Treatability Manual Volume 3 Technology For Controlremoval Of Pollutants


    EPA-600/2-82-001c
                               TREATABILITY MANUAL

                VOLUME III.   Technologies for
                             Control/Removal of Pollutants
                       OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
                      U.S.  ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                             WASHINGTON, D.C.  20460
Ox
                                  September  1981
                                     (Revised)

-------
                             PREFACE

In January, 1979,  EPA's Office of Enforcement and Office of Water
and Waste Management requested help from the Office of Research
and Development in compiling wastewater treatment performance
data into a "Treatability Manual."

A planning group was set up to manage this activity under the
chairmanship of William Cawley, Deputy Director,  Industrial
Environmental Research Laboratory - Cincinnati.   The group in-
cludes participants from:  1)  the Industrial Environmental
Research Laboratory - Cincinnati; 2) Effluent Guidelines Divi-
sion; 3) Office of Water Enforcement and Permits; 4) Municipal
Environmental Research Laboratory - Cincinnati;  5) R.S. Kerr,
Environmental Research Laboratory - Ada; 6) Industrial Environ-
mental Research Laboratory - Research Triangle Park; 7) WAPORA,
Incorporated; 8) MATHTECH, Incorporated; 9) Monsanto Research
Corporation; and 10) Aerospace Corporation.

The objectives of this program are :

     •    to provide readily accessible data and information on
          treatability of industrial waste streams;

     •    to provide a basis for research planning by identifying
          gaps in knowledge of the treatability of certain pollut-
          ants and waste streams.

The primary output from this program is a five volume Treatabil-
ity Manual.  This was first published in June 1980, with this
publication representing a major update of that previous work.
The individual volumes are named as follows:
     Volume I
     Volume II
     Volume III
     Volume IV

     Volume V
Treatability Data
Industrial Descriptions
Technologies
Cost Estimating (In the process of re-
vision for later publication)
Summary
                               11

-------
                         ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The development of this revision to the Treatability Manual has
resulted from efforts of a large number of people.  It is the
collection of contributions from throughout the Environmental
Protection Agency, particularly from the Office of Water Enforce-
ment, Office of Water and Waste Management, and the Office of
Research and Development.  Equally important to its success were
the efforts of the employees of WAPORA, Inc., and MATHTECH, Inc.,
who participated in this operation.

A list of names of contributors would not adequately acknowledge
the effort expended in the development of the manual.   This
document exists because of the major contributions of numerous
individuals within EPA and the EPA contractors, including:

     Effluent Guidelines Division
          Office of Water Regulations and Standards, Office of
          Water

     Permits Division
          Office of Water Enforcement and Permits, Office of
          Water

     National Enforcement Investigation Center
          Office of Enforcement

     Office of Research and Development

          Center for Environmental Research Information

          Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory

          Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory

          Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
               Research Triangle Park, NC

          Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
               Cincinnati, OH

As Committee Chairman, I would like to express my sincere appre-
ciation to the Committee Members and others who^contributed to
the success of this effort.
                              filliam A. Cawley, Deputy Dir
ictor,
                              lERL-Ci
                             Chairman, Treatability Coordination
                              Committee
Date:  9/25/81               iii

-------
                          TABLE OF CONTENTS




11 I.I  INTRODUCTION	111.1-1




III.2  TECHNOLOGY OVERVIEW 	 III.2-1




III.3
WASTEWATER TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL
III. 3.1






















III. 3. 2







III. 3. 3




Physical-Chemical Treatment
I I I. 3. 1.1 Activated Carbon
I I I. 3. 1.2 Chemical Oxidation. . .
I I I. 3. 1.3 Chemical Precipitation.
I I I. 3. 1.4 Chemical Reduction. . .
I I I. 3. 1.5 Coagulation and
Flocculation 	
III. 3. 1.6 Distillation 	
I I I. 3. 1.7 Electrodialysis ....
I I I. 3. 1.8 Evaporation ......
1 1 1. 3. 1.9 Filtration 	 	
I I I. 3. 1.10 Flotation 	
III. 3. 1.11 Flow Equalization . . .
III. 3. 1. 12 Ion Exchange 	
I I I. 3. 1.13 Neutralization. ....
I I I. 3. 1.14 Oil Separation 	
I I I. 3. 1.15 Polymeric Adsorption. .
I I I. 3. 1.16 Reverse Osmosis ....
I I I. 3. 1.17 Screening 	
I I I. 3. 1.18 Sedimentation 	
1 1 1. 3. 1.19 Stripping, 	
I I I. 3. 1.20 Solvent Extraction. . .
I I I. 3. 1.21 Ultrafiltration ....
Biological Treatment
I I I. 3. 2.1 Activated Sludge. . . .
I I I. 3. 2. 2 Lagoons 	
I I I. 3. 2. 3 Nitrification/
Denitrif ication . . .
I I I. 3. 2. 4 Rotating Biological
Contactors. .....
III. 3. 2. 5 Trickling Filters . . .
Disposal
I I I. 3. 3.1 Deep Well Injection . .
I I I. 3. 3. 2 Incineration 	
I I I. 3. 3. 3 Land Application. . . .
I I I. 3. 3. 4 Recycling .......


, III. 3. 1.2-1
. . III. 3. 1.3-1
11173.1.4-1

III. 3. 1.5-1
III. 3. 1.6-1
III. 3. 1.7-1
III. 3. 1.8-1
III. 3. 1.9-1
III. 3. 1.10-1
. III. 3. 1.11-1
III. 3. 1.12-1
III. 3. 1.13-1
III. 3. 1.14-1
. III. 3. 1.15-1
III. 3. 1.16-1
III. 3. 1.17-1
III. 3. 1.18-1
III. 3. 1.19-1
. III. 3. 1.20-1
III. 3. 1.21-1

. III. 3. 2. 1-1
III. 3. 2. 2-1

. . III. 3. 2. 3-1

III. 3. 2. 4-1
III. 3. 2. 5-1

. . III. 3. 3. 1-1
III. 3. 3. 2-1
. III. 3. 3. 3-1
III. 3. 3. 4-1
Date:  9/25/81

-------
                    TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)

III.4  SLUDGE TREATMENT
       III.4.1  Conditioning 	  III.4.1-1
       III.4.2  Digestion,  Aerobic and Anaerobic ....  III.4.2-1
       III.4.3  Dewatering 	  III.4.3-1
                  Belt Filter
                  Centrifuge
                  Drying Beds
                  Filter Press
                  Lagoons
                  Thermal
                  Vacuum Filtration
       III.4.4  Incineration 	  III.4.4-1
       III.4.5  Land Application (Sludge Disposal)  .  .  .  III.4.5-1

III.5  REFERENCES  	 III.5-1
Date:  9/25/81                      vi

-------
                          LIST OF FIGURES

111. 3.1.2-1.   Process flow sheet - chemical oxi-
               dation	III.3.1.2-4

III.3.1.3-1.   Solubility of metal hydroxides and
               sulfides as a function of pH	III. 3.1.3-2

III.3.1.4-1.   Hexavalent chromium reduction with sulfur
               dioxide 	  III.3.1.4-3

III.3.1.6-1.   Schematic of a continuous fractional
               distillation column	III.3.1.6-3

III.3.1.7-1.   Electrodialysis unit flow schematic .  .  III.3.1.7-2

III.3.1.10-1.  Typical dissolved air flotation
               system	v .  . . .  111.3.1.10-2

III.3.1.11-1.  Flow diagram for equalization basin. .  III.3.1.11-2

III .3.1.12-1.  Operational modes for ion exchange. .  .111.3.1.12-3

III.3.1.13-1.  Schematic of neutralization system. .  .111.3.1.13-2

111.3 .1.15-1.  Schematic of a resin adsorption system
               for the removal of phenol from water.  .111.3.1.15-2

III.3.1.16-1.  Transfer against osmotic gradient in
               reverse osmosis system	III.3.1.16-2

III.3.1.19-1.  Schematic of a typical steam stripping
               process	III.3.1.19-4

III.3.1.20-1.  Schematic of solvent extraction pro-
               cess	III.3.1.20-1

III.3.1.21-1.  Schematic of ultrafiltration process.  .111.3.1.21-5
Date:  9/25/81

-------
                          LIST OF TABLES
III.2-1.        Treatment technology matrix by
               industry	III.2-3

III.3.1.1-1.    Treatability rating of priority pollutants
               utilizing carbon adsorption	111. 3.1.1-7

III.3.1.1-2.    Classes of organic compounds adsorbed on
               carbon	III.3.1.1-8

III.3.1.3-1.    Theoretical solubilities of hydroxides
               and sulfides of selected metals in pure
               water	III.3.1.3-12

III.3.1.3-2.    Estimated achievable maximum 30-day
               averages for the applied
               technologies 	 III.3.1.3-12

III.3.1.5-1.    Mixing and flocculation design
               criteria	III.3.1.5-6

III.3.1.12-1.   Comparison of ion exchange operating
               modes	III. 3.1.12-2

III .3. 1. 12-2.   Ion exchange design criteria	III.3.1.12-7

III.3.1.15-1.   Properties of currently available
               resin adsorbents	111. 3.1.15-7

111. 3.1.18-1.   Typical hydraulic loading	111. 3.1.18-6

III.3.1.21-1.   Ultrafiltration design' criteria.  .  .  . III.3.1.21-4

III.3.2.2-1.    Design criteria for lagoons 	  III.3.2.2-5

III.3.2.5-1.    Design criteria for trickling filters. .111.3.2.5-4

III.3.3.3-1.    Comparison of site characteristics
               for land treatment processes	111. 3. 3. 3-4
Date:  9/25/81                    viii

-------
                       III.I  INTRODUCTION

This volume describes treatment technologies and their perfor-
mance when treating industrial wastewaters.  The technologies
include those which are widely used in treating industrial waste-
waters and those which are being used on a limited basis but have
potential application in the removal of toxic pollutants from
wastewaters.  The technology descriptions are grouped as those
applicable to treatment and disposal of industrial wastewater and
those applicable to treatment and disposal of sludges resulting
from wastewater treatment.  The wastewater treatment technologies
include 21 physical-chemical processes, 5 biological processes,
and 4 disposal methods.  The sludge treatment and disposal tech-
nologies include sludge conditioning, digestion, and dewatering
processes; and sludge disposal by incineration and land disposal.

The wastewater and sludge treatment and disposal technologies are
briefly described and generalized performance characteristics are
given for each technology.  The emphasis is, however, placed on
the pollutant removal capabilities of the processes.  Performance
data for each technology are provided where available in the form
of technology data sheets which summarize the characteristics of
a specific application of the technology.  Both concentration and
removal efficiency data are given for the following groups of
pollutants:

     (1)  Classical pollutants which include the conventional
          pollutants defined in Section 301 of the Clean Water
          Act and nonconventional pollutants commonly found and
          of concern in specific industrial wastewaters.  This
          includes pollutants such as biochemical oxygen demand
          (BOD5), chemical oxygen demand (COD), total organic
          carbon (TOC), total suspended solids (TSS), oil and
          grease, total phosphorus, total kjeldahl nitrogen
          (TKN), and ammonia nitrogen.

     (2)  The toxic pollutants derived by USEPA from the 65 "pri-
          ority pollutants," listed in a Consent Agreement,
          Natural Resources Defense Council vs Train, 8 ERG 2120
          (D.D.C. 1976).

     (3)  Compounds selected from the list of substances
          designated by USEPA as hazardous under authority
          of Section 311 of the Clean Water Act (CWA).
Date:  9/25/81               III.1-1

-------
The technology discussions provide basic information on the
process in the form of a process overview that includes the
following:

     - Description,
     - Representative Types and Modifications,
     - Technology Status,
     - Applications,
     - Advantages and Limitations,
     - Reliability,
     - Chemicals Required,
     - Residuals Generated,
     - Design Criteria,  and
     - Performance.

The discussions include data on the process applicability to
specific industrial wastewaters, and performance in removing
classical and toxic pollutants.  The technology descriptions
provide general information on process design or operation.
Appropriate references should be consulted for detailed infor-
mation on these factors.  A list of references is included for
each technology.

Pollutant removal data for the physical-chemical and biological
processes are presented in two forms:  plant-specific technology
data sheets and summary tables.  Each plant-specific technology
data sheet lists the concentrations of various pollutants in the
influent and effluent to the treatment operation and the corres-
ponding removal efficiencies for these pollutants.  When avail-
able, the following types of information are also provided.

     • Point source category, subcategory, and identifica-
       tion code of the plant discharging the waste

     • Scale of the treatment operation (e.g., full scale,
       pilot scale, bench scale)

     • Location of the treatment operation in the overall
       waste treatment system for the plant

     • Design and operating parameters

     • Reference from which the information was taken

References for the plant-specific data include Effluent Guide-
lines development documents and contractor reports, other USEPA
reports, journal articles, and conference papers.  The data are
reported as they appear in the original references, except that
certain concentration and removal efficiency values are rounded
to fewer significant figures.  Classical pollutant concentrations
are reported to a maximum of two significant figures, as are
removal efficiencies and concentration data for the other groups


Date:  9/25/81               III.1-2

-------
of pollutants.  This convention has been adopted for formatting
purposes only and does not necessarily reflect the accuracy and
reproducibility of the data.  In many cases, the concentrations
of toxic organic pollutants in treatment system effluents are
reported as "not detected" or "below detection limit" in the
original references and no detection limits are specified.  These
concentrations are also reported as "not detected" or "below
detection limit" on the plant specific data sheets.

For removal efficiency calculations the "not detected" (ND) value
is treated as zero.  In general, the "below detection limit"
(BDL) value is treated as one-half of the detection limit.  The
exception to this procedure occurred where a variable detection
limit was reported for pollutants within the industrial category
(i.e., Steam Electric and Electrical and Electronic Components).
In these cases, the concentration reported in the source for each
measurement was used in calculating removal efficiencies.  Where
no detection limit is reported, a limit of 10 ug/1 has been
assumed to be the detection limit when required for calculations
of removal efficiencies unless otherwise specified.  The follow-
ing procedure summarizes the approach used to calculate percent
removal:

     a.   If influent concentration is given and effluent concen-
          tration is given as ND, then percent removal is re-
          ported as >99.

     b.   If influent concentration is given as BDL and effluent
          as ND, percent removal is reported as not meaningful
          (NM).

     c.   If both influent and effluent concentrations are given
          as BDL, then percent removal is reported as NM.

     d.   If influent concentration is given and effluent concen-
          tration is given as BDL, then percent removal is calcu-
          lated using half of the detection limit.

In some cases, treatment system effluents have been reported to
contain higher concentrations of certain pollutants than the
untreated wastewaters.  These "negative removals" are reported on
the plant-specific technology data sheets as not meaningful.

The summary table for each physical-chemical and biological
wastewater treatment technology incorporates effluent concentra-
tion and removal efficiency data contained in the plant-specific
full scale and pilot plant data base for that technology.  Min-
imum, maximum, and median effluent concentrations and removal
efficiencies are given for each pollutant listed on one or more
of the data sheets.  These summaries are intended only as general
performance indicators for the treatment technologies since
Date:  9/25/81               III.1-3

-------
they do not account for differences in system design and opera-
tion, influent pollutant loadings,  or the type of industrial
wastewaters being treated.   Median effluent concentrations and
removal efficiencies reported for a given treatment technology
are not necessarily indicative of the technology's pollutant
removal capabilities when applied to a specific industrial waste-
water.
Date:  9/25/81               III.1-4

-------
                   III.2  TECHNOLOGY OVERVIEW

The wastewater treatment technologies discussed in this volume
are divided into two groups, based on the nature of the process,
consisting of physical-chemical treatment processes and biological
treatment processes.  Physical-chemical processes are designed to
separate matter (e.g.,  settleable and colloidal solids, non-
aqueous liquids, gases, and dissolved solids) from the main body
of liquid by physical separations and/or chemical reactions.
Separation of solid phase materials from the liquid phase by
sedimentation, flotation, screening, or filtration is an effec-
tive yet relatively inexpensive means of removing pollutants.
With many industrial wastewaters, a substantial degree of purifi-
cation is accomplished simply by separation of the solid phase
that is initially present.  Thus solids separation is a basic
step in almost every industrial waste treatment system.  Solids
separation techniques are also applied for final polishing after
biological or chemical treatment.

Nonaqueous liquids such as oil are also separated by physical
phase separation processes following the same principle as sus-
pended solids settling and can be accomplished using the same
equipment.  In some instances, the solid phase cannot be separa-
ted by sedimentation because of its specific gravity being close
to that of the wastewater.  This problem is alleviated by the use
of a flotation process which lowers the specific gravity of the
solids so that they rise to the surface.

In addition to sedimentation, screening, flotation, and filtra-
tion (the most common separation processes used in industry),
several other physical-chemical processes described in the text
are used for separating dissolved organics, dissolved solids,
colloidal solids,  volatile liquids, and gases from the main body
of liquid.  However, these processes have narrow application and
are generally applied to a specific waste stream to separate or
remove a specific pollutant and for concentrating and recovering
the pollutant for reuse.  The processes involving chemical reac-
tions are used to shift chemical equilibria so that dissolved
materials are precipitated and separated, or to alter or destroy
the pollutants.  The most universal chemical treatment is neu-
tralization (pH adjustment), which is used as an intermediate
step in some treatment systems or to prepare the effluent for
final discharge.  Chemical precipitation and coagulation are also
widely used processes for removal of industrial waste pollutants.
Date:  9/25/81              III.2-1

-------
The function of biological treatment processes is to remove
organic matter and at times ammonia and toxic degradable organic
materials from wastewater through the metabolic means of oxida-
tion and cell synthesis.   Biological treatment may be either
aerobic or anaerobic.  Each type of process has its own dominant
strains of microorganisms and yields a different quality of pro-
duct, although the basic process in both is to convert organic
constituents of wastewater into cell material, gases, and water.

The ultimate disposal of treated wastewater and by-product
sludges is also presented.  The alternatives to discharge of
treated wastewaters to surface waters include disposal on land,
deep well injection, incineration, or recycling and reuse.
Disposal of solid waste or sludge includes incineration and land
application technologies.

The selection of wastewater treatment processes for industrial
wastewater is based on the characteristics of the wastewater, the
degree of treatment required or the required effluent quality,
and volume of wastewater to be treated.  The major groups of
pollutants in industrial wastewater which may cause problems in
receiving water are as follows:

     - Suspended solids and turbidity,
     - Soluble organics,
     - Soluble constituents that result in taste and odors,
     - Toxic organic and inorganic materials,
     - Color,
     - Nutrients, nitrogen, phosphorus, and carbon,
     - Oil, grease, and immiscible liquids,
     - Acids and alkalies,
     - Dissolved solids,  and
     - Pathogenic organisms.

Wastewater treatment processes can either remove the above pollu-
tants or alter the characteristic of the pollutant such that it
has less impact on the quality of receiving water.  These pro-
cesses can be categorized according to the physical and chemical
nature of the pollutant or group of related pollutants to be
removed.  Depending on the type of pollutants to be removed and
the degree of treatment required, a single process or a group of
processes can be selected.  In some cases a specific wastewater
stream may not be amenable to a certain treatment process  (e.g.,
toxic compounds may inhibit biological treatment); such a  stream
would require pretreatment prior to the desired treatment.

The current use of the treatment technologies in several in-
dustries is shown in Table 2-1.  The treatment technology by
industry matrix shown in the table is compiled from the informa-
tion obtained from Development Documents for Effluent Limitation
Date:  9/25/81              III.2-2

-------
         **
-P
(0
•H
 M
-p
 nj
 e
 O
 a
 x:
 u
 0)
-p
fi
0)
 (1)
 trj
 EH
            2*
                            :-V
                         eee!eee
                    e e
                See
! ee
                    V e
                             * e
                                 ^
                    \ e
                 ee
                     e*
"»• e ' eee
                            • *
ring
Auto and Other Laundrloa
Coal Mining

Inorganic Caealcale Manuf
teal Manufacturing

nning and Finlahln
                            !!i
                             1 !
                          •I  a
lec


and
                           ll
and
                     l\*  IfrJ «

                     lii|lli|l
ical

lea
                                 eee
                                 *•
                                 S
                                 ee
Porcelain Eiuuaelin

Exploalvea Hanufac

CUB and Uood Chnl
                                     eee
                 eee
                  *%
                                     eee
Pharoaceutlcal Manufacturing

Honfcrroua Metals Hanufacturlng

Ore Hinlng and Dress lag
                      se
Organic Chesilcels Manufacturing

Paint and Ink Foraulatlon

PctroleuB Rafining
                                             V»
Pulp and Papar Hll

Rubber Proceaelng

Soap and Detergent
                                                  eee
                                                  e *
Date:   9/25/81
           III.2-3

-------
 -p
 to
 3
 •O
 G
 •H
 X
•H
 O
 C!
 A
 O
 (0
•P
C!
0)
0)
   0)
   3
   £
   -H
   -P
   C
   O
 H O
 EH —
 rH
 I
 (N


 0)
 (0
 E-i
j
:
j
% l


•





w


s
*


• •

Auto and Other Laundries
Coal Mining
Inorganic Chemlcala Manufacturing


S •



e
*



•






•>
•\
Iron aiid Steel Manufacturing
Leather Tanning and Finishing
Metal Finishing
. ; ;
^ 1 1
! j
I i
SYv {% "
i
!
\e*j
W ! !

v !
i
i
!
*
Vv •

!
i
|
i
!
1
!
:
i
!
AluainuB Foning
Battery Manufacturing
Coil Coating
Electrical and Electronic Coop.
Foundries
Photo Equlpncnt and Supplies


N


>,
\
^



e
^


V


*
^
Porcelain Enaneling
Explosives Manufacturing
Cua> and Wood Chesilcala
•
^
•

*>.

•
• •

•
•
^•\


V>
^
V

•
•
Pharmaceutical Manufacturing
Konferrous Metals Manufacturing
Ore Mining and Dressing
^ {
^ j
!
|
! 'v
j
is
^ !
^%!
Vv|\
vh
1*
v>«| •%
•>•! ••
Organic Cheicicalt Manufacturing
Paint and Ink Formulation
Petroleun Refining
Pulp and Paper Mills
Rubber Processing
Soap and Detergent Manufacturing











•Vi.
•


V
V

••
•
Steam Electric Power Plants
Testlle Mills
Timber Products Processing
Date:   9/25/81
                                 III.2-4

-------
Guidelines and Standards for the industries identified in the
table.  The technology usage by industry is grouped as having
wide use, limited use, or potential use.  A widely used tech-
nology indicates that based on the industry data collection
portfolios and plant visits, the technology is reported as being
used at a significant number" of plants within the industry and
thus is a common technology for that particular industry.  The
limited use category indicates that a minority of plants in the
data base are using that particular technology.  The potential
use category indicates that either a full scale or pilot scale
demonstration has been carried out, or the technology has been
used in a related industry and has potential application in the
industry indicated.

The performance of the technologies in removing classical pollut-
ants from industrial wastewaters is well documented in the lite-
rature.  The performance data on removal of priority pollutants,
except for some metals and phenols, is more limited.  Lack of
long-term data precludes the determination of reliable quanti-
tative performance evaluation of these technologies for removal
of priority pollutants.  It should also be recognized that in
several cases the performance data shown in the technology data
sheets for the removal of priority pollutants represents inci-
dental rather than intentional control.  For example, the removal
of organic toxics may be observed for some technologies that are
designed and operated mainly for the removal of inorganic toxic
materials, such as heavy metals.  Such removal is of interest in
determining the overall pollutant removal capabilities of the
technology.
Date:  9/25/81              III.2-5

-------
            III.3  WASTEWATER TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL

III.3.1  PHYSICAL-CHEMICAL TREATMENT

III.3.1.1  Activated Carbon Adsorption

     Description

Activated carbon adsorption is a physical separation process in
which organic and inorganic materials are removed from wastewater
by sorption or the attraction and accumulation of one substance
on the surface of another.  There are essentially three consecu-
tive steps in the sorption of dissolved materials in wastewater
by activated carbon.  The first step is the transport of the
solute through a surface film to the exterior of the carbon.  The
second step is the diffusion of solute within the pores of the
activated carbon.  The third and final step is sorption of the
solute on the interior surface bounding the pore and capillary
spaces of the activated carbon.  While the primary removal mecha-
nism is adsorption, biological degradation, and filtration also
may reduce the organics in the solution.

Activated carbon is considered to be a non-polar sorbent and
tends to sorb the least polar and least soluble organic com-
pounds; it will sorb most, but not all, organic compounds.

Much of the surface area available for sorption by carbon is
found in the pores within the carbon particles created during the
activation process.  A carefully controlled process of dehydra-
tion, carbonization, and oxidation of raw materials which include
coal, wood, coconut shells, and petroleum base residues yields
the activated carbon.  As activated carbon adsorbs organics from
wastewater, the carbon pores eventually become saturated and the
exhausted carbon must be regenerated for reuse or replaced with
fresh carbon.  The adsorptive capacity of the carbon can be re-
stored by chemical or thermal regeneration.

     Representative Types and Modifications

There are two forms of activated carbon in common use, granular
and powdered.  Granular carbon is generally preferred for most
wastewater applications because it can be readily regenerated.
The two forms of carbon and different process configurations are
described below.
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.1-1

-------
     (1)   Granular Activated Carbon.   Granular carbon is about
          0.1 to 1 mm in diameter and is contacted with waste-
          water in columns or beds.   The water to be treated is
          either filtered down (downflow) or forced up (upflow)
          through the carbon column or bed.   Additional design
          configurations of carbon contact columns include grav-
          ity or pressure flow,  fixed or moving beds,  and single
          (parallel)  or multi-stage (series) arrangements.
          Multi-stage or countercurrent operation offers a more
          efficient utilization of the carbon as only the most
          saturated carbon is withdrawn for regeneration.  In a
          typical downflow countercurrent operation, two columns
          are operated in series with a common spare column.
          When breakthrough occurs for the second column (i.e.,
          the concentration of a target pollutant in the effluent
          is higher than the desired concentration), the exhausted
          column is removed from service for regeneration of the
          carbon.  The partially exhausted second column becomes
          the lead column, and the fresh spare column is added as
          a second column in the series.  When breakthrough is
          again reached, the cycle is repeated.  The fixed bed
          downflow operation, in addition to adsorption, provides
          filtration  but may require frequent backwashing.   In an
          upflow configuration,  the exhausted carbon is removed
          at the bottom of the column and virgin or regenerated
          carbon is added at the top, thereby providing counter-
          current contact in a single vessel.

          The exhausted granular carbon is either regenerated or
          disposed.  It is economical for large plants to regene-
          rate the carbon.  This can be done by thermal regenera-
          tion or by  chemical regeneration using oxidizing agents
          or solvents.  Thermal regeneration in a multiple hearth
          furnace is  most commonly used and involves heating
          carbon at 820 to 980°C (1,500 to 1,8000F) in the pres-
          ence of steam.  During the regeneration process,  the
          adsorbed organics are oxidized to gases.  Some elemen-
          tal carbon  is lost in the process but this is usually
          limited to  less than 10% by weight.   Chemical regener-
          ation is generally used when the adsorbate is valuable
          and will be recovered and reused in the industrial
          process.

          Carbon adsorption may require preliminary treatment of
          the waste stream to minimize plugging of the carbon bed
          with suspended material.  Suspended solids in the
          influent should be less than 50 mg/L to minimize back-
          wash requirements [3-15].  Much higher levels of sus-
          pended solids (up to 2,000 mg/L) can be treated,  but
          will require frequent backwashing.  Oil and grease
          should be less than about 10 mg/L.  A high level of
          dissolved inorganic material in the influent may cause
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.1-2

-------
          problems with thermal carbon reactivation (i.e.,
          scaling and loss of activity) unless appropriate pre-
          ventive steps are taken.  Such steps include pH con-
          trol, softening, and washing the carbon with acid prior
          to reactivation.

     (2)  Powdered Activated Carbon.  Powdered carbon is about
          50 - 70 microns in diameter and is usually mixed with
          the wastewater to be treated.  This "slurry" of carbon
          and wastewater is then agitated to allow proper con-
          tact.  Finally, the spent carbon carrying the adsorbed
          impurities is settled out or filtered.  In practice, a
          multi-stage, countercurrent process is commonly used to
          make the most efficient use of the carbon's capacity.

          Powdered activated carbon is also added directly to the
          activated sludge process in carbon-biological systems.
          Powdered carbon improves treatment in the activated
          sludge process because of its adsorptive and physical
          properties.  Many pollutants that are not biologically
          degraded in a conventional activated sludge system can
          be degraded by using longer contact times with the
          biomass.  When adsorbed by the carbon, these pollutants
          settle into the sludge and the contact time with the
          biomass is extended from hours to days.  The waste
          sludge which contains powdered carbon is removed from
          the activated sludge system, dewatered, and either
          disposed or regenerated.  The regenerated carbon may
          require an acid wash to remove metals as well as other
          inorganic materials to improve the adsorption capacity.

     Technology Status

Carbon adsorption systems have been .demonstrated to be practical
and economical for the reduction of dissolved organic and toxic
pollutants from industrial wastewaters.  The process is viable
for organic waste streams containing up to 1% refractory or toxic
organics.  The technology has been demonstrated at full scale
plant and pilot plant levels for several industrial wastewaters.

     Applications

Activated carbon can be used to remove chemical oxygen demand
(COD),  biological oxygen demand (BOD), and related parameters, to
remove toxic and refractory organics, to remove and recover
certain organics, and to remove selected inorganic chemicals from
industrial wastewater.  Most, but not all, dissolved organics can
be adsorbed by carbon.  An important aspect of carbon adsorption
is its capability of removing organics which are not completely
removed by conventional biological treatment.  Activated carbon
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.1-3

-------
presently finds application in the treatment of petroleum-
refining, petrochemicals, and organic chemical wastewater
streams.  Compounds which are readily removed by activated carbon
include aromatics, phenolics, chlorinated hydrocarbons,  surfac-
tants, organic dyes, organic acids, higher molecular weight
alcohols, and amines.  Activated carbon can also be used to
remove selected inorganic chemicals, such as cyanide, chromium,
and mercury.  In addition to the Petroleum Refining and Organic
Chemicals Manufacturing industries, the technology is currently
used on a limited basis in the following industries:

     - Metal Finishing,
     - Textile Mills,
     - Pharmaceutical Manufacturing,
     - Inorganic Chemicals Manufacturing, and
     - Gum and Wood Chemicals.

     Advantages and Limitations

The major benefits of carbon treatment include applicability to a
wide variety of organics, with high removal efficiencies.  The
system is compact, and recovery of adsorbed materials is some-
times practical.  Compared to biological systems for removal of
organic pollutants, activated carbon offers the following advan-
tages:

     - Insensitivity to toxics (in fact, the system will remove
       most toxic organics),

     - Reduced sensitivity to temperature,

     - Less time required for start-up,

     - Increased tolerance of concentration and flow rate varia-
       tions,

     - Higher removal of BOD, COD, and  total organic carbon
       (TOC) for many wastes, and

     - Effectiveness in streams with high dissolved solids.

The limitations of the process include ineffective removal of  low
molecular weight or highly soluble organics, low tolerance for
suspended solids in the wastewater, and relatively high capital
and operating costs.

     Reliability

Granular activated carbon systems  are very reliable provided
upstream protection and proper operation and maintenance proce-
dures are utilized.
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.1-4

-------
     Chemicals Required

Acid may be required to wash the exhausted or regenerated carbon
to remove metals as well as other inorganic materials adsorbed on
the carbon.

     Residuals Generated

The process generates contaminated activated carbon that requires
disposal. If the carbon undergoes regeneration, the solid waste
problem is reduced.

     Design Criteria

The carbon adsorption isotherm test is widely used to determine
the treatability of a particular wastewater by activated carbon,
to screen the applicability of different activated carbons, and
to calculate theoretical exhaustion rates.  Isotherm tests will
also show the approximate sorptive capacity of the carbon for the
particular application and provide a convenient means of studying
the effects of pH and temperature on sorption.  Pure species
isotherm data for the removal of some organic pollutants are
included in Volume I as an indication of pollutant removability.

Although treatability of particular wastewaters and relative
capacity of different types of activated carbon for treatment may
be estimated from sorption isotherms, performance and design
criteria are best determined by pilot tests.  Pilot tests provide
much more accurate estimates of the performance that can be
expected in a full-scale system.  The following information
needed for designing systems can be obtained from pilot tests:

          Performance of different carbon types under the same
          dynamic flow conditions,

          Minimum contact time required to produce the desired
          quality of effluent,

          Pretreatment requirements to reduce suspended solids,
          to remove oil and grease, to adjust pH to the optimum
          level, and to equalize flow and organic concentrations,

          Activated carbon dosages in terms of kg of carbon per
          million liters of wastewater treated or kg of organic
          material removed per kg of carbon, and the required bed
          depth,

          Breakthrough characteristics of the system,
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.1-5

-------
          Hydraulic loadings,  headless characteristics,  and back-
          wash needs,  and

          Biological growth effects.

     Performance

Activated carbon is effective in removing a variety of organic
and inorganic materials.   In general,  molecules are more readily
adsorbed than ionized compounds.  The aromatic compounds tend to
be more readily adsorbed than the aliphatics,  and large molecules
more readily adsorbed than smaller ones,  although extremely high
molecular weight materials can be too large to penetrate the
pores in the carbon.

Isotherm tests [3-23]  have indicated that activated carbon is
very effective in adsorbing 65% of the organic priority pollu-
tants and reasonably effective for another 22%.  Table 3.1.1-1
summarizes the treatability effectiveness for most of the organic
priority pollutants by activated carbon and Table 3.1.1-2 summa-
rizes classes of organic compounds together with examples of
organics that are readily adsorbed on carbon.   However,  the tests
performed on single compound systems are not indicative of actual
performance expected in treatment of a specific industrial waste-
water which may contain a mixture of many organic compounds.  If
more than one organic compound is present in a waste stream, the
preferential adsorption of one compound over another may render
lesser degrees of overall pollutant removal than is anticipated
by data based on single pollutant adsorption data.  The actual
degree of removal of different organic compounds will thus vary
from wastewater to wastewater and is influenced by the following
factors:

     (1)  Nature of the adsorbate - the solubility of the solute
          is, to a large extent, the controlling factor for
          adsorption equilibria.

     (2)  pH of the solution - because hydrogen and hydroxide
          ions are adsorbed quite strongly, the adsorption of
          other ions is influenced by the pH of the solution.

     (3)  Temperature - adsorption reactions are normally exo-
          thermic, thus the extent of adsorption generally in-
          creases with decreasing temperature, although not to a
          significant extent over the range of small temperature
          variations normally encountered.

     (4)  Wastewater characteristics - in wastewater treatment,
          the material to be adsorbed commonly will be a mixture
          of many compounds rather than a single one.  These com-
          pounds may mutually enhance adsorption, may act rela-
          tively independently, or may interfere with one another.


Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.1-6

-------
            TABLE  3.1.1-1.
TREATABILITY  RATING  OF  PRIORITY  POLLUTANTS  UTILIZING
CARBON  ADSORPTION  [3-23]
Pn
1.
2.
3.
1.
5.
6.

7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
11.
16!
17.
18.
19.

20.
21.
22.
23.
21.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.

31.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
10.
11 .
12
13.
11.

15.
16.
17.
18.



)ri tv Pol lutant
acenaphthene
acrolein
acrylonitri le
benzene
benz id me
carbon tetrachloride
( tetrachloromethane)
chlorobenzene
1 , 2,1- t rich lorobenzene
hexach 1 o robenzene
1 , 2-d i ch 1 oroethane
1,1, 1-trichloroetnane
hexach 1 oroethane
1, 1-dlch to roe thane
1, 1,2-trlchl oroethane
chloroethane
bislchloronethyl (ether
bls(2-chloroethyl )ether
2-chloroethyl vinyl ether
( m i xed )
2-chloronaphtha lene
2,1,6-trichlo ropheno 1
parachlorometa cresol
chloroform ( trichloromethane)
2-chlo ropheno 1
1 , 2-d i ch 1 o robenzene
1 , 3-d i ch 1 o robenzene
1 , 1-di chlorobenzene
3,3'-dichlo robenz 1 d i ne
1,1-dichloroethylene
1,2-trans-dlchlo roethy 1 ene
2, 4-d ich 1 o ropheno 1
1,2-dichioropropane
1 , 2-d i ch 1 o rop ropy 1 ene
( 1,3-dlchloropropene)
2. i-di me thy (phenol
2,1-dini tro toluene
2, 6-dinltro toluene
1 , 2-d t pheny 1 hyd raz 1 ne
ethylbenzene
f luoranthene
1-chlorophenyl phenyl ether
1-bromophenyl phenyl ether
bis(2-chloroi sopropyt } ether
bi s( 2-ch lo roe thoxy) me thane
methyl ene chloride
(dichlorome thane)
methyl chloride (Ohio rone thane)
methyl bromide (bromomethane)
bromoform ( tribromomethane)
d ichlorobromomethane



'Remova 1 Ratinq Priority Pollutant "
H
L
L
M
H
M

H
H
H
H
H
H
H
M
L
-
H
L

H
H
H
L
H
H
H
H
H
L
L
N
H
M

H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
M
M
L

L
L
H
M



19.
50.
51.
52.
53.
51.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
65 !
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
71.
72.

73.

71.

75.

76.
77.
78.
79.

80.
81.
82.

83.

81.
85.
86.
87.
88.

106.
107.
108.
109.
110.
111.
112.
t rich lorof t uorome thane
d ten lorod i f 1 uorome thane
chlorod i bromomethane
hexach lorobu tad i ene
hexach 1 o rocyc 1 open tad i ene
i sophorone
naphtha lene
ni trobenzene
2-n i t ropheno 1
1-n it ropheno 1
2,1-dini trophenol
1 , 6-d i n i t ro-o-c reso 1
N-ni t rosodi methyl am ine
N-ni t rosodi pheny lam ine
N-ni t rosodi -n-p ropy lam ine
phenol
bis(2-ethylhexyl )phtha late
butyl benzyl phthalate
di-n-butyl phthalate
di-n-octyl phthalate
diethyl phthalate
dimethyl phthalate
1 ,2-benzanthracene (benzo
(a)anthracene)
benzofa )pyrene (3,1-benzo-
pyrene)
3, 1-benzof luoranthene
{ benzo( b )f 1 uoranthene )
1 1 , 12-benzof luoranthene
(benzo( k)f luoranthene)
chrysene
acenaphtnyfene
anthracene
1, 12-benzoperylene (benzo
(ghi)-perylene)
f 1 uorene
phenanthrene
1 , 2, 5, 6-d i benza th racene
(dibenzo (a,h) anthracene)
ideno (1,2,3-cd) pyrene
(2, 3-o-phenylene pyrene)
pryrene
tetrachlo roe thy lene
toluene
trichlo roe thy lene
vinyl chloride
(chloroethylene)
PCB-1212 (Arochlo 1212)
PCB-1251 (Arochlo 1251)
PCB-1221 (Arochlo 1221)
PCB-1332 (Arochlo 1232)
PCB-1218 (Arochlo 1218)
PCB-1260 (Arochlo 1260)
PCB-1016 (Arochlo 1016)
Removal Ratinq
M
L
M
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
M
H
M
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
H

H

H

H

H
H
H
H

H
H
H

H

-
H
H
L
L

H
H
H
H
H
H
H
            *  NOTE:  Explanation of Removal Ratings

            Category H (high removal)
               adsorbs at levels > 100 mg/g carbon at C(f) =  10 mg/l
               adsoros at leveJs > 100 mg/g carbon at C(f)  TOO mg/g carbon at C(f) =  10 mg/l
               adsorbs at levels < 100 ng/g carbon at C(f) <1.0 mg/l

            Category L ( Iow remova I )
               adsorbs at levels < 100 mg/g carbon at C(f) = 10 mg/l
               adsorbs at levels < 10 mg/g carbon at C(f) < 1,0 mg/l

            C(f) - final concentrations of priority pollutant at equilibrium.

            Dash Indicates data not available.
Date:    9/25/81
                III.3.1.1-7,

-------
     TABLE 3.1.1-2.  CLASSES OF ORGANIC
                     CARBON [3-23]

Organic Chemical Class

Aromatic Hydrocarbons

Polynuclear Aromatics


Chlorinated Aromatics



Phenolics


Chlorinated Phenolics
*High Molecular Weight Aliphatic
 and Branch Chain Hydrocarbons

Chlorinated Aliphatic Hydrocarbons
High Molecular Weight Aliphatic
 Acids and Aromatic Acids

*High Molecular Weight Aliphatic
 Amines and Aromatic Amines

*High Molecular Weight Ketones,
 Esters, Ethers, and Alcohols

Surfactants

Soluble Organic Dyes
      COMPOUNDS ADSORBED ON


      Examples o_f  Chemical Class

      benzene, toluene, xylene

      naphthalene,  anthracene,
      biphenyls

      chlorobenzene,  polychlorinated
      biphenyls, aldrin, endrin,
      toxaphene, DDT

      phenol, cresol,  resorcenol
      and polyphenyls

      trichlorophenol, pentachloro-
      phenol

      gasoline, kerosene
      1,1,1-Trichloroethane,  tri-
      chloroethylene,  carbon  tetra-
      chloride,  perchloroethylene

      tar acids,  benzoic acid
      aniline,  toluene diamine


      hydroquinone,  polyethylene,
      glycol

      alkyl benzene  sulfonates

      methylene blue.  Indigo carmine
*High molecular weight includes compounds in the range of 4 to 20
 carbon atoms.
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.1-8

-------
The degree of removal can also be affected by the surface area
and nature of the adsorbent.

Specific performance data from studies on the following indus-
tries and/or waste streams are provided in subsequent data
sheets:

     - Auto and Other Laundries,
     - Electrical and Electronic Components,
     - Gum and Wood Chemicals,
     - Ore Mining and Dressing,
     - Organic Chemicals Manufacturing,
     - Petroleum Refining,
     - Pulp and Paper Mills,
     - Textile Mills, and
     - Pesticides Manufacturing.

     References

3-1, 3-2, 3-4, 3-5, 3-11, 3-15, 3-16, 3-21, 3-23, 3-24, 3-25,
3-26, 3-63.
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.1-9

-------



















GC
_l
Z
X.
o
1
z
o

u-
Q.
<£
0
CO


z
o
CO
o:
o

Q
bJ
H
>
0


or
0
u.

^.
cc
^
y
13
w
>_

s
O
Z
X
o
LJ
H
O
oc

o
o


















&s

,
>
u
c
CD
O
cj-

0
E
CD
a:

c
0

•p
CO
1_
4->
c
CD
0
c
O

4J
C
CD

^
Cv
u










U9
4->
C
o
a

03
CO
a





























c
CO

T3
CD
Z




CD
O
C
CO
d-^co_t-^o-vocoin
CMco — CM -O • — OO — CMO • • r- O O it CM
CO 	 -00 • • -O -OlACM— -O • •
O OOO -O • O 'O —
O O V O
V

o
00 0
OOOO ^f
O *OO —0000 — CMO
PO — CVJVO — J-OOONOOO — Of-lTiCMV V 	

! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

ON ^ *O CM P"~ lA CM CM LA VO — CM LTN^ VO "• — NO ON —
.— • -OO -OOOOOO .OOlAOOOCM
— — \O -OCM -OOO -O-& • »OO •
V O • 0 • • -O • O O • -O
VO OOO O VOO
V V V V V





vo r^ ON o — ir\ CM
«











ooir\roocoir\i^eocooocoeocMoooor~ooaocovo
CM ~* CO





..
—1
01
E

•I
in
4-1
c u>
CO 3
4* «-  3 C
— a aT3 30)3  <»
co^- C C C — S ^O3-OC— >>CDOO
WOQWO4J4J— 3CC1-O 	 C31T3 — £1 <~ £
COOOMOOO 	 cococo<-3cocoOOOOE
COflOOl— *— t— 1— OCO — C/5OSC/3SOOD<
.«
0
*
cyv o ^" vo CM ^ co in o ON — J31 2 ^f vo h* vo in 2£ o ^ z £ s o* o r*- p**
— z co j NO NO co — CMZvod-ONh- zc\izzzzr»-in — r-
A A





ON tnOCM ON * * *

co A ON ON A A A vo in co A vo ON ON ON ON ON

II 1 1 1 ! 1 III 1 ! ! 1 11 1

OO VO O CO — CM O O CM invOfOO ONO it
i~ 	 A — — eviin in vo



in CM CM CM o oo m CM m vo o in m ON in _J - m _J j- j- _i -J r~ in f- -i in
CM— V V CM— V CM .COCNJ V — NOCMO • 00 O -OQ • « Q
v vv vovv v oa— -oo oca oo o\o co
V 0





o
— o o o
o .3-000 -o oooo m -ION _io
initm v cMcomr-- v v m v v Nod- 	 ON cood-a-cocv

i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i

co — ^ m^f ^CMCO — -J^r*-m~~^-J^cM — ' — J ^ -J — J — i
•VO «VVV— OQV .— V -QQ • OOOOQO
_ ._ V '00 —V d-COOO— CO CO CO CO CO CO
O V O
V V






	 cococo CM eo CM coco — CM— — CM CM —












^•^^•^•invo — invoin — m — vo f-- CM r*- co — 	 CM CM cvi r- CM co




0)
as
— CD
a c
•P CD CO E
£ *> C CO
_l a CD CD CD 	
"^ — 4J 4J E ^i
Oi -^ cc co CD 10 eo Q. 	
11 — .c— >*> CB *> CO a >»t- C C O O
* X-C-C03 — JTCQ.CDCDCCO
co CD a*>— co *> co i r:£ a> o
4J £^TCDXI£^ZCO. C^ JT ^
c 	 a£ a 0.0.1 o— a. o
w >> >> -P .C 	 <- >» O I
*> £ N — £ a— -o-o o.c t- E
3 E «C>>Q. XOO— 4-> 0 1
— >, 3 E E E 0)0)4-1— 4JWW-CO)— O
— CO— E 3 CD X 3 3 1.03— >> O O O O E .C !- CD
00 	 3 — S-T3 « 	 ' 	 CM & >>£ Ot-«- 	 0 — 0 C
a. e c 	 E a> — 3 tu c >E O O-C-O OJC CD >— 0 >>C+>4>C 	 1 I+»C£N
U4UU]t.-ot.acDCD<-O 	 CO C W 4J 1 CD E 1 CCitd-CCDOC
— CCg)«£O>»a>a>— ® — £ 	 3 	 1 1 •..CD.CItt

o
i-
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.1-10

-------
* * * * *



















cc
5
1
o
i
z
0
—
i—
a.
cc.
o
10
o
<

z
0
CO
cc

o
o
K^
< CO
> 3
— C
O -P
< c
o
ceo
^
^.
cc
2J
^
CO
>_
o
o

o
z
X
0
LJ
H
O
CC
H-
0
u


















s«

,
>
u
c
CO
u
Cl_
c^
CO

«
CO
^
0
E
ID
CC
C
CO

•a
ID
Z





CO
a
c
CO
cc





C
o

4->
co
1_
•P
c
CO
o
c
o
o

4J
c
ID
3

(^
't-
.ij
c
CO

TJ
CO
s:








CO
o
c
CO
cc











o>
.P
C
o
a
eg
CO
0







CO
CO
u
U)
_
3
U-



co
CO
u
ID

JJ
O

._
a.















43
c
CO
*>
^
_
—
o
CX
00 ON OifNONOiAOCMS — OOf*- ON ON ON ON ON ^- ON OCOONONifsSCM2.SS
ON ON i/^ r*~ ON GO ON ON ON 7T iTN ON ^^ ON ON ON ON ON O\ ON t*~ NO ON ON 1""" ^T ifN ^^ Z 2T
A AAAAAA AA






* * ON ON ON ON ON ONON
ON h- IT\ ONCOONONONON 00 ON ON ON ON ON
ON ON ON ONONAAAA O\AON AAON

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 III III

co O * * * O* CNJ— NO* O ONONOO
CM tfN 00 f*" U"\ ^J" ^f CN( ON lA ON ON 1T>
00 OXON NO NO A



oaa .j- -.3-aacic-aaoazoN -mz — QZZ -coo -QQ
CO CO CO — O -CO COCO CO CO ro CO O CO CM NO — CO CO
0 «
CM 00


O O
O OO
O OO O
« o - o
J-coo itoo -1 — I-JO -OifO-lO ON NO
• *ro^* • • O OO^COIANO • -4" O J" CM -O ON •>
ITN — NOONOO CO CQ CO CM — ^t T 	 CO ON CO — Z lT\ NO ON

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

_J _ J _J Q -J _J ^ t lr^^^r^^r^^^-•/^^(^ if^Nr^ 	 1 i/^>
ooQzoa a OQZZZZZ -z •azzaao

«







(0— — 	 	 CNl — —










— ror-CO— ITvCM — CM— CM CM CM IfN O fO — CO ij- ON PO CM CO CO CM fO 	
— — —





CO
c
CO
co >> a>
c x:  CO CO >, 0 Q. 	 CO CO C E
C O C -C.C.C— OS->>OOCOO
co ^- a>co  o o >> 3 -o
COCO — C03CO CO CO O O O — O £ _O !-
C — N — C CL<1- £ CS- £1 	 IB — (DO 	 OO — O O
co £ c £- o •**— • ^ 4J o.c.c.£rc.x:c — i-t-^-i-^xi 	
XJOCOCOHOeoJCCC:— 4J CO>3 -CNNOO*JC0OO! I 1 1 £5- --OO >>£- -P
— CNJ JI — CM *» C C 3 3 0.0 ! 	 CNJ — CM CM JJJ-> 	 — — C Q.J- a

CJ — Ult— — 
T3 > CO CO CO
C 013 E E

co .P-P x
(0X1 O O O
•X C C (-
c - a
CO— 1 •> -Q.
— Q Q ?£ <
CQCQZZ*
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.1-11

-------


















O
UJ

O
^

CC.
0
u_
>
a:
«£
s:
CO

^
o
o
o
z
X
o
UJ
1-

o
cc
H
Z
O
o


















^

•
>
o
c
CD
0
K
Ct-
CD

—
CO
>
0
c
CO
CC
c
CO
—
•o
CD
S




CD
a
c
to
IT








C
o
—
p
CO
S-
p
c
CO
o
c
o
0
p
c
CO

—
t.
Cf_
UJ
C
CO
—
•c

z







CD
a
c
CO
a:











•p
c
0
Q
CO
p
CO
Q






CO
CO
o
in

	
u_



CD
—
CO
0
in
•p
o
—
—
a.




















P
C
CO
p
—
o
a.

•^° O NO O ON J*
ON Is- ON r^» ON in
A




r-d- CMON>O
ON ON ON A ON

II III

O O ^ ON 00
ONVO VOON
A








CO NO -^ O CO Zf
CNJ o in co — —
— o

0



00

OO OO
V rOCO — OtfN

1 1 1 1 1 1

in co r^ o — ON
— ITS — CM O
.
o
V






CM— —










"^







• •
_J
^^
cn
E

to
4J
C
CO
4J CO
3 in co
— — CO
— O CO
0 C i-
a co 01

— a-o
CO ^^ C
om — co
w o'o co o -P —
w O O W O O —
COOOOI-I-I-O
— •
o

 ~»
3. -

•« x
in co
4* Ju
C —
CO >>
P JZ CD
-3 E PC
->>3E g E CO 4)
— CO— E 3 CD >> 3 3 1 —
oo 	 3— '-•a s 	 s- — CM— eo
aEC 	 ECO— 3CDCCO— — OJ=
— co>»Eoa.c-oo.*co>— o C4J
G4J>CBCO— CO — JC 	 .CCO
X«OQOOOO— ISZC/5COt-NCDO-Z
0
K






























































•
CO
^
J3
CO


CO

4J
0
c
to
•p •
CO —
•0 3
ttm
co at
P C
CO-—
o c
*~ CQ

£ s
P
01 O
-X C
c
CO «
— z
coz
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.1-12

-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated  Carbon Adsorption -  Granular
               Effluent Guidelines
               Auto and other laundries
               Power laundries
Data source:
Point source
Subcategory:
Plant: N
References: 3-84, Appendix  C
Pretreatment/treatment:  Screen.
  Carbon Adsorp.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
Data source  status
  Not specified
  Bench  scale
  Pilot  scale
  Full scale
                                                                                 x
                                     Equal., Sed./
 Wastewater flow  rate: 15.1 m3/d
 Contact time: Unspecified
 Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
 Weight capacity  of carbon: Unspecified
 Unit configuration:   Unspecified
                                               Bed depth:  Unspecified
                                               Volumetric capacity: Unspecified
                                               Carbon type/characteristics: Un-
                                                   specified
                                               Backwash rate:  Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL DATA
                sampling; 2 dav composite and grab	Ana IvsIs:
                                                  Data set I (V.7.3.II
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, ng/L:
BOD5(8)
COD
TOC
TSS
Ol 1 and grease(a)
Toal phenol
Total phosphorus
Toxic pollutants, M9/L:
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
Bis (2-ethylhexyl ) ph thai ate
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Di ethyl phthalate
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Pentach 1 oropheno 1
Pheno 1
To 1 uene
Chloroform
Methylene chloride
Tetrachloroethy lene
T r i ch 1 o roe thy 1 ene
Concentre
Influent E

57(a)
130
40
146
t(a)
0.028 0
1.6

12
34
31
66
50
11
2<|0
67
36
7
NO
5
ND
2
3
70
38
100
12
tion
friuent

361 a)
110
38
78
8(b)
.029
2.0

15
36
42
65
BDL
7
210
23
17
5
3
4
3
1
4
18
3
32
5
Percent
remova 1

37
NM
5
NN
NM
NH
NH

NH
NH
NH
2
64*
36
13
66
53
29
NH
20
NH
50
NH
74
92
68
58
Detection
limit









2
4
4
22
36
5
1
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.03
0.89
0.4
0.07
0.1
5
0.4

0.5
                Blanks indicate data not available.
                BDL, below detection limit.
                ND, not detected.
                NH, not meaningful.
                •Approximate value.
                (a) Average of four values.
                (b) Average of three values.
Date:   9/25/81
                                III.3.1.1-13

-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Activated Carbon  Adsorption - Granular
Data source:  Government report
Point source:  Auto and other laundries
Subcategory:   Industrial laundries
Plant: Unspecified
References: 3-94,  pp.  50,66
Pretreatment/treatment:  Filter/Carbon  adsorp.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater  flow rate:  See below
Contact time:  See  below
Hydraulic loading  rate: Unspecified
Weight capacity of carbon-. 2,400 g
Unit configuration: 5.08 cm diameter
  column
                                                    Data source  status:
                                                      Not specified
                                                      Bench scale
                                                      Pilot scale
                                                      Full scale
                                               Bed depth: Unspecified
                                               Volumetric capacity:  Unspecified
                                               Carbon type/characteristics: Fil-
                                                  trasorb 400
                                               Backwash rate:   Unspecified
                                   REMOVAL DATA
      Sampling:  Composite and Grab
BOOI51 COD
Wastewater flow. Contact carbon tvoe/ Concentre)
cu.m/mln/sa.n time, mln characteristics Influent
0.273 11.3 Fl Itrasorb tiOO(a) 330
300

;ion. nq/L
Effluent
132
190
TOC
Concentration. ma/L
Influent Effluent
Percent
remova 1
60
36

Percent
remova 1
Concentration. ma/L Percent
Influent Effluent removal
520 160 69
630 350 <4l4
Oi 1 and Crease
Concentration, ma/L Percent
Influent Effluent removal
       0.273         11.3 '  Fl Itrasorb 1)00(«)   150      55     63     I20(b)   82(b)    29

                                     190     120     37     20     <•)     >57

      Blanks Indicate data not available.
      (a)Suspected error in analysis.
  Date:   9/25/81
                                    III.3.1.1-14

-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Carbon  Adsorption - Granular
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Electrical and  electronic
  components
Subcategory:  Oil filled capacitors
Plant:  30082
References:  3-31, pp. VII-27-29,38,40
Pretreatment/treatment:  Oil.  Sep.,  Filter/Carbon Adsorp.
                Data source  status:
                  Not specified
                  Bench  scale
                  Pilot  scale
                  Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  234 m3/day
Contact time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading  rate:   Unspecified
Weight capacity of carbon:   Unspecified
Unit configuration:   Series
           Bed depth:  Unspecified
           Volumetric  capacity:   Unspecified
           Carbon  type/characteristics:
             Unspecified
           Backwash  rate:   Unspecified
                                   REMOVAL DATA
Samol inq: Three 24-hour composites
Pol lutant/oarameter
Toxic pollutants, u,g/L:
Ant imony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
S i 1 ve r
Zinc
2,4-Trichlorobenzene
1, l-Trichloroethane
l-Dichloroethane
l-Dichloroethylene
2-trans-Dichloroethylene
Methyl ene chloride
Naptha lene
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Diethyl phthalate
Toluene
Trichloroethylene
Concent rat
Influent

1.7
2.3
<5
<20
67
<50
8I
NM
NM
NM
94
>99
99
85
>99
98
78
51
NM
0
5
99
99
     Blanks  indicate data not available.
     ND,  not detected.
     NM,  not meaningful.
     (a(Values presented as "less than"  the reported concentration are below
        detectable limits.  They are not reported as BDL because the detection
        limits are variable in this industry.
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.1-15

-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Carbon Adsorption - Granular
Data source: Effluent Guidelines
Point source: Gum and wood
Subcategory:  Unspecified
Plant: 102
References: 3-4, pp. 7-9,7-10
Pretreatment/treatment: Oil Sep., Neutral,  Flota-
 tion (DAF), Filter/Carbon Adsorp.
                  Data source status:
                    Not specified
                    Bench scale
                    Pilot scale
                    Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate: 12,300 ma/d design,
  9,820 m3/d actual
Contact time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weight capacity of carbon:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Unspecified
             Bed depth:  Unspecified
             Volumetric  capacity-.  Unspecified
             Carbon  type/characteristics:  Un-
                specified
             Backwash  rate:  Unspecified
             Carbon  exhaustion  rate:   1.2  kg
                COD/kg  carbon; 0.44 kg TOC/kg
                carbon
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling: 3-day, 24-hour
composite and qrab

Ana 1 vs i s :
Concentration
Pol lutant/oa rameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
BOD5
COD
TOC
TSS
Oi 1 and grease
Total phenol
Toxic pollutant, ug/L:
Cadmium
Ch rom i urn
Copper
Nickel
Zinc
Pentach 1 o ropheno 1
Benzene
Toluene
Phenol
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Influent

300
750
200
81
28
4.66

91
1, 100
1,300
1,000
1, 100
120
590
2,500
120
ND
Effluent

82
160
42
13
2.2
0.58

22
260
360
330
290
49
210
630
49
330
Data
Percent
remova 1

73
79
79
84
92
88

76
77
72
68
74
59
64
75
59
NM
set 1 (V.7.3.19)
Detection
1 imit








10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
    Blanks  indicate data not available.
    ND,  not detected.
    NM,  not meaningful.
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.1-16

-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Activated Carbon Adsorption  - Granular


Data source: Effluent Guidelines                 Data  source status:
Point source: Ore mining and dressing              Not specified         	
Subcategory: Gold mill                             Bench scale           	
Plant: 4105                                        Pilot scale           	x_
References: 3-66, pp.  V 68-70                      Full scale            	
Pretreatment/treatment: Sed./Carbon Adsorp.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified            Bed depth:  Unspecified
Contact time: Unspecified                    Volumetric capacity: Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate: Unspecified          Carbon type/characteristics: Un-
Weight capacity of carbon: Unspecified         specified
Unit configuration: Unspecified              Backwash rate:  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA

Sampling;  24 hours	Analysis;  Data set 1  (V.7.3.23)

                           Concentration	    Percent     Detection
Pollutant/parameter	Influent	Effluent	removal	limit	

Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
  Copper                  140          <50          >64
  Zinc                     40           10           75

Blanks indicate data not available.
Date:   9/25/81             III.3.1.1-17

-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Activated Carbon Adsorption - Granular
Data source:  Government  report
Point source:  Organic chemicals
Subcategory:  Unspecified
Plant:  Steam 081A
References:  3-88, pp. 50-55,  35,  216-217
Pretreatment/treatment:   Unspecified/Carbon Adsorp.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
                                                   Data source  status:
                                                     Not specified
                                                     Bench  scale
                                                     Pilot  scale
                                                     Full scale
Wastewater  flow  rate:  3.79 L/min
Contact time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading  rate:   41.6 L/min/m2
Weight capacity  of carbon:  0.15 kg or-
  ganics/kg carbon
Unit configuration: Plexiglass column
 12.7 cm in diameter;  columns have a
 double layer  of fiberglass window screen,
 10-15 cm of pea gravel  at the bottom
                                              Bed depth:  Unspecified
                                              Volumetric capacity:   Unspecified
                                              Carbon type/characteristics:
                                                Westvaco-WVG
                                              Backwash rate:   15.2  L/min
                                              Total carbon  inventory:   28.3 L,
                                                11.3 kg
                                   REMOVAL DATA
Sampling; _ Composite and grab
                                                               Analysis: Data set I IV.7.3.211
Runni rig
tine, hr
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
21
27
30
33
36
39
H2
'15
18
51
51
57
60
1.2-0
Concentrate
influent 1
2,100
730
1.100
880
560
600
1,600
1.800
230
2.000
3.300
2,000
2,000
2,600
50
'150
860
1.100
520
250
jcnloroe^hane
jn. ua/L
Effluent
720
20
180
230
550
560
1 , 800
2.300
1,200
8,100
1,200
1,200
2,100
1.500
50
110
3,200
3.100
6,800
12.000
Percent
remova 1
71
97
81
71
2
7
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
0
76
NM
NM
NM
NM
1.2-Trans-dichloroethvlone
Concentration. uo/L
Influent Effluent
8,800
6,500
15,000
3,500
2,800
2,500
3,900
3.900
2.000
1.100
3.500
3,000
7,500
12,000
230
15.000
1,300
l.UOO
3,200
2,600
250
230
90
110
200
20
170
90
110
210
210
220
110
210
210
180
90
90
390
110
Percent
renova 1
97
96
99
96
93
99
96
98
93
85
93
93
95
98
NM
99
93
91
88
95
Motl
Concentraj
Influent
27,000
13.000
19.000
3,200
1.300
1,100
3.200
2.200
1,300
210
2.100
2,100
1 1 , 000
20,000
22,000
22,000
260
3.900
1.500
2.100
ivtene chloride
Lion, ua/L
Effluent
650
190
150
330
180
60
230
210
390
310
380
380
390
280
23.000
25,000
210
210
300
280
Percent
remova 1
98
99
99
90
86
96
93
89
70
NM
82
82
96
99
NM
NM
8
91
80
87
1 . 1 .2.2-Tetrachloroethano
Concent raj
Influent

1,600
2,300

110
10
350

33,000


210
2,000
2,100
2,800
2,000
150
920
2,200
230
Lion. ua/L
Effluent
2,000
20
2,800






50




1 1 , 000
7.900
130
20
20

Percent
renova 1

>99
NM

NM
NM
NM
NM

NM

NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
13
98
99

Blanks indicate data not available.
NM, not Meaningful.
   Date:   9/25/81
                                  III.3.1.1-18

-------
TREATMENT  TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Carbon Adsorption  -  Granular
 Data  source:   Government  report
 Point source:   Organic  chemicals
 Subcategory:   Unspecified
 Plant:   Steam  081A
 References:  3-88,  pp.  50-55,  35,  216-217
 Pretreatment/treatment:   Unspecified/Carbon Adsorp.
                  Data source status:
                    Not specified
                    Bench scale
                    Pilot scale
                    Full scale
 DESIGN  OR  OPERATING PARAMETERS

 Wastewater flow  rate:  3.79  L/min
 Contact time:  Unspecified
 Hydraulic  loading rate:   41.6 L/min/m2
 Weight  capacity  of carbon:   0.15  kg or-
   ganics/kg carbon
 Unit  configuration: Plexiglass column
  12.7 cm in diameter;  columns have  a
  double layer  of fiberglass window  screen,
  10-15  cm  of pea gravel  at  the bottom
             Bed depth:  Unspecified
             Volumetric capacity:  Unspecified
             Carbon type/characteristics:
               Westvaco-WVG
             Backwash rate:  15.2 L/min
             Total carbon inventory:  28.3 L,
               11.3 kg
                                     HCMOVAL DATA
                                                                    Oats set I IV.7.3.211
1 . 2-0 ich lo roe thane
Runn i ng
t i me . h r
3
6
9
\2
15
18
21
2<4
27
30
33
36
39
12
15
"48
51
VI
57
60
Blanks indi
Concent ra
Influent
80,000
146,000
150,000
76,000
250,000
11.000
170,000
170.000
5.000
'100
190. 000
160.000
12.000
12,000
21,000
6,200
5,100
5 / . 000
6.500
2. 100
icnte data
tion. iig/i. Pe
Effluent re
120
2.600
90
25.000
12.000
180
160,000
260,000
1HO.OOO
160,000
110,000
91,000
130,000
31,000
63.000
85,000
37,000
33,000
50,000
60
not ava 1 table.
rcent
mova 1
>99
91
>99
67
83
96
6
NH
NH
NH
26
11
NH
19
NH
NH
NH
12
NH
97

1.2-Trans-dcchloroetnylene
Concentration. IIQ/L
Influent Effluent
110.000
3,700

910
2,100
7,000
12,000
1,100
320
60
7,800
11,000
1.800
750
20
30
220
18.000
110
170

20
100

500
750
1.100
2,600
8,200
620
8,600
12,000
17,000
19,000
30,000
30
30
5,100
7,200
6,800
1.220

Percent
remova 1
>99
97

17
69
81
79
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NH
NM
NM
0
NM
60
NK
NM

Methvlene chloride
Concontral
Influent
150
130
180
310
1.300
320
200
360
70
510
320
130
210
130
70
620
100
120
1?0
320

tion. HQ/L
Effluent
20
50
140
60
170
70
110
70
60
10
810
90
100

220
310
230

120
56,000

Percent
remova 1
87
62
78
82
87
78
15
81
11
98
NH
31
58
NH
NM
15
12
NH
NM
NM

l,_l_.?.2-TotrBchlo roe thane
Concent ml
Influent
320,000
330,000
190,000
11,000
110,000
110,000
18,000
18,000
50,000
30,000
9,500
10,000
60,000
36,000
3,800

13,000
50,000
50,000
20,000

tion. iig/L
tffluont
61,000
6,300
7,000
21,000
25,000
680
36,000
2,700
10,000
8,500
20,000
3,200
1,000
3,000


1.000
2,600
3 . 800
1.600

Percent
remova 1
80
98
96
NM
77
>99
NM
85
80
72
NM
63
93
92
NM

91
95
92
92

IM, not meaningful.
 Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.1-19

-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Activated Carbon Adsorption  -  Granular
Data source:  Government report
Point  source:  Organic  chemicals
Subcategory:  Unspecified
Plant:   Steam 081A
References:   3-82, pp.  214-215
Pretreatment/treatment:   Unspecified/Carbon Adsorp.
                Data source status:
                  Not specified
                  Bench scale
                  Pilot scale
                  Full scale
DESIGN  OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
Wastewater flow rate:  See below
Contact  time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic  loading rate:   See below
Weight capacity of carbon:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Columns have a  double
  layer  of fiberglass  window screen  and 10-15
  cm of  pea gravel at  bottom
           Bed depth:   Unspecified
           Volumetric  capacity:   Unspecified
           Carbon  type/characteristics:
             Unspecified
           Backwash rate:  Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL DATA
   Samp I Ing;  3 runs
                                                Analysis: Data set 1 IV.7.3.241
                 Hydraulic
   Wastewater flow,    loading.   Number of      Toxic
                 L/sa.cm/mln   samples	pollutants
               Concentration. uq/L
               Influential Effluent
Percent Detection
removaI limit
1.1
1.9
2.85
1.1
1.9
2.85
1.1
1.9
2.85
1.1
1.9
2.85
1.1
1.9
2.85
1.1
1.9
2.85
1.1
1.9
2.85
1.1
1.9
2.85
0.74
1.23
1.84
0.71|
1.23
1.84
0.74
1.23
1.84
0.74
1.23
1.84
0.74
1.23
1.84
0.74
1.23
1.84
0.74
1.23
1.84
0.74
1.23
1.84
4
5
6
4
4
6
4
3
6
4
4
6

4
6
4
4

4
4
5
3
4
6
Chloroethane


Chloroform


1 , 1-Dlchloroethane


1,2-0 I Chloroethane


1 , 2-Oichloroepropane


1,1,1-Tr I Ohio roe thane


1, 1,2-Trlchloroethane


Vinyl chloride


42,000
60,000
35,000
11,000
92,000
12,000
26,000
91,000
64,000
510,000
1,170,000
1,220,000

28,000
6,900
5,000
12,000

23,000
15,000
20,000
2,300
4,400
4,800
4,600
67,000
99,000
NO
NO
ND
ND
ND
9,000
ND
150,000
330,000

ND
ND
ND
ND

ND
ND
ND
1,100
9,600
8,600
89
NM
NH
>99
>99
>99
>99
>99
86
>99
87
73

>99
>99
>99
>99

>99
>99
>99
52
NM
NM
   Blanks Indicate data not available.
   ND, not detected.
   NM, not meaningful.
   (a) Halogenated hydrocarbons Wastewater.
   Date:    9/25/81
III.3.1.1-20

-------
 TREATMENT  TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Carbon Adsorption - Granular

 Data source:   Government  report                   Data source status:
 Point source:  Organic chemicals                    Not specified         	
 Subcategory:   Unspecified                          Bench scale           	
 Plant:   Unspecified                                 Pilot scale             x
 References:  3-88, p. 43                            Full scale            	
 Pretreatment/treatment:   None/Carbon Adsorp.

 DESIGN OR  OPERATING PARAMETERS

 Wastewater flow  rate:  Unspecified           Bed depth:  Unspecified
 Contact time:  Unspecified                   Volumetric capacity:  Unspecified
 Hydraulic  loading  rate:   Unspecified         Carbon type/characteristics:
 Weight capacity  of carbon:  Unspecified        Westvaco-WVG
 Unit configuration:  One  column with a       Backwash rate:  Unspecified
   double layer of  fiberglass window screen   pH:  1
   and 10-15  cm of  pea gravel in bottom
                                REMOVAL DATA

 Sampling;   1  run	Analysis;  Data set 1 (V.7.3.24)

                                  Concentration     _     .    «,.,.•
                              	  Percent   Detection
   Pollutant/parameter	Influent (a) Effluent  removal	limit	

 Classical  pollutants, mg/L:
   COD                           1,200        450      62
   TOC                             720         76      90

 Toxic pollutants,  yg/L:
   Chloroethane                 390,000         ND     >99
   1,1-Dichloroethane            40,000         ND     >99
   1,2-Dichloroethane           950,000         ND     >99
 Blanks  indicate  data not  available.
 ND,  not detected.
 (a)Chlorinated hydrocarbons contaminated wastewater.
Date:   9/25/81                III.3.1.1-21

-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Activated Carbon Adsorption  - Granular
Data source :   Government report
Point source:  Organic chemicals
Subcategory:   Unspecified
Plant:  Unspecified
References:  3-88,  p.  43
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Carbon Adsorp.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:   Unspecified
Contact time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weight capacity of carbon:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  One column with a
  double layer of fiberglass window screen
  and 10-15 cm of pea gravel in bottom
                    Data source  status:
                      Not specified
                      Bench scale
                      Pilot scale
                      Full scale
               Bed depth:   Unspecified
               Volumetric  capacity:   Unspecified
               Carbon type/characteristics:
                 Westvaco-WVG
               Backwash rate:  Unspecified
               pH:  1
                                REMOVAL DATA
Sampling;  1 run
                Analysis;  Data set 1  (V.7.3.24)
  Pollutant/parameter
    Concentration     _     ,_   „ ^_
	  Percent   Detection
Influent(a) Effluent  removal     limit
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  COD                            1,600
  TOC                              570
              1,100      31
                960      NM
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Chloroe thane
1 , 1-Dichloroethane
1 , 2-Dichloroe thane

59,000
78,000
960,000

190,000
8,000
170,000

NM
90
82
Blanks indicate data not available.
NM, not meaningful.
(a)Chlorinated hydrocarbons contaminated wastewater.
Date:   9/25/81
   III.3.1.1-22

-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Activated Carbon  Adsorption - Granular

 Data source:  Government report                  Data  source status:
 Point source:  Organic chemicals                   Not specified         	
 Subcategory:  Unspecified                          Bench  scale           	
 Plant:  Unspecified                                Pilot  scale           	x_
 References:  3-88,  p.  43                           Full scale            	
 Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Carbon  Adsorp.

 DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

 Wastewater flow rate:   Unspecified          Bed depth:  Unspecified
 Contact time:  Unspecified                  Volumetric capacity:  Unspecified
 Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified         Carbon type/characteristics:
 Weight capacity of carbon:  Unspecified        Westvaco-WVG
 Unit configuration:  One column with  a      Backwash rate:  Unspecified
   double layer of fiberglass window screen  pH:  1
   and 10-15 cm of pea gravel in bottom
                                 REMOVAL  DATA

 Sampling;  1 run	Analysis;  Data set 1  (V.7.3.24)

                                   Concentration      _      .   „ ,.  ,.•
                               	   Percent   Detection
   Pollutant/parameter	Influent(a)  Effluent   removal	limit	

 Classical pollutants mg/L:
   COD                            1,100      1,100        0
   TOC                              660        300       55
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Chloroethane
1 , 1-Dichloroe thane
1 , 2-Dichloroe thane

330,000
310,000
3,000,000

ND
ND
ND

>99
>99
>99
 Blanks indicate data not available.
 ND, not detected.
 (a)Chlorinated hydrocarbons contaminated wastewater.
Date:   9/25/81                III.3.1.1-23

-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Activated Carbon  Adsorption  - Granular

Data source:  Government report                  Data  source status:
Point source:  Organic chemicals                   Not specified         	
Subcategory:  Unspecified                          Bench  scale           ^^
Plant:  Unspecified                                Pilot  scale             x
References:  3-88,  p.  43                           Full scale            	
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Carbon Adsorp.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:   Unspecified           Bed depth: Unspecified
Contact time:  Unspecified                   Volumetric capacity:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified         Carbon type/characteristics:
Weight capacity of carbon:  Unspecified         Westvaco-WVG
Unit configuration:  One column with a       Backwash rate:  Unspecified
  double layer of fiberglass window screen   pH: 1
  and 10-15 cm of pea gravel in bottom
                                REMOVAL DATA

Sampling;  1 run	Analysis;   Data set  1  (V.7.3.24)

                                  Concentration     _      .    _  .
                              	  Percent    Detection
  Pollutant/parameter	Influent(a)  Effluent  removal	limit	

Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  COD                            1,100      1,500     NM
  TOC                              660        590     11

Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
  Chloroethane                 330,000    240,000     27
  1,2-Dichloroethane         3,000,000    180,000     94


Blanks indicate data not available.
NM, not meaningful.
(a) Chlorinated hydrocarbons contaminated wastewater.
 Date:   9/25/81              III.3.1.1-24

-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Activated Carbon Adsorption  -  Granular

Data source:  Government report                  Data  source  status:
Point source:  Organic chemicals                   Not specified         	
Subcategory:  Unspecified                          Bench  scale           	
Plant:  Unspecified                                Pilot  scale             x
References:  3-88,  p.  43                           Full scale            	
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Carbon Adsorp.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:   Unspecified           Bed depth:  Unspecified
Contact time:  Unspecified                   Volumetric capacity:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified         Carbon type/characteristics:
Weight capacity of carbon:  Unspecified        Westvaco-WVG
Unit configuration:  One column with a       Backwash rate:  Unspecified
  double layer of fiberglass window screen   pH:  1
  and 10-15 cm of pea gravel in bottom
                                REMOVAL DATA

Sampling;  1 run	Analysis;   Data  set 1  (V.7.3.24)

                              	Concentration     percent    Detection
  Pollutant/parameter	Influent (a)  Effluent   removal	limit	

Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  COD                            1,500       900       40
  TOC                              640       270       58

Toxic pollutants,  yg/L:
  Chloroethane                 130,000        63       >99
  1,2-Dichloroethane         1,300,000        78       >99


Blanks indicate data not available.
(a) Chlorinated hydrocarbons contaminated  wastewater.
Date:  9/25/81               III.3.1.1-25

-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Activated Carbon Adsorption - Granular
Data source:  Government report
Point source:   Organic chemicals
Subcategory:  Unspecified
Plant:  Unspecified
References:  3-88,  p.  43
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Carbon Adsorp.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:   Unspecified
Contact time:   Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weight capacity of carbon:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  One column with a
  double layer of fiberglass window
  screen and 10-15 cm of pea gravel in  bottom
                    Data  source  status:
                     Not specified
                     Bench scale
                     Pilot scale
                     Full scale
               Bed depth:   Unspecified
               Volumetric  capacity:  Unspecified
               Carbon type/characteristics:
                 Westvaco-WVG
               Backwash rate:   Unspecified
               pH:  1
                                REMOVAL DATA
Sampling;  1 run
                Analysis;   Data set  1  (V.7.3.24)
                                  Concentration
                                                    Percent
  Pollutant/parameter
                                Detection
Influent(a) Effluent  removal     limit
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  COD                            1,500
  TOC                              570
              1,400       7
                610      NM
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Chloroe thane
1 , 1-Dichloroe thane
1 , 2-Dichloroe thane

59,000
78,000
960,000

150,000
45,000
760,000

0
42
21
Blanks indicate data not available.
NM, not meaningful.
(a) Chlorinated hydrocarbons contaminated wastewater.
Date:   9/25/81
  III.3.1.1-26

-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Carbon Adsorption - Granular

Data source:  Government report                   Data source  status:
Point source:  Organic chemicals                    Not specified        	
Subcategory:  Unspecified                           Bench scale           	
Plant:  Unspecified                                 Pilot scale             x
References:  3-88, p. 43         .                   Full scale           	
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Carbon Adsorp.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified           Bed depth:  Unspecified
Contact time:  Unspecified                   Volumetric capacity:   Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified         Carbon type/characteristics:
Weight capacity of carbon:  Unspecified        Westvaco-WVG
Unit configuration:  One column with a       Backwash rate: Unspecified
  double layer of fiberglass window screen   pH:  1
  and 10-15 cm of pea gravel in the bottom
                                 REMOVAL DATA

Sampling;  1 run	Analysis;   Data  set  1  (V.7.3.24)


                                  Concentration     „     .    „....•
                              	  Percent    Detection
  Pollutant/parameter	Influent (a)  Effluent  removal	limit

Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  COD                           1,500       1,200      19
  TOC                             640         390      38

Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
  Chloroethane                130,000          ND     >99
  1,1-Dichloroethane          190,000          ND     >99
  1,2-Dichloroethane        1,300,000          ND     >99
Blanks indicate data not available.
ND, not detected.
(a) Chlorinated hydrocarbons contaminated wastewater.
Date:   9/25/81                III.3.1.1-27

-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Activated Carbon Adsorption  - Granular
Data source:  Government report
Point source:  Organic chemicals
Subcategory:  Unspecified
Plant:  Unspecified
References:  3-88, p. 43
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Carbon Adsorp.
                    Data  source  status:
                     Not specified
                     Bench  scale
                     Pilot  scale
                     Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:   Unspecified
Contact time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weight capacity of carbon:  0.34 kg
  organics/kg C
Unit configuration:  One column with a
  double layer of fiberglass window screen
  and 10-15 cm of pea gravel in bottom
               Bed depth:   Unspecified
               Volumetric  capacity:  Unspecified
               Carbon type/characteristics:
                 Westvaco-WVG
               Backwash rate:   Unspecified
               pH:  1
                                REMOVAL DATA
Sampling;  1 run
                Analysis:   Data set  1  (V.7.3.24)
                                  Concentration
                                                    Percent   Detection
  Pollutant/parameter
Influent(a) Effluent  removal 	 limit
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  COD                            1,000
  TOC                              630
                510
                350
49
44
Blanks indicate data not available.
(a)Chlorinated hydrocarbons contaminated wastewater.
Date:   9/25/81
  III.3.1.1-28

-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Activated Carbon Adsorption - Granular

 Data source:   Government report                   Data source status:
 Point source:   Organic  chemicals                   Not specified         	
 Subcategory:   Unspecified                          Bench scale           	
 Plant:  Unspecified                                Pilot scale           	x_
 References:   3-88,  p. 43                           Full scale            	
 Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Carbon Adsorp.

 DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

 Wastewater flow rate:   Unspecifed           Bed depth:  Unspecified
 Contact time:   Unspecified                  Volumetric capacity:  Unspecified
 Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified         Carbon type/characteristics:
 Weight capacity of carbon:   Unspecified        Westvaco-WVG
 Unit configuration: One column  with a       Backwash rate:  Unspecified
   double layer of fiberglass window screen   pH:  1
   and 10-15 cm of pea gravel in  bottom
                                 REMOVAL DATA

 Sampling;   1 run	Analysis;  Data set 1 (V.7.3.24)

                                   Concentration     _      .   _ .   . ,
                               	  Percent   Detection
   Pollutant/parameter	Influent (a) Effluent  removal	limit	

 Classical  pollutants, mg/L:
   COD                            1,000        560      44
   TOC                              630        440      30

 Toxic pollutants,  yg/L:
   Chloroethane                 110,000         ND     >99
   1,1-Dichloroethane             79,000         ND     >99
   1,2-Dichloroethane            920,000         ND     >99


 Blanks indicate data  not available.
 ND, not detected.
 (a)Chlorinated hydrocarbons  contaminated wastewater.
Date:   9/25/81                III.3.1.1-29

-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Activated Carbon Adsorption - Granular

Data source:  Government report                   Data source status:
Point source:   Organic chemicals                   Not specified         	
Subcategory:  Unspecified                          Bench scale           	
Plant:  Unspecified                                Pilot scale             x
References:  3-88, p.  43                           Full scale            	
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Carbon Adsorp.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:   Unspecified           Bed depth:  Unspecified
Contact time:   Unspecified                   Volumetric capacity:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified          Carbon type/characteristics:
Weight capacity of carbon:  Unspecified        Westvaco-WVG
Unit configuration:  One column  with a        Backwash rate:  Unspecified
  double layer of fiberglass window screen   pH:  1
  and 10-15 cm of pea gravel in  bottom
                                 REMOVAL  DATA

Sampling;  1 run	Analysis;   Data  set  1  (V.7.3.24)

                                 Concentration      Percent   Detection
  Pollutant/parameter	Influent   Effluent    removal	limit	

Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  COD                          1,200        220       82
  TOC                            720         40       94
Blanks indicate data not available.
(a)Chlorinated hydrocarbons contaminated wastewater.
 Date:  9/25/81               III.3.1.1-30

-------









••
Ul
3
4-1
as TJ
4-1 41
Ul -H
>4H
Si 41 -H
(0 U U
rH Si 4)
3 3 a
C O Ul
(0 W
Si 4-1
O <0 O
•P 2
1 (0
Q
C
o
•rl
4-1
O
w

rt!
C
O

Si
10
u

T3 Ul
41 4J rH
4-1 Si fO
(0 O U
^ 04 'rl
•H 41 e
4-1 Si 4)
U X!
rt! 4J O
C
0) U
" € "r"'
^* 3 C
BSi i 4-1 U) 01
41 4-1 U C 01
JQ -H (0 »
U Si
0) (0 (0
41 CUJ3 "41
in as u 41 E
U -^. -P -H
41 3 10 4-1
" O OL, O Si
cj *|-f ^^ i—i £2
4-1 Si 4-1 41 JC 3
Cu 4-1 .Q in Si
41 41 c m
T3 S 0 0) 3 rH
3 XI 41 M (0
TJ rH Si W U 4-1
41 O (0 (0 O
CO > U CO H

41
rH
•s
o ro
3 TJ C
*o o *o
4) rH (0
•H 41 C
IH & 41 41 S
-H > 41 O
3 U 41 (0 Si 4J
V) O 41 41 X U 4-1
C6 rH D. W WO
[i] 41 Ul Ul X)
H XI C C 3
W T3 D " g O 4J
S 41 4) C 3 "O (0
rtj 41 -H O f-H C

 (0 >
4) 41 (0 U Ul (0
O 4-1 O, Si •• Ul Si
2 <0 Ul <*H C <0 O>
I-H Si C C7> O O rH
H d C -H cn to
rt! 3 -rl >i 4J Si 41
06 O TD 4-> (0 0) O,
(d rH « (0 -H Si XI
CM <4H4IOU3-H>4-|
O S rH (0 &> *M O
^ -rl D. jrj
O 4J -rl U C O U
(0 4-1 rH O
2 3 u 3 4-* U Si if)
O 4) (0 (0 Si 4) rH
M 4J 4J Si D> 4J >1 1
Wl Ul C T3 -H -H 10 O
U (OO>l41CrHrH
Q 3: U X S S








J


1^
>

«J
a>
Iff
e



«
u
>
!
1









2


J
>
$
Ul















.0
u
°
(D
*
o
(
t
1
i
a
1
«
09
a.


_
•s.
-

c
—
£
c
u
10
u


L.
—
s
o




-
1
0





c
1
IB
<0

—
o
r-



* «
*J
o
"°
•D
ffi

Ol
«.
(D
o


o>
(_


i

ewater
S
1
>


**


K

^
Ik.
kl
-*
|
1
C




j;





c
i.
*
1
J
°





>
L
e

«
1






.



o
Q
V
>.
K
S




\



O\ON^T «^ (09>
ffiO\C* lA ^vO
A A



OOO O OO
ZOO O OO
oo o oo

^O O T-
V r- r- O>
*-

ooo o oo
ooo o oo
ooo o oo
§§§ § §§
."X"^1^ "^ *"^,
fOlOf- ft) »- W>


"§S ^ 2^
*~ 1 ftj •-
*0
^


*
§co> c
oo— o
a1 A ff *» A
Li O U
etoA a co
«0 0 <-"-.O
g^ *-S§«
eg o a-C O
i- O O I- U O
*J O « 4J O W
— *»c c — c
i*- S* 3E k. £
«*- Of»<~ — "•

•-ifia-a1 s 33
• W -O CJ U U

— Wl ftlW OCM
CTiJC *— M O • O
H f"-—- . O •
^ • O — O
••"" 51 •* 51
>- o\
d «-o


A O"D

O\COiTt • O *
rOM5tf% *~ «-*~
^
^
d




tnfOCM •- «- •
odd d d
s




sss s °;s
... o •
ooo o o
%o




































_'
V
—
. 2
Q) — a
w — — •
«2»2

C 3 5
— o *»
£«°S
II*

o **
00.
'CiS

W W O
•wo c
M % A
33^
09 CCU
c ooo
5 ««x
• ® 1- <-£
•O O 33

g— fc. fc. *»
£ C c a
•WO DOC
0)— O O —
•DO *-
§-• III
^^^^OWk^h
gie»st
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.1-31

-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Carbon Adsorption - Granular
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  B
References:  3-116,
Effluent Guidelines
 Petroleum refining
Unspecified
      pp. 148-154
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  Flotation (DAF), Filter/Carbon Adsorp.
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Contact time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weight capacity of carbon:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Unspecified
                               Bed depth:  Unspecified
                               Volumetric capacity:  Unspecified
                               Carbon type/characteristics:  Un-
                                 specified
                               Backwash rate:  Unspecified
    Sampling:  Four days
                  REMOVAL DATA

                            Analysis:
  Data sets  1.2 (V.7.3.26)
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
BOD(5)
COD
TOG
TSS
Oi 1 and grease
Total phenol
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Beryl 1 ium
Chromium
Cyanide
Selenium
Zinc
Si Iver
Cadmium
Copper
Nickel
Lead
Arsenic
Antimony
Thai 1 ium
Influent

15
101
40
21
8.5
0.022

<2.5
30
50
56
65
<3
20
79
67
79
12
>55

NM
39
>63
II
54
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
    Blanks indicate data not available.
    NM, not meaningful.
Date:  9/25/81
                  III.3.1.1-32

-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Activated Carbon Adsorption - Granular
 Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
 Point source:  Petroleum refining
 Subcategory:  Unspecified
 Plant:  H
 References:  3-116,  pp. 148-154
 Pretreatment/treatment:  Oil Sep.

 DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
                            Data source  status:
                              Not specified
                              Bench scale
                              Pilot scale
             /                Full scale
            (API), Filter/Carbon Adsorp.
 Wastewater flow rate:   Unspecified
 Contact time:  Unspecified
 Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
 Weight capacity of carbon:  Unspecified
 Unit configuration:  Unspecified
                       Bed depth:   Unspecified
                       Volumetric  capacity:   Unspecified
                       Carbon type/characteristics:   Un-
                         specified
                       Backwash rate:   Unspecified
 Sampling;  Four days
          REMOVAL DATA

         	Analysis;   Data sets  1,2  (V.7.3.26)
   Pollutant/parameter
           Concentration      Percent   Detection
        Influent   Effluent   removal     limit
 Classical pollutants,
   COD
   TOC
   TSS
   Oil and grease
mg/Li
            29
            19
           3.8
           8.3
 12
9.3
3.9
7.1
 Blanks indicate data not available.
 NM, not meaningful.
59
51
NM
14
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Copper
Zinc
Silver
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Nickel
Lead
Arsenic
Antimony
Selenium
Thallium

12
<40
<3
<2
<1.5
<7
<10
<18
<20
<25
<20
<15

<6
<40
<3
<2
<1 .5
<5
<10
<18
<20
<25
<20
<15

>50
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
Date:   9/25/81
         III.3.1.1-33

-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Carbon Adsorption - Granular
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Petroleum refining
Subcategory:  Unspecified
Plant:  K
References:  3-116, pp. 148-154
                  Data source status:
                    Not specified
                    Bench scale
                    Pilot scale
                    Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  Flotation (DAF), Filter/Carbon Adsorp.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Contact time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weight capacity of carbon:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Unspecified
             Bed depth:  Unspecified
             Volumetric capacity:  Unspecified
             Carbon type/characteristics:  Un-
               specified
             Backwash rate:  Unspecified
    Samp I I no:  Four days
REMOVAL DATA

          Analysis;
Data  sets 1.2  tV.7.3.261
Concentration
Pol 1 utant/oa rameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
COD
TOC
TSS
0! 1 and grease
Total phenol
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Ch rom i urn
Zinc
Si Iver
Be ry 1 1 i urn
Cadmium
Copper
Nickel
Lead
Arsenic
Antimony
Se 1 en i urn
Tha 1 1 i urn
Influent

56
22
t»
6.3
0.023

34
92
<3
<2
62
5
>50

63
65
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
    Blanks  indicate data not available.
    NM,  not meaningful.
 Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.1-34

-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Carbon Adsorption  -  Granular
 Data  source:  Effluent Guidelines
 Point source:  Petroleum  refining
 Subcategory:  Unspecified
 Plant.-  M
 References:  3-116, pp. 148-154
                   Data source status:
                     Not specified
                     Bench scale
                     Pilot scale
                     Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  Flotation  (DAF),  Filter/Carbon  Adsorp.
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater  flow rate:  Unspecified
Contact  time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading  rate:  Unspecified
Weight capacity of carbon:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Unspecified
              Bed depth:  Unspecified
              Volumetric capacity:  Unspecified
              Carbon type/characteristics:  Un-
                specified
              Backwash rate:  Unspecified
     Sampling;   Four days
  REMOVAL DATA

            AnaIvsis;
Data  sets 1.2  (V.7.3.261
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
COD
TOC
TSS
Oil and grease
Toxic pollutants, u.g/L:
Ch rom i urn
Cyanide
Se 1 en i urn
Zinc
Si iver
Be ry 1 1 i urn
Cadmium
Copper
Nickel
Lead
Arsenic
Antimony
Tha 1 1 i urn
Influent

55
17
3
12

148
65
26
200
<3
<2
<\.5
<1.5
56
28

34
>65
0
50
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
     Blanks indicate data not available.
     NM, not meaningful.
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.1-35

-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Carbon Adsorption -  Granular
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Petroleum refining
Subcategory:  Unspecified
Plant:  0
References:  3-116,  pp. 148-154
Pretreatment/treatment:  Flotation,

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
                  Data source status:
                    Not specified
                    Bench scale
                    Pilot scale
                    Full scale
    Filter/Carbon Adsorp.
Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Contact time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Height capacity of carbon:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Unspecified
             Bed depth:  Unspecified
             Volumetric capacity:  Unspecified
             Carbon type/characteristics:  Un-
               specified
             Backwash rate:  Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL DATA
Samollna: Four days

Ana lysis:
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
BOD(5)
COD
TOC
TSS
Oi 1 and grease
Tota 1 pheno 1
Toxic pollutants, Mg/L:
Ch rom i um
Chromium (plus 6)
Zinc
Si Iver
Beryl 1 ium
Cadmium
Copper
Nickel
Lead
Arsenic
Ant i mony
Senenium
Tha 1 1 i um
Influent

20
120
44
18
1 1
0.032

60
30
84

10
>33
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
      Blanks indicate data not available.
      NM, not meaningful.
 Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.1-36

-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Carbon Adsorption - Granular
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Petroleum refining
Subcategory:  Unspecified
Plant:  P
References:  3-116, pp. 148-154
Pretreatment/treatment:  Oil Sep.,

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
                  Data source status:
                    Not specified
                    Bench scale
                    Pilot scale
                    Full scale
   Filter/Carbon Adsorp.
Wastewater flow rate :  Unspecified
Contact time:   Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weight capacity of carbon:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Unspecified
             Bed depth:  Unspecified
             Volumetric capacity:  Unspecified
             Carbon type/characteristics:  Un-
               specified
             Backwash rate:  Unspecified
    Samp Iina:  Four days
 REMOVAL DATA

          Ana lysis:
Data  sets 1.2  (V.7.3.26)
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
BOD(5)
COD
TOC
TSS
Oi 1 and grease
Total phenol
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Antimony
Cyanide
Zinc
Mercury
Silver
Beryl 1 ium
Cadmium
Ch roin i urn
Copper
Nickel
Lead
Arsenic
Senen i urn
Tha 1 1 ium
Influent

13
130
45
14
17
0.051

1*30
42
30
<0.5
<3
<2
36
50
27
45
24
>90

0
NM
5
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
    Blanks  indicate data not available.
    NM, not meaningful.
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.1-37

-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Activated Carbon Adsorption  - Granular

Data source:  Conference paper                   Data  source status:
Point source:  Petroleum refining                  Not specified
Subcategory:  Unspecified                          Bench  scale
Plant:  East coast oil refinery                    Pilot  scale
References:  3-99, pp. 207;  3-100,  p.  217           Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  Filter(sand), Oil.  Sep.  (API)/Carbon Adsorp.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:   0.0204 m3/min/m2       Bed  depth: Unspecified
Contact time:  88 min                         Volumetric capacity:
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified           0.228 kg/ma(d)
Weight capacity of carbon:  0.21 kg COD(d)/kg  0.297 kg/m3(e)
  carbon; 0.16 kg COD(e)/kg carbon           Carbon type/characteristics:
Unit configuration:  2 sets of 4-0.0338 m       8  x  30 mesh lignite(d),
  carbon columns in parallel and in series     8  x  30 mesh bituminous(e)
  upflow
                                 REMOVAL DATA

Sampling;  Unspecified	|	Analysis:   Unspecified

                                   Concentration	     Percent
    Pollutant/parameter	Influent	Effluent	removal	

Classical pollutants, mg/L:
COD
70(a)
70(c)
2Kb)
2Kb)
70
70
(a)First set of columns (lignite carbon).
(b)Breakthrough at 70% removal.
(c)Second set of columns (bituminous carbon).
(d)First set of columns.
(e)Second set of columns.
  Date:   9/25/81               III.3.1.1-38

-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Carbon Adsorption  -  Granular
Data source:  Conference paper
Point source:  Petroleum refining
Subcategory:  Unspecified
Plant:  East coast oil refinery
References:  3-99, pp. 207;  3-100,  p.  217
Pretreatment/treatment:  Filter (sand),  Oil.
  (API)/Carbon Adsorp.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
                Data source status:
                  Not specified
                  Bench scale
                  Pilot scale
                  Full scale
           Sep.
Wastewater flow rate:  0.082 m3/min/m2        Bed depth:  Unspecified
Contact time:  18 min (empty bed)             Volumetric  capacity:
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified           0.111  kg/m3(d)
Weight capacity of carbon:  0.65 kg COD(d)/kg  0.157  kg/m3(e)
  carbon; 0.46 kg COD(e)/kg carbon           Carbon type/characteristics:
Unit configuration:  2 sets of 3-0.034  M.I.D.   12 x 40 mesh  lignite(d),
  carbon columns in parallel and in series      12 x 40 mesh  bituminous(e)
  upflow
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling;  Unspecified
                     Analysis;  Unspecified
Concentration
Pollutant/parameter
Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Classical pollutants,  mg/L:
COD
104(a)
104(c)
31 (b)
31(c)
70
70
(a)First set of columns (lignite carbon).
(b)Breakthrough at 70% removal.
(c)Second set of columns (bituminous carbon).
(d)First set of columns.
(e)Second set of columns.
 Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.1-39

-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Carbon Adsorption -  Granular
Data  source:   Effluent Guidelines
Point source:   Pulp, paper and paperboard
Subcategory:   See below
Plants   Unspecified
References:  3-82, p. VII-27
Pretreatment/treatment:   See Below/Carbon Adsorp.
                       Data source status:
                          Not specified
                          Bench  scale
                          Pilot  scale
                          Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
Wastewater flow rate:   Unspecified
Contact times   See below
Hydraulic loading rate:   See below
Weight capacity of carbons  See below
Unit  configuration:  Unspecified
                  Bed  depth:  Unspecified
                  Volumetric capacity:   Unspecified
                  Carbon type/characteristics:  Un-
                    specified
                  Backwash rate:   Unspecified
8a*)p 1 1 nq : Unsoec if led
pretreatnent or Influent
LI Be, treatment
and clarification
Clarification
Clarification
Line precipitation
Biological oxidation
and clarification

REMOVAL DATA
Analysis: Data set 1 (V.
Contact
tine
• In
108
110

Concentratio
Influent
Hydraul Ic
loading,
cu. a. /Bin/so. B.
0.06
0.029
0.06
0.15-016
0.087
BODI5I
n. BO/L Percent
Effluent removal
Cs rbon
nakeup rate,
ku C/cu.n.
0.03
3.36
2.46
0.96
COD
poncentration. ma/L
Influent Effluent
7,3,28)



Percent
remova 1
          Line, treatment
           and clarification
          Clarification
          Clarification
          Line precipitation
          Biological oxidation
           and clarification
                                 82
                                           12
                                                  85
                                                          320
                                                                   210
                                                                            35
                                         TOC
                              Concentration. BQ/L
                              Influent   Effluent
                 Percent
                 renoval
                                                                TSS
                        Coj
              Concentration. BQ/L
              influent   Effluent
                        Percent
                        removaI
          Lime,  treatment
           and clarification
          Clarification
          Clarification
          Line precipitation
          Biological oxidation
           and clarification
180
310
220
                                150
100
120
 83
                                          57
44
61
62
                                                  62
                         1,300
                                  1,200
          Blanks indicate data not available.
          (a)Subcategory:  unbleache* kraft Bill waste.
 Date:   9/25/81
   III.3.1.1-40

-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Activated Carbon  Adsorption - Granular
Data source:
Point source
Subcategory:
Plant:  A
References:
Pretreatment/treatment:
  Carbon Adsorp.
                                      Data source status:
                                        Not specified
                                        Bench scale
                                        Pilot scale
3-89, pp. 39-43                         Full scale
            Coag.  Floe., Sed., Filter  (multimedia)/
Effluent Guidelines
 Textile mills
Wool finishing
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater  flow rate:  Unspecified
Contact  time:   Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weight capacity of carbon:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Unspecified
                                 Bed  depth:  Unspecified
                                 Volumetric capacity:  Unspecified
                                 Carbon type/characteristics:
                                    Unspecified
                                 Backwash rate:  Unspecified
                                     REMOVAL DATA
Samolina: 2li-hr composite
Pollutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
Aluminum
Barium
Boron
Ca 1 c I urn
Coba 1 t
1 ron
Magnesium
Manganese
Molybdenum
Sod 1 urn
Phosphorus
Si 1 icon
Stroni turn
Tin
T Itanium
Vanadium
Phenol
Toxic pollutants. ug/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Be ry 1 1 1 urn
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl )
phthatate
Heptachlor
1 , Z-D i ch 1 o robenzene
2.1-Tr ichlorobenzene
Alpha BHC
IV DDT
Toluene
Ethyl benzene
Pheno 1
Benzofa )pyrene
l-Ni trosodipheny lamina
1-D i methy 1 pheno 1
Pentachlorophenol

Concen
influentla

0.52
0.02
0.3
70
0. 1 1
2.7
5.3
0.2
75
NM
25
67

NM
>99
NM
95
11
57
>60
>72
NM
NM
NM


NM
NM
NM
NM
NH
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
1 IV. 7. 3. 321
Detection
limit































0.01
1.0
0.05
0.09
1.0
1.0
0. 1
0.2
0.07
0.02

0. 1
0.1
                 Blanks indicate data not available.
                 BDL, below detection Unit.
                 NH, not meaningful.
                 (a) Influent is taken from final treatment effluent and is then run through
                   pi lot process.
 Date:   9/25/81
                    III.3.1.1-41

-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Carbon Adsorption  -  Granular
Data source:   Effluent Guidelines
Point  source:   Textile mills
Subcategory:   Wool finishing
Plant:   C
References:   3-89, pp. 45-48
                          Data source  status:
                            Not specified
                            Bench  scale
                            Pilot  scale
                            Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:
  Carbon Adsorp.
Coag. Floe.,  Sed.,  Filter (multimedia)/
DESIGN  OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Contact time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weight  capacity of carbon:  Unspecified
Unit  configuration:  Unspecified
                     Bed depth:   Unspecified
                     Volumetric  capacity:  Unspecified
                     Carbon  type/characteristics:
                       Unspecified
                     Backwash  rate:   Unspecified
                                   REMOVAL DATA
Same II no: 24-hr composite
Pollutant/pa ramter
Classical pollutants, ng/L:
Aluminum
Barium
Boron
Calcium
Coba 1 t
1 ron
Magnes 1 urn
Manganese
Molybdenum
Nickel
Phosphorus
Si 1 Icon
Stront fun
Tin
Tl tanfuiR
Vanadium
Pheno 1
Toxic pollutants, U9/L:
Ant loony
Arsenic
Beryl 1 lull
Cadmium
Ch rom i UHI
Copper
Cyan i de
Lead
Nickel
Si Iver
Zinc
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Bls(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Anthracene
Pentachlorophenol
Pheno 1
To 1 uene
Dibromochlorometharte
1 , 2-0 1 ch lorobenzene
Ethyl benzene
Methylene chloride

Concent
Influential

1 1
0.07
0.06
5.6
<0.006
O.T5
3.7
0.02
0.02
<0.04
2
15
0.07
0.07
O.OI
0.52
0.02

mo
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Carbon Adsorption - Granular
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Textile mills
Subcategory: Woven fabric finishing
Plant:  D
References:  3-68, p. VII-84
Pretreatment/treatment:  Screen., Neutral.,
  Filter (multimedia)/Carbon Adsorp.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  2.59 m3/day
Contact time:  45 min
Hydraulic loading rate:  0.062 m3/min/m2
Weight capacity of carbon:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Downflow; 3 columns  in
  series
Total carbon inventory:  54 kg
              Act.
      Data source status:
        Not specified
        Bench scale
        Pilot scale
        Full scale
     SI..
               Bed depth:   7.09  m
               Volumetric  capacity:   Unspecified
               Carbon type/characteristics:
                 Westvaco  WV-L
               Backwash rate:  Unspecified
Sampling;  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
                Analysis;   Data  set  1  (V.7.3.32)
  Pollutant/parameter
   Concentration      Percent    Detection
Influent   Effluent   removal      limit
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  BOD 5
  COD
  TOC
  TSS
     19
    630
    160
     85
 13
420
100
 23
32
33
38
73
Blanks indicate data not available.
Date:   9/25/81
 III.3.1.1-43
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Activated Carbon Adsorption  - Granular

Data source:  Effluent Guidelines                Data  source status:
Point source:  Textile mills                       Not specified         	
Subcategory: Woven fabric/stock and yarn finishing  Bench  scale           	
Plant:  DD                                         Pilot  scale             x
References:  3-68, p.  VII-85                       Full scale            	
Pretreatment/treatment:  Screen., Neutral., Act.  Si.,
  Filter (multimedia)/Carbon Adsorp.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:   2.59 m3/day           Bed  depth: 7.09 m
Contact time:  45 min                        Volumetric capacity:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  0.062 m3/min/m2     Carbon type/characteristics:
Weight capacity of carbon:   Unspecified        Westvaco WV-L
Unit configuration:  Downflow; 3 columns in  Backwash rate:  Unspecified
  series
Total carbon inventory:  54 kg
                                 REMOVAL DATA

Sampling;  8-hr	Analysis;   Data set 1  (V.7.3.32)
Concentration
Pollutant/parameter
Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
limit
Toxic pollutants, ]ig/L:
  Chromium                        58       130        NM
  Copper                          59        42        29
  Lead                            37        35         5
  Nickel                          72        81        NM
  Silver                          25        32        NM
  Zinc                           190       370        NM
Blanks indicate data not available.
NM, not meaningful.
Date:  9/25/81               III.3.1.1-44
-------
           TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Carbon Adsorption  - Granular
           Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
           Point source:  Textile mills
           Subcategory:  Wool finishing
           Plant:  N
           References:  3-89, pp. 65-68
           Pretreatment/treatment:  Filter  (multimedia)/
             Carbon Adsorp.
                   Data source status:
                     Not specified
                     Bench scale
                     Pilot scale
                     Full scale
           DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

           Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
           Contact time:  Unspecified
           Hydraulic loading rate:   Unspecified
           Height capacity of carbon:  Unspecified
           Unit configuration:  Unspecified
              Bed depth:  Unspecified
              Volumetric capacity:  Unspecified
              Carbon type/characteristics:
                Unspecified
              Backwash rate:  Unspecified
                                                REMOVAL DATA


Classical pollutants, mg/L:
Aluminum
Barium
Boron
Ca 1 c 1 urn
Coba 1 t
1 ron
Magnesium
Manganese
Molybdenum
Sod 1 urn
Phosphorus
Si licon
Strontium
Tin
Titanium
Vanadium
Pheno 1
Su 1 f i de
Ammon i a
Nitrate
COO
TSS
pH, pH units
Toxic pollutants, Mg/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Be ry 1 1 1 urn
Cadmium
Ch rom i urn
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
S! Iver
Zinc
Mercury
Se 1 en i urn
Thai 1 ium
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)
phtha late
Anthracene
Diethyl phtha late
Dl-n-butyl phthalate
Methylene chloride
To 1 uene
1 ,2-Dtchlorobenzene
Dimethyl phtnafate
Huoranthene
Pyrene
Fluorene
2 , 4-0 i ch 1 o ropheno 1
Phenanthrene
1 , 2-Dichloropropane
Tetrachloroettiylene
Ethy 1 benzene

Concentrat
Inffuentfa) 1

0.04
0.003
0.007
6.2
0.009
0.29
0.99
0. 19
33
62
II
16
NM
0
57
NM
0
NM
NM
25
50
NM
NM
33
79
NM
NM

NM
0
NM
NM
95
82
NM
NM
NM
NM
27
NM
NM
NM

NM
NM
NM
NM
43
92*
NM
NM
88*
95*
NM
NM
99*
65*
NM
NM
set 1 (V. 7. 3. 321
Detection
limit








































0.04
0.01
0.03
0.02
0.4
0. 1
0.05
0.03
0.02
0.01
0.02
O.I
0.01
0.7
0.2
                      Blanks indicate data not available.
                      BOL, below detection limit.
                      NM, not meaningful.
                      •Approximate value.
                      (a)lnfluent is taken from final treatment effluent and is then  run through
                        pi lot process.
Date:    9/25/81
III.3.1.1-45
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Activated Carbon Adsorption - Granular
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:   Textile mills
Subcategory:  Woven fabric finishing
Plant:   P
References:  3-68,  p.  VII-88
                   Data source status:
                     Not specified
                     Bench scale
                     Pilot scale
                     Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:   Screen.,  Neutral., Equal.,
  Act. SI., Coag.  Floe.,  Filter (multimedia)/Carbon Adsorp.
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:   1.32-2.59  m3/day
Contact time:  23-45 min
Hydraulic loading rate:  0.032-0.062
  ms/min/m2
Weight capacity of carbon:   Unspecified
Unit configuration: Downflow; 3  columns  in
  series
Total carbon inventory:  54 kg
              Bed depth:  7.09 m
              Volumetric capacity:  Unspecified
              Carbon type/characteristics:
                Westvaco WV-L
              Backwash rate:  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling;  24-hr composite
               Analysis;  Data set 1  (V.7.3.32)
Concentration
Pollutant/parameter
Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
limit
Classical pollutants,  mg/L:
  BOD5                           19
  COD                           120
  TOC                            25
  TSS                            16
            9.7
             73
             10
             19
49
39
60
NM
Blanks indicate data not available.
NM, not meaningful.
 Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.1-46
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated  Carbon Adsorption -  Granular
Data source:   Effluent Guidelines
Point source:   Textile mills
Subcategory:   Knit fabric finishing
Plant.-  P
References:   3-89, pp. 60-63
                     Data source status:
                       Not specified
                       Bench scale
                       Pilot scale
                       Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  Filter  (multimedia)/Carbon Adsorp.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
Wastewater  flow rate:  Unspecified
Contact time:   Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weight capacity of carbon:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Unspecified
             Bed depth:  Unspecified
             Volumetric capacity:   Unspecified
                Carbon type/characteristics:
                  Unspecified
             Backwash rate:  Unspecified
                                    REMOVAL DATA
Sampling: 21-hr composite
Pol 1 utant/parameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
Phenol
A 1 um i num
Ba r i um
Boron
Ca 1 c > um
Coba 1 t
1 ron
Magnesium
Manganese
Molybdenum
Sod i um
Si 1 icon
Tin
Stront ium
Ti tan ium
Vanadium
Ammonia nitrogen
Nitrate nitrogen
Phospate phosphorus
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Ant imony
Arsenic
Be ry 1 1 i um
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Se 1 en ium
Si 1 ver
Tha 1 1 i um
Zinc
Bi£( 2-ethylhexyi )phtha late
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Diethyl phthalate
Anthracene
Pheno 1
Chloroform
T r i ch 1 o roe thy 1 ene
To 1 uene
Benzene
N-n i t roso-din-p ropy 1 ami ne
Ethyl benzene
Methylene chloride
Analysis: Data set 1 IV. 7. 3. 32)
Concentration
Influential

0.07
0.03
90
NM
8
NM
NM
NM
NM
50
NM
NM
II

25
NM
NH
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
11
NM
NM
NM
>99
0
99*
NM
80
98*
NM
NM
NM
90*
NM
NM
NM
Detection
limit



































0.04
0.02
0.03
0.01
0.07
5.0
0.5
0. 1
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.4
                Blanks indicate data not available.
                BOL, below detection Hmft.
                NM, not meanfngft I,
                "Approximate value.
                (a) Influent is taken from final treatment effluent and U then run through
                  pi lot process.
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.1-47
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Activated Carbon Adsorption - Granular
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Textile mills
Subcategory: Knit fabric finishing
Plant:  Q
References:  3-68,  p.  VII-89
Pretreatment/treatment:  Screen.,  Equal., Act. SI,
  Chem. Ppt., Filter (multimedia)/Carbon Adsorp.
                   Data  source status:
                     Not specified
                     Bench  scale
                     Pilot  scale
                     Full scale
x
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:   1.15-1.73 m3/day
Contact time:  22-30 min
Hydraulic loading rate:  0.03-0.041
  m3/min/m2
Weight capacity of carbon:   Unspecified
Unit configuration: Downflow; 3 columns  in
  series
Total carbon inventory:  54 kg
               Bed depth:   7.09 m
               Volumetric  capacity:  Unspecified
               Carbon type/characteristics:
                 Westvaco  WV-L
               Backwash  rate:  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA

Sampling;  24-hr composite samples	Analysis;   Data  set  I  (V.7.3.32)
  Pollutant/parameter
   Concentration      Percent   Detection
Influent   Effluent   removal     limit
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
BOD 5
COD
TOC
TSS
4.2
200
22
4.2
1.9
72
14
2.4
55
64
36
43
Blanks indicate data not available.
 Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.1-48
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Carbon Adsorption - Granular
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Textile mills
Subcategory:  Knit fabric  finishing
Plant:   S
References:   3-89, pp. 55-58
Pretreatment/treatment:  Filter (multimedia)/
  Carbon Adsorp.

DESIGN OR  OPERATING PARAMETERS
                 Data source status:
                   Not specified
                   Bench scale
                   Pilot scale
                   Full scale
Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Contact  time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic  loading rate:   Unspecified
Weight capacity of carbon:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Unspecified
            Bed depth:   Unspecified
            Volumetric  capacity:  Unspecified
            Carbon  type/characteristics:
              Unspecified
            Backwash rate:  Unspecified
                                     REMOVAL DATA
                 $»fPtl"«,i	2M-hr coupes I te
                                             Analysis: Oata set I (V.7.3.321
                                                   Percent  Detection
Pol lutant/oaraMter
Classical pollutants, lag/L:
Alunlnuo
Ba r i urn
Boron
Ca 1 c 1 UM
Coba 1 t
1 ron
Magnet 1 UK
Manganese
Mo 1 ybdenun
Sod 1 UK
Phosphorus
Si 1 icon
Stront iu«
AiMonla
Ti tan tun
Vanadiun
Pheno 1
Nitrate
Toxic pol lutants, ug/L:
Ant Inony
Arsenic
Beryl 1 iun
Cadu i UK
ChroniuM
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
Mercury
Selenlun
Thallium
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)
phthalate
Acenapthene
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Phenol
2. 1-Diiaethyl phenol
2,i|-Dlchlorophenol
Pa ra -ch 1 o ro-*etac reso 1
Chlorofoni
To 1 uene
Methylene chloride
Tricnlorof luoromethane
Influential

0.45
0.006
1. 1
6.2
0.007
0.15
1.5
0.01
0.01
190
2.1
1 1
0.02
0.06
0.004
0.02
NA
0. 12

620
85
>l
2
NM
NM
59
0
NM
NM

NM
97"
990
98»
NM
NH
NM
64*
NM
NM
NM
Unit



































0.04
0.04
0.02
0.07
O.I
O.I

5.0
O.I
0.4
2.0
Blanks Indicate data not available.
                 BOL, below detection limit.
                 NM, not Beaningful.
                 •Approximate value.
                 (a) Influent is taken from final treatment effluent and is then run
                   through pilot process.
 Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.1-49
-------
           TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Carbon Adsorption  -  Granular
           Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
           Point source:  Textile mills
           Subcategory:  Woven fabric  finishing
           Plant:  T
           References:  3-89, pp. 76-82
           Pretreatment/treatment:  Filter(a)/Carbon Adsorp.

           DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
                   Data source status:
                     Not specified
                     Bench scale
                     Pilot scale
                     Full scale
           Wastewater flow rate :  Unspecified
           Contact time:  Unspecified
           Hydraulic loading  rate:  Unspecified
           Height capacity of carbon:  Unspecified
           Unit configuration:  Downflow,  3  columns
             in series
           Total carbon inventory:  54 kg
              Bed depth:  7.09 m
              Volumetric capacity!  Unspecified
              Carbon type/characteristics:   Un-
                specified
              Backwash rate:  Unspecified
                                              REMOVAL DATA
Stapling: 24-hr composite sample, volatile
oraanlcs were drab same led
Pol lutant/narameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
Aluminum
Ba r i urn
Boron
Calcium
Coba 1 t
1 ron
Hagnes 1 urn
Hanganese
Holybdenum
Sodium
Phosphorus
SHI con
Strontium
Tin
Titanium
Vanadium
Phenol
Ammon i a
Nitrate
COD
TSS
Sulflde
pH, pH units
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
Mercury
Se 1 en 1 urn
Thallium
Benzene
Chlorobenzene
1, l-Dlchloroethylene
Pa ra-ch 1 oro-meta-creso 1
1, l-Dlchloroethane
Ethylbenzene
Hec.hylene chloride
Tnchlorof luoromethane
Pheno 1
BiM?-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Bucyl benzyl phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Tetrachloroethylene
To i uene
Trichloroethylene
Concent r
Influent

0.18
0.007
0.26
II
<0.006
0.52
3
0.71
0.01
170
13
6.3
O.O7
<0.02
O.OO5
0.04
0.16
18
1.2
160
14
0.02
7.6

58
3
<0.04
<2
95
100
20
26
100
32
97

2
<50
6.9
4.8
BOL
0.6
BDL
0.2
19
0.8
1. 1
19
2.5
7.0
0.8
0.8
0.4
Analysis:
at ion
Effluent

0.13
0.005
0.25
II
<0.006
0.59
3.3
0.61
90
NH
10
12
NH
NH
>50
NH
NH
98*
NH
NM
50»
0
NH
18
26
99*
76
NM
25
75
1 (V.7.3.32)
Detection
limit







































0.2
0.2
2.0
0. 1
3.0
0.2
0.4
2.0
0.07
0.04
0.03
0.02
NA
0. 1
0.5
                     Blanks indicate data not available.
                     BOL,  below detection limit.
                     NM, not meaningful.
                     *ApproxIIMte value.
                     la)Influent Is taken fro* final treatment effluent and is then run through
                      pi lot process.
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.1-50
-------
            TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Carbon  Adsorption - Granular
            Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
            Point source:  Textile mills
            Subcategory:  Woven fabric finishing
            Plant:  V
            References:  3-89, pp. 70-74
            Pretreatment/treatment:  Filter(a)/Carbon Adsorp.
                      Data  source status:
                        Not specified
                        Bench scale
                        Pilot scale
                        Full scale
            DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
            Hastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
            Contact time:   Unspecified
            Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
            Weight capacity of carbon:  Unspecified
            Unit configuration:  Downflow, 3 columns
              in series
            Total carbon inventory:  54 kg
                Bed  depth:   7.09 m
                Volumetric  capacity:  Unspecified
                Carbon  type/characteristics:  Un-
                  specified
                Backwash  rate:   Unspecified
                                               REMOVAL DATA

                    Sampling:  21-hr composite sample, volatile
                             organics were grab sampled
                                                         Analysis:  Data set I  (V.7.3.32)
Pol lutant/oaraneter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
COD
TSS
Total phenol
Total phosphorus
A 1 un i nun
Ba r i urn
Boron
Ca 1 c i urn
Coba 1 t
1 ron
Magnesium
Manganese
Molybdenum
Sod i urn
Si 1 icon
Strontium
Tin
Ti tan mm
Vanad turn
Ammon i a
Ni trate
pH, pH units
Toxic pollutants, M9/L:
Ant imony
Arsenic
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
Selenium
Si Iver
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) ph thai ate
Butyl benzyl phthalste
Di-n-butyl phthalate
To 1 uene
Anthracene/phenanthrene
Me thy lene chloride(b)
Tr Ichloroethy lene
Beryl 1 turn
Cadmium
Chromium
Mercury
Tha 1 1 ium
Benzene
Ethyl benzene
Trans- I , 2-0 ichlo roe thy lene
Concentration
Influent

72
1
0.013
1 . 1
0.07
0.013
0.71
1.5
<0.006
0.21
2.2
0.08
33
16
NM
NM
NM
61
NM
97»
99*
23
97*
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
Detection
1 imit
















13
















0.01
0.03
0.02
0. 1
0.01
0.1
0.5





0.2
0.2
2.0
                    Blanks indicate data not available,
                    BDL, below detection limit.
                    NM, not meaningful.
                    "Approximate value.
                    (a)infiuent is taken from final treatment effluent and is then run through
                      the pi lot process.
Date:    9/25/81
III.3.1.1-51
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Activated Carbon Adsorption  -  Granular
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:   Textile mills
Subcategory:  Knit fabric finishing
Plant:  W
References:   3-89, pp. 50-53; 3-68, p
Pretreatment/treatment:
  Carbon Adsorp.
              91
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
Sed., Filter  (multimedia)/
DESIGN OR  OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  0.002 m3/min
Contact  time:  45 min (empty bed)
Hydraulic  loading rate:  Unspecified
Weight capacity of carbon:  Unspecified
Unit  configuration:  Downflow, 3 columns
   in  series
Total carbon inventory:  54 kg
                     Bed depth:  7.09 m
                     Volumetric capacity:  Unspecified
                     Carbon type/characteristics:
                       Unspecified
                     Backwash rate:  Unspecified
Samolind: 24-hr composite
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
Aluminum
Barium
Boron
Ca 1 c i urn
Coba 1 1
1 ron
Magnesium
Manganese
Molybdenum
Sodium
Phosphorus
Silicon
Strontium
Afflmon 1 a
Titanium
Vanadium
Pheno 1
Nitrate
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Be ry 1 1 i urn
Cadmium
Chromium
Coppe r
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
S i 1 ve r
Zinc
Oi-n-butyl ph thai ate
Bis-(2-ethylhexyl )
phtha late
Anthracene
Fluoranthene
Benzol a Ipyrene
Pyrene
Benzo ( k ) r 1 uo ranthene
Toluene
Ethyl benzene
Methylene chloride
REMOVAL
Influential

3. 1
0.11
0.6
33
0.06
2. It
6.6
0.01»
<0.2
61
0. 1
2.7
0. 16
2.6
0.06
0. II
0.02
6.5

<200
83
<2
33
31
26
50
NM
7
0
19
25
15
NM
>64
0
0

NM
49
NM
NM
NM
>33
85
NM
NM
NM
70
NM

NM
50
95
95
98
90
NM
NM
62
set 1 IV. 7. 3. 32)
Detection
Unit

































0.04
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.02
O.I
0.2
0.4
              Blanks Indicate data not available.
              BDL, below detection limit.
              NM, not meaningful.
              (a)Influent is taken from final treatment effluent and is then run through
               pi lot process.
  Date:   9/25/81
       III.3.1.1-52
-------
TREATMENT  TECHNOLOGY:   Activated  Carbon Adsorption  - Granular
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Pesticide chemicals
Subcategory:  See below
Plant:  See below
References:  3-75, pp. 111,113
Pretreatment/treatment:  None (unless  otherwise
   specified)/Carbon Adsorp.
                                                       Data  source status:
                                                         Not specified
                                                         Bench scale
                                                         Pilot scale
                                                         Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow  rate:   Unspecified
Contact  time:  See below
Hydraulic loading rate:  See below
Weight capacity  of carbon:   Unspecified
Unit configuration:   Downflow unless other-
   wise specified
Regeneration  technique:  Thermal
                                                 Bed depth:  Unspecified
                                                 Volumetric capacity:   Unspeci-
                                                    fied
                                                 Carbon  type/characteristics:
                                                    Unspecified
                                                 Backwash  rate:   Unspecified
                                          REMOVAL DATA
                                                                       Data set
Contact


6(b|
20(c|
39(d)
46 ( e )
50(f I
45(9)
t ime.
HI')
KM
35
230
120
292
456
BODI5)
Hydraulic loading. Concentration. ma/L
0.013
0.02
0.085/
0.027
0.053
0.021
0.015

1,600
45,000
1.000

190


780
37,000
1, 100

9.2

COO
Percent Concentration. mq/L

51
IB
NM

95

5,800
5,800
150,000
8.300

4.900
4,800
320
2, 100
110,000
6,400

31
810


TOC
Percent Concentration. mo/L

6'l
27
23

99
83
700
2,200
80,000
930

2,200
1,600
86
530
67,000
2,000

15
150

Percent
881
76
16
NM

99
91
                                    TSS           	Tota I phenoj	
                              Concentration. ma/L Percent Concentration. mo/L Percent
                              Influent Effluent  remove I influent^  Effluent  removal
81 a I
6(b)
?0(c)
39(d)
'|6( e )
50(f)
45
479
760
35
230
120
292
456
0.013
0.02
0.0857
0.027
0.053
0.021
0.015
1,500
69
1,500
170
30
670
69
260
110
2,600
160
8.8
6.6
47
83
NM
NM
6
71
99
32

78



0.28
130

2.3



<0.7
43

97



NM
97
    Blanks indicate data not available.
    NM, not meaningful.
    (a)Subcategory:  halogenated organics.
               halogenated organics; unit configuration:  upflow.
               halogenated organics, organo nitrogen, metatlo-organic; pretreatment of influent: two multimedia filters
(bJSubcatogory:
(c) Subcategory:
  in para I lei.
(d)Subcateqory;
(elSiifoontcqory:
               organo ni trogen.
               orqano nitrogen.
    (fISubcategory:  organo nitrogen, metaIlo-organic, unit configuration:  downflow, two carbon columns in scries.
    (g)Subcategory:  organo ni trogen, noncategorized pesticides; pretreatment of influent: meutraIization, duaI media f111rat ion.
      equalization.
  Date:    9/25/81
                                  III.3.1.1-53
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Carbon Adsorption  - Granular
Data source:  Government report
Point source:  Unspecified
Subcategory:  Unspecified
Plant:  Reichhold Chemical, Inc.
References:  3-113, pp. 66-85
                  Data  source  status:
                    Not specified
                    Bench  scale
                    Pilot  scale
                    Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  Sed.  (clarifier)/Carbon Adsorp.
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  20 mL/min
Contact time:  25.3 min/m of bed depth
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weight capacity of carbon:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  See below
             Bed depth:   See  below
             Volumetric  capacity:   Unspecified
             Carbon  type/characteristics:
                Calgon  Filtrasorb 300 GAC
             Backwash  rate:   Unspecified
                                   REMOVAL DATA
                                                   Analysis: Data set 2 (V.7.3.311

Data
source
status
Bench scale
PI lot scale
Pi lot scale
Bench scale
Pi lot scale
Unit configuration:
number or 25.4-mm
diameter
columns in series
1
i(
5
2
3


Bed depth.
m
0.305
2.75
3.68
0.92
1.83
Total
ca rbon
inventory.
a
66
597
797
197
397



TOO
Concentration. rno/L
Influent
2,200
2,200
2,200
2,200
2,200
Effluent
2,000
990
630
1,600
1, 100


Percent
remova 1
9(8)
55
62
27
50
      (a)Average concentrations listed.
 Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.1-54
-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
          Activated Carbon Adsorption - Powdered
          (With Activated Sludge)
 Data source:
 Point source;
 Subcategory:
 Plant:  B
 References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Petroleum refining
 Unspecified

3-116, pp. 155-157
Data source status;
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
 Pretreatment/treatment:  Flotation (DAF)/Carbon Adsorp.
 DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

 Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
 Carbon dosage:  Unspecified
 Flocculant dosage:  Unspecified
 Clarifier configuration:  Unspecified
 Carbon type/characteristics:  Unspecfied
                                Hydraulic detention time:  Un-
                                  specified
                                Hydraulic loading rate:  Un-
                                  specified
                                Weir loading:  Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL DATA
Sampling; Composite and arab

Ana lysis:
Concentration
Pol lutant/parameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
COD
TOG
TSS
Oi 1 and grease
Total phenol
Toxic pollutants, u.g/L:
Chromium
Chromium (plus 6)
Cyanide
Se ten i urn
Si Iver
Be ry 1 1 i urn
Cadmium
Copper
Nickel
Lead
Zinc
Arsen ic
Ant imony
Tha 1 1 ium
Influent

420
100
36
25
24

90
55
60
<20
<3
<2
<1.5
<5.5
<10
<18
<45
<20
<25
<15
Effluent

100
30
56
9
<0.01

2k
<20
<20
40
<3
<2
^1.5
<5.5
<5
<18
<45
<20
<25
<15
Data sets 1.2 (V.7.3.26)
Percent Detection
remova I limit

76
70
NM
64
>99

73
>64
>67
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
     Blanks  indicate data not available.
     NM,  not meaningful.
Date:   9/25/81
                 III.3.1.1-55
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
          Activated Carbon Adsorption -  Powdered
          (With Activated Sludge)
Data source:
Point source;
Subcategory:
Plant:  K
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Petroleum refining
 Unspecified

3-116, pp. 155-157
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  Flotation (DAF)/Carbon Adsorp.
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Carbon dosage:  Unspecified
Flocculant dosage:  Unspecified
Clarifier configuration:  Unspecified
Carbon type/characteristics:  Unspecified
                                Hydraulic detention time:   Un-
                                  specified
                                Hydraulic loading rate:   Un-
                                  specified
                                Weir loading:   Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Semolina: Composite and qrab
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
COO
TOC
TSS
Oi 1 and grease
Total phenol
Toxic pollutants, ng/L:
Ch rom i urn
Chromium (plus 6)
Copper
Lead
Me rcu ry
Nickel
Zinc
Si Iver
Beryl 1 ium
Cadmium
Arsenic
Antimony
Se 1 en i urn
Tha Ilium

Analysi
Concentration
Influent

900
250
430
270
1.1

1,800
50
380
82
<0.5
21
5,900
<3
<2.5
<2.5
<20
<25
<20
<15
Effluent

53
20
17
11
0.012

60
<20
11
<18
0.6
<10
110
<3
<2
<1.5
<20
<25
<20
<15
s: Data sets 1.2 (V.7.3.26)
Percent Detection
remova I limit

91
92
96
96
99

97
>60
96
>78
NM
>58
98
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
     Blanks indicate data not available.
     NM, not meaningful.
 Date:   9/25/81
                  III.3.1.1-56
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
Activated Carbon Adsorption -  Powdered
(With Activated Sludge)
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Petroleum  refining
Subcategory:  Unspecified
Plant:  M
References:  3-116, pp. 155-157
                            Data source status:
                              Not specified
                              Bench scale
                              Pilot scale
                              Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:   Flotation (DAF)/Carbon Adsorp.
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Carbon dosage:  Unspecified
Flocculant dosage:  Unspecified
Clarifier configuration:   Unspecified
Carbon type/characteristics:   Unspecified
                      Hydraulic detention time:  Un-
                         specified
                      Hydraulic loading rate:  Un-
                         specified
                      Weir loading:  Unspecified
     Sampling;  Composite and grab
           REMOVAL DATA

          	Analysis:  Data  sets 1.2 (V.7.3.261
       Pol lutant/parameter
            Concentration      Percent   Detection
         Influent   Effluent   removal	limit
     Classical pollutants, mg/L:
       COD                         300       106       65
       TOC                          77        23       70
       TSS                          29        52       NM
       OiI  and grease                23        16       43
       Total phenol                 6.0     0.013      >99
Toxic pollutants, ng/L:
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
Se I en i urn
Zinc
Si I ve r
Be ry 1 1 i urn
Arsenic
Antimony
Tha 1 1 ium

<1
450
18
140
<18
10
23
280
<3.5
<2.5
<20
<25
<15

10
46
7
45
38
<10
<20
140
<3
<2.5
<20
<25
<15

NM
90
61
69
NM
NM
>1 3
50
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
     Blanks  indicate data not available.
     NM,  not meaningful.
Date:   9/25/81
        III.3.1.1-57
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
          Activated Carbon Adsorption - Powdered
          (With Activated Sludge)
Data source:
Point source
Subcategory:
Plant:  P
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Petroleum refining
 Unspecified

3-116, pp. 155-157
Data source status;
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  Oil Sep./Carbon Adsorp.
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Carbon dosage:  Unspecified
Flocculant dosage:  Unspecified
Clarifier configuration:  Unspecified
Carbon type/characteristics-.  Unspecified
                                Hydraulic detention time:
                                  specified
                                Hydraulic loading rate:  Un-
                                  specified
                                Weir loading:  Unspecified
                      Un-
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Samolinq: Composite and qrab

Ana l.vsi s:
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
COD
TOC
TSS
Oi 1 and grease
Total phenol
Toxic pollutants, ng/L:
Antimony
Chromium
Chromium (plus 6)
Copper
Cyanide
Nickel
Zinc
Si Iver
Be ry 1 1 i urn
Cadmium
Lead
Arsenic
Antimony
Se 1 en i urn
Tha 1 1 i urn
Influent

400
120
62
62
55

430
620
<20
10
40
10
100
<3
<2
<1.5
<18
<20
<25
<20
<15
Effluent

160
43
83
57
0.058

410
110
20
29
20
22
78
<3
<2
<1.5
<18
<20
<25
<20
<15
Data sets 1.2 (V.7.3.26)
Percent Detection
remova 1 limit

60
64
NM
8
>99

5
86
NM
NM
50
NM
26
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
    Blanks  indicate data not available.
    NM,  not meaningful.
 Date:   9/25/81
                   III.3.1.1-58
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
Activated Carbon Adsorption - Powdered
(With Activated Sludge)
 Data source:  Conference paper
 Point source:  Petroleum refining
 Subcategory:  Unspecified
 Plant:  First of four refinery and/or
  petrochemical plants
 References:  3-100, pp. 225-230
 Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Carbon Adsorp.
                           Data source status:
                             Not specified
                             Bench scale
                             Pilot scale
                             Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  160 m3/hr
Carbon dosage:  Unspecified
Flocculent dosage:  20 mg/L cationic polymer
Clarifier configuration:  Not applicable
Carbon type/characteristics:  Hydrodarco
   (high density, lignite based)
MLSS:  3,600 mg/L
                         Hydraulic detention time:   Un-
                           specified
                         Hydraulic loading rate:
                           17.2 m3/m2/d
                         Weir loading:   3,600 mg/L
 Sampling;  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
                                Analysis;   Unspecified
    Pollutant/parameter
                                    Concentration
          Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  BOD 5
  COD
  TOC
             300
           2,000
             420
   <30
   350
   100
  >90
   70
   76
Date:   9/25/81
        III.3.1.1-59
-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Activated Carbon Adsorption  -  Powdered
                          (With Activated Sludge)

 Data  source:  Effluent  Guidelines                  Data source status:
 Point source:  Pulp, paper and paper-board           Not specified          	
 Subcategory:  Unspecified                            Bench scale            ~^_
 Plant:   Unspecified                                   Pilot scale            	
 References:  3-82, pp.  24,25                         Full scale             	x_
 Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Carbon Adsorp.

 DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

 Wastewater flow rate:   Unspecified            Hydraulic detention limit:  See
 Carbon dosage:  See below                       below
 Flocculent dosage:  Unspecified               Hydraulic loading rate:   Unspeci-
 Clarifier configuration:   Unspecified           fied
 Carbon type/characteristics:  Unspecified    Weir loading:  Unspecified

                                      REMOVAL DATA
              Unioeelfled	Ajiilyjlij  MM ttt I IY.7.3.2«I
                                                               BOOS 	 	
             Carbon doaage.    Carbon regeneration   Hydraulic detention    Concentr«tion. ma/L    percent
       Scale	  ma/L         technique	tlJft4_Jl£	Inf luant	Effluent	fmmavml
       Bench      160       Therawlly regenere-        6.1          300       23      92
                         ted end acid watned
       Full       180                           IS          V»       It      97
Date:   9/25/81               III.3.1.1-60
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
                       Activated Carbon Adsorption  - Powdered
                       (With Activated Sludge)(a)
              Effluent Guidelines
               Textile mills
              Wool scouring
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  A
References:  3-68,  p.  VII-101
Pretreatment/treatment:   None/Carbon Adsorp.
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  1,380 m3/day
Carbon dosage:  2,000-10,000 mg/L in
  aeration basin
Flocculant dosage:  Unspecified
Clarifier configuration:  Unspecified
Carbon type/characteristics:  Westvaco "SC"
                                        Hydraulic  detention time:  Unspecified
                                        Hydraulic  loading  rate:  Unspecified
                                        Weir  loading:  Unspecified
                                        Carbon makeup  rate:   139-694 mg/L/day
Sampling;  Two weeks
                                  REMOVAL DATA

                                 	Analysis;  Data set 1  (V.7.3.32)
                                  Concentration
                                                    Percent
                Carbon
  Pollutant/parameter	

Classical pollutants, mg/L:
                               Influent   Effluent    removal   dosage, mg/L
BOD 5

COD

TOC

2,600
2,600
5,500
5,500
1,800
1,800
54
51
560
460
390
340
98
98
90
92
78
81
2,000
10,000
2,000
10,000
2,000
10,000
(a)Raw wastewater is seeded with activated sludge.
 Date:   9/25/81
                               III.3.1.1-61
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
                       Activated Carbon Adsorption - Powdered
                       (With Activated Sludge)(a)
              Effluent Guidelines
               Textile mills
              Wool finishing
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  B
References:  3-68,  p.  VII-99
Pretreatment/treatment:   None/Carbon Adsorp.
Data source status;
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  3,700 m3/day
Carbon dosage:  2,000-8,000 mg/L in
  aeration basin
Flocculant dosage:  Unspecified
Clarifier configuration:  Unspecified
Carbon type/characteristics:  Westvaco "SC"
                                        Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
                                        Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
                                        Weir  loading:  Unspecified
                                        Carbon makeup  rate:  97-388 mg/L/day
Sampling;  Two weeks
                                  REMOVAL  DATA

                                 	Analysis;  Data  set 1  (V.7.3.32)
                                  Concentration
                                                    Percent
                Carbon
  Pollutant/parameter	

Classical pollutants, mg/L:
                               Influent   Effluent    removal   dosage, mg/L
BOD 5

COD

TOC

410
410
1,900
1,900
460
460
29
18
110
73
44
38
93
96
94
96
90
92
2,000
8,000
2,000
8,000
2,000
8,000
 (a)Raw wastewater is seeded with activated sludge.
Date:   9/25/81
                               III.3.1.1-62
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
          Activated Carbon Adsorption -  Powdered
          (With Activated Sludge)(a)
Data source:
Point source;
Subcategory:
Plant:  D
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Textile mills
 Woven fabric finishing

3-68,  p.  VII-99
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:   None/Carbon Adsorp.
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:   1,550 m3/day
Carbon dosage:  3,000-6,000 mg/L in
  aeration basin
Flocculant dosage:  Unspecified
Clarifier configuration:   Unspecified
Carbon type/characteristics:  Westvaco
                           Hydraulic  detention  time:  Unspecified
                           Hydraulic  loading rate:  Unspecified
                           Weir loading:   Unspecified
                           Carbon makeup  rate:   105-210 mg/L/day

                          "SC"
Sampling;  Two weeks
                     REMOVAL DATA

                    	Analysis;   Data  set  1  (V.7.3.32)
                                  Concentration
                                        Percent
                Carbon
  Pollutant/parameter	

Classical pollutants, mg/Li
                  Influent   Effluent   removal    dosage, mg/L
BOD 5

COD

TOC

1,200
1,200
2,100
2,100
620
620
24
24
390
450
110
100
98
98
82
79
82
84
3,000
6,000
3,000
6,000
3,000
6,000
(a)Raw wastewater is seeded with activated sludge.
Date:   9/25/81
                  III.3.1.1-63
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
          Activated Carbon  Adsorption  - Powdered
          (With Activated Sludge)(a)
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  E
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Textile mills
 Knit fabric finishing

3-68, p.  VII-101
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Carbon Adsorp.
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  2,650 m3/day
Carbon dosage:  2,000-5,000 mg/L in
  aeration basin
Flocculant dosage:  Unspecified
Clarifier configuration:  Unspecified
Carbon type/characteristics:  Westvaco
                           Hydraulic  detention  time:  Unspecified
                           Hydraulic  loading rate:  Unspecified
                           Weir loading:   Unspecified
                           Carbon makeup  rate:   216-540 mg/L/day

                          "SC"
Sampling:  Two weeks
                     REMOVAL DATA

                    	Analysis;   Data  set  I  (V.7.3.32)
                                  Concentration
                                        Percent
                Carbon
  Pollutant/parameter	

Classical pollutants, mg/L:
                  Influent   Effluent   removal   dosage,  mg/L
BOD 5

COD

TOC

500
500
1,700
1,700
450
450
21
21
100
69
52
40
96
96
94
96
88
91
2,000
5,000
2,000
5,000
2,000
5,000
 (a)Raw wastewater is seeded with activated sludge.
Date:   9/25/81
                  III.3.1.1-64
-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
Activated Carbon Adsorption - Powdered
(With Activated Sludge)(a)
 Data  source:  Effluent Guidelines
 Point source:  Textile mills
 Subcategory:  Carpet finishing
 Plant:  F
 References:  3-68, p. VII-102
 Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Carbon Adsorp.
                           Data source status:
                             Not specified
                             Bench scale
                             Pilot scale
                        Full scale
 DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

 Hastewater flow rate:  5,300 m3/day
 Carbon dosage:  2,000-5,000 mg/L in
   aeration basin
 Flocculant dosage:  Unspecified
 Clarifier configuration:  Unspecified
 Carbon type/characteristics:  ICI-KB
                 Hydraulic detention time:   Unspecified
                 Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
                 Heir loading:  Unspecified
                 Carbon makeup rate:  277-694 mg/L/day
 Sampling;  Two weeks
           REMOVAL DATA

           	Analysis:  Data set 1  (V.7.3.32)
                                  Concentration
                              Percent
Carbon
   Pollutant/parameter

 Classical pollutants, mg/L:
        Influent   Effluent   removal   dosage,  mg/L
BOD 5

COD

TOC

470
470
1,500
1,500
390
390
6
4
67
40
35
18
99
99
96
97
91
95
2,000
5,000
2,000
5,000
2,000
5,000
 (a)Raw wastewater is seeded with activated sludge.
Date:  9/25/81
         III.3.1.1-65
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
                       Activated Carbon Adsorption - Powdered
                       (With Activated Sludge)(a)
              Effluent Guidelines
               Textile mills
              Wool finishing
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  0
References:  3-68,  p.  VII-102
Pretreatment/treatment:   None/Carbon Adsorp.
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
x
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:   3,780 m3/day
Carbon dosage:  1,000-5,000 mg/L in
  aeration basin
Flocculant dosage:   Unspecified
Clarifier configuration:   Unspecified
Carbon type/characteristics: Westvaco  "SC"
                                        Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
                                        Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
                                        Weir  loading:  Unspecified
                                        Carbon makeup  rate:  25-125 mg/L/day
Sampling;  Two weeks
                                  REMOVAL DATA

                                 	Analysis.-   Data  set  1  (V.7.3.32)
                                  Concentration
                                                     Percent
                Carbon
  Pollutant/parameter	

Classical pollutants, mg/L:
                               Influent   Effluent    removal   dosage, mg/L
BOD 5

COD

TOC

250
250
1,100
1,100
340
340
8
6.5
63
33
23
11
97
97
94
97
93
97
1,000
5,000
1,000
5,000
1,000
5,000
(a)Raw wastewater is seeded with activated sludge.
Date:   9/25/81
                               III.3.1.1-66
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
          Activated Carbon Adsorption  - Powdered
          (With Activated Sludge)(a)
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  P
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Textile mills
 Woven fabric finishing

3-68,  p.  VII-100
Data source status;
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
x
Pretreatment/treatment:   None/Carbon Adsorp.
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  7,570 m3/day
Carbon dosage:  1,000-5,000 mg/L in
  aeration basin
Flocculant dosage:   Unspecified
Clarifier configuration:   Unspecified
Carbon type/characteristics:  Westvaco
                           Hydraulic  detention  time:  Unspecified
                           Hydraulic  loading  rate:  Unspecified
                           Weir  loading:   Unspecified
                           Carbon  makeup  rate.-   122-608 mg/L/day

                          "SC"
                                  REMOVAL DATA
Sampling;  Two weeks
                                 Analysis;  Data  set 1  (V.7.3.32)
  Pollutant/parameter
                     Concentration      Percent
                  Influent    Effluent   removal
                Carbon
             dosage,  mg/L
Classical pollutants,  mg/L:
BOD 5

COD

TOC

400
400
570
570
240
240
8
8.5
96
82
42
34
98
98
83
86
82
86
1,000
5,000
1,000
5,000
1,000
5,000
(a)Raw wastewater is seeded with activated sludge.
Date:   9/25/81
                  III.3.1.1-67
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
          Activated Carbon Adsorption  - Powdered
          (With Activated Sludge)(a)
Data source:
Point source
Subcategory:
Plant:  Q
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Textile mills
 Knit fabric finishing

3-68, p.  VII-100
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:   None/Carbon Adsorp.
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  9,460 m3/day
Carbon dosage:  1,000-5,000 mg/L in
  aeration basin
Flocculant dosage:  Unspecified
Clarifier configuration:   Unspecified
Carbon type/characteristics:  Westvaco "SC"
                           Hydraulic  detention  time:  Unspecified
                           Hydraulic  loading  rate:  Unspecified
                           Weir loading:  Unspecified
Sampling;  Two weeks
                     REMOVAL DATA

                    	Analysis;   Data  set  1  (V.7.3.32)
                                  Concentration
                                        Percent
                Carbon
  Pollutant/parameter	

Classical pollutants, mg/L;
                  Influent   Effluent   removal    dosage,  mg/L
BOD 5

COD

TOC

320
320
960
960
380
380
14
11
180
120
56
44
96
97
81
88
85
89
1,000
5,000
1,000
5,000
1,000
5,000
(a)Raw wastewater is seeded with activated sludge.
 Date:   9/25/81
                  III.3.1.1-68
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
                       Activated Carbon Adsorption  - Powdered
                       (With Activated Sludge)(a)
              Effluent Guidelines
               Textile mills
              Stock and yarn finishing
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  S
References:  3-68,  p.  VII-103
Pretreatment/treatment:   None/Carbon Adsorp.
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  5,300 m3/day
Carbon dosage:  2,000-5,000 mg/L in
  aeration basin
Flocculant dosage:  Unspecified
Clarifier configuration:  Unspecified
Carbon type/characteristics:  Westvaco
                                        Hydraulic  detention  time:  Unspecified
                                        Hydraulic  loading  rate:  Unspecified
                                        Weir loading:   Unspecified
                                        Carbon makeup  rate:   122-304 mg/L/day

                                       ««SC"
Sampling;  Two weeks
                                  REMOVAL DATA

                                 	Analysis;  Data  set  1  (V.7.3.32)
                                  Concentration
                                                    Percent
                Carbon
  Pollutant/parameter	

Classical pollutants, mg/L:
                               Influent   Effluent    removal   dosage, mg/L
BOD 5

COD

TOC

95
95
960
960
390
390
8.5
6
74
35
35
18
91
94
92
96
91
95
2,000
5,000
2,000
5,000
2,000
5,000
 (a)Raw wastewater is seeded with activated sludge.
Date:   9/25/81
                               III.3.1.1-69
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY!
          Activated Carbon Adsorption - Powdered
          (With Activated Sludge)(a)
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  Y
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Textile mills
 Woven fabric finishing

3-68, p. VII-103
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Carbon Adsorp.
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  7,950 m3/day
Carbon dosage:  2,000-5,000 mg/L in
   aeration basin
Flocculant dosage:  Unspecified
Clarifier configuration:  Unspecified
Carbon type/characteristics:  ICI-Hydrodarco
                           Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
                           Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
                           Weir loading:   Unspecified
                           Carbon makeup  rate:  210-526 mg/L/day
 Sampling:  Two weeks
                     REMOVAL DATA

                    	Analysis;   Data set  1  (V.7.3.32)
   Pollutant/parameter
                     Concentration      Percent
                  Influent   Effluent   removal
                Carbon
             dosage, mg/L
 Classical pollutants, mg/L:
BOD 5

COD

TOC

110
110
300
300
91
91
5
4
60
37
12
9
96
96
80
88
87
90
2,000
5,000
2,000
5,000
2,000
5,000
 (a)Raw wastewater is seeded with activated sludge.
Date:   9/25/81
                  III.3.1.1-70
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Activated Carbon Adsorption - Powdered
                       (With Activated Sludge)

Data source:  Effluent Guidelines                 Data  source status:
Point source:  Textile mills                       Not specified         	
Subcategory:  Carpet finishing                     Bench scale           	
Plant:  Unspecified                                Pilot scale           	
References:  3-68,  p.  VII-97                       Full scale             x
Pretreatment/treatment:  Screen, Equal./Carbon  Adsorp.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:   757 m3/day       Hydraulic  detention  time:  Unspecified
Carbon dosage:  Unspecified             Hydraulic  loading rate:  Unspecified
Flocculant dosage:   Unspecified         Weir loading:   Unspecified
Clarifier configuration:  Unspecified
Carbon type/characteristics:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Mix tank and filter press  for solids removal
                                  REMOVAL DATA

Sampling;  24-hr grab and composite	Analysis;   Data  set  1  (V.7.3.32)

                                  Concentration	  percent  Detection
  Pollutant/parameter	Influent   Effluent(a) removal	limit	

Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
  Antimony                        <12        150        NM
  Zinc                             20         80        NM
  Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate     400          T       >97
  Phenol                           67          T       >85
  Naphthalene                     240          T       >96


NM, not meaningful.
T, trace; assumed to be <10 yg/L.
(a)Effluent calculated from average of maximum and minimum values.
Date:   9/25/81              III.3.1.1-71
-------
III.3.1.2  Chemical Oxidation

     Description

Oxidation is a chemical reaction process in which one or more
electrons are transferred from the chemical being oxidized to the
chemical initiating the transfer (the oxidizing agent).  In a
typical oxidation reaction shown below, the oxidation state of
the cyanide ion is raised from -1 to +1; the cyanide is oxidized
as it combines with the atom of oxygen to form cyanate.  The
oxidation state of the permanganate decreases from -1 to -2
(permanganate is reduced to manganate).

     2 MnO4-  + CM'  + 20H~  =  2 Mn04'2 + CNO" + H20
     permanganate + cyanide + hydroxyl ion =   manganate    *• cyanate  + water
The change in oxidation state implies that an electron was trans-
ferred from the cyanide ion to the permanganate.  The increase in
the positive valence or decrease in the negative valence with
oxidation takes place simultaneously with reduction in chemically
equivalent ratios.  Some oxidation reactions proceed readily to
carbon dioxide (C02).  In other cases, the oxidation is not
carried as far, perhaps because of the dosage of the oxidant, the
pH of the reaction medium, the oxidation potential of the oxidant,
or the formation of stable intermediates.  The primary function
performed by oxidation in the treatment of hazardous wastes is
essentially detoxification.  For instance, oxidants are used to
convert cyanide to the less toxic cyanate or completely to carbon
dioxide and nitrogen.  A secondary function is to assure complete
precipitation, as in the oxidation of Fe++ to Fe+ + + and similar
reactions, where the more oxidized material has a lower solu-
bility under the precipitation reaction conditions.

     Representative Types and Modifications

There are many oxidizing agents; however, their application in
wastewater treatment requires that a specific determination be
made of their effectiveness in removing the pollutants, and in
particular, to determine if the reaction products are innocuous.
The oxidizing agents commonly used in waste treatment are de-
scribed below.

     (I)  Oxidation by Chlorine.  Chlorine in elemental or hypo-
          chlorite salt form is a strong oxidizing agent in
          aqueous solution and is used in industrial waste treat-
          ment facilities primarily to oxidize cyanide.  Chlorine
          and hypochlorites can also be used to oxidize phenol-
          based chemicals, but their use is limited because of
          the formation of toxic chlorophenols if the process is
          not properly controlled.
  Date:   9/25/81             III.3.1.2-1
-------
          The cyanide  alkaline chlorination process uses  chlorine
          and caustic  to  oxidize cyanides to cyanates  and ulti-
          mately to carbon  dioxide and nitrogen.  The  oxidation
          reaction between  chlorine and cyanide is believed to
          proceed in two  steps as follows:

          (1)  CM' + C12  =  CNC1 + Cl~

             cyanide ion + chlorine = cyanogen chloride + chloride ion


          (2)  CNC1 +  20H-  = CNO- + Cl~ + H20

             cyanogen chloride + hydroxyl ion = cyanate ion + chloride ion + water


          The formation  of  cyanogen chloride (CNC1) is essen-
          tially instantaneous.  The second reaction,  the forma-
          tion of cyanate,  is  accomplished most rapidly and
          completely at  a pH of 10 or higher.  A  detention time
          of 30 minutes  to  two hours is usually allowed [3-4].

          The cyanates can  be  further decomposed  into  nitrogen
          and carbon dioxide by excess chlorination:

               2CNO" + 4OHT +  3C12 = 6C1~ + 2C02  + N2  + 2H20

            cyanate + hydroxyl ion + chlorine =• chloride ion + carbon dioxide + nitrogen + water


               An alternate approach uses acid hydrolysis:

               CNO- +  2H20  = C02 + NH3 + OH'

              cyanate ion + water  = carbon dioxide + ammonia + hydroxyl ion
          Decomposition by excess chlorination  can be accomplished
          in  about  one hour if the pH is adjusted to 8.0-8.5.
          Acid hydrolysis usually takes place at pH 2-3.   Since
          care must be taken to avoid the liberation of the toxic
          cyanogen  chloride as a gas., hydrolysis is not usually
          the chosen option [3-4].

          Chemical  oxidation equipment often consists of an
          equalization tank followed by two reaction tanks,
          although  the reaction can be carried  out in a single
          tank.   Each tank has an electronic recorder-controller
          to  maintain required conditions with  respect to pH and
          oxidation reduction potential (ORP).   In the first
          reaction  tank, conditions are adjusted to oxidize
          cyanides  to cyanates.  To effect the  reaction,  chlorine
          is  metered to the reaction tank as required to maintain
Date:  9/25/81               III.3.1.2-2
-------
          the ORP in the range of 350 to 400 millivolts, and 50
          percent aqueous caustic soda is added to maintain a pH
          range of 9.5 to 10.  In the second reaction tank,
          conditions are maintained to oxidize cyanate to carbon
          dioxide and nitrogen.  The desirable ORP and pH for
          this reaction are 600 millivolts and a pH of 8.0.  Each
          of the reaction tanks is equipped with a propeller
          agitator designed to provide approximately one turnover
          per minute.  Treatment by the batch process is accom-
          plished by using two tanks, one for collection of water
          over a specified time period, and one for the treatment
          of an accumulated batch.  If dumps of concentrated
          wastes are frequent, another tank may be required to
          equalize the flow to the treatment tank.  When the
          holding tank is full, the liquid is transferred to the
          reaction tank for treatment.  After treatment, the
          supernatant is discharged and the sludges are collected
          for removal and ultimate disposal.

          An alternative chlorination technique involves the use
          of sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) as the oxidant.  Re-
          actions with sodium hypochlorite are similar to those
          of chlorine except that there is no caustic requirement
          for destruction of free cyanide in the oxidation stages.
          However, alkali is required to precipitate metal-
          cyanide complexes as hydroxides.  A typical oxida-
          tion system using chlorine and caustic is shown in
          Figure 3.1.2-1.

     (2)  Oxidation By Ozone.  Ozone, an unstable molecule (03),
          is a highly reactive oxidizing agent that is approx-
          imately ten times more soluble than oxygen on a weight
          basis.  Ozone is used in industrial waste treatment to
          oxidize cyanide to cyanate and to oxidize phenols and
          dyes to a variety of colorless nontoxic compounds.
          Ozonation is best suited for wastewaters that contain
          low levels of oxidizable material.  There are no in-
          herent restrictions on levels of dissolved or suspended
          solids in the wastewater, so long as they do not con-
          tain oxidizable material that can compete for ozone
          with the pollutant component to be removed.

          The cyanide oxidation can be illustrated by the follow-
          ing ionic equation:

                    CM"    +  Q3   =   CMC'  +   02
               cyanide ion + ozone = cyanate + oxygen

          The reaction indicated by the above equation represents
          the oxidation of cyanides to cyanates.  Continued
          exposure to ozone will convert the cyanate to carbon
          dioxide; however, this is not economically practical.
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.2-3
-------
         Raw
      Wastewater
                                                     Chemical Feed: Caustic
                                                     (for cyanide oxidation)
                                                     Chemical Feed: Chlorine
                                                     (for cyanide oxidation)
Reactor
  Treated Wastewater
(to subsequent treatment)
                                                Sludge (where applicable)
     FIGURE  3.1.2-1.   PROCESS  FLOW SHEET - CHEMICAL OXIDATION
Date:   9/25/81
 III.3.1.2-4
-------
          Thus,  further breakdown of the cyanate waste is de-
          pendent on processes such as hydrolysis and bio-oxida-
          tion.

          Ozone is also effective in the treatment of phenols.
          It is about twice as powerful as hydrogen peroxide and
          is not as selective; thus it oxidizes a wide range of
          materials.  For low concentration phenolic wastes, the
          usual practice is to oxidize the phenolic compound to
          intermediate organic compounds that are toxic but
          readily biodegradable.   For concentrated or inter-
          mediate level phenolic  wastes, oxidation by ozone may
          not be as economical as compared to biological oxida-
          tion;  however, it is useful as a polishing process
          following a biological  system.

          Ozone is more soluble and more stable in acidic solu-
          tions than in basic solutions.  However, the rate of
          ozonation reaction is relatively insensitive to pH.
          Therefore, it is rarely worthwhile to adjust pH prior
          to ozonation, since the cost of the neutralization
          process will frequently offset any gains in ozonation
          efficiency.  One exception to this generalization is
          cyanide ozonation.  The cyanate formed initially hy-
          drolyzes more rapidly in alkaline media.  If complete
          conversion of cyanide to carbon dioxide is required,
          acidic streams should be adjusted to a pH of about 9
          before ozonation.

          Because ozone is unstable, it must be generated on
          site.   Ozone generators utilize a corona discharge that
          occurs when a high-voltage alternating current is
          imposed across a discharge gap.  Ozone is generated
          either from air or from oxygen.  Two to two and a half
          times as much ozone will be produced from a stream of
          100% oxygen as from an air stream.  The ozonized air
          from the generator is introduced into a contact chamber
          designed to ensure good mixing with the waste streams.
          The two ozone/water mixing systems in most widespread
          use are venturi mixers  and porous diffusers.  With the
          venturi mixer, ozonized gas and waste flow co-currently,
          and ozonized gas flow is limited to 30-60% of the
          liquid volume flow.  In a porous diffuser system, a
          counter-current flow is usual, and gas flow may be up
          to twenty times the liquid flow.  In some systems the
          contact column is a packed bed.  This increases surface
          area and increases the  rate of mass transfer of ozone
          into solution. One equipment manufacturer has been
          using ultrasonics in conjunction with ozonation, which
          also increases the surface area available for mass
          transfer.  Depending on the extent of treatment re-
          quired, it may be necessary to incorporate two or more
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.2-5
-------
          contact stages,  which can be  of  different  types.   If
          oxygen is  used as  the feed gas instead of  air,  the
          closed-loop ozonation method  is  utilized.   In this
          system off-gas from the contactor is  recycled back to
          the ozone  generator and enriched with ozone.

          Modern ozone systems are completely automated.   An
          ozone monitor provides continuous on-line  monitoring of
          the ozone  concentration in the gaseous effluent from
          the contactor.  If the concentration  of ozone exceeds a
          preset level (usually 0.05 ppm),  the  voltage  or fre-
          quency of  the ozone generator is reduced.

     (3)   Oxidation  By Ozone With Ultraviolet (UV) Radiation.
          One of the modifications of the  ozonation  process is
          the simultaneous application  of  ultraviolet light and
          ozone for  oxidation of cyanides,  phenolic  chemicals,
          and halogenated organics.  Some  compounds  that are
          highly resistant to ozone alone  can be ozonated in the
          presence of UV light.  UV radiation catalyzes the
          ozonation  process  and the mode of action seems to be
          activation of ozone itself.  Application of ultraviolet
          light reduces the  amount of ozone required compared
          with a system using ozone alone.

     (4)   Oxidation  By Hydrogen Peroxide.   Hydrogen  peroxide
          (H202) is  a powerful oxidizing  agent  and has been used
          to oxidize phenols, cyanides, sulfur  compounds, and
          metal ions.  Hydrogen peroxide  in the presence of a
          metal catalyst (e.g., Fe++, Fe+++, Al+++,  Cu+ + , and
          Cr"1"1") effectively oxidizes phenols over a  wide range of
          temperature and concentrations.   The  process is sensi-
          tive to pH, with an optimum pH  range  of 3  to 4 and
          efficiency decreasing rapidly at both higher and lower
          values [3-25].

          The oxidation of cyanide with hydrogen peroxide can be
          carried out by two processes.  The first involves the
          reaction of hydrogen peroxide with cyanide at alkaline
          pH and in  the presence of a copper catalyst.   The
          second process, known as the  Kastone  process, uses a
          formulation containing 41% hydrogen peroxide, with
          trace amounts of catalyst and stabilizers, in conjunc-
          tion with  formaldehyde.  The  cyanide  wastes are heated
          to 120°C (248°F),  treated with  oxidizing solution and
          formaldehyde, and then agitated for one hour.  Prin-
          ciple products from the reaction are  cyanates, ammonia,
          and glycolic acid amide.  Complete destruction of
          cyanates requires acid hydrolysis subsequent to this
          reaction.
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.2-6
-------
          Hydrogen peroxide has been used for the separation of
          metal ions by selective oxidation.  In this way, it
          helps remove iron from combined streams by oxidizing
          the ferrous ion to ferric, which is then precipitated
          by the addition of the appropriate base.  In dilute
          solution (<30%), the decomposition of hydrogen peroxide
          is accelerated by the presence of metal ion contami-
          nants.  At higher concentrations of hydrogen peroxide,
          these contaminants can catalyze violent decomposition.
          Therefore, hydrogen peroxides should be added slowly to
          the solution with good mixing.  Sulfides,  sulfites, and
          sulfur dioxide can also be readily oxidized with hydro-
          gen peroxide.  Under alkaline conditions,  sulfates are
          usually produced.

     (5)  Oxidation By Potassium Permanganate (KMn04).   Potassium
          permanganate has been used for destruction of organic
          residues in wastewater and in potable water.   Potassium
          permanganate reacts with aldehydes, mercaptans, phenols,
          and unsaturated acids.  It is considered a relatively
          powerful oxidizing agent.  The reduced form of per-
          manganate is manganese dioxide (MnO2), which can be
          removed by filtration.

          Potassium permanganate is mainly used to destroy
          phenolic compounds in industrial wastewater.   It reacts
          by cleaving the aromatic ring structure of phenol to
          produce a straight chain aliphatic molecule.   The
          aliphatic is then further oxidized to carbon dioxide
          and water.  The initial reaction takes place almost
          immediately, and almost 90% of the phenol is oxidized
          in the first ten minutes.  A retention time from one to
          three hours is sufficient to insure complete oxidation
          of the phenol [3-17],  The process is affected by pH;
          the higher the pH (up to 9.5), the faster is the re-
          action time.

     Technology Status

The technology for large-scale application of chemical oxidation
is well developed.  Industrial wastes such as cyanides and other
hazardous species in dilute waste streams (e.g., phenols and
organic sulfur compounds) are commonly treated by chemical oxida-
tion.  The oxidation of cyanide wastes by chlorine is a classic
process and is found in most plants using cyanides in electro-
plating operations.

     Applications

Chemical oxidation can be used to treat both organic and in-
organic waste components.  The main applications of the process
are as follows:
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.2-7
-------
     (1)   Oxidation of Cyanide  Effluent.  Numerous plating  and
          metal  finishing plants  use  chemical  oxidation methods
          to treat  their  cyanide  wastes.  Cyanides and heavy
          metals are often present  together  in plating industry
          wastes.   Their  concentration and their  value influence
          the selection of the  treatment process.  If the cyanide
          and heavy metals are  not  economically recoverable by a
          method such as  ion exchange (Section III.3.1.12), the
          cyanide radical is converted either  to  the less toxic
          cyanate or to carbon  dioxide and nitrogen by oxidation,
          while  the heavy metals  are  precipitated and removed as
          a sludge.   In treating  cyanide waste by oxidation,
          hypochlorite or caustic plus chlorine (alkaline chlor-
          ination)  or ozone,  or ozone with UV  radiation may be
          used to oxidize the cyanide.  The  treatment of cyanides
          by chemical oxidation is  currently practiced in the
          following industries  on a widespread basis:

              - Inorganic Chemicals  Manufacturing,
              - Metal Finishing, and
              - Textile  Mills.

          Chemical  oxidation is also  used on a limited basis  in
          the following industries:

                  Iron and Steel  Manufacturing,
                 Coil Coating,
                 Photographic  Equipment and Supplies,
                 Pharmaceutical  Manufacturing,
                 Nonferrous Metals Manufacturing,
                 Ore Mining and  Dressing,  and
                 Petroleum  Refining.

     (2)   Oxidation of Phenol.  Chemical oxidation of phenols has
          found  application  to  date'only on dilute waste  streams.
          Potassium permanganate, one of the oxidants used, is
          reduced to manganese  dioxide (MnO2)  which  is a  filter-
          able solid.  Chlorine gas is not  frequently used  be-
          cause  of  the high  potential of formation of chloro-
          phenols.   An ozonation  process for oxidation of phenols
          is currently practiced  in the Iron and  Steel Manufac-
          turing industry.

     (3)   Oxidation of Other Organics. Chemical  oxidizing  agents
          have been, used  for the  control of organic  residues in
          wastewaters and in potable  water  treatment.  Among the
          organics  for which oxidative treatment  has been  re-
          ported are aldehydes, mercaptans,  benzidine,  and  un-
          saturated acids.  For these applications,  sodium  hypo-
          chlorite, calcium  hypochlorite, potassium  permanganate,
          and hydrogen peroxide have  been  reported  as  oxidants.
          In one application nitrous  acid was  used.
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.2-8
-------
          In addition to the above major applications,  chemical
          oxidation using chlorine and calcium hypochlorite has
          been used to prevent accumulation of soluble  sulfides
          in sewer lines.  Oxidation of pesticides has  also been
          investigated to remove residual diguat and paraquat
          from water.

     Advantages and Limitations

Some advantages of chlorine oxidation are operation at  ambient
temperature, suitability for automatic control, and low cost.
Limitations of the process include the need for careful pH con-
trol, possible chemical interference in the treatment of mixed
wastes, and the potential hazard of storing and handling chlorine
gas.  In addition, oxidation of phenols using chlorine  may result
in the formation of dangerous and more toxic chlorophenols if the
wastewater is underchlorinated.

Some advantages of ozone oxidation are that it is well  suited to
automatic control, on-site generation eliminates treatment chem-
ical procurement and storage problems, reaction products do not
include chlorinated organics, and no dissolved solids are added
in the treatment step.  Some limitations of the process are high
capital expense, possible chemical interference in the  treatment
of mixed wastes, and an energy requirement of 25 kwh/kg of ozone
generated.

The principal disadvantage of chemical oxidation is that the
process is not selective.  Since priority pollutants are often a
small percentage of total organic material, high dosages may be
required to achieve removal of desired pollutants.  For these
reasons, its use is generally restricted to specific product
waste streams where the target pollutant is a major factor, or
where no reasonable alternative exists.

     Reliability

The oxidation process is highly reliable with proper monitoring
and control and proper pretreatment to control interfering sub-
stances.

     Chemicals Required

Common chemicals used as oxidizing agents include chlorine (C12),
sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl), calcium hypochlorite [Ca(OCl)2]/
potassium permanganate (KMn04), hydrogen peroxide (H2O2), and
ozone (03).

     Residuals Generated

Most chemical oxidations will generate a residue which is removed
by subsequent treatment operations.  The most significant genera-


Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.2-9
-------
tion of residue occurs from the use of caustic or lime slurry
with chlorine gas in alkaline chlorination.   Smaller amounts of
residue result from oxidations using hypochlorites.

     Design Criteria

Either batch or continuous operations may be employed for oxida-
tion.  Batch treatment is preferred for flows less than 190,000
to 380,000 liters per day (50,000 to 100,000 gallons per day).
Oxidizing reagent consumption and choice of reagent will depend
upon process efficiency,  presence of competing oxidizable mate-
rial, and temperature, and should be determined by pilot-scale
testing.  Very simple equipment is required for chemical oxida-
tion.  This includes storage vessels for the oxidizing agents and
perhaps for the wastes, metering equipment for both streams, and
vessels with agitators to provide suitable contact of oxidant and
waste.  Some instrumentation is required to determine the concen-
trations of pollutants, pH of the water, and the degree of com-
pletion of the oxidation reaction.  The process may be monitored
by an oxidation-reduction potential (ORP) electrode.  This elec-
trode is generally a piece of noble metal (often platinum) which
is exposed to the reaction medium.  The electrode produces an
electromotive force (EMF) output that is empirically related to
the ratio of oxidized to reduced constituents in the solution.

A typical reaction condition for the alkaline chlorination of one
kilogram (2.2 pounds) of cyanide to cyanate requires six kilo-
grams (13.2 pounds) each of sodium hydroxide and chlorine.  The
reaction is carried out at pH 10, and at least 15 minutes contact
time is required to drive the reaction to completion.  If metal
cyanide complexes are present, extended chlorination for longer
periods may be necessary.  Complete destruction of cyanate re-
quires a second oxidation stage with approximately 45 minutes
retention at a pH below 8.5.  The theoretical reagent requirement
for this second stage is 4.1 kilograms (9.0 pounds) of chlorine
and 1.1 kilograms (2.4 pounds) of caustic per kilogram (2.2
pounds) of cyanide [3-25].

Oxidation of cyanide to cyanate with, ozone requires approximately
2 kilograms (4.4 pounds) of ozone per kilogram (2.2 pounds) of
cyanide, and complete oxidation requires 5 kilograms (11 pounds)
of ozone per kilogram  (2.2 pounds) of cyanide.  Cyanide oxidation
to cyanate is very rapid (10 to 15 minutes) at pH 9 to 12 and
practically instantaneous in the presence of trace amounts of
copper  [3-25] .

Ozone requirements for partial destruction of phenols range from
one to five parts per part of phenol.  The actual ozone demand
will be a function of phenol concentration, pH, and retention
time.
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.2-10
-------
     Performance

Chemical oxidation is very effective in destroying free cyanide
as well as cadmium, copper, and zinc cyanide complexes.  However,
nickel'cyanide is incompletely destroyed, and iron cyanide com-
plexes are apparently unaffected by chlorine or ozone [3-25].
The ozone-UV radiation process is effective for treatment of
complexed cyanides such as ferric cyanide, copper cyanide, and
nickel cyanide.  Performance data of oxidation processes from the
following industries and/or waste streams are presented in the
data sheets:

     - Inorganic Chemicals Manufacturing,
     - Ore Mining and Dressing,
     - Organic and Inorganic Wastes,
     - Textile Mills,
     - Organic Chemicals, and
     - Adhesives and Sealants.

     References

3-3, 3-4, 3-12, 3-16, 3-17, 3-24, 3-25, 3-36, 3-37.
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.2-11
-------
















LU
z


oc
^
a

>


_i
o
z
X
o
LJ
>—
-j
o
ce
i-



















k<

^
^
u
0)
0
4-
V
0)


co
>
O
e
0)

c
o

4J
2
p
c
0)
o
c
o
0

V

0)
3

(^
4-
^J
c
CO

^3









0)
a

a
(X









CO
4J
C
o
o

CO
4->
CO
0






CD

cc
c
U)

—
u.




0)

CO
c
co

4-
o


a.















4->
C
CO
+


inr»-z j-avz
ooz — oz
A



o
o\
A

i

VO
to



OMO OlAO
OOfO«O CMroO
(J> — fO UA
CV?






0
(0





V
V







	 — CM —











—







Jli
^-
Ol
U
_ ^^
% ^^
a> at
•P 3.
c
 >CB
CO OKI- XOO-J
1— 0
0 H























































.
4)

A
co

co
CO
t»

co
*» •
CO-
TS 3
Q-
SS1
CO —
U C

ii
MB
*»
(0 O
.* C
CO «
-z
00 Z
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.2-12
-------
                                                           * * *



















UJ
z
o
N
O
1
z
o

1-
o

X
o

I


E
UJ
U
a:
0

>.
oc
2£
=3
CO

o
o
o
z
X
o
Ul
1-

^
o
a:
i-
o
U





















&s

•
>
o
c
CD
O

0
E
CD
cc
I
4->
CO
i.
p
C
CD
O
C
o
U

.p
c
CD
3
f|
Ct-
LU







ia
4->
c
O
a
CO
P
CO
a






























c
eg
._
•D
CD
E





CD
D
C
CO
 E "O *»*»•— *»
Olf\ 	 WD3 OCC— CD3I3— CCW
— *— cocoEoico— c— coOOC— XcaOO'-
COOQCOO-P-P3CCL.On>-P&-— O)*D — J3 *- E -P C
cocn8H°°°ca-OTHcnozwsowco — «OCM C
C3> •"• co eo CD
3, -.C- £
X*> eo *>
X££ C
«9 CD a-P CD eg
JJ £ £— C <-
c 	 ao CD a> o
CO XX C C S- 3
4J £ N — CD CD CD X—
3 E PC X£ N C a<>-
— X 3 6 E E CD CD P a C CD ~ ~ CD
— CO— S3 CD X 3 3 I.D3OCDCDCDUCO.aC
OO 	 3— i-'O « 	 « 	 CM .O'-C.flCefl — >^~ CD
Q.EC 	 SCO— 3 CD C CD — ~— 1 PCD— CDS-OOS-
— CDXEpaC-OOJ«:cD>— O XC— NX3£NN3
O-P(A<--O(-acocg(-O 	 CO C W 4-> 1 ZC£— P C C O
— C(-CDCO£OXCDCD— CD — £ 	 3— 1 CB+>OCCDCD —
X«eOOOUU-l£ZC/>C/}HNCQCQOCMCOLUI-
-------














LJ
Z
o
N
0

z
o

i-
^
a
X
0

J
rf
0
LJ
OTJ
CO
a: 3
o c
U. •—

> c

3
5
h-
—
CO
>
O
E
1)

5

4->
co
c
4J
™
3)
U
C
o
u
•p
^
a>
3
•_
>-
LJ







C/>
4J
C
O
D
re
R
Q

























c
eg
•—
•o
0)

0)
0
c
co
a:


c
eg

•c

r







CD
a
c
CO
a:





0)
eg
C

—
u.



0)
co
O
w
e

•«,
a.














jj
c
(0
*
_
o
a.
f^ z £ «£ •£ z ox y
\ozzzzzo\z
A










-_l_l — IfN— Q0\
.00 • — \oz •
OCOOQCM O








































J—
a>
£
4J
0) CO
a> o a> c
C S- TJ 0) 0)
(0 0 	 C
£- V t- >>«

®'§S£5 >>
O — *- £ d) £
'-•o o o o *>
EO 1 — <- 0)
— «£ a> o p
of c o c— «-
C^. O CD C ^— O
A) Q -^ &• «•" ^ fj ••—
C (-OH >>>>«£
£O I 1 £C 1- O
— — CM *» *> 4J —
>>.C •« * Q} Q) CD t.
a.0 — rri-i-



















































.
Q)

A
CO

•—
CO
co -P
o.—
c —

 o

•OW . 3 3
OT5 V —
*» *> *> C >
OT3 CO C 0
*~ 4J <0 **
•O > co » co
c o-o i E

0) *»*> X
«9A OOP
JC C C C
c . a
CO — 1 « « O.
§^
*
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.2-14
-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Chemical Oxidation (Chlorine)
 Data source: Effluent Guidelines
 Point source:  Inorganic chemicals
 Subcategory: Sodium bisulfite
 Plant:  282
 References; 3-85, pp. 555-556
 Pretreatment/treatment: None/Chem. Ox.

 DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

 Wastewater  flow  rate: 2.67 m3/Mg
 Chemical  dosage(s): NaOCl  (unspecified dosage)
 Contact time:  Unspecified
 pH:  Unspecified
 Type of sedimentation device: Unspecified
 Unit configuration: Single reactor tank
                   Data source status:
                     Not specified
                     Bench scale
                     Pilot scale
                     Full scale
                                 REMOVAL DATA
 Sampling:   72-hr composite
 	and grab
              Analysis;  Data set 1 (V.7.3.15)
    Pollutant/parameter
                                     Concentration(a)
     Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detec-
 tion
limit
 Classical pollutants, mg/L:
   COD
   TSS
 Toxic pollutants,
   Copper
   Lead
     1,500
        89
       370
     2,500
   980
   160
   320
 2,500
   35
   NM
   14
    0
 Blanks  indicate  data not  available.
 NM,  not meaningful.
 (a)Concentration is calculated  from pollutant flow in m3/Mg and
   pollutant  load in kg/Mg.
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.2-15
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Chemical Oxidation (Chlorine)
                                                  Data  source  status:
                                                   Not specified
                                                   Bench  scale
                                                   Pilot  scale
                                                   Full scale
Data source: Effluent Guidelines
Point source: Inorganic chemicals
Subcategory: Hydrogen cyanide
Plant: 765
References: 3-85,  pp. 427-428
Pretreatment/treatment: Neutral./Chem.  Ox.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
Wastewater flow rate: 57 m3/Mg
Chemical dosage(s): Unspecified
Contact time:  Unspecified
pH: Unspecified
Type of sedimentation device: Settling ponds
Unit configuration: Two ponds in parallel where  sodium hypochlorite  is
   added, then caustic and chlorine are added in another treatment pond.
                                 REMOVAL DATA

Sampling;  72-hr composite and grab	Analysis;   Data set 1 (V.7.3.15)
   Pollutant/parameter
                                     Concentration(a)
                                   Influent
Effluent
           Detec-
Percent     tion
removal    limit
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  TSS
  NH3-N

Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
  Cyanide
                                     980
                                     190
                                   6,800
   33
  120
   <2
   97
   37
  >99
Blanks indicate data not available.
(a)Concentration is calculated from the wastewater flow in m3/Mg
   of HCN and the pollutant load in kg/Mg.  Pollutant load was
   calculated by apportioning the mass emitted between the two
   waste streams on the basis of measured flows.   This is a very
   approximate process.
Date:  9/25/81
                                III.3.1.2-16
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Chemical Oxidation (Chlorine)
                                                  Data  source  status:
                                                   Not specified
                                                   Bench scale
                                                   Pilot scale
                                                   Full scale
Data source: Effluent Guidelines
Point source: Ore mining and dressing
Subcategory •. Lead/zinc mill
Plant: 3144
References: 3-66, p.  VI-28
Pretreatment/treatment: None/Chem.  Ox.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
Wastewater flow rate: Unspecified
Chemical dosage(s):  1,200 - 1,500 16/d C12
Contact time:  Unspecified
pH: 11-12 (maintained by lime addition)
Type of sedimentation device: Settling tank
Unit configuration:  Three FRP reactor tanks in series  plus  chlorination
   and lime slaker
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling;  30 days
                                             Analysis:  Data  set 4  (V.7.3.23)
                         Concentration,  yg/L      Percent
Pollutant/parameter	Influent	Effluent	removal
                                                                  Detection
                                                                    limits
Toxic pollutants:
  Cyanide
                        68,000
130
>99
Blanks indicate data not available.
Date:   9/25/81
                               III.3.1.2-17
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Chemical Oxidation  (Chlorine)
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source: Ore mining and dressing
Subcategory:  Ferroalloy mine/mill
Plant: 6102
References: 3-66, p.  VI-26
Pretreatment/treatment: Unspecified/Chem. Ox.
                 Data  source  status:
                   Not specified
                   Bench scale
                   Pilot scale
                   Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Chemical dosage(s): 10-20 mg/L  NaOCl
Contact time: 30-90 min
pH: 8.8-11.0
Type of sedimentation  device: Settling tank
Unit configuration: Unspecified
REMOVAL DATA
Sampling:

Pollutant/
parameter
4 months

Concentration,
Influent Eff
Toxic pollutants:
Cyanide 190
190













190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190
190


yg/L
luent
80
50
70
40
30
40
30
20
20
30
30
30
10
20
20


Percent
removal
58
74
63
79
84
79
84
89
89
84
84
84
95
89
89
Analysis
NaOCl
dosage ,
mg/L
20
20
20
10
10
10
20
20
20
10
10
10
20
20
20
: Data set

Contact
time , min
30
60
90
30
60
90
30
60
90
30
60
90
30
60
90
3 (V.7.3.23)

PH
8.8
8.8
8.8
10.6
10.6
10.6
10.6
10.6
10.6
11.0
11.0
11.0
11.0
11.0
11.0
 Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.2-18
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Chemical Oxidation (Chlorine)
Data source:  Government report                   Data  source  status:
Point source:  Organic and inorganic wastes         Not specified
Subcategory:  Unspecified         .                 Bench  scale
Plant:  Reichhold Chemical,  Inc.                    Pilot  scale
References:  3-113,  p. 55                          Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  Equal.,  Neutral., Sed.  (clarifier)/Act. Si.,
  Oxidation Column,  Sed. (clarifier),  Chem.  Ox.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:   1,880 m3/day
Chemical dosage(s):   5.25% aqueous solution  of NaOCl
Contact time:  15 min
pH:  Unspecified
Type of sedimentation device:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:   Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling;  24-hour composite
              Analysis;   Data  set'2  (V.7.3.3S)
                                   Concentration
   Pollutant/parameter
Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
NaOCl dosage,
   weight %
Classical pollutants,  mg/L:
COD
COD
COD (a)
COD(a)
COD(b)
COD
780
780
750
750
820
720
720
710
560
500
510
440
7
9
25
28
38
39
0.5
1.0
2
3
4
5
(a)Average of 9 samples.
(b)Average of 3 samples.
 Date:   9/25/81
III. 3.1.2-19
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Chemical Oxidation (Ozone)
Data source: Effluent Guidelines
Point source: Ore mining and dressing
Subcategory: Gold mine/mill
Plant: 4105
References: 3-66, pp. VI 29, 58
Pretreatment/treatment: Carbon Adsorp./Chem.  Ox.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate: See below
Chemical dosage(s): See below
Contact time: Unspecified
pH: Unspecified
Type of sedimentation device: Clarifier
Unit configuration: Continuous
                   Data source  status:
                     Not specified
                     Bench scale
                     Pilot scale
                     Full scale
x
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling: Grab
Flow rate,
L/min
3,200
9.5
9.5
4.9
Ozone feed rate,
g/hr
3
3
6
Analysis: Data set 1 (V.7.3.23)

Cyanide
Concentration, yg/L
Influent
900
360
160
200
Effluent
<20
20
18
95

Percent
removal
>97
94
89
51
Blanks indicate data not available.
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.2-20
-------
            TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Chemical Oxidation (Ozone)
            Data source:
            Point source
            Subcategory:
            Plant:   V
            References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Textile mills
 Woven fabric finishing

3-89, pp. 70-75
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
            Pretreatment/treatment:   Filter(a)  (multimedia)/Chem. Ox.

            DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

            Wastewater flow rate:   Unspecified
            Chemical dosage(s): Unspecified
            Contact time:   Unspecified
            pH:   Unspecified
            Type  of sedimentation  device:   Unspecified
            Unit  configuration: Contactor-2.0  m; 1.58 m3 contactor
                                Generator-PCI  Ozone Corporation Model C2P-3c
                                                REMOVAL DATA
Sampling: 24-hr composite, volatile
Pol lutant/oara meter
Classical pollutants, ug/L:
A 1 urn i num
Ba r 1 urn
Boron
Ca 1 c i urn
Coba 1 t
1 ron
Magnesium
Manganese
Molybdenum
Sodium
Phosphorus
Silicon
strontium
Tin
Titanium
Vanadium
Phenol
Ammon i a
Nitrate
COD
TSS
pH, pH units
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Beryl 1 ium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
SI Iver
Zinc
Mercury
Selenium
Tha 1 1 i urn
Bts(2-ethy Ihexyl ) phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Anthracene
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Methylene chloride
Toluene
T r i ch 1 o roe thy 1 ene
1 , 1-Dichloroethane
Benzene
Ethyl benzene
Chloroform
Trans-), 2-01 chloroethylene
Concentra
Influent

0.07
0.01
0.714
1.5
<0.006
0.21
2.2
0.08
<0.01
54
1.1
4.8
0.03
<0.02
0.001
0.01
0.01
0.22
3.4
72
It
7.6

<10
14
•C0.04
<2
«1
75
3
31
<36
<5
190
<1.1
<1
<50
16
12
0.3
0.9
13
1.3
0.4
BDL
0.5
BDL
BDL
BDL
Ana lysis:
tion
Effluent

0.13
0.01
0.74
4.8
0.008
0.25
2.2
0.07
<0.01
53
1.1
4.7
0.03
<0.02
0.002
0.02
0.02
0.26
1.8
76
12


25
4
<0.04
<2
6.3
89
<2
<22
66
16
240
<1.1
<1
<50
90
2.7
BDL
BOL
15
0.9
0.9
BDL
BDL
0.1
BDL
2.1
Data set 1
Percent
remove 1

NM
0
0
NM
NM
NM
0
12
NM
2
0
2
0
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
47
NM
NH
NM

NM
0
NM
NM
NM
NM
>33
>29
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
78
98»
98»
NM
31
NM
NM
80*
NM
NM
NM
1 IV. 7. 3. 32)
Detection
limit






































0.04
0.02
0.01
0.03
0.4
0.1
0.5
3.0
0.2
0.2
5.0
2.0
                      Blanks Indicate data not available.
                      BDL, below detection limit.       ~
                      NM, not meaningful.
                      •Approximate value.
                      (a)lnfluent is taken from final  treatment effluent and is then run through
                         pi lot process.
Date:   9/25/81
                  III.3.1.2-21
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Chemical Oxidation (Ozone)
Data source:
Point source
Subcategory:
Plant:  W
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Textile mills
 Wool scouring

3-89, pp. 50-53
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
X
Pretreatment/treatment:   Sed.,  Filter/Chem. Ox.
DESIGN OR  OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Chemical dosage(s):  Unspecified
Contact time:   Unspecified
pH:   Unspecified
Type  of sedimentation device:  Unspecified
Unit  configuration:  Unspecified
                                    REMOVAL DATA
Sample: 21-hr composite
Po 1 1 utant/oa ramete r
Classical mg/L:
A 1 urn i num
Barium
Boron
Ca 1 c i urn
Coba 1 t
1 ron
Magnesium
Manganese
Molybdenum
Sod i urn
Phosphorus
Sit icon
Strontium
Ammonia
Titanium
Vanadium
Phenol
Nitrate
Toxic pollutants, M9/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Be ry 1 1 i urn
Cadm i urn
Chromium
Copper
Cya n 1 de
Lead
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
Di-n-butyl ph thai ate
Bis(2-ethylhexy 1 )phtha late
Anthracene
Fluoranthene
Benzol a (pyrene
Pyrene
Benzol k)f luoranthene
Toluene
Ethyl benzene
Methylene chloride
Ana 1 vs i s : Data
Concent ra
Influent

3.1
0.11
0.6
33
0.06
2.4
6.6
0.04
<0.2
61
0.1
2.7
0.16
2.6
0.06
0.11
0.02
6.5

<200
83
<2
<40
<80
120
260
<1400
<700
<100
400

14
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.1
BOL
BDL
4.8
tion
Effluent

7
0.12
1.0
30
0.38
2.3
6.1
0.09
<0.4
56
0.16
2.6
0.002
5.5
0.18
0.54
0.01
8.8

1,200
43
<4
250
<200
590
<4
<900
5,000
1,300
460

110
0.4
0.1
BOL
0.1
BDL
1.2
BDL
61
Percent
remova I

NM
NM
NM
9
NM
4
8
NM
NM
8
NM
4
99
NM
NM
NM
50
NM

NM
48
NM
NM
NM
NM
>98
NM
NM
NM
NM

NM
NM
50
95*
67
90*
NM
NM
NM
set I (V. 7. 3. 321
Detection
limit
































0.04
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.02
0.1
0.2
0.4
              Blanks indicate data not available.
              BOL, below detection limit.
              NM, not meaningful.
              •Approximate value.
Date:   9/25/81
                   III.3.1.2-22
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Chemical  Oxidation  (Ozone)
Data source:  Government report
Point source:  Organic chemicals
Subcategory:  Unspecified
Plant:   Unspecified
References:  3-88,  pp. 160,163,166,169
Pretreatment/treatment:  See Below/Chem. Ox.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow  rate:   Unspecified
Chemical dosage(s):  1-1.2 wt% of feed
Contact time:  See  below
pH:   <10
Type of sedimentation device:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Stirred tank reactor
                    Data source status:
                       Not specified
                       Bench scale
                       Pilot scale
                       Full scale
               Turbine  speed:  700  rpm
               Weight ration required for
                 complete oxidation:   See below
               Gas  feed rate:  11.5 L/min
                                      REMOVAL DATA
Ueloht ratio raaulrad for BODI3) TOC
Pratreitwnt of Ozonatlon tlM.
uie In BvitaH Influe
nt Bin
Secondary(a) Staaa (tripping 180
Frlnary(b) 360
Seconds ry(i) Air stripping
Priury(c)
PrlMry(c)
330
180
complete oxlditlon. pORcent ration. ma/L Percent Concentration. m/L Percent

UOO <100 >75
7.0 3,100 2,800 16
$.6 110 290 30
7.3 93 610 NM 630 630 24
7.3 100 50 50
 Blank* Indicate data not available.
 NM, not Manlngful.
 (a) Waitawatar fro* an athylane dlchlorlde proee».
 (b) Wattewater fro* a toluene dlltocyanata proceas uaed In the unufacture or polyurethana.
 (c) Poiyol wastewater wat taken from an etnylene glycol proceaa plant.
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.2-23
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Chemical Oxidation  (Ozone)
Data source:  Government report
Point source:  Organic  chemicals
Subcategory:  Unspecified
Plant:  Unspecified
References:  3-88, p. 160
Pretreatment/treatment:   None/Chem. Ox.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
                     Data source status:
                        Not specified
                        Bench scale
                        Pilot scale
                        Full scale
Wastewater flow rate:   90 L/s
Chemical dosage(s):  Unspecified
Contact time:  See below
pH:   See below
Type of sedimentation  device:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Tubular reactor with static mixers
                                     REMOVAL DATA
       Sampling; COMPOS Ite and grab
                                                          Analysis; Data tat UV.7.3.211

1
1
1
1
1
1
8
8
ft
a
Gas flow,
L/Bln
10
10
21
21
26
26
10
10
20
20
Residence tine,
• In
1.5
3.0
1.0
2.0
0.7

1.5
3.0
0.8
1.6
Mole ratlolal
0.176
0.176
0.121
0.121
0.151
0.159
0.22
0.200
0.396
0.396
Influent TOC
Concent rat ion. M^L
1,100
1,100
1,100
1,100
1.100
1,100
1,100
1,100
1,100
1,100
Effluent TOC

970
910
960
930
960
960
1,100
1,000
950
1,000
Percent
12
15
13
16
13
13
0
9
11
9
Detection
Halt










       Blanks Indicate data not available.
       (a) Hole ratio (Ozone to TO*.) calculated on the bail* of the TOC being pure TDA.
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.2-24
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Chemical Oxidation (Ozone)
Data  source:  Government report
Point source:  Organic chemicals
Subcategory:  Unspecified
Plant:   Unspecified
References:  3-88,  p. 159
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Chem. Ox.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
                                                       Data source status:
                                                         Not specified
                                                         Bench  scale
                                                         Pilot  scale
                                                         Full scale
Wastewater flow  rate:  105  L/s
Chemical dosage(s):  Unspecified
Contact time:  See below
pH:   See below
Type  of sedimentation device:   Unspecified
Unit  configuration:  Tubular reactor,  dispersion of the gas  and liquid was
  achieved with  a nozzle
                                      REMOVAL DATA
         DlInQ:  Coaootlta and grab
                                                           Analv»l«! Dltl «at UV.7.3.gill
Gat flow,   Retldenoe tine.              Influent TOO       Effluent TOO
 L/mln	Bjfl	Moie ratlolal  Concentration. ma/L  Concentration. a«/L
                                                                   Percent
                                                                     vi I
                                                                         Detection
                                                                          Halt
11
11
11 I
11
11
11
g
a
•
a
i
i
i
i
6
6
I.S*
.51
.OH
.01
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
1.1
3.7
1.3
2.6
1.0
2.0
1.7
3.11
1.0
2.0
1.7
3,»
1.0
2.0
1.0
2.0
0.059
0.059
0.120
0.102
0.127
0.127
0.06H
0.06*
0.127
0.127
0.068
0.061
0.135
0.135
0.135
0.135
560
560
560
560
560
560
560
560
560
560
560
560
560
560
560
560
590
560
530
550
520
510
»90
5*0
490
MBO
5HO
530
530
510
660
510
NM
0
5
2
6
9
12
l|
12
111
It
5

it
NM
It
       Blanka Indicate data not available.
       (•) Mole ratio (Ozone to IDA) la calculated on the bttlt or the TOC being pure TOA.
Date:   9/25/81
                                  III.3.1.2-25
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Chemical Oxidation  (Ozone)
Data source:  Government report                  Data source status:
Point source:  Adhesives and sealants               Not specified
Subcategory:  Unspecified                          Bench scale
Plant:  San Leandro                                Pilot scale
References:  3-95,  p.  81                           Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:   Sed.,  Ultrafiltration/Chem. Ox.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:   Unspecified
Chemical dosage(s):  Unspecified
Contact time:  Unspecified
pH:  Unspecified
Type of sedimentation device:   Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA

Sampling:  Equal volume grab samples
           collected throughout an 8-hr day;
	average of 2 days sampling	Analysis;   Data  set 2  (V.7.3.17)

                                  Concentration       Percent   Detection
  Pollutant/parameter	Influent    Effluent     removal	limit

Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  BOD5                          5,800       5,200         10
  COD                          77,000      12,000         84
  TSS                              64         140         NM
  Oil and grease                  130         4.0         97
  Total phenol                     47        0.13        >99

Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
  Cyanide                         560       1,500         NM
  Zinc                          2,200          90         96
Blanks indicate data not available.
NM, not meaningful.
Date:   9/25/81               III.3.1.2-26
-------
Ill 3.1 3  ffh am "i r* a 1 P rt*(*. i I^Lti 81i Pn

     Description

Precipitation is a chemical unit process in which undesirable
soluble metallic ions and certain anions are removed from waste-
water by conversion to an insoluble form.  It is a commonly used
treatment technique for removal of heavy metals, phosphorus, and
hardness.  The procedure involves alteration of the ionic equi-
librium to produce insoluble precipitates that can be easily
removed by sedimentation.  Chemical precipitation is always
followed by a solids separation operation that may include
coagulation (Section III.3.1.5) and/or sedimentation (Section
III.3.1.18), or filtration (Section III.3.1.9) to remove the
precipitates.  The process can be preceded by chemical reduction
(Section III.3.1.4) in order to change the characteristics of the
metal ions to a form that can be precipitated.

     Representative Types and Modifications

The chemical equilibrium relationship in precipitation that
affects the solubility of the component(s) can be achieved by a
variety of means.  Most precipitation reactions for industrial
wastewater treatment are induced by one or a combination of the
following processes:

     (1)  Hydroxide precipitation.  Dissolved heavy metal ions
          can be chemically precipitated as hydroxides for re-
          moval by physical means such as sedimentation or fil-
          tration.  The process uses an alkaline agent to raise
          the pH of the wastewater which causes the solubility of
          metal ions to decrease and thus precipitate out of the
          solvent.  The optimum pH at which metallic hydroxides
          are least soluble varies with the type of metal ion as
          shown in Figure 3.1.3-1.  A simple form of the hydroxide
          precipitation reaction may be written as:
                                                  /
               M+ + + 2(OH)- = M(OH)2

          The product formed is an insoluble metal hydroxide.  If
          the pH is below the optimum for precipitation, a soluble
          metal complex will form:

               M++ + OH" = M(OH)+

          Hydroxide precipitation is also affected by the presence
          of organic radicals that can form chelates and mask the
          typical precipitation reaction:

               M++ + OH" + nR = M(R)n OH+
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.3-1
-------
                                                  Pb(OH).
        10
        10
        10
        10
        ao
        10
          .-12
              01   2  3   45   67   6   9  10  11 12  13  14
FIGURE 3.1.3-1.   SOLUBILITY OF  METAL HYDROXIDES AND SULFIDES AS A
                  FUNCTION OF pH [3-4]
 Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.3-2
-------
          Reagents commonly used to effect the hydroxide precip-
          itation include alkaline compounds such as lime or
          caustic soda (sodium hydroxide).  Lime in the form of
          quicklime or unslaked lime (CaO),  and hydrated lime
          [Ca(OH)2] can be used.  Lime is generally made into wet
          suspensions or slurries before introduction into the
          treatment system.  The precise steps involved in con-
          verting the lime from the dry to the wet stage will
          vary according to the size of operation and type and
          form of lime used.   In the smallest plants,  bagged hy-
          drated lime is often charged manually into a batch
          mixing tank with the resulting "milk-of-lime" (or
          slurry) being fed by means of a solution feeder to the
          treatment process.  Where bulk hydrate lime is used,
          some type of dry feeder charges the lime continuously
          to either a batch or continuous mixer.  The lime is
          transferred by a solution feeder to the point of appli-
          cation.  With bulk quicklime, a dry feeder is also used
          to charge a slaking device, where the oxides are con-
          verted to hydroxides, producing a paste or slurry.  The
          slurry is then further diluted to milk-of-lime before
          being fed by gravity or pumping to the process.  Dry
          feeders can be of the volumetric or gravimetric type.
          Caustic soda, in the form of 59% or 20% aqueous solu-
          tion, is fed directly to the treatment system and does
          not require any dispensing and mixing equipment.  The
          treatment chemicals may be added to a flash mixer or
          rapid mix tank, or directly to the sedimentation device.
          Because metal hydroxides tend to be colloidal in nature,
          coagulating agents may also be added to facilitate
          settling.

     (2)  Sulfide Precipitation.  Both "soluble" sulfides such as
          hydrogen sulfide or sodium sulfide and "insoluble"
          sulfides such as ferrous sulfide may be used to pre-
          cipitate heavy metal ions as insoluble metal sulfides.
          Sodium sulfide and sodium bisulfide are the two chem-
          icals commonly used, with the choice between these two
          precipitation agents being strictly an economic con-
          sideration.  Metal sulfides have lower solubilities
          than hydroxides in the alkaline pH range and also tend
          to have low solubilities in the pH 7 range or below
          (Figure 3.1.3-1).
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.3-3
-------
The basic principle of sulfide treatment  technology.is
similar to that of hydroxide precipitation.   Sulfide is
added to precipitate the metals  as metal  sulfides and
the sludge formed is separated from  solution  by gravity
settling or filtration.

          Several steps enter into the process of sulfide pre-
          cipitation:

          a.  Preparation of sodium  sulfide.   Although this
              product is often in oversupply  from byproduct
              sources, it can also be made by reduction of sodium
              sulfate.  The process  involves  an energy loss in
              the partial oxidation  of carbon (such as that
              contained in coal) as  follows:

              Na2S04 + 4C = Na2S + 4C02  (gas)

               Sodium sulfate + carbon = sodium sulfide + carbon dioxide

          b.  Precipitation of the pollutant  metal (M) in the
              waste stream by an excess  of  sodium sulfide:

              Na2S + MS04 = MS  (precipitate)  + Na2SO4

              Sodium sulfide + metallic sulfate = metallic sulfide + sodium sulfate


          c.  Physical separation of the  metal sulfide in thick-
              eners or clarifiers, with  reducing conditions
              maintained by excess sulfide  ion.

          d.  Oxidation of excess sulfide by  aeration:

              Na2S + 202 = Na2SO4
              Sodium sulfide + oxygen =  sodium sulfate

     Because of the toxicity of  both the  sulfide ion and hydrogen
     sulfide gas, the use of sulfide precipitation may require
     both pre- and post-treatment and close, control of reagent
     additions.  Pretreatment involves raising the pH of the
     wastewater to-pH 7-8 to reduce  the  formation of obnoxious
     hydrogen sulfide gas.  The  pH adjustment may be accomplished
     at essentially the same point as the sulfide treatment, or
     by addition of a solution containing both sodium sulfide and
     a strong base (such as caustic  soda).  The post-treatment
     consists of oxidation by aeration or chemical oxidation to
     remove excess sulfide, a toxic  substance.

     A recently developed and patented process to eliminate the
     potential hazard of excess  sulfide  in  the effluent and the
     formation of gaseous hydrogen sulfide  uses ferrous sulfide
Date:  9/25/81               III.3.1.3-4
-------
     as the sulfide source.   The  fresh ferrous sulfide is pre-
     pared by adding  sodium  sulfide to ferrous sulfate.   The
     ferrous sulfide  slurry  formed is added to a wastewater to
     supply sufficient  sulfide  ions to precipitate metal sul-
     fides, which have  lower solubilities than ferrous sulfide.
     Typical reactions  are:

          FeS + Cu++  =  CuS + Fe++

          Ferrous sulfide + copper ion = insoluble copper sulfide + iron ion


          FeS + Ni(OH)2 = Fe(OH)2 + NiS

          Ferrous sulfide + nickel hydroxide = ferrous hydroxide + insoluble nickel sulfide


          A detention time of 10-15 minutes is sufficient to
          allow the reaction to go to completion.   Ferrous sulfide
          itself is also  a relatively insoluble  compound.  Thus
          the sulfide ion concentration is limited by the solu-
          bility of ferrous  sulfide,  which amounts to about 0.02
          mg/L, and the inherent  problems associated with conven-
          tional sulfide precipitation are minimized [3-4].

     (3)  Cyanide Precipitation.   Cyanide precipitation, although
          a method for  treating cyanide in wastewater,  does not
          destroy the cyanide molecule,  which is retained in the
          sludge that is  formed.   Reports indicate that during
          exposure to sunlight, the cyanide complexes can break
          down and form free cyanide.   For this  reason the sludge
          from this treatment method must be disposed of carefully.
          Cyanide may be precipitated and settled out of waste-
          water by the  addition of zinc sulfate  or ferrous sul-
          fate, which forms  zinc  ferrocyanide or ferro-  and
          ferri-cyanide complexes.   In the presence of iron,
          cyanide will  form  extremely stable cyanide complexes.

     (4)  Carbonate Precipitation.   Carbonate precipitation may
          be used to  remove  metals either by direct precipitation
          using a carbonate  reagent such as calcium carbonate or
          by converting hydroxides into carbonates using carbon
          dioxide.  The solubility of most metal carbonates is
          intermediate between  hydroxide and sulfide solubilities;
          in addition,  carbonates form easily filtered precip-
          itates.

     (5)  Coprecipitation.   In  coprecipitation,  materials that
          cannot be removed  from  solution effectively by direct
          precipitation are  removed by incorporating them into
          particles of  another  precipitate,  which is separated by
          settling, filtration, or flotation.


Date:  9/25/81               III.3.1.3-5
-------
     Technology Status

Chemical precipitation of metal hydroxides is a classical waste
treatment technology used by most industrial waste treatment
systems.  Chemical precipitation of metals in the carbonate form
alone has been found to be feasible and is used in commercial
application to permit metals recovery and water reuse.  Full scale
commercial sulfide precipitation units are operational  at numerous
industrial installdtions.  Cyanide precipitation is used at
several coil coating plants.

     Applications

Chemical precipitation can be used to remove metal ions such as
aluminum, antimony, arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, cobalt,
copper, iron, lead, manganese, mercury, molybdenum, tin, and
zinc.  The process is also applicable to any substance that can
be transformed into an insoluble form, for example, fluorides,
phosphates, soaps, and sulfides.

Hydroxide precipitation and particularly the use of lime to cause
chemical precipitation has gained widespread use in industrial
waste treatment because of its ease of handling, its economy, and
its effectiveness in treatment of a great variety of dissolved
material.  Industries using hydroxide precipitation include:

     - Inorganic Chemicals Manufacturing,
     - Metal Finishing,
     - Coil Coating,
     - Copper Forming,
     - Aluminum Forming,
     - Foundries,
     - Explosives Manufacturing,
     - Steam Electric Power Plants,
     - Photographic Equipment and Supplies,
     - Pharmaceutical Manufacturing,
     - Rubber Processing,
     - Porcelain Enameling,
     - Battery Manufacturing,
     - Iron and Steel Manufacturing,
     - Nonferrous Metals Manufacturing,
     - Coal Mining,
     - Electrical and Electronic Components, and
     - Ore Mining and Dressing.

The most common treatment configuration is pH adjustment and
hydroxide precipitation using lime or caustic followed by settling
for solids removal.  Most plants also add a coagulant or floccu-
lant prior to solids removal.
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.3-6
-------
Sulfide precipitation use has mainly been to remove mercury,
lead, and silver from wastewater,  with less frequent use to
remove other metal ions.  Sulfide precipitation is also used to
precipitate hexavalent chromium (Cr+6) without prior reduction to
the trivalent state (Cr+3), as is required in the hydroxide
process.  Sulfide precipitation is being practiced in the follow-
ing industries:

     - Photographic Equipment and Supplies,
     - Inorganic Chemicals Manufacturing,
     - Coal Mining,
     - Textile Mills,
     - Nonferrous Metals Manufacturing, and
     - Ore Mining and Dressing.

Most of the chlor-alkali industry (subcategory of the Inorganic
Chemicals Manufacturing) is applying this technology to remove
lead or mercury from its waste streams.  Most metal sulfides are
less soluble than hydroxides and in general, the precipitates are
frequently more dependably removed from wastewater.  Sulfide
precipitation has potential for use as a polishing treatment
after hydroxide precipitation and sedimentation to remove re-
sidual metals.

Cyanide precipitation can be used when cyanide destruction is not
feasible because of the presence of cyanide complexes that are
difficult to destroy.   This technology is being used in the Coil
Coating industry.

Carbonate precipitation is sometimes used to precipitate metals,
especially where precipitated metals are to be recovered. Car-
bonate ions also appear to be particularly useful in precipita-
ting lead and antimony.  Coprecipitation is used for radium con-
trol in the uranium industry (a subcategory of Ore Mining and
Dressing).   Radium sulfate (RaS04) is coprecipitated by addition
of barium chloride, which in the presence of sulfate ion forms
barium sulfate precipitate.  Coprecipitation of molybdate anion,
which is not removed effectively by hydroxide or sulfide precip-
itation, can be carried out by addition of ferric sulfate or
ferric chloride, which forms ferric hydroxide precipitates at an
acid pH.  Vanadium is also subject to coprecipitation with ferric
hydroxide.

     Advantages and Limitations

Chemical precipitation has proven to be an effective technique
for removing many industrial wastewater pollutants.  It operates
at ambient conditions and is well suited to automatic control.
The use of chemical precipitation may be limited because of
interference of chelating agents and other chemical interference
possible when mixing wastewaters and treatment chemicals, or
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.3-7
-------
because of the potentially hazardous situation involved with the
storage and handling of chemicals.

Hydroxide precipitation is most commonly used in industry and
produces a high quality effluent when applied to many waste
streams (particularly when followed by flocculation and filtra-
tion) .   Often, coprecipitation of a mixture of metal ions will
result in residual metal solubilities lower than those that could
be achieved by precipitating each metal at its optimum pH. Some
common limitations of the hydroxide process are as follows:

        The theoretical minimum solubilities for different metals
        occur at different pH values (Figure 3.1.3-1).  For a
        mixture of metal ions, it must be determined whether a
        single pH can produce sufficiently low solubilities for
        the metal ions present in the wastewaters.

        Hydroxide precipitates tend to resolubilize if the so-
        lution pH is increased or decreased from the minimum
        solubility point; thus maximum removal efficiency will
        not be achieved unless the pH is controlled within a
        narrow range.

        The presence of complexing ions, such as phosphates,
        tartrates, ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA), and
        ammonia may have adverse effects on metal removal effi-
        ciencies when hydroxide precipitation is used.

        Hydroxide precipitation usually makes recovery of the
        precipitated metals difficult because of the heteroge-
        neous nature of most hydroxide sludges.

Lime for hydroxide precipitation has gained widespread use
because of its ease of handling, economy, and treatment effec-
tiveness for a great variety of dissolved materials.  However,
if there is sulfate ion present in the wastewater, gypsum
(calcium sulfate) will be formed.  This increases the sludge
production, may cause a scaling problem in pipelines, and may
clog dual media filters.  Using caustic soda is more expensive,
but it generally eliminates the scaling problem.  Total dis-
solved solids will increase in wastewaters treated with caustic
soda as a result of the formation of sodium salts.

Sulfide precipitation has been demonstrated to be an effective
alternative to hydroxide precipitation for removing various
heavy metals from industrial wastewaters.  The major advantage
of the sulfide precipitation process is that because of the
extremely low solubility of metal sulfides, very high metal
removal efficiencies can be achieved.  Additional advantages of
sulfide precipitation are as follows:
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.3-8
-------
        The sulfide process has the ability to remove chromates
        and dichromates without preliminary reduction of the
        chromium to the trivalent state.

        The high reactivity of sulfides with heavy metal ions and
        the insolubility of metal sulfides over a broad pH range
        are attractive features compared with the hydroxide
        precipitation process.

        Sulfide precipitation, unlike hydroxide precipitation, is
        relatively insensitive to the presence of most chelating
        agents and eliminates the need to treat these wastes
        separately.

The major limitations of the sulfide precipitation process are
the evolution of toxic hydrogen sulfide fumes and the discharge
of treated wastewaters containing residual levels of sulfide.
Other factors include:

        Sulfide reagent will produce hydrogen sulfide fumes when
        it comes in contact with acidic wastes.  This can be
        prevented by maintaining the pH of the solution between 8
        and 9.5 and may require ventilation of the treatment
        tanks.

        As with hydroxide precipitation, excess sulfide ion must
        be present to drive the precipitation reaction to com-
        pletion.  Since the sulfide ion itself is toxic, sulfide
        addition must be carefully controlled to maximize heavy
        metals precipitation with a minimum of excess sulfide to
        avoid the necessity of post-treatment.  Where excess
        sulfide is present, aeration of the effluent stream would
        be necessary to oxidize residual sulfide to the less
        harmful sodium sulfate (Na2SO4).

        The cost of sulfide precipitants is high in comparison
        with hydroxide precipitant, and disposal of metallic
        sulfide sludges may pose problems.

The use of ferrous sulfide (insoluble sulfide process) as a
source of sulfide reduces or virtually eliminates the problem of
hydrogen sulfide evolution.  The use of ferrous sulfide, however,
requires reagent consumption considerably higher than stoichio-
metric and significantly higher sludge generation than either the
hydroxide or soluble sulfide treatment processes.

     Reliability

Hydroxide and sulfide chemical precipitation are highly reliable,
although proper monitoring and control are required.  The major
maintenance needs involve periodic upkeep of monitoring equip-
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.3-9
-------
ment, automatic feeding equipment, mixing equipment, and other
hardware.

     Chemicals Required

          Hydroxide precipitation:  quicklime (CaO), hydrated
     lime [Ca(OH)2]/ and liquid caustic soda (NaOH).

          Sulfide precipitation:  sodium sulfate (Na2S04), sodium
     sulfide (Na2S), and ferrous sulfate (FeS04).

          Cyanide precipitaton:  zinc sulfate (ZnS04), and ferrous
     sulfate (FeS04).

          Carbonate precipitation:  calcium carbonate (CaC03),
     and carbon dioxide (C02).

     Residuals Generated

Chemical precipitation generates solids that must be removed in a
subsequent treatment step, such as sedimentation or filtration.
Sulfide sludges are less subject to leaching than hydroxide
sludges.  However, the long-term impact of weathering and of
bacterial and air oxidation of sulfide sludges has not been
evaluated.

     Design Criteria

Chemical precipitation treatment can either be a batch or con-
tinuous operation, with batch treatment being favored when waste
flows are small. In batch treatment, the equipment usually .con-
sists of two tanks, each with a capacity to treat the total
wastewater volume expected during the treatment period.  These
systems can be economically designed for flows up to 190,000
liters per day (50,000 gallons per day).

The batch treatment tanks serve the multiple functions of equal-
izing the flow, acting as a reactor, and acting as a settler.
For a typical treatment operation, the wastewater is stirred, and
a homogeneous sample is taken and analyzed to determine the
chemical dosage requirements.  The chemicals are then added,
mixed, and stirred for about 10 minutes.  After the reaction is
complete, the solids are allowed to settle for a few hours.  The
clear liquid is then decanted and discharged.  Settled sludge is
retained to serve as a seed for crystal growth for the next
batch, but must be drawn off periodically for disposal.  For
larger daily flows, a typical continuous flow treatment scheme
consists of a chemical feed system, flash mixer, flocculator,
settling unit, and in some cases a filtration system.  In a
continuous system, a control system is used to regulate the
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.3-10
-------
chemical feed to the process.   For high-speed mixing,  residence
times of 10 to 30 seconds have been reported as satisfactory and
a mix time of as much as two minutes has been recommended for two
parallel units [3-37].   For development of good floe charac-
teristics, residence times of 15 to 30 minutes have been suggest-
ed [3-37].

The chemical dosage for precipitation can be determined on the
basis of wastewater alkalinity and acidity,  desired pH level to
be maintained for the process, and stoichiometric requirements.
An alternative is to estimate the chemical dosage on the basis of
jar tests.  These jar tests react the wastewater with a series of
chemical doses,  with the optimum dose selected on the basis of
observed and measured removal effectiveness.  Dosages determined
on the basis of stoichiometric requirements may have to be in-
creased by up to four times the stoichiometric amount as a result
of chemical interactions, solubility variances, mixing effects,
and multi-valent competition [3-37].

     Performance

The performance of chemical precipitation depends on several
variables.  The most important factors affecting precipitation
effectiveness are:                          ,

        Maintenance of an alkaline pH throughout the precip-
        itation reaction and subsequent settling.

        Addition of a sufficient excess of treatment ions to
        drive the precipitation reaction to completion.

        Addition of an adequate supply of sacrificial ions (such
        as iron or aluminum) to ensure precipitation and removal
        of specific target ions.

        Effective removal of precipitated solids.

Proper control of pH is absolutely essential for favorable per-
formance of precipitation/sedimentation technologies.   This is
clearly illustrated by solubility curves for selected metal
hydroxides and sulfides as shown in Figure 3.1.3-1.  Hydroxide
precipitation is affective in removing arsenic, cadmium, chromium
(+3), copper, iron, manganese, nickel, lead, and zinc.  Sulfide
treatment is superior to hydroxide treatment for removal of
several metals and is very effective for removing mercury and
silver.  As shown by theoretical solubilities of hydroxides and
sulfides of selected metals (Table 3.1.3-1), sulfide precipita-
tion is highly effective in removal of cadmium, cobalt, copper,
iron, mercury, manganese, nickel, silver, tin, and zinc.  Esti-
mated achievable maximum 30-day average concentrations of several
heavy metals under different chemical precipitation and solids
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.3-11
-------
removal technologies are shown in Table  3.1.3-2.   The estimated
achievable concentrations  are  based  on the  performance data
reported  in  literature  [3-4].
 TABLE  3,1.3-1
                      THEORETICAL SOLUBILITIES OF HYDROXIDES AND  SULFIDES
                      OF  SELECTED METALS  IN PURE  WATER  [3-12]
   Metal
                    As  hydroxide
                                Solubility of metal ion, mg/L
                    As carbonate
                                    As sulfide
Cadmium (Cd"1"1")
Chromium (Cr"1"1"1")
Cobalt (Co"1"1-)
Copper (Cu++)
Iron (Fe++)
Lead (Pb"1"1-)
Manganese (Mn++)
Mercury (Hg++)
Nickel (Ni++)
Silver (Ag+)
Tin (Sn++)
Zinc (Zn"1"1-)
2.3 x 1CT5
8.4 x 10"»
2.2 x 10'1
2.2 x lO'2
8.9 x 1CT1
2.1
1.2
3.9 x 1CT4
6.9 x 10'3
13.3
1.1 x 10-«
1.1
1.0 x ID'4




7.0 x ID"3

3.9 x ID'2
1.9 x 10'1
2.1 x 10'1

7.0 x 10'«
6.7 x 10'10
No precipitate
1.0 x 10-8
5.8 x 10-18
3.4 x 1C-5
3.8 x 10-9
2.1 x ID'3
9.0 x 10-20
6.9 x 10-8
7.4 x 10~12
3.8 x ID'8
2.3 x 10-7
TABLE  3.1.3-2.
                     ESTIMATED ACHIEVABLE MAXIMUM  30-DAY  AVERAGES  FOR
                     THE APPLIED  TECHNOLOGIES  [3-4]
                              FINAL CONCENTRATIONS

                                 Suicide ppt.
                                 foI I owed by
                                 f i 1 tration
                Line ppt.
              f o I I owed by
               r I 11 ra t i on
 Lime ppt.
foI I owed by
fiItration
         Ferrite cop reelp-
         itation followed
           by f11tratIon
           Soda ash addi-
          tion roilowed by
           sed imentat ion
         Soda ash addi-
         tion f o M owed by
           fiItration	
    Antimony, Sb
    Arsenic, As
    BerytIium, Be
    Cadmium, Cd
    Copper, Cu
    Chromium, Cr(»3)
    Lead, Pb
    Mercury, Hg<+2)
    Nickel, Ni
    Silver, Ag
    Selenium, Se
    Thallium, Tl
    Zinc, Zn
               0.8-1.5
               0.5-1.0
               0.1-0.5
               0.1-0.5
               0.05-1.0
               0.0-0.5
               0.3-1.6

               0.2-1.5
               0.4-0.8
               0.2-1.0
               0.2-1.0
               0.5-1.5
 0.4-0.8
 0.5-1.0
 0.01-0.1
 0.05-0.1
 0.4-0.7
 0.05-0.5
 0.05-O.6

 0.1-0.5
 0.2-0.4
 0.1-0.5
 0.1-0.5
 0.4-1.2
0.05-0.1

0.01-0.1
0.05-0.5

0.05-0.4
0.01-0.05
0.05-0.5
0.05-0.2
                                 0.02-1.2
<0.05
<0.05
 0.01
 0.20
<0.01
                                             0.02-0.5
0.4-0.8
 Date:   9/25/81
                                      III.3.1.3-12
-------
Subsequent data sheets provide performance data from studies on
the following industries and/or waste streams using chemical
precipitation and sedimentation, and chemical precipitation,
flocculation and sedimentation:

     - Foundries,
     - Metal Finishing,
     - Iron and Steel Manufacturing,
     - Textiles,
     - Steam Electric Power Plants,
     - Inorganic Chemicals Manufacturing,
     - Ore Mining and Dressing,
     - Porcelain Enameling,
     - Paint and Ink Formulation,
     - Coil Coating,
     - Nonferrous Metals Manufacturing,
     - Aluminum Forming,
     - Battery Manufacturing,
     - Electrical and Electronic Components,
     - Copper Coating,
     - Organic and Inorganic Wastes, and
     - Auto and Other Laundries.

     References

3-2, 3-3, 3-4, 3-5, 3-6, 3-8, 3-12, 3-16, 3-17, 3-23, 3-24, 3-27,
3-31, 3-37, 3-40, 3-41. .
Da'te:  9/25/81              111. 3.1.3-13
-------





o
Ul
u.
o
Ul
a.
(0
z
3
•*•».
tc.
Ul

i
—
r*
t-
Z
Ul
z
a
Ul
W

X
i
§
i

£
~
o
ae
a.

-i
<
_
S
X
o

ce
o
u.
£
i
M

U
3
§
X
u
Ul
^
o
a:
H
I

n
•
g
a>
u

u
•

a
0


o
CO
o
w
_
«
2
U.



a

CO
c
«
4J
o
a.











*j
e
a
*
I
CMvO««»ir\ — WOVOOVO —
^O «f ^K flO €0 CM ^K 40 40 CK irt






— O\COONO\OvO\ OvOv
NO AOAON^O^ON A A

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II

W — (OjJ-COrOfO — O
CMCM Ifvvo •
J^



cvjco— . . .3-— .c-o
— m— . .0 • •
OO OO




o
o a-
r~ 4- • •
^f ^N^T C^ ^* t^ W ^f ^* ^^

• i i i i i i i it
ONVO — CM-J JS-OO^ h-vo
— CM OOfOOO OO
O OOO OO





eo co o €0 co co ^ ^ ~* o c^
CM — — — CM —















j'
^v
6
^
09
*J
C M
5 2,
2 £S
— ao
o «> C
Ov-ZvOiACV)jJ-|-00\
A





O\
ON«OO 7

lit i

OlAI- O
CM —
•
O


CM -rooOOOfOO
VIA— . .N. .0 •
V V — O



oVS §
jf — o co
... .
fl-OO CM

III 1
r^oo o
ff) ^3 • OD
0°
























6
3

|
o
B *»
a ooio « 3 ec
£ O B « B3C 3CD
— O.'O •QSO} 3B— O —B —
«-~ C— CC8 — 3WB-B*» TJ 3 «
OlTl — «o t--— «j 5 C— O 3 A— <0— >
— — ID OB 0>— C HOC— >> « T3 — T3 <0
MQOV) *>— 33CkOC4J— Ol-O — AM — — O X
WOOOTO — — — W«fc — — CBnPOOQO<0£Q>
5

CMfOVOOvCDI^f- •ON— ZOMTiZONONZcOOOroZOvOvZOvOv
V A eo A A





ON ^^ ON ^^ ^^
ON ON ON ON ^^ ON ^^ ^^
Ov A A A ON^ A vo A

I I I 1 I I I I I

OtfOOVOOCOO O
I- «M —
A



A A A A















CO^VOOOOOO — OOJOO-I-JQQ-*OOO-IQQ-IQQ
— V mvoCMn) ON — OOOZZI^CM WOOZZQ ZZ
V OCM — v — coca r — ONOO co
—
§0
o
OO O
o « .
OOOO 0 0
•OOO O O
OOCMCMO •* OO
O O\ . . .VO *lfN .


1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
irMrt^t_i_i — incM o
CIO V — Z
co OQ •
o





— CMCMCM— .CM CM












CD

(B
CB
4J 03 0)
£ *» C
_i a. CD-
'S. — E
O> "» «0 CO

x*> xo
. X £ C C
« (B O. 03 ID
•P £ ££
c 	 ao. a>
CO »— O C
M £ N-D t- o> 0)
3E *> C O 4-> N C
— >, 3 E EffiffiiA— CO)
— C— E3 > 3 IAOC 03 0> » O
O O — 3 — «- -0 « 	 1 	 CM < 	 C.OCCO
ag 	 se— son)— — — *>o o «— » «-
~ca>«£o>>»a> — £ — si .£0)4Joc
x
-------




0
Ul
u.
O
Ul
0.
(/}
z
3
CC
Ul
O
Q.
1
Z
o

5
1-
z
Ul
y
~e
a
Ul
CO

X
K
^
z
t- CO
< 3
h- C
Z'JJ
— C
U O
UIO
o.*'

_J
<
_
s
X
0
cc
o
u
>.
o.
5
z
V)
>_
§
o
z
X
0
Ul
K
|
O
K
1-
I



»<
>
O
C
o

h-
«
^
(0

o
E


C
CD
•o
Z



(0
a
c

c
(D
*

I
ISHi





W)
O

1

co
a\



— JtO — Jt

C5








0
to


1

o
CD






-co 	


















CD
C
to ca
CO Cf
•o « *> co
— — CO C

— *> o >»
O O£ *»
EL. u 0)
CB O— O
O C— t. t.
4- 0>£l- O
8—01 —
>CB — JC
OJC (- .O
SzH — H






















































.
co
fi
eg
«.
5 .
eg -P
P E
O —
c —

03 C
*J 0
CO •" ^
•0** • 3
CO CD *»*! C
a co o —
O V CO C
~ *> 03
•o > (0 a
c S-o i
e *» *»
•O^OO
gJoV

Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.3-15
-------













Ul
s
—
	 1
1
z
o
h™
1-
z
Ul

Q
_
O
O
_J
o

X
o
Ul
1-

o
K.
Z
o
o
















ps

•
>
0
c
0
£
0)

—
CO
>
0
E
0>
a:


c
o
JJ
CO
1_
c
0)
0
c
0
0

c
0)
3

Ct_
c*.
Ul












UJ
4-J
c

0
a
CtJ
CO
a

































c
CD
•—
•o
4)
E



(B
O
C
CO
o:





c
CO
Yl
u
0)
2:






0)
o
c
CO
a:








01

CD
c

—
«•
2
u.




a>
CO
u
in

c

.—
a.



















jj
c
CD
4J
~
—
O
a.
*
h-OOO— OJ-d-|~-ONroiANO— OOOOroCMI-.S-Oro— SJ-QNONro
NOON— ON ON .* ON ON ro in ON ON if\ 00 IT\ CO CM in ON NO ON ON Z CM ON ON ON
A




ON ON ON ON ONONON
ON ON CM ON ON 03 ON O\ ON NOONCNON —
ONACMONAONt-^AA ONAAA 00

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

d-Or-ONO J-ONO03 roooroo ON
— — ^J ONlTN — lT\ CO IfN rO





OI--OCO — CMCM^TNOCM — NOfO — ir\OlT>OroCMOlT\roJ-O — ON-J
CO 	 03O -CM 	 O— roOOOON . ifr O O O CNJ O O O • -Q
OO OOOOOOOO OO - OO - V
CM ON



0 0
ro o CM CM O
OONQtO — ifNiCO CNI OO O O
rOlrtO\ • -O « • • -ONO • IT\ ^
IT\ — NO — ONOONOO OCM — O ro Jt

1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

cMor-Noa Qii-QQ CMQQO o o
Z OZZ -ZZ OZZZ ro CM
— • CM d1
o o









f^OlTlO — CM POdT 	 CM ITl ro CM — CM — — — & — 	 — — 	
CM 	 —












~







II _)
oi —

S a
_ N^^ ^ ^.
^ , ^S*-'
V OT3
C U> O.CU
CO 3 *—>
•P i-  — O
— SZ — CO CO t»
— O.O Q) -u UJ
OWC!- E O —
a ocucnv E3 E -UTJ
fniCEME E 3C 30)
— a O.TJ T330)3 3 E— 0) — E TJ « «
CO C— CC— E — 3WE-0-M 4J3— EEC
O 	 CO !- — CO T3 3 CC— '-— cnTj — ijw— s-*» — -o-o —
uJOWOOO 	 — a co £oj«BX
j? ~ so o > o a: ot x
o
* *

0000 ZCOONONCOCOCOr^f"* ON NO ON ON ON ON ro
A A




ON ON ON ON ON ON ON NO ON ON ON i^ ON
ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ^ ON ON
AA AAAAAAAAAAAON

II 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

CMO or**roh— OON NO o ON oo ir\ ~* •
OOCM CMJffONO NO it ON IT\ CM it
A




ONIT\ NO O lT\ON O IT* 00 — O CM O — O — 1 — J — J iTt
• — LU CM — roift ro —CM 	 ONQQQd"
— CNJ — CM
OO


o
ON O O O O
Ul O 0 O O
OO ro OOOinO CNJ O - -1-1
00— . O -CM «COro •>!•-. O CM NO O O O ro
	 CM 00 — CM IfMTi Jfr 1T\ 00 ON V CNI It CO CO r-

II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

OO NO OOOQO — OOO — ro O — JO— J
ZZ Ul ZZZZZ 'ZZZ • — ZOZO
— O — CQ CO
•
NO








ro— ro— OO — C-ON
£ -P
_J aw a>
Cft ''" "* W 05
3. -£-  co -P
^ ••" X ^Z  £ JC CO
co-— 	 aj:
co -P— 1 XX P
P -v JC N— C.
3 «UJE 4JCXa
— XVJL.3E EECUOIP
— COOCO— E3 0) X 3 3 IJQ3 —
OO— PJQ— 3— t. -0 S 	 ! 	 CM JQX
aecuj 	 ea>— 3a>ca)— — — i .c
•— Q)fl)Ct— XEOQ,C"OO^Ctt)>-"O XC4^
OPUJjQ — V-^S-O-coojl-O — — COCUJPI C)
— C I- UJ (U CO 4C O X 0) 0) — 0) — jZ — — 3 — —
O
1-
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.3-16
-------













LJ
—
J
1
o
i-
z
u
—V
Q
LU
M

X
1-

36
Z
0

H-

i-

Q.
WO
ce o>
Q. 3
C
< w
o c
— o

u

ce
o
u.

oe
§
y
3
W

^
U
O

o
o
UJ
i-

_j
o
ce
i-
1



B«

^
O
c
CD
U
(h.
4-

C
CD
O
C
o
u

c
CD
3

4-
CH
LJ
c
CO
•a
CD








CD
O
C
co
ce











CO
P
C

o
Q
co
CO
a







CD
co
o
to
_
3
U.




CD
co
O
ia

P
O

«
a.










c
co
p
3
I
£ COOx^OvZ OtfN£O\£ — OxCOOr— VOZ£O£ co£Z Z \O
3T vf* ^0 ^f ON 2- lA f*^ 2E C^ Z C^ C^ ^^ C^ ^^ C^ Z SC ON 2T ro 3C 3C 3E
A A A





* ON O\
00 ON ON
« A A

1 1 1
00 O CM
if ON




Q 09 -I CNJ ITl O lf\ -1 -1 -1 IfMTl O _J lf> -1 — (0 -J _) O CM Q NO — O
Z QNO • • •QQOCVICVIZO -QCO OO • Z- • NO
co oocMcacacQ COCNICO coco^r — IA







* *

o— ° ° aooooooo°oo o —
z— — IA cococo — cocoeoco — coco m MIA

ii i i i i i i i i i i t i i i ii

0-1 0 0 OQQQQOOO-JQQ _l -Q
zo z z zzzzzzzzozz o z
£0 CO 00








cvitM — cvi — N 	 oo CM evico m cv f* f- c\j CM r~ — co — CNJ NO in










CNJ —







CD
c
CO
£
CD CO CD C
41 -O O CD «
ce— ~CDO'-CJC
— O — CD «- CTJOO4JCB
CO C O C O CO 	 CD C
•P£ CD CD O CD £ POO-CI 	
jc a i- c co c u co— co P ox
CX— O CD COCO t-CD CD CD CO O .C *- CD — JC
>> i c c— ft- c c (- i- o •!-> o J= <->
— £ E CD COXCO-UX CD CD CD  CD O C *»P CD co-~C» « CD »£ *>O£Ct— <- <- Q
US t- CO CD CD££ O-~co C C C— *> *- O CO CM £ t- O *-
O 	 OCJ3CO.a£! CO+JOOOCCOCOJZ — — co£Xco£ -O *CD -(-co
o CNJ o. aeo uiH« 0 _• •
OTS*- —
***» *» c >
OT9 CD C Q>
— JJ (0 *»
«D*>*» X
MA OOO
.* c c C
c « a.
TO-! » -a.
-QQZ<
coeozz*
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.3-17
-------












z
13
^
^
1
O
h"
i-
z
Ul
z
—
O
UJ
CO

X
—
^

^J
o
«_
H
1-
o.
0
UJ
a.
_j

o
^
y
UJ
X
o

at:
o
u.

ce
z
z
™^l
CO
>_
3

o
z
X
a

_j
o

1-
z
0
u









w

•
>
o
c
CD
u
CD

—
CO

O
E
CD

c
CD
•—
•o
CD
z



V
o
c
co
cc.




C C
o
—
4-1
co
i.
4J
c
CD
O
O
O

^J
c
ffi

^
ci-
UJ
CD
•~
•o
to
z







CO
0
c
CD
a:












ca
*>
C

o
a
OJ
CO
o





CO
CD
o
CO

^
»
3
U.




CO
CO
o
ca

C

a.

















C
CD
4-
^^
O
a.
IAW>— OlAONMOONO
lA f*» ON tA^ CM OA CK lA






ON ON
— ONONO^-VOONONVO
COr-AOOKiAONAI--

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

!"•• CO f"* CM CM 00 — IA Jf
lA — — lANOf)


OOOOfOcOl^iAto
OlAiAO O— SO
lA lA lA • •
. . . O O
CM 00 CM



00
OOOO
OOOO
. »OO OO NO
O— . .fOCMOOO .


1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

roooovocod-iA —
*O PO C^ if * ^U 'O •
— — o «o
• o
o v







oo co r*~ r** ^ oo NO IA IA












CM CM 	







U
en
E

^
ca
4^
C ca
CD 3
4J I- CO
3 o ca ca
— £— ca
— Q.O CD
O CO C «-
a o co 01 CD
££ E O+>*>— 3CC
•— ONCM
ON lA ^






ONOON
ONONON
A V A

1 1 1

*f NO CO
oo **} ^
V

Od-oo
•CM —

OC3





Jt
•CO
MO •
& V ^

1 1 1

am.*
zo-

do
V V







^^^












—




















E
i c
t- O C 41
caoocoooo — — caeocD'- — —
coCDOt-l-l-(-OOQ — 1— t-
^
U


Z^ONZ — O*AON — ONf*J
E CO CO Z ON CO 00 ON NO CO lA
A





ONO ON
IAVO ON 00 !*• ON f>- CM .*
^f CO A A ^^ A CO ^* f^

II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

ON^ 00 lA <*? f* ON ^ NO
CM— — •stO\Jf~


OlACMOiANOr-ONOOO
PO CM ~™ ^3 . C? *f '^ C3 C^ C3
COCO pf)O** h*fO NO
OO ...





OOO
OOO
O O f-OCMlAJf
miAOO -IA ...
^ ^* c^ ^ CM **) ~* r^ cy^ co

i i i i i i i i i i

— MOJ-^fOCOOOfO
* ONOOO — OOO

OOO .
V V CM







iA lA UNlAlAlA^ UNlANO












_ _




















! i
CD E— CD
•P 3 C0 E 6T34J
cs— CD 3 3J3-
c» o c — — >>a
	 en-o i — o co co co



ZOZNONOr*>O
Z ZI^NOf^NO — NOCMCMZNOOOZONZONIAONONOOOO
A A A A





ON 00 ON ON ON ONONON
OOIAON NOtoOO COON ON ON ONONON
00 ON A ONONON AA A A AAA

III III II 1 1 III

00 coo ONOO — O OO O ONOOO
c*i — PO — ON ON ^ NO
A

sf CM coco- 1- On ONf~ 0 0 0 ONOd" lAOI-a- co IAOO
CMVO — d1 1>- CM « ON « 	 O — «o O CM O CM —
vv— vvtAv — -a-
. o
CO



OO OOO O
§0 OOO 0 IAO
ooooo o oo
lA O . .CM .O .O — . O O O • .
CM CM — h- 1*- r — .3- .— r — IAI-- IA d- — OOOIA
V NO V J- — CM V — 3-iA— V MNO lA — fOVroco

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

OCMNOCM — OCMflOf>-Oh-OOO O OQOOQ
— NO V — fOZVCM • -V— — Z Z ZZZZZ
V 	 V —








IA iA lA ^» ^* NO ^ NO ^* ^O lA f*1" *t ^ if — — tA f*5 LA CM












— CM CMCM — — CM— —CM — CM —




CD
4J
CO
CD
4J CD
£ *»

^*. — ** 4J CO
en ~-co co eo c

X4J CO CD O N
. X £ £ £ C C
ca CD o.4-> 4J CD co
4J £ £££ J3
c 	 aaaococo
CO >>>» O (- C C
•P £ N 	 I- O CD CD
3 E +> C >>>>0 - N N
— >> 3 E E OJCP4J4J— £CC
— CO— ES » >> 3 IJ33O£ 0) O CO CO
oo 	 3~ '-•o ' — « — CM .0.00— c — .0 .a
a E c 	 BCD— 3CDCD— ~— i i co o co o — o
— CD>>EOaC-OOJtf>— O >>CC4JCNI>>'-
O4>>caL-o<.acDco(-o— co c w *> i i CCDCCNJ£+>
— Ct-COco£O>>CBCO 	 £ 	 3 	 
-------













jr
3
^
i
o
1-
z
U

_
0
Ul
CO

X
H

^

jr
O

H

1-
o.
O— •
LJ-Q
oe CD
0. 3
c
< **
c c
— o
5
y
^
CO
^
3

o
o
LJ
K
§
•^
O
U




M

«
>
u

CD
U
V
ci-
te
__
co
^
i
CD
ce

c
o
._
4->
co
1_
4J
C
CD
U
C
0
u

JJ
c
CD
3
_

U









CO
4J
C

O
a
CO
CO
Q

















C
CO

•D
CD
S.





O
c
co
oe



c
CO
._
•D
CD
£








CD
O
C
CO
fi£






CD
CD
U
M
—
3
U.




CD
CO
U
CO

c

cZ








4J
lutan
o
Q.
O — tfO\OZOOs^O\O^OMrtZvOCMOZ

A AAA AA AA







OS Osos O\
f*~ O\ A AAA

III III
O— O OOS O
Os £t Os O\ ^
A

irtoroo — \oosoioocoiniriocor~ooo
coiTiMZfO— — OsZco — jf- — 	
. V V
_



o
o o
o o o
VOOO O O -.Of- — O
•tin co in csj o c\j os vo o *~ ^ c^
co 	 mcMoscxj— — r^vv —

III 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

room oooom oooino
mvo z — zzv xx— vz
— V









VO CM vOCMJrcOCM 	 VOinrocMin —










CUM — 	




CD
c
ce
ce ">,
C C. CD CD
CD CD CD CD *» C C
N-DC C CD CD CDCSCS
C— co CD CD ce O C CDCfJC
CD L.£ cc— t- ccj -a ce *» *» CD
n o 4J coeo>>oo. 	 CD CD c
O-CD £££- 0 CD t- XO 0 CD
L.£ E 4-> 4J 4J j: t-"O O£ ^ ^ —
O O O CD ce CD U Q. 	 4-> O O X
— eo e OOO— O«-£CD 	 £
£(-O i-Cc,'t3L.OOO£f+>
O4-><-EOOOIO— I-OUCD (-CD
— CD A ! 	 c» — £ CD O 	 O OC
«-+>— O£££C£OC— 4-CCl 	 O
CICOO 	 £ 	 Ul 1— QUO
CDJJ- 0 «- «-QQC3l-Q >>>>«- CM£ 1 co£
3 «J3 O O 1 1 1 1 !££(- , .O- W O.
— CM «- 	 CM — CM— *J4J4J — — — jf ao





























































,
CD
A
CO
co

«
4J
g
co
4J .
•a -3
««_
ndicate
detectei
meaning
*J4J
|00
— Of
CDZZ
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.3-19
-------








^^
CM
*^F
_•
U
CO
00
i
z
o
1- •
1-


M
o
LJ
w

z
1-

^

z
o
1-
a_
o
u
as
a.


U
5
z
u

C£
O
U.
>
1
§
CO
^
0
i

rj
U
1-

o

^(V
z
0
u








ft<

>
a
ij
j
B

— «.
CO
>
o
E
0>
at



3
w
n
P
c
CD
U

o
O
p
c
0)
3
l-
ij








U
c

o
o

eg
CO

























C
co
•o




CD
O
c
co
a:






CO
•o
w
*






CD
o
c
CO
oe



CD

CCj
c
u
—
3





CD
cc
c
(A
p
O

a.
















•P
c
Cl
4.
^m
O
a.

•^ 00 flO ^* ^3 ^C ^o irt CD C? >
CO ~-> - - 9.
P — W CO CD
3 — o P *> C.
— CO «« C O —
— *J M CO *> >>
O O— P JC
a P-O 3 « P
— .»— COO3 >>3 1
co e e o o — *> — «- i-~ M
U 33 CLECtAECD 3C —
.- .-.- — cjj a> o a-o u CD u
CD CJ H~ ^ fl£ OC X ^ ^C ^ CJ U -J 3E (A 1^ CO
— o
O H



















































a
CO
A
co
 en
•P C

u c
— CO

(0 O
JC C
c
co •.
-£
eoz
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.3-20
-------






w
z
h-

o.
—
o
UI
cc
a.

o
UI
CO
E.
O
0
1
z
o
—
H

H
Z
UI
—
Q
UI
W

I
h-
— •
^

O
H
t-
__
0.
—
0
UJ
ce
Q.

—i
o

E
UJ
X
o

ce
£

ce

1
>.
o
o
_l
o
z
X
o
UI
H

i
O
1-
0
u





»*

>
o
c
0)
o
'C
o>

—
re

o
E
0)
ce
c
co

•o
0)
£




V
a
c
re
ce





c
o
4->
CO
i.
4J
C
a)
u
c
o
o

4J
c
a>
3

C*.
Ii-
Ul
c
re
•o
0)
£







0)
O
c
CO
ce





CO






U)
*J
c
0
a

CO

to
a





—
a
u
in

_
2
u.




0)

CO
u
U)

o
._
a.















c
CO
4J
3
O
a.
^0 ^J ^N t^ O^ CO ^K ^* ^^ ^^ ^^ ^N ^* (^ ift «? ^™ 'Z ^0 ^J (^ ^^ ™" ^^ ^^
A A A






ON ONCO ON ONONONON Is-
00 IfN. ON ^ f*" ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON 00 ON CO 00 CO CM CO NO
r^ONA^ONAA AONAAAA -Sfl^- AON ONONONON

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II II 1 1 1 1

CO co co ^ ON 00 O ON CO O co f*- h* O tfN ON ^* O NO co co
•3" M 00 CNI 00 .3- CM r~JTNOOONOr- COIfy l*>ON NO r-00
A A A A



OONOO -OCMCM -too • • .CMW — comOZOOO —
iTviTN O— • ifN • • — OO*NO CMO • COfOI^ON
^ •> . O OO A .O » » «
CMI~- CM A o j-a- —
V


o
oooo o* oooo
OOOO COOCNI O — O OOOO
O «:*iT\tf\co — coif\ -NO O CO -O NO — cod"
^CM •>••• •v~^^- • *CMO • *"ON *>O^ «***
ON 	 CM 	 ON-S-coCM O V V r~ 00 — IfNVV ifNif>CM —

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 till

cOOCM CM coOCM OQ — \f\— O O OlAOiAJ OOOO
•CO— CM -Z 	 Z— O -ZZ — -tftOO OOOCVJ
jt— v— o -o CMr — • • cMfoi— .3-
• o oo « « «
o v v v irN-s- —






fOfONOcoCMVOvOcOtfMACONO^'tfN — COCOCOfO^ — COCOCOCVI












— — — —




U
*x*
O)
Q

n
to
4J
C V>
CO 3
•P t. 0) —
3 o v> 
— ao >CO —
(OOOWCJ*»4J— 33Ct-OC*>CO— OITJ — A — WWW
u) O O W O O O 	 coco1 	 >»cocoOOOco(Aa>(0
•>-•
o
Z ON ON ON ON JS- £ ON O CM Z ON NO S 00 ON £ if\ O ON
ZONONONONCOZONOONO ZONONZONONZ\OI*-ON
A A A A A






ON ON ON ON ON ON
ONONON ON^ON ON ON NO O ON
A A ON AONA A A ONONON

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 III

ONONCO lACO-d" JJ- Is- coOCO
ONON^ ^* ^ ON ON co lA ON
A A A A



ir\acMr~-oooocMO OOO-IOOCMOONO —
CMZ • • — oocNio irt 	 ooozz — CMO —
V ON 	 V— V VVlACQ V CM
V V V V




0 0
o o o o
oooo o
OOiTiO coo •> OO »O O CO
iTl — OO.O — CMOOO 	 1 	 O- t-«CM
CM V V OJ.3TO v ON— VV — V Zco J-toCM

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II III

in oaaoNOOvoo j-ooj-i oo ovoo
(V ZZZ CMZ -Z • — COO. ZZ — d-Z
V V O 00 V CO V
V V







CO — Sf 1A VO VO CO VO CO NO CO CO VO CO — 1TV CM — CNI CO CNi
















CO
CO
c

£ *>
_j aco o>
^^ *^ +i
01 ^^ co re
a. — £_ oj —
>>.p re w o
« X££ CO C

+> £ C COC
C 	 Q.£ O. 0)
CO >>>> W O C
4J C N — £ <- 0)
3 e +J c >>a.o N
— >> 3 E EEd>a)*>— C
— CO— S3 0) X 3 3 IA3 — £ 0)0)
OO 	 3 — i--0 1 	 t 	 CM .0 >> O — C .0
aec 	 ECB— sojcoj— — i£cooo) —

— C I- CB CO £ O >> 0) 0) — 03 — £ 	 3 	 0) £ 0) +»
X«CQOUUO-l£ZWWr-NCQCQOOevQ.a)UI
o

Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.3-21
-------




co
•M
r^
J5
«_
Q.
— •
u
u
ce.
a.

0
UI
i
u
§
t-
^f
1-
Ul
5
o
u
co

z
1-
oS"
— e
1- 3
— **
o. c
os""
Q.

— !
2

UJ
o

g

i

O
§
U
u
1-
o
K
t-
1



*
•
^
U
D
O
K
0

•!»
CO

I
0!
Of
c
a
^m
V
i




0>
O
c
CD
ac




C
o
4*
2
c
o
g
o
u
p
c
0)
a

s
c
a
•a
£




a>
o
c
CO
cc







M
p
C
O
a
a
a
O




«
CO
o
(0
—
3
Ik



0)
cc
c
 » CM O
a vzz.3- o\c — «o

1 1 1 1 1 III 1

m -JOO-J OQoO a
r- azza ozcvi z
flD OD OS





_„ cotMCMJT eo ro a- co co
















o> d>
c0 o> e c
•DC o> «  c e C£C
i-£ c C WD 0> PP 0)
OP eg eg a— — « o> c
— « c.cp«->,op»
£ B PP U Q£ t U —
o o coo) a— *» o o >>
Q) COB PpOftt— ••*•£
CO CO Q)4)UBOOO UQQQ)
N C CO)X)t — — — cj)O 	 p
c a> « o> P— O.E.C.C c- «- 1. C
CDCDOC— •o*. o o o a>.c(-t- o
A C CO 0 CO C p O 	 Ol 1 —
p0fc>w£O*^OOO ^CB*^CV£
« — 5 3 a"8 — S. 1. csj CM 5 i — — "
~OC— COCB££ ..«00 «•.<-
Z(-«
P P*J C >
co 0 a —
O'O 0 C O
— «J CO «l
0 ** ** X
je"0 § c 2
c« a
- o o*r <
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.3-22
-------
* * * *








LU
O
~
X
0
CC
Q
>•
X

z:
o
i
o
h"
<
h-

LU
y
— •
0
LU
CO

X
1-
w
^

Z
O
•—
1-
1-
o_
U
LU
ce
a.
5!
U

LU
X
o

ce
o
u.

ce
^
f
w

3
_j
o
X
o
LU

-1
0
CC
h-
o
o


»«

•
>
o
c
CD
U
d-
c>.
CD

«
CO



CD
ce
c
cc.

13
CD
Z





CD
0
C
CO
CC




c
o
jj
co
(.
4J
C
CD
u
c
o
u

4J
c
CD
3

C^
{^
LU
c
cc
•o
CD
2








CD
O
C
CO
at











0)
4J
C
O
0

CO
•p
CO
o





CD
co
o
to
^
3
U.




CD

CO
U
w> PO o
•31.* CM CMiAco ooh-r«- vo




h-iricocMO.S'.tfooaof-oooaoh- — O-JQ-J-JOOJ— i _J — i o — iair\voo — o —
cvir- J- — ONiA — vozzocMifNvozz — OOZOZQQ -zooaa -oz a-z • —
•O • *O • — -• — OQ CO CO CM CO CO CO CO — CO —
O • OO -O •>
O O if\



o
VO ON O OO
VO — O OO *
OOCNJOO_I«OOONOO -1 -1 O-l O
_ . ._ . ._ CON*) « » — JS-VOITNCVJ OCM a -o o
toCMOCNl— OW CO — OroifN. CMvOiOcMITt COON CO —CO ON —

1 1 1 1 1 II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II 1 II 1 1

ONCOCMOO ON— OOQCO* O — 3-Q-J QQ O -JO O Q
— CVIO -Z Oro ZCOZ — O Z — iTZO ZZ Z OZ • Z
. .CM O • VO CO CO —
00 -O -
0






^ \f\ W l^ tfN ^ CM II\ •• c*9 CO *O JS" IXN ^ CO f> IfN^ ^ -"^Jf^™ 'fO^"""" PO CO"™™~CM^CM^^















CD
CO
-J CO
^ J=
(71 U CD
E f *> CD CD
aa CD CD c c
« E— •P "D CD CO co
44 	 £ — CD CD C--OCD+>+>CD
C U) E X-P CO 4-> C O 	 CD CD C
« 3 OXffco CD — t-XOOfl)
*» t- CD — «-ffla*J— O £ O£<-< 	
3OC0U 09 £££(0 CO O — 4J O O X
— £ — CO *> 0 	 0-£ «- 0) CO £CD 	 £
— aoa> o xx +> £ c «- oo££4J
O «> C «- •!-> *»£ N — £ CD *» 03 0) P S *- O O CD
aocoot CD c w c x a cc C<-CD<-CDO 	 o
££ OEM •. E CD 0) 0) V CDC00a5CD£-POC— (. L. i.
— a a-0 -O3CD 0 E3 — IJO3— CDCDO-~CC— *» <(-CD£l-HO
CO C— CC T3 3—t- — i- CO CM J3 XC C co CO 0) CD co C C O— O 1 1 —
U 	 CO ' 	 CO — — E CD CD CD > 	 1 £ CD <6 ( 	 £coOi.>>co — CM£
~ coco OEOIC C EO O.TJ JC > O CO XCWN3£NXO-PC^3O£'- « « O
WW4J4J— 33COCCOWT3«-Q.COO— CXM<-> 1 CDC—44C<-3a.tD< 	 4J4J 	
MCOOO 	 CO*-— XO COfOCD 	 CD — 3 	 CDOCCDf— «£<0£CDCD « •>'-

O




























































•
CD
CO

'i .
CO 4*

•w E
o —

CO C
+J O

13 *> -33
CD CD CD (71 CO
CO CD O —
anks indie
L, below d
, not dete
, not mean
pproximate

cocozz*
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.3-23
-------


Ul

g

i
o
i
f
a
i

o
u
!
u
B
1
~,

CJ
II

as
* I
i'
c
i
o
o
*J «
• !
a.
— 0
2

i
•
c
•
M :
M U
C
i
« i
si
•
4
I
P




4
1
(
i
I
KttmKHKKHlptfK


CM
*
1
ni


— *o *co * • *OCM -o m *ooooo •
O -«COOOO . -O • .O • « • • -O
O MO O — OOOOO
CM
Sm  vSoS o = s
°°d " d i
o •
o








B-
^
f
*>
c «
« 3
*» C 9
a 9 M w
5 II'-jSj . § | iig
u
A A A A

^

A CK CK
1 1 1

vo «h co

« WO *v O> » m «O « O> CM CM — O J -1 -J O O -1 0 — f- O
mm cur- if\ wa- — tfr-ooozKO *i«>— •
CUtO Ot M— 4CCDCD0 CDCM —
in
00 0

on en oo «
m>o — v5— "v— *— ,• o ac-oujt « >- o cuieSocCo
OtfMt-TK-ClfDKku — — KC«I OJ «> — — 4» w —
"SiSS^So'i™!?™*" 	 ~ ••Co'c4e'-
3
























.
a
—
I .
* *>
I"
nks indicate data
, below detection
not detected.
not meaningful.
>prox)Mte value.
5iii?
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.3-24
-------







^*
CO

U

u
!(-
CD
_
CD
^
o
E
CD
CC


C
O
4J
co
t.
JJ
c
CD
U
C
o
u
4J
c
CO
3
«
«-
il








10
•P
C
o
o
CD
CO
a




























c
CO
•«
•o
CD
Z


CD
O
C
CO
CC.





e
CD
•o
CO
"£.







CD
O
C
co
cc




CD

CD
U
(0
_
3
U.



CO
CD
O
10
JJ
o
—
OL


















^
o>
E

^
Ifl
4J
C M
CO 3

3 o ca
— ao
O 10 C E
a. o co CD E 3 E
££EIOE E 3C 3
— «J 0. CL 3 CD D 3 E— CD C— CD
C5 *^ C CZ •*" B *"" 3 W S T5 *^ O 4^ ^
O C 	 Cfl-03 CC— C03A— UCco
— O co TO e W co — C eoOOC— >>«— O«-
WOWEOO— cococo« 	 OeoeoOOO— *» —
^_
U
ZI^ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ ZZ l^iZZZZd-Z
A















* — ^cMr-or~h- — ro — cMOovo— i^— i-J — — CM-J-J— /rf —
CM V O V -OCMtO -r-V— incod-Q -OQ • • -Odd— •
• \Q ^~ ^™ V >

_l a. co CD a) *>
>x — *» C CO
Ol ^^ CO CO CO fl) O CO
3. — £— c— «--a co
>>+»« C0>>0— C
•. X££ ££— 1- CO
Ifl CD Q.4J JJ 4J£ O —
*» ££ CO CD U— >>
c 	 aco o o — £ £
CD >>>> C «- S-X3 O *»
W £ N— CD CD g O O 1 CD
3 E *> C >> N C' 	 Ifl CD O
— X 3 E E E CO CD *> C CDO££CC1-
— CO—E3 CD >> 3 3 IA3CDCOCOU«-«-dQi- >>£
— • CD >>E o ac-o oje CD >— o >>cNX3£Oi i i£u
UWIOL.-OCacDCD<-U 	 CflC«0*»l C £ — -P 	 CM** —
— Ct-CDCD£O>>CDa>— CD — £ 	 3— CD*»OC£ « « «CD«-
X«COUOUCJ— IZZWWI-NcneDQCQUIK-------













I
i

_i
u.
X
^™
^

o

K
rf
H
^
O.
O
LJ
CC
Cu
_l
0
£
X
o

DC
0
U.

>
<
z
3
CO

^.
|

O
H
j
g
t-
•x.
8












»«
<
>
u
ID
0
t.
CO

•—
CO


CD
cc.
c
CO
•—
T>
CD
Z


CD
O
c
£




c
o
n
*
c
- • co — o
o
0




om
•
o




NO NO — m NO 	 NO m — m CM * 	
















j
V.

6
^
(0
^4
c w
CO 3
•P C «B
3 O to *
— C.— CO
— ao £
o «« c t-
— a a-O T9 3 « 3 3
co C— C C~ B —
o —-co t-— co-o 3 c
— COCO OBOICO— C CO-O
(OC/5*J*J— SSCCt-OCW —
WCflOO — 	 CO .JO 03 t- 	 0
o

























^
CO
4»
0
4»
zzcoz















OCOOO
m -ooo
ON
A




S
A

1
ON
CK




i"£i
A




NO
CO

1
0\
^



*
bzoo^ •
o • -o
o*



o
o

*
m

i

NO
l«-
%
CM




	 in





























B
3 •> 3 1
— » B— CD
^IsllSlw
£^iSzcS?







o
z

1

o







— cv






























00



o
— CM
• *
O —

1 1

-Q
OZ
•
O





— CMCM —






























B BB3
3 B 3 3 C
*»7i— lj Jo «-
£c5±ic:S


§coo*o\coc\jf»-r«-zc\j
to — ON ON ON. NOON Z .4-





ON ON ON
O\ ON ON ON
A A ON A

1 1 1 1

in— eo









ON
ON CO
A r-

1 1
!- O
.» J-




OcoinZZCMZ
ONONZZNOZ





ON ON
ON ON
A A

1 1
CM in
CO CM




Z£Z
zzz














>|;
OOONOCOOtOOlTNOOOvnO-l-J-JroO— IQ
a- • • — OOCM — o* -m 	 QQO— -oz
•t— r~ 'CM O\ COCQCO —CO




§§
CMt-
ON t *00
— CM — NO

1 1 1 1

QONOO
z • — z
in






— — — tnmNo\o



















• •
_i
%^
ei
a.

^
09
4t
C
CO
4*
2* § B
og-sri^
0.6 C 	 B CD
og8b||||
l<<






























t-S.
3 CD C CD
£%2>






_l

NOGO COr-

II II

0-1 -10
— a az
CO CO






— NO CO — COCO —














CO
co
CO

4J <|)
£ +J
— *>
•^•* CO CO
— JC— CO
>+> CO 4J
XJ=£ co
CO O.,a
B a co *»
3 1 A 3 —
— CM J3 >>—
— ~— 1 £ 0
— 0 >>C*» C
CO C  *> 1 CD CO
_C -^ -^ *3 
-------











z
o
I

J
u.

X
*
o

1-

^v
•V
o.
_
u
w

x e


o"
u.

>
5
Z
=J
(0

^
§
o
CJ
UI
1-

i
i












g«

>
J
B
D

_
a
i
a
K
c
09
•o
*


o
o
c
ee




2
D
4J
09
L
D
0
O

4J
C
a>
3

^
^
UI
c

•o
01
z




«
c
c
09
ee











W
+>
C
o
a
a

a
O



«
09
t
M

^
~
U.



CO

09
C
ID
+
O
a.











+J
C
a
+

c
Z Z Z Z Z if\Z
zzzzzr~z












*

azaa • •
OQ COCO OO




-1 O
O VO •
CO 	

1 1 1

a on
z x •
0







CM 	 CJCVI —
















09
a c
•0 09

Z -o *> os
o — a) c
— «- o «
£ 0 t —
o —ox
eg (B £ — £
c t- on 4J
O 4) *> E O 00
C t- » C 09 — O
<»£*> 0 C t- t-
— ** d- a>H o
09 C C O— 1 —
£ 09 O <- >>— £
+> C£ O£ «O
Q.OO « 	 *» 	
(D JZ CQ JC O * **
Zfl"00

















































oj
A
09
09
> -
+>li
O— .

09 C
4> O
09— — 0
•O ** -33
o-o*- —
o a 03 oiog
*>*»** c >
09 CO O —
o-o o c CD
— 4> 09 *»
C O V 6 C
~ 0*»**X
«£• 0 0 g
c» a
-oeaz^1
COCQZZ*
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.3-27
-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
  Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
  (Unspecified)
 Data source:  EGD  Combined Data Base
 Point source:  Battery
 Subcategory:  Lead
 Plant:  20993
 References:  3-113
                              Data source  status:
                                Not specified
                                Bench scale
                                Pilot scale
                                Full scale
 Pretreatment/treatment:  Equal., Screen/Chem.  Ppt., Sed.
   (clarifier), Polishing Lagoon
 DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

 Wastewater flow  rate:   Influent:  561,000
   m3/day; effluent:  552,000 m3/day
 Chemical dosages(s):  Sodium hydroxide:
   227,000 kg/yr
 Mix detention  time:  Unspecified
 Flocculation detention time:  Unspecified
 Unit configuration:  Continuous operation
   (24 hr/day)
 Hydraulic detention time:  10.2 L/hr/m2
                         Type of sedimentation:
                           Clarifier
                         Hydraulic loading rate:
                           693 L/hr/m2
                         Hydraulic detention time:
                           7.0 hr
                         Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                         Type of sedimentation:   Polishing
                         lagoon
                         Hydraulic loading rate:  120 hr
                                       REMOVAL DATA
                Samp I ing:
2'l-hr composite, flow
proportion (one hrl
                                               -Analysis: Data set 2 (V.7.3.81
                                       Concentration
                                                      Percent
                Blanks indicate data not available.
                DDL, below detection limit.
                NO, not detected.
                NM, not meaningful.
                'Approximate value.
                                                             Detection
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
pH, minimum
pH, maximum
TSS
IDS
1 ron
Oi 1 and grease
Manganese
Strontium
Toxic pollutants, |ig/L:
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
1,1, 1-Trichlo roe thane
Bi s(2-ethy Ihexyl )ph thai ate
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Methylene chloride
Influent

2.0
2.11
1i)
880
16
BDL
120
33

57
78
1,1400
36
120
0.1*
10
NO
BDL
Effluent

8.7
9.1
11
2,000
0.92
BDL
Kt
27

5.0
11
130
9.0
ND
0.1«
BDL
BDL
BDL
remova 1



21
NM
914
NM
63
18

91
82
91
75
>99
NM
50
NM
NM
1 i m i t



5.0
5.0
0.005
5.0



3.0
1.0
30
6.0
1.0
0.1
10
10
1.0
Date:   9/25/81
         III.3.1.3-28
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
                       (Unspecified)

Data source:  Effluent Guidelines                 Data  source  status:
Point source:  Aluminum forming                     Not specified         	
Subcategory:  Unspecified                           Bench scale            	
Plant:  J                                           Pilot scale            	
References:  3-27, pp. 95,315,316                   Full scale              x
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Equal., Chem Ppt., Sed.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified           Type of sedimentation:   Clarifier
Chemical dosages(s):  Unspecified            Hydraulic  loading rate:
Mix detention time:  Unspecified               Unspecified
Flocculation detention time:  Unspecified    Hydraulic  detention  time:
Unit configuration:  Unspecified               Unspecified
                                             Weir loading rate:   Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL DATA

     Sampling:   Three 24-hour or
               one  72-hour composite	Analysis;  Data set 2 (V.7.3.71
Concentration
Pol 1 utant/oa rameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
Oi 1 and grease
Suspended sol ids
COD
TOC
Pheno 1
pH, pH units
Toxic pollutants, u.g/L:
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Me rcu ry
Nickel
Zinc
Fluoranthene
Methyl ene chloride
2,4-Dinitrophenol
N-n i t rosod i pheny 1 am i ne
Chrysene
Anthracene/phenanthrene
Pyrene
Influent

86
450
260
75
0.003
2.8

900,000
2,200,000
BDL
3,200
<1
2,600
2,000,000
10
260
37
67
10
<26
16
Effluent

15
710
280
74
0.002
3.7

790,000
2,200,000
BDL
1,000
<1
2,400
1,800,000
ND
15
ND
ND
ND
BDL
ND
Percent
remova 1

99
NM
NM
1
33
NM

12
0
NM
69
NM
8
10
>99
93
>99
>99
>99
NM
>99
Detection
1 imit








5
9
100
20
0.1
5
50
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
     Blanks indicate data not available.
     BDL, below detection limit.
     ND, not detected.
     NM, not meaningful.
 Date:   9/25/81                III.3.1.3-29
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
                       Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
                       (Unspecified)
Data source:  EGD Combined Data  Base
                                                   Data source statust
Point source:  Metal finishing
Subcategory:  Common metals; precious metals;
  hexavalent chromium; cyanide,  oils
Plant:  36040
References:  3-113
Pretreatment/treatment:  Chem. Ox.(CN),  Chem.  Red.(Cr)/Chem.
  Sed.(clarifier)
                                                     Not specified
                                                     Bench scale
                                                     Pilot scale
                                                     Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater  flow  rate:   107,000  m3/day
Chemical dosage(s):  Unspecified
Mix detention  time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention  time:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Batch chem. ox.  (CN);
  continuous chem. red.  (Cr); clarifier -
  continuous operation
                                              Type of sedimentation:  Clarifier
                                              Hydraulic loading rate:  Un-
                                                specified
                                              Hydraulic detention time:  Un-
                                                specified
                                              Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL DATA(a)
      Samp I ing:
               24-hr  composite,
               flow proportion
                                             Analysis:   Data set 1 (V.7.3.13Ha 1
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
pH, minimum
pH, maximum
Fluorides
Phosphorus
TSS
TDS
1 ron
Tin
Oi 1 and grease
Gold
Toxic pollutants, ng/L:
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Cyanide, total
Hexavalent chromium
Influent

6.8
7.1
4.5
2.2
100
960
1.3
0.08
20
0.04

5.0
26,000
5,900
53
120,000
910
330
24,000
Effluent


9.1
5.7
0.07
11
1,500
•0.07
0.06
BDL
0.17

5.0
530
69
BDL
1,400
18
57
11
Percent
remova I


NM
NM
97
89
NM
95
25
88*
NM

0
98
99
72*
99
98
83
>99
Detection
I imit



0.1
0.003
5.0
5.0
0.005

5.0


2.0
3.0
1.0
30
6.0
1.0
5.0
5.0
      Blanks indicate data not available.
      BDL, below detection limit.
      NM, not meaningful.
      * Approximate value.
      (a) Plant data are a three-day average.
      (b) Original source of data:  Electroplating  Pretreatment 1976-1977  (HS).
 Date:   9/25/81
                                 III.3.1.3-30
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
         Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
         (Unspecified)
Data source:  EGD Combined Data Base
                                    Data source status:
Point source:  Metal finishing
Subcategory:  Common metals; hexavalent chromium;
  cyanide; oil
Plant:  33024
References: 3-113
Pretreatment/treatment:  Chem. Ox.(CN), Chem. Red.(Cr)/Chem.  Ppt.,
  Sed.(clarifier)
                                      Not specified
                                      Bench scale
                                      Pilot scale
                                      Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  303,000 m3/day
Chemical dosage(s):  Unspecified
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention time:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Clarifier - continuous
  operation
                               Type of sedimentation:  Clarifier
                               Hydraulic loading rate:  Un-
                                 specified
                               Hydraulic detention time:  Un-
                               Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
     Samp I ing:
8-hr composite,
flow proportion
                                            Analysis;  Data  set 1(V.7.3.13)(a)
Concentration
Pol lutant/parameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
pH, maximum
Fluorides
Phosphorus
TSS
Tin
1 ron
Manganese
Oil and grease
Aluminum
BOD
COD
Toxic pollutants, Mg/L:
Cadmium
Ch rom i urn
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Cyanide, total
Hexa va 1 ent ch rom i urn
Mercury
Silver
Influent

8.5
23
0.80
250
0.12
2.5
0.07
22
22
11
82

95
3UO
1,600
H7
96
12,000
1,000
5.0
1.0
2.0
Effluent

8.5
18
2.1
42
0.15
0.18
0.1«*
18
2.2
21
90

5.0
70
160
18
19
1,100
40
5.0
1.0
U.O
Percent
remove I


22
NM
83
NM
93
NM
18
90
NM
NM

95
79
90
62
80
91
96
0
0
NM
Detection
1 imit


0.1
0.003
5.0

0.005
0.005
5.0
0.005



2.0
3.0
1.0
30
6.0
1.0
5.0
5.0
0.1
0.1/1.0
    Blanks indicate data not available.
    NM, not meaningful.
    (a) Original source of data:  MftMPM Composite'Samp I ing 1975  (HS).
Date:   9/25/81
                 III.3.1.3-31
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
Chemical Precipitation with Sedimentation
(Unspecified)
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  23061
References:  3-113
Pretreatment/treatment:
                           Data  source  status:
                             Not specified
                             Bench  scale
                             Pilot  scale
                             Full scale
  None/Chem. Ppt., Sed.  (clarifier)
EGD Combined Data Base
 Metal finishing
Common metals, complexed metals
DESIGN OR OPERATING  PARAMETERS

Wastewater  flow rate:   105,000  m3/day
Chemical dosage(s):  Unspecified
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Flocculaton detention  time:   Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Clarifier  - continuous
   operation
                       Type of sedimentation:  Clarifier
                       Hydraulic loading rate:
                         0.0 L/hr/m2
                       Hydraulic detention time:
                         0.0 hr
                       Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                   REMOVAL DATA
      Sampling: 24-hr composite,
               flow proportion
                      Analysis:  Data set  11V.7.3.13)(a)
Concentration
Pol lutant/parameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
pH, maximum
Fluorides
Phosphorus
TSS
I ron
Tin
Gold
Toxic Pollutants, ug/L:
Cadmium
Ch rom i urn
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Cyanide, total
Si Iver
Hexavalent chromium
Influent

7.5
0.60
13
200
17
.14
0.012

5.0
54
66
31
740
52
5.0
3.0
5.0
Effluent

7.4
0.46
10
15
1.9
.075
0.004

5.0
5.0
4.0
10
110
2.0
5.0
1.2
5.0
Percent
remova I


23
23
92
89
46
67

0
91
94
68
85
96
0
60
0
Detection
limit


0.1
0.003
5.0
0.005



2.0
3.0
1.0
30
6.0
1.0
5.0
0.1/1.0
5.0
      Blanks  indicate data not available.
      NM,  not meaningful.
      (a)  Original source of data:  Printed Circuit Boards & Electroless Plating
        1975-1976JHS).
 Date:   9/25/81
         III.3.1.3-32
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
          Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
          (Unspecified)
Data source:  EGD  Combined Data Base
Point source:  Metal  finishing
                                     Data source status
                                       Not specified
Subcategory:  Common metals;  hexavalent chromium;   Bench scale
  cyanide; oil
Plant:  20086
References:  3-113
Pretreatment/treatment:
  Sed.(clarifier)
                                       Pilot scale
                                       Full scale

            Chem.  Red.(Cr)/Chem. Ppt., Chem. Ox. (CN),
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow  rate:
  Influent: 145,000 m3/day,-
  effluent: 164,000 m3/day
Chemical dosage(s):  Unspecified
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention  time:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Continuous operation
                                Type of sedimentation:  Clarifier
                                Hydraulic loading rate:  376 L/
                                  hr/m2
                                Hydraulic detention time:
                                  6.0 hr
                                Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
    Samp I ing:
24-hr composite,
flow proportion
(unspecified)
                                            Analysis;  Data set 1 (V.7.3.13Ha 1
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
pH, maximum
Fluorides
Phosphorus
TSS
TDS
1 ron
Tin
Oil and grease
Toxic pollutants, Mg/L:
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Cyanide, total
Hexavalent chromium
Influent

11
5.7
0.92
2,800
1,700
38
3.3
33

920
79,000
100,000
170
48,000
190,000
150,000
5.0
Effluent

9.1
3.4
0.34
17
1,100
0.50
0.086
BDL

12
830
500
36
790
760
5,200
460
Percent
remove 1


40
63
99
35
99
97
92*

99
99
>99
79
98
>99
90
NM
Detection
1 imit


0.1
0.003
5.0
5.0
0.005

5.0

2.0
3.0
1.0
30
6.0
1.0
5.0
5.0
    Blanks  indicate data not available.
    BDL, below detection limit.
    NM,  not meaningful.
    * Approximate value.
    (a)  Original  source of data:  BAT Verification  Sampling 1978-1979 (HS).
Date:   9/25/81
                III.3.1.3-33
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY;
         Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
         (Unspecified)
Data source:  EGD Combined Data Base
Point source:  Metal finishing
                                    Data  source  status:
                                      Not specified
Subcategory:  Common metals; precious  metals;
  complexed metals; hexavalent  chromium;  cyanide
Plant:  20083
References: 3-113
Pretreatment/treatment:   Chem.  Red.(Cr)/Chem.  Ppt.,  Sed. (clarifier)
                                      Bench  scale
                                      Pilot  scale
                                      Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  439,000  m3/day
Chemical dosage(s):  Unspecified
Mix detention times  Unspecified
Flocculation detention time:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Continuous chem. red.
  continuous clarifier
                               Type  of sedimentation:  Clarifier
                               Hydraulic loading rate:
                                  733 L/hr/m2
                               Hydraulic detention rate:
                                  7.1 hr
                               Weir  loading rate:  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
    Samp I ing:
24-hr composite, flow
proportion (unspecified)
                                            Analysis:  Data set  I(V.7.3.I3)(a)
Concentration
Pol 1 utant/oa rameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
pH, minimum
pH, maximum
F 'Uorides
Phosphorus
TSS
IDS
1 ron
Tin
Oil and grease
Pa 1 lad i urn
Toxic pollutants, u.g/L:
Cadmi um
Chromium
Hexavalent chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Cyanide, total
Influent

2.5

1.4
19
16
3,500
1.8
3.7
BDL
0. 12

12
450,000
5.0
48,000
170
97,000
63
5.0
Effluent


9.9
1. 1
14
9.0
2,600
0.38
0. 10
BDL
0.044

6.0
3,200
BDL
210
32
810
15
5.0
Percent
remova 1



21
26
44
26
79
97
NM
67

50
99
50*
>99
81
99
76
0
Detection
1 imit



0. 1
0.003
5.0
5.0
0.005

5.0


2.0
3.0
5.0
1.0
30
6 0
1.0
5.0
    Blanks indicate data  not available.
    BDL, below detection  limit.
    NM, not meaningful.
    * Approximate value.
    (a) Original source of data:  Electroplating Pretreatment 1976-1977 (HS).
Date:   9/25/81
                  III.3.1.3-34
-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
   Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
   (Unspecified)
 Data source:  EGD Combined Data  Base
 Point source:  Metal finishing
 Subcategory:  Common metals; hexavalent chromium;
    cyanide
 Plant:  20080
 References:  3-113
 Pretreatment/treatment:  Chem. Ox.(CN), Chem.  Red.(Cr)/Chem.  Ppt.,
     Sed.(clarifier)
                                Data source status:
                                  Not  specified
                                  Bench  scale
                                  Pilot  scale
                                  Full scale
 DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
 Wastewater flow  rate:   367,000 m3/day
 Chemical dosage(s):   Unspecified
 Mix detention time:   Unspecified
 Flocculation detention time:  Unspecified
 Unit configuration:   Batch chem.  red.;
   batch chem. ox.; continuous sed.
    (clarifier)
                           Type of sedimentation:  Clarifier
                           Hydraulic loading rate:
                             163 L/hr/m2
                           Hydraulic detention time:
                             24 hr
                           Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                      REMOVAL DATA
               Samp IIng:
24-hr composite,
flow proportion
I unspecified)
                                              Analysis:  Data set 1(V.7.3.13lla1
               Pollutant/paraaeter
                                    	&
                                    |nf|i
                loncen trail on
                uent  Effluent
Percent
remavaI
Detection
  limit
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
pH, minimum
pH, maximum
Fluorides
Phosphorus
TSS
TDS
1 ron
Tin
01 1 and grease
COD
A 1 urn I num
Toxic pollutants, M9/L:
Cadmium
Chromium, total
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Cyanide, total
Hexavalent chromium
Mercury
6.9

0.140
0.13
10
3,700
4.3
0.14
9.6



2I|
140,000
59
75
560
59,000
4,100
450


9.7
0.34
0.02
5.0
1,700
0.16
0.091
BDL
26
0.08

5.0
200
28
10
18
380
1,200
5.0
1.0


15
85
50
54
96
36
74«



79
>99
52
87
97
99
71
99



0.1
0.003
5.0
5.0
0.005

5.0

0.04

2.0
3.0
1.0
30
6.0
1.0
5.0
5.0
1.0
               Blanks indicate data not available.
               BDL, below detection limit.
               * Approximate value.
               (a) Original source of data: Electroplating Pretreatnent 1976-1977 (HS).
Date:   9/25/81
           III.3.1.3-35
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
(Unspecified)
Data source:  EGD Combined Data Base
                           Data source  status;
Point source:  Metal finishing
Subcategory:  Common metals; hexavalent  chromium;
  cyanide
Plant:  20078
References:  3-113
Pretreatment/treatment:  Chem. Red.(Cr),  Chem.  Ox.(CN)/Chem.  Ppt.,
  Sed.(clarifier)
                             Not specified
                             Bench  scale
                             Pilot  scale
                             Full Scale
x
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:   191,000 m3/day
Chemical dosage(s):  Unspecified
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention  time:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Continuous chem.  red.
  continuous chem. ox.;  continuous  sed.
  (clarifier)
                      Type of  sedimentation:   Clarifier
                      Hydraulic  loading rate:
                        323 L/hr/m2
                      Hydraulic  detention rate:
                        8 hr
                      Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA

    Sampling: 24-hr composite,  flow proportion
             (unspecified)
                      Analysis:  Data set 1(V.7.3.13)(a)
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
pH, minimum
pH, maximum
Fluorides
Phosphorus
TSS
IDS
1 ron
Tin
Oil a nd g rea se
Gold
Toxic pollutants, uxj/L:
Cadmium
Chromium, total
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Cyanide, total
S i 1 ve r
Hexavalent chromium
Influent

2.6

2.0
1.3
21
1,700
0.25
0.091
BDL
0.015

5.0
120,000
7,700
84
85,000
4,700
60
3.0
5.0
Effluent


1.0
1.0
0.03
14
1,700
0.073
0.091
6.0
0.028

5.0
400
310
BDL
140
29
5.0
3.0
76
Percent
remova I



50
98
33
0
72
0
NM
NM

0
>99
96
82*
>99
99
92
0
NM
Detection
I imit



0.1
0.003
5.0
5.0
0.005

5.0


2.0
3.0
1.0
30
6.0
1.0
5.0
0.1/1.0
5.0
    Blanks indicate data not available.
    NM, not meaningful.
    * Approximate value.
    (a) Original source of data:   Electroplating Pretreatment 1976-1977 (HS).
 Date:   9/25/81
          III.3.1.3-36
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
          Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
          (Unspecified)
Data source:  EGD Combined Data Base
Point source:  Metal finishing
Subcategory:  Common metals; precious metals;
  complexed metals; hexavalent chromium;  cyanide
Plant:  19063
References:  3-113
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Chem. Ppt.,  Sed.(clarifier)
                                     Data  source  status:
                                       Not specified
                                       Bench  scale
                                       Pilot  scale
                                       Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  87,600 m3/day
Chemical dosage(s):  Unspecified
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention time:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Continuous operation
                                Type of  sedimentation:   Clarifier
                                Hydraulic  loading rate:   Un-
                                  specified
                                Hydraulic  detention time:  Un-
                                  specified
                                Weir loading rate:   Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
    Samp I ing:
24-hr composite,
flow proportion
(unspecified)
                                            Analysis:  Data  set KV.7.3.131 (a 1
Concentration
Pol 1 utant/oa rameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
pH, minimum
pH, maximum
Fluorides
Phosphorus
TSS
IDS
1 ron
Tin
Oil and grease
Gold
Pa 1 ladium
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Cadmium
Ch rom i urn
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Cyanide, total
S i 1 ve r
Hexavalent chromium
Influent

1.9

190

86
6,300
20
54
160
0.055
0.064

19
190
8,500
7,600
4,100
1,500
7.0
34
5.0
Effluent


8.0
2.6
20
16
370
0.24
0.54
78
0.11
0.012

6.0
21
3,300
400
190
50
13
35
5.0
Percent
remova I



99

81
94
99
99
51
NM
83

68
89
61
95
95
97
NM
NM
0
Detection
I imit



0.1
0.003
5.0
5.0
0.005

5.0



2.0
3.0
1.0
30
6.0
1.0
5.0
0.1/1.0
5.0
    Blanks  indicate  data not available.
    NM,  not meaningful.
    (a)  Original source of data:  Electroplating Pretreatment  1976-1977  (HS).
Date:   9/25/81
                  III.3.1.3-37
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
        Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
        (Unspecified)
Data source:  EGD Combined Data Base
Point source:  Metal finishing
Subcategory:  Common metals; precious metals;
  cyanide; complexed metals; hexavalent chromium
Plant:  19063
References:  3-133
Pretreatment/treatment:  Chem. Ox.(CN)/Chem. Red.(Cr),  ChemPpt.,
  Sed.(clarifier)

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
                                   Data  source  status:
                                     Not specified
                                     Bench  scale
                                     Pilot  scale
                                     Full scale
Wastewater flow rates  362,000 m3/day
Chemical dosage(s):  Unspecified
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention time:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Continuous operation
                              Type of  sedimentation:   Clarifier
                              Hydraulic  loading rate:   Un-
                                specified
                              Hydraulic  detention time:  Un-
                                specified
                              Weir loading rate:   Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL DATA
     Samp I ing:
24-hr composite,
flow proportion
                                             Analysis;  Data set 1(V.7.3.13Hal
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
pH, minimum
pH, maximum
Fluorides
Phosphorus
TSS
IDS
1 ron
Tin
Oi 1 and grease
Gold
Pa 1 lad ium
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Cadmium
Ch rom i urn
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Cyanide, total
S i 1 ve r
Hexavalent chromium
Influent


12.0
30
1.7
150
4,700
2.4
24
10
0.18
0.10

11
48,000
18,000
10,000
1,800
95
5.0
6.0
4,400
Effluent

6.9

12
2.4
6.0
1,300
0.086
0.11
9.6
0.021
0.034

5.0
1,600
3,600
80
190
28
5.0
2.0
5.0
Percent
remova 1



60
NM
96
72
96
>99
4
89
70

54
97
80
99
89
70
0
67
>99
Detection
limit



0.1
0.003
5.0
5.0
0.005

5.0



2.0
3.0
1.0
30
6.0
1.0
5.0
0.1/1.0
5.0
      Blanks indicate data not available.
      NM, not meaningful.
      (a) Original source of data:   Electroplating Pretreatment 1976-1977
                                                    [HS).
Date:   9/25/81
                III.3.1.3-38
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
         Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
         (Unspecified)
Data source:  EGD Combined Data Base
Point source:  Metal finishing
Subcategory:  Common metals; precious metals;
  hexavalent chromium; cyanide
Plant:  6087
References:  3-113
Pretreatment/treatment:  Chem. Ox.(CN),  Chem.  Red.(Cr)/Chem.  Ppt.,
  Sed.(clarifier)
                                    Data source status:
                                      Not specified
                                      Bench scale
                                      Pilot scale
                                      Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  269,000 m3/day
Chemical dosage(s):  Unspecified
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention time:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Continuous  chem.  ox.,
  chem. red.; continuous clarifier
                               Type of sedimentation:   Clarifier
                               Hydraulic loading rate:
                                 41,700 L/hr/m2
                               Hydraulic detention  time:
                                 3 hr
                               Weir loading rate:   Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL DATA
     Samp I ing:
24-hr composite,
flow proportion
(unspecified!
                                            Analysis;  Data set  1 (V.7.3.13Ha
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
pH, maximum
Fluorides
Phosphorus
TSS
IDS
1 ron
Tin
Oi 1 and grease
Gold
Rhodium
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Cadmium
Chromium, total
Hexa va lent ch rom i urn
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Cyanide, total
Si Ivor
Influent

9.9
1.4
14
390
3,300
6.9
0.40
BDL
0.15
O.OI

22
650
5.0
80,000
1,100
73,000
18,000
370
0.18
Effluent

9.2
1.5
1.8
34
2,900
0.24
0.06
BDL
0.14
0.01

13
52
5.0
2,600
65
6,UOO
1,100
82
0.12
Percent
remova 1


NM
87
91
12
96
98
NM
7
0

41
92
0
97
94
91
94
78
33
Detection
limit


0.1
0.003
5.0
5.0
0.005

5.0



2.0
3.0
5.0
1.0
30
6.0
1.0
5.0
0.1/1.0
    Blanks indicate data  not available.
    BDL, below detection  limit.
    NM, not meaningful.
    (a) Original source of data:   Electroplating Pretreatment 1976-1977 (HS).
Date:   9/25/81
                 III.3.1.3-39
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
        Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
        (Unspecified)
Data source:  EGD Combined Data Base
                                   Data source status:
Point source:  Metal finishing
Subcategory:  Common metals; hexavalent chromium;
  cyanide; oil
Plant:  6083
References:  3-113
Pretreatment/treatment:  Chem. Red.(Cr)/Chem.  Ppt.,  Sed.(clarifier)
                                     Not specified
                                     Bench scale
                                     Pilot scale
                                     Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater  flow  rate:  239,000 m3/day
Chemical dosage(s):  Unspecified
Mix detention  time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention time:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Continuous  operation
                              Type of sedimentation:   Clarifier
                              Hydraulic loading  rate:   204 L/
                                hr/m2
                              Hydraulic detention  time:
                                13.0 hr
                              Weir loading  rate:   Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL DATA
      Samp I ing:
2U-hr composite,
flow proportion
                                            Analysis:  Data set  1 (V.7.3.I31(ai
Concentration
Pol lutant/pa rameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
pH, maximum
Fluorides
Phosphorus
TSS
70S
1 ron
Tin
Oil and grease
Toxic pollutants, M9/L:
Cadmium
Chromium, total
Hexavalent chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Cyanide, total
Influent

8.2
27
H.H
U70
1, 100
161
0.09
28

13
12,000
5.0
200
2,500
9,300
3,700
1,200
Effluent

8.3
37
I.I*
22
1, 100
7.1*
0.06
19

5.0
560
5.0
150
160
2,300
170
WO
Percent
remova 1


NM
68
95
0
95
33
32

NM
95
0
25
9U
75
95
63
Detection
limit


0. 1
0.003
5.0
5.0
0.005

5.0

2.0
3.0
5.0
1.0
30
6.0
1.0
5.0
      Blanks indicate data not available.
      NM, not meaningful.
      (a) Original source of data:   Electroplating Pretreatment 1976-1977 (HS).
 Date:   9/25/81
                 III.3.1.3-40
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
         Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
         (Unspecified)
Data source:  EGD Combined Data  Base
Point source:  Metal  finishing
Subcategory:  Common  metals; precious  metals;
  hexavalent chromium; cyanide;  oil
Plant:  6074
References:  3-113
Pretreatment/treatment:   Chem. Red.(Cr)/Chem.  Ppt.,  Sed.(lagoon)

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
                                    Data source status:
                                      Not specified
                                      Bench scale
                                      Pilot scale
                                      Full scale
Wastewater flow rate:   191,000 m3/day
Chemical dosage(s):  Unspecified
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention  time:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Continuous  operation
                               Type of sedimentation:  Lagoon
                               Hydraulic loading rate:  Un-
                                 specified
                               Hydraulic detention time:  Un-
                                 specified
                               Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL DATA
     Samp I ing:
24-hr composite,
flow proportion
                                            Analysis;  Data set  1(V.7.3.13)(a1
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
pH, maximum
Fluorides
Phosphorus
TSS
TDS
1 ron
Tin
Oi 1 and grease
Gold
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Cadmium
Chromium, total
Hexavalent chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Cyanide, total
Influent

10
1.5
30
7,600
2,600
990
0.35
590
0.25

2U
128,000
21
730
180
130,000
420
37
Effluent

9.5
0.41
.64
31
2,200
3.2
0.17
14
0.09

23
400
5.0
32
96
490
23
19
Percent
remova I


73
98
>99
15
>99
.51
98
64

4
>99
76
96
47
>99
95
49
Detect ion
I imit


0.1
0.003
5.0
5.0
0.005

5.0


2.0
3.0
5.0
1.0
30
6.0
1.0
5.0
     Blanks indicate data not available.
     (a) Original  source of data:  Electroplating Pretreatment 1976-1977 (HS).
Date:   9/25/81
                 III.3.1.3-41
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
(Unspecified)
Data  source:  EGD Combined Data Base
                           Data source status:
Point  source:  Metal  finishing
Subcategory:   Common  metals;  complexed metals;
   hexavalent chromium; cyanide,- oils
Plant:   06051
References:  3-113
Pretreatment/treatment:   Chem. Ox.(CN),  Chem. Red.(Cr)/Chem.  Ppt.,
   Sed.(clarifier)
                             Not specified
                             Bench scale
                             Pilot scale
                             Full scale
 DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

 Wastewater flow rate:   200,000  m3/day
 Chemical dosage(s): Unspecified
 Mix detention time: Unspecified
 Flocculation detention time:  Unspecified
 Unit configuration: Continuous operation
                      Type of sedimentation:  Clarifier
                      Hydraulic loading rate:  23.7 L/
                        hr/m2
                      Hydraulic detention time:
                        5.2 hr
                      Weir loading  rate:  Unspecified

Sampling: 8-hr composite,
flow proportion
REMOVAL


DATA

Ana lysis
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
Fluorides
Phosphorus
TSS
1 ron
Tin
Oi 1 and grease
BOO
COD
Aluminum
Manganese
Toxic pollutants, u.g/L:
Cadmium
Ch rom i urn
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Cyanide, total
Hexa va I ent ch rom 1 urn
Mercury
S i 1 ve r
Influent

0.28
0.90
130
O.U1
0.08
17
49
57
0.38
0.29

110
1,600
800
in
190
160
5.0
630
28
2.0
Effluent

0.37
0.20
9.0
1.2
0.08
12
19
31
0.18
0.0k

28
260
95
22
67
75
5.0
5.0
26
2.0


: Data
Percent
remova 1

NM
78
93
NM
0
29
61
16
53
86

74
84
88
46
65
53
0
99
7
0


set 1(V. 7.3.13)(a)
Detection
1 imit

0.1
0.003
5.0
0.005

5.0


0.04
0.005

2.0
3.0
1.0
30
6.0
1.0
5.0
5.0

0.1/1.0
       Blanks indicate data not available.
       NM, not meaningful.
       (a) Original sorce  of data:  MftMPM Composite Sampling 1975  (HS).
Date:  9/25/81
        III.3.1.3-42
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
        Chemical  Precipitation With Sedimentation
        (Unspecified)
Data source:  EGD Combined Data  Base
Point source:  Metal finishing
Subcategory:  Common metals; precious  metals
  complexed metals; cyanide
Plant:  4065
References:  3-113
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Chem. Ppt.,  Sed.(clarifier)
                                    Data source status:
                                      Not specified
                                      Bench scale
                                      Pilot scale
                                      Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  109,000 m3/day
Chemical dosage(s):  Unspecified
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention time:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Clarifier - continuous
  operation
                               Type of sedimentation:  Clarifier
                               Hydraulic loading rate:  Un-
                                 specified
                               Hydraulic detention time:  Un-
                                 specified
                               Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                REMOVAL DATA(a)
     Samp I ing:
24-hr composite,
flow proportion
                                             Analysis;  Data set 1 (V.7.3.13Hb)
Concentration
Pol lutant/parameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
pH, minimum
pH, maximum
Fluorides
Phosphorus
TSS
1 ron
Tin
Gold
Pa 1 lad! urn
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Cyanide, total
Hexavalent chromium
S i 1 ve r
Influent

7.0
7.7
2.6
2.9
48
0.12
0.1
0.016
0.012

18
7.0
5,500
7k
46
19
12
5.0
1.2
Effluent

6.6

2.0
0.19
22
0.071
0.09
0.012
0.01

5.0
84
640
55
56
15
5.0
5.0
1,2
Percent
Remova I



23
93
54
41
10
0.25
17

72
NM
88
26
NM
21
58
0
0
Detection
I i m i t



0.1
0.003
5.0
0.005




2.0
3.0
1.0
30
6.0
1.0
5.0
5.0
0.1/1.0
     Blanks  indicate data not available.
     NM,  not meaningful.
     (a)  Sampling data are the average of two consecutive days.
     (b)  Original source of data:  Printed Circuit  Boards & Electroless Plating
       1975-19.76 (HS).
Date:   9/25/81
                 III.3.1.3-43
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
        Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
        (Unspecified)
Data source:  EGD Combined Data Base
                                   Data  source  status;
Point source:  Metal finishing
Subcategory:  Common metals; hexavalent chromium;
  cyanide
Plant:  15070
References:  3-113
Pretreatment/treatment:  Chem. Ox.(CN), Chem. Red.(Cr)/Chem.  Ppt.,
  Sed.(clarifier)
                                     Not  specified
                                     Bench scale
                                     Pilot scale
                                     Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate.-
  Influent:  194,000 m3/day;
  effluent:  249,000 m3/day
Chemical dosage(s):  Unspecified
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention time:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Batch chem.  ox., batch
  chem. red.; continuous clarifier
                              Type  of sedimentation:  Un-
                                 specified
                              Hydraulic loading rate:   Un-
                                 specified
                              Hydraulic detention time:  Un-
                                 specified
                              Weir  loading rate:  Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL DATA
     Samp I ing:
24-hr composite,
flow proportion
(unspecified)
                                             Analysis;   Data set KV.7.3.13)(a)
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
pH, minimum
pH, maximum
Fluorides
Phosphorus
TSS
IDS
I ron
Tin
Oil and grease
Toxic pollutants, Mg/L:
Cadmium
Chromium, total
Hexavalent chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Cyanide, total
Influent


9.3
1.2
0.76
920
2,UOO
11
0.17
BDL

13
200,000
12,000
50
72
80
100,000
6,300
Effluent


8.9
1.1
0.55
12
2,000
0.2U
0.067
BDL

10
U,200
2,800
20
«tt
50
1,300
30
Percent
remova 1



8
28
99
17
98
59
NM

23
98
77
60
39
38
99
>99
Detection
1 imit



0.1
0.003
5.0
5.0
0.005

5.0

2.0
3.0
5.0
1.0
30
6.0
1.0
5.0
     BDL,  below detection limit.
     NM,  not meaningful.
     (a)  Original source of data:
                 Electroplating Pretreatment  1976-1977  (HS).
 Date:   9/25/81
                 III.3.1.3-44
-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Chemical  Precipitation With Sedimentation
 Data source:  EGD Combined Data  Base
 Point source:  Metal finishing
 Subcategory:  Common metals; precious  metals;
   complexed metals; hexavalent chromium;  cyanide
 Plant:  20073
 References:  3-113
 Pretreatment/treatment:  Chem. Ox.(CN),  Chem.  Red.(Cr)/Chem. Ppt.,
   Sed.(clarifier)
                    Data source status:
                      Not specified
                      Bench scale
                      Pilot scale
                      Full scale
 DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

 Wastewater flow rate:  1,490,000 m3/day
 Chemical dosage(s):  Unspecified
 Mix detention time:  Unspecified
 Flocculation detention time:  Unspecified
 Unit configuration:  Continuous operation
               Type of sedimentation:  Clarifier
               Hydraulic loading rate:
                 448 L/hr/m2
               Hydraulic detention time:
                 5.5 hr
               Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                    REMOVAL DATA
       Sampling: 24-hr composite,
                flow proportion
                (unspecified)
                Analysis:  Data  set KV.7.3.13(a)
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
pH, minimum
pH, maximum
Fluorides
Phosphorus
TSS
IDS
1 ron
Tin
Oi 1 and grease
Pa 1 ladium
Toxic pollutants, ng/L:
Cadmium
Chromium, total
Hexavalent chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Cyanide, total
Influent

5.7

2.2
70
700
4,800
7.9
1.7
BDL
0.08

37
160,000
5.0
65,000
140
54,000
1,400
110
Effluent


7.9
2.6
22
11
4,400
0.083
0.16
BOL
0.04

5.0
1,500
120
810
38
450
100
30
Percent
remove 1



NM
68
98
8
99
90
NM
50

86
99
NM
99
73
99
93
73
Detection
limit



0.1
0.003
5.0
5.0
0.005

5.0


2.0
3.0
5.0
1.0
30
6.0
1.0
5.0
       Blanks indicate data not available.
       BDL, below detection limit.
       NM, not meaningful.
       (a) Original  source of data:  Electroplating  Pretreatment 1976-1977 (HS).
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.3-45
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
(Lime)
Data source:  EGD Combined Data Base
Point source:   Copper
Subcategory:  Pickle
Plant:  6070
References:  3-113
                            Data source status:
                              Not specified
                              Bench scale
                              Pilot scale
                              Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Chem. Ppt.,  Sed.  (clarifier)
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
Wastewater  flow rate:  3,000 m3/day
Chemical dosages(s):   Unspecified
Mix detention time:   Unspecified
Flocculation detention time:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:   Continuous operation
   (24 hr/day)
                       Type of sedimentation:   Clarifier
                       Hydraulic loading rate:
                         Unspecified
                       Hydraulic detention time:
                         Unspecified
                       Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL DATA
     Sampling:  24-hr composite, flow
     	proportion (one hrl
                        AnaIvsis:
           Data  set  I (V.7.3.13)
       Pol latent/parameter
                                      Concentration
           Influent
Effluent
Percent
remove I
     Classical pollutants, mg/L:
       pH,  minimum                     1.0
       pH,  maximum                     3.2
       Fluorides                     0.80
       Phosphorus                      5.0
       TSS                             18
       Iron                           13
       Oi I  and grease                  4.0
       Phenols, total                0.01
       TOC                             12
       Manganese                     0.77
                          5.0
                          7.0
                           10
                         0.86
                           18
                         0.27
                          1.0
                         0.01
                           10
                         0.32
     Blanks indicate data  not available.
     BDL,  below detection  limit.
     NO,  not  detected.
     NM,  not  mean i ng fuI.
     •Approximate value.
               NM
               83
                0
               98
               75
                0
               17
               58
Detection
  I imit
               O.I
             0.003
               5.0
             0.005
               5.0
             0.005

             0.005
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
1,1, l-Trichlo roe thane
Chloroform
Bis(2-ethylhexyl )phthalate
T r i ch 1 o roethy 1 ene
To 1 uene
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
Benzene
Naphthalene

200
9,UOO
430
320
74,000
0. l»
BDL
BDL
0.2
1.0
BDL
BDL
1.0
BDL

23
220
ND
300
1,400
ND
BDL
ND
ND
ND
BDL
BDL
ND
BDL

88
98
>99
6
98
NM
NM
NM
>99
>99
NM
NM
>99
NM

3.0
1.0
30
6.0
1.0
0. 1
1.0
10
1.0
1.0
10
10
1.0
10
 Date:   9/25/81
         III.3.1.3-46
-------
 TREATMENT  TECHNOLOGY:
Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
(Lime)
 Data source:   Effluent Guidelines
 Point source:  Nonferrous metals
 Subcategory:   Columbium/tantalum
 Plant:   Unspecified
 References:  3-77, p. 337
 Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Chem. Ppt.

 DESIGN  OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

 Wastewater flow  rate:  Unspecified
 Chemical dosages(s):  Unspecified
 Mix detention  time:  Unspecified
 Flocculation detention time:  Un-
   specified
 Unit configuration:  Unspecified
                           Data source  status:
                             Not specified
                             Bench scale
                             Pilot scale
                             Full scale
                  Type of sedimentation:   Unspecified
                  Hydraulic loading rate:   Unspecified
                  Hydraulic detention time:  Unspeci-
                     fied
                  Weir loading rate:   Unspecified
 Sampling:   24-hour and 72-hour
 	composite and grab
                                 REMOVAL DATA
                       Analysis;   Data set  2  (V.7.3.22)
    Pollutant/parameter
          Concentration
       Influent   Effluent
        Percent   Detection
        removal     limit
 Classical  pollutants, mg/L:
   COD
   TSS
   Fluoride
   Aluminum
   Calcium
   Iron
   Manganese
            16
           900
           4.5
           9.0
           550
           120
            17
  8
 10
2.5
0.2
230
0.3
0.2
 50
 99
 44
 98
 58
>99
 99
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Cadmium
Copper
Nickel
Zinc

25
110,000
60,000
27,000

2
700
500
200

92
99
99
99
 Blanks  indicate data not available.
Date:   9/25/81
       III.3.1.3-47
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
(Lime)
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Nonferrous metals
Subcategory:  Tungsten
Plant:  Unspecified
References:  3-77, pp. 337
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Chem.  Ppt.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Chemical dosages(s):  unspecified
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention time:   Un-
  specified
Unit configuration:  Unspecified
                           Data source  status:
                             Not specified
                             Bench scale
                             Pilot scale
                             Full scale
                  Type of sedimentation:   Unspecified
                  Hydraulic loading rate:   Unspecified
                  Hydraulic detention time:  Unspeci-
                     fied
                  Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling:  24-hour and 72-hour
	composite and grab
                       Analysis;   Data set 2 (V.7.3.22)
   Pollutant/parameter
          Concentration      Percent   Detection
       Influent   Effluent   removal     limit
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  COD                            300
  TSS                            300
  Chloride                    25,000
  Aluminum                         3
  Iron                            50
                      53
                     150
                  19,000
                     0.5
                       2
82
50
24
83
96
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc

7,000
200
2,000
5,000
20,000
1,000
2,000

80
80
50
70
200
100
600

99
60
98
99
99
90
70
Blanks indicate data not available.
Date:  9/25/81
        III.3.1.3-48
-------
 TREATMENT  TECHNOLOGY:
Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
(Lime)
 Data source:   EGD Combined Data Base
 Point source:  Coil  coating
 Subcategory:   Steel
 Plant:  46050
 References:   3-113
                              Data source status:
                                Not specified
                                Bench  scale
                                Pilot  scale
                                Full scale
 Pretreatment/treatment:  Ion Exch./Chem.  Red. (Cr),  Equal.,  Chem. Ppt.,
   Coag. Floe, (polymer), Sed.  (tank)
 DESIGN OR  OPERATING PARAMETERS


 Wastewater flow rate:   156 m3/day
 Chemical dosages(s):   Unspecified
 Mix detention time:  Unspecified
 Flocculation detention time:  Unspecified
 Unit configuration:  Batch (8 hr/day)
   Chem. Red.  (Cr); continuous (24 hr/day)
   Chem. Ppt.
                        Type  of sedimentation:  Tank
                        Hydraulic loading rate:
                          Unspecified
                        Hydraulic detention time:
                          16.0 hr
                        Weir  loading rate:  Unspecified
                                         REMOVAL DATA

     Sampling:  Influent:  (201,202) continuous 24-hr composite,
             time proportion (one hr);
             effluent:  batch (unspecified) composite,
             time proportion (three hr);
             (205) continuous (unspecified) composite,
             flow proportion (one day);
             (253) batch-unspecified composite,  flow
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
pll, minimum
pH, maximum
Fluorides
Phosphorus
TSS
1 ron
01 1 and grease
Phenols, total
Manganese
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Chromium
Copper
Lead
N 1 eke 1
Zinc
Cyanide, total
1,1, 1-Trlchloroethane
Bls(2-ethyhexyl ) phthalate
Oi-n-butyl phthalate
Di ethyl phthalate
Trlchloroethylene
Phenanthrene
Hexavalent chromium
Acenaphthylene
Anthracene
Influent
201 202

7.0
7.4
1.0
22
160
0.85
10

0.73 1

ND
1U
180
150 32,
5, 300 65,
43
1.2
23
BOL
BDL
0.5
ND
ND
ND
ND
stream) a)
253

4.3
5.8
78
11
70
1.1
1.1
ND
.05

130
ND
ND
000
000
ND
ND
200
ND
330
ND
NO
60
BDL
ND

7.5
7.5
2.6

870
7.2
ND
ND
3.6

620,000
43
56
20, 300
370,000
ND
ND
15
ND
15
ND
ND
330,000
NO
ND
205

2.0»
6.9
0.78
0.6
110
0.60
ND
0.005»
2.4

NO
11
ND
NO
230
ND
ND
BDL
ND
ND
0.6
ND
ND
ND
ND
Ava.

5.2*
6.9
21
17
150
1.1
6.4
BDL
1.1

18,000
11
110
9,100
31,OOO
BDL
BDL
68
BDL
91
36
NO
9,500
BDL
ND
Effluent

7.0
7.0
10
1.6
8.0
0.17
11
0.020
0.16

24
3.0
ND
1,400
440
ND
ND
40
ND
40
NO
BOL
ND
BDL
BDL
Percent
remova 1



52
90
95
84
NM
NM
85

>99
73
>99
85
98
NH
NM
41
NM
56
>99
NM
>99
NH
NM
Detection
limit



0.1
0.003
5.0
0.005
5.0
0.005


3.0
1.0
30
6.0
1.0
5.0
0.1
10
10
10
0.1
10
5.0
10
10
     Blanks Indicate data not available.
     BDL, below detection limit.
     ND, not detected.
     NM, not meaningful.
     (a)lnfluent streams 202, 201 and 205 are coded as continuous raw waste streams,
       stream 253  is coded as batch.
Date:   9/25/81
       III.3.1.3-49
-------
TREATMENT  TECHNOLOGY:   Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
                         (Lime)

Data source:  EGD Combined Data Base               Data  source status:
Point source:  Coil coating                          Not specified          	
Subcategory:  Steel                                   Bench scale            ZZH
Plant:   11058                                         Pilot scale
References:   3-113                                    Full scale               x
Pretreatment/treatment:   Chem. Red.  (Cr)/Skimming, Chem. Ppt., Sed.
  (clarifier)

DESIGN OR  OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:   202,000 m3/day         Type of  sedimentation:   Clarifier
Chemical dosages(s):   Lime:  74,000  kg/yr;   Hydraulic  loading rate:
  coagulating agents:   370 kg/yr                204 L/hr/m2
Mix detention time:  Unspecified              Hydraulic  detention time:
Flocculation detention time:  Unspecified      13.8 hr
Unit configuration:  Clarifier-continuous    Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
  operation (12 hr/day)
                                    REMOVAL DATA

                Sampling:  Unspecified composite, now
                	proportion lono hrl	Analysis:  Data set 1 IV.7.3.91

                                    Concentration	   Percent  Detection
                 Pol lutant/oarameter	influent	Effluent	remova I	I lult
Classical pollutants, mg/L:'
pll, minimum
pH, Max I mum
Fluorides
Phosphorus
TSS
TDS
1 ron
Oi 1 and grease
Phenols, total
Aluminum
Manganese
Toxic pollutants, M9/L;
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Z i nc
Fluorene
Anthracene
1.1,1-Tnchlo roe thane
Chrysene
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) ph thai ale
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Oi-n-butyl phthalate
Diethyl phthalate
Benzo(a)pyrene
Phenanthrene
1 sophorone
1. 1-Diohloroethane
Ftuoranthene
1,2-Benzanthracene

7.1
9.8
3.8
29
Il50
2.800
1.3
110
0.008
1.8
0.16

6.600
26
'130
30,000
10
50
NO
BDL
BUL
BDL
BOL
BDL
BDL
50
BDL
NO
BDL
5.0«

8.3
9.5
3.2
0.79
17
3,300
0.66
6.0
ND
0.07
ND

J50
7.0
ND
280
ND
ND
2.0
NO
BDL
BDL
,BDL
BDL
NO
NO
ND
4.0
ND
ND



16
97
96
NM
85
9'l
>99
96
>99

95
73
>99
99
>99
>99
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
>99
NM
NM
NM
NM



0.1
0.003
5.0
5.0
O.005
5.0
0.005
O.OM
0.005

3.0
1.O
30
1.0
10
10
0.1
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
0.1
10
1.0/1O
                Blanks indicate data not available.
                BDL, below detection Unit.
                ND, not detected.
                NM, not meaningful.
                •Approximate value.
  Date:   9/25/81              III.3.1.3-50
-------
            TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
(Lime)
            Data  sourcet  EGD Combined Data Base
            Point sourcei  Coil coating
            Subcategory:  Steel
            Plant:  11055
            References:  3-113
            Pretreatment/treatments  Chera.
              Sed. (clarifier)
        Red. (Cr)/0il Sep.
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
(skimming), Chem. Ppt.
            DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

            Wastewater flow  rate:  84,000 m»/day
            Chemical dosages(s):  Lime:  17,000 kg/yr
            Mix detention  time:  Unspecified
            Flocculation detention time:  Unspecified
            Unit configuration:  Continuous operation
              (21 hr/day)
                      Type of sedimentation:   Clarifier
                      Hydraulic loading rate:
                        212 L/hr/m*
                      Hydraulic detention time:
                        19.6 hr
                      Heir loading rate:  Unspecified
REMOVAL DATA
Sampling: 24-hr composite.
flow orooortjop (gne hr) Analvtis:
Pol lutant/oaraaeter
Classical pollutants, >g/L:
pH, • minus)
pH. HaxiBU*
Fluorides
Phosphorus
Boron
TSS
Iron
Tin
Bariun
Aluainuai
01 1 and grease
Manganese
TDS
MagnesiiMB
Molybdenuej
Calcine
Sodiuei
Coba 1 t
Titaniua
Strontiuai
Vanadiu*
Yttriux
Phenols, total
Toxic pollutants, M9/L:
Ca da lull
ChroatiuM, total
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
2,i|-DlMthylphenol
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Olethyl phthalate
Antlanny
Arsenic
chroaiiuai, hexavalent
Mercury
Ethyl benzene
Benzene
Fluoranthene
Methylene chloride
1 sopho rone
Naphthalene
Phenol
Chrysene
Anthracene
Fluorene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
Concentrati
Influent 1

6.5
9.0
18
31
0.25
1,100
15
0.3)
0.51
1.9
210
BOL
1,600
21
0.07
70
310
0.31
0.01
0.33
0.03
0.02
.03

9.0
15.000
66
1,500
150
31(0,000
21
33
DDL
BOL
1,300
75
1,100
0.1
1.0
1.0
BOL
3.0
600
NO
16
BOL
6»«
NO
61
10
1.0*
5.0
Ion
:f fluent

• .0
11
12
0.31
0.05
31
NO
0.0)
0.02
ND
6. >t
ND
3,100
3.5
0.0)
350
210
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.02
O.OM
.03

7.0
180
IS
110
120
500
11
3.0
BOL
BDL
NO
NO
6.0
0.1
3.0
1.0»
BOL
2.0
560
BDL
BDL
NO
BOL
1.0*
BDL
1.0*
1.0*
5.0

Percent
reanval



33
99
SO
97
>99
91
96
>99
97
KM
KM
81
57
NH
22
91
50
91
33
NM
0.0

22
>99
77
9)
20
>99
18
91
NH
NH
>99
>99
>99
75
NH
NH
NH
33
6
NM
69»
NM
NM
NM
92>
NH
NM
0
set 1 IV. 7. 1.91
Detection
Unit



0.1
0.001

5.0
0:005


0.01
5.0
5.0
5.0









0.005

2.0
3.0
1.0
JO
6.0
1.0
10
10
10
10
0.1/100
0.1/10
5.0
0.1
1.0
1.0
10
1.0
10
10
10
10
10
10
to
10
10
5.0
                       Blanks Indicate data not available.
                       BDL, below detection Halt.
                       ND, not detected.
                       NM, not Manlngful.
                       "Approximate value.
Date:    9/25/81
       III.3.1.3-51
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
          Chemical Precipitation With  Sedimentation
          (Lime)
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  26
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Paint manufacturing
 Unspecified

3-20, pp. VI-10-11,  Appendix G
             Data source  status:
               Not specified
               Bench scale
               Pilot scale
               Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Chem Ppt.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  0.02-0.04 L/s
Chemical dosages(s):  Unspecified
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention time:  Un-
  specified
Unit configuration:  Batch operation
                           Type of sedimentation:  Unspecified
                           Hydraulic  loading rate:  Unspecified
                           Hydraulic  detention times  Unspecified
                           Weir loading rates   Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
 Sampling  Grab and composite
                                  Analysis:  Data set  1  (V.7.3.25)
Pollutant/parameter
                           Concentration(a)
            Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
 limit
Toxic pollutants, yg/Ls
Antimony
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Thallium
Zinc

1,000
<20
40
240
250
700
5.8
210
80
270,000

180
<20
30
30
80
190
8
310
<20
8,200

82
NM
25
88
68
73
NM
NM
>75
97
 Blanks  indicate data not available.
 NM,  not meaningful.
 (a)One  sample.
Date:  9/25/81
                  III.3.1.3-52
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Chemical Precipitation With  Sedimentation
                       (Lime)

Data source: Effluent Guidelines                 Data  source  status:
Point source: Ore mining and dressing              Not specified
Subcategory:  Base-metal mine                      Bench scale
Plant: Plant 3 of Canadian pilot plant study       Pilot scale
References: 3-66, pp. VI-60,61                     Full scale           ~
Pretreatment/treatment: Unspecified/Chem.  Ppt.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate: Unspecified    Type  of sedimentation:  Unspecified
Chemical dosages(s): Unspecified     Hydraulic  loading  rate: Unspecified
Mix detention time: Unspecified      Hydraulic  detention time: Unspecified
Flocculation detention time: Un-     Weir  loading rate: Unspecified
  specified
Unit configuration: Two-stage lime
  addition
                             REMOVAL DATA

Sampling;  One year	Analysis;   Data  set 4  (V.7.3.23)

                            Concentration	     Percent    Detection
  Pollutant/parameter   Influent(a)   Effluent(b)   removal	limit	

Toxic pollutants,  yg/L
Copper
Lead
Zinc
19,000
1,300
110,000
60
150
350
99
88
99
Blanks indicate data not available.
(a)Average value for raw minewater influent  to pilot  plant.
(b)Effluent qualities during periods of optimized steady operation.
 Date:   9/25/81              III.3.1.3-53
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
                       Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
                       (Lime)
              Effluent Guidelines
               Ore mining and dressing
              Lead/zinc mine
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  3113
References:  3-66, pp. VI-101,102
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Chem.
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Chemical dosages(s):  Unspecified
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention time:  Un-
  specified
Unit configuration:  Unspecified
pH in clarifier: 9.1-9.7
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
                                    Ppt.
                                        Type of sedimentation:  Unspecified
                                        Hydraulic  loading rate:  Unspecified
                                        Hydraulic  detention time:  Unspecified
                                        Weir loading rate:   Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling:  4 days
                                              Analysis:   Data set 4 (V.7.3.23)
  Pollutant/parameter
                                  Concentration        Percent    Detection
                               Influent(a) Effluent    removal      limit
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  TSS                              112

Toxic pollutants, yg/Lt
  Cadmium                          230
  Copper                         1,500
  Lead                              88
  Zinc                          71,000
                                               33
                                               25
                                              100
                                              100
                                              <20
        71
        89
        93
        NM
       >99
Blanks indicate data not available.
NM, not meaningful.
(a)Average of seven observations.
Date:  9/25/81
                               III.3.1.3-54
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
(Lime)
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Ore mining and dressing
Subcategory.- Copper mine/mill/smelter
Plant:  2117
References: 3-66, pp. V-52-61
Pretreatment/treatment: Unspecified/Chem.  Ppt.
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Chemical dosages(s)-. Unspecified
Mix detention time: Unspecified
Flocculation detention time: Unspeci-
  fied
Unit configuration: Aerator
                           Data source status:
                             Not specified
                             Bench scale
                             Pilot scale
                             Full scale
                Type of sedimentation:  Unspecified
                Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
                Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
                Weir loading rate: Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling!  24-hr composite and grab
                       Analysis;   Data set 1 (V.7.3.23)
   Pollutant/parameter
           Concentration       Percent   Detection
       Influent    Effluent    removal     limit
Classical pollutants,  mg/L:
  COD
  TOC
  TSS
  Total phenol
              35
              11
              24
            0.37
  30
   9
 4.5
0.33
14
18
81
11
    2
    1
    1
0.002
Toxic pollutants yg/L
Asbestos, fibers/L
Copper
Cyanide
Zinc

1.3 x 108
190
<20
760

6.1 x 10s
120
45
120

95
34
NM
85

2.2 x 10(5)
10
20
5
NM, not meaningful.
Date:   9/25/81
        III.3.1.3-55
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Chemical  Precipitation With Sedimentation
                       (Lime)

Data source: Effluent  Guidelines                 Data source status:
Point source: Ore mining and dressing              Not specified         	
Subcategory:  Copper mine/mill                     Bench scale           	
Plant: 2120                                        Pilot scale           	
References: 3-66, pp.  V-99,100                     Full scale              x
Pretreatment/treatment:  Neutral./Chem.  Ppt.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified        Type of  sedimentation:  Unspecified
Chemical dosages(s):  Unspecified        Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Mix detention time: Unspecified        Hydraulic detention  time.-  Unspecified
Flocculation detention time:  Un-        Weir loading  rate:   Unspecified
  specified
Unit configuration: Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA

Sampling;  24-hr composite and grab	Analysis;  Data  set 2  (V.7.3.23)

                                 Concentration     Percent    Detection
  Pollutant/parameter	Influent   Effluent  removal	limit	

Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  COD                              10         18     NM         2
  TOC                              19         12     37         1
  TSS                              14          4     71         1
  Total phenol                  0.018(a)   0.012     33      0.002
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Arsenic
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
4
500
40
<1
<20
3
SO
40
1
30
25
84
0
NM
NM
2
10
50
0.5
20
NM, not meaningful.
(a)An ethoxylated phenol (Nalco 8800) is used as a wetting agent for dust
 supression during secondary ore crushing.
 Date:   9/25/81               III.3.1.3-56
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
(Lime)
Data source: Effluent Guidelines
Point source: Inorganic chemicals
Subcategory: Hydrofluoric acid
Plant: 705
References: 3-85,  pp. 199,  227
Pretreatment/treatment: Unspecified/Sed.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate: Unspecified
Chemical dosages(s): Unspecified
Mix detention time: Unspecified
Flocculation Detention time:  Un-
  specified
Unit configuration: 30 to 35% of effluent
   recycled, remaining effluent neutralized
   and discharged
                           Data source status:
                             Not specified
                             Bench scale
                             Pilot scale
                             Full scale
                  Type of sedimentation:  Unspecified
                  Hydraulic loading rate: Unspecified
                  Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
                  Weir loading rate: Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling:  72-hr composite
	and grab	
                 Analysis;   Data set 1 (V.7.3.15)
 Pollutant/parameter
                              Concentration,(a)
    Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
  limit
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Thallium
Zinc

10
40
9.7
390
290
50
5.8
560
2.6
240

1.9
<9.7
1.6
47
19
23
0.48
<9.7
1.1
53

81
>76
84
88
93
54
92
>98
58
78
Blanks indicate data not available.
(a)Values are for combined wastes from HF and A1F3,
   concentrations are calculated from pollutant  flow
   in m3/Mg and pollutant loading in kg/Mg.
Date:   9/25/81
        III.3.1.3-57
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
                       (Lime)
Data source: Effluent Guidelines                  Data  source  status:
Point source: Inorganic chemicals                   Not specified         	
Subcategory: Hydrofluoric acid                      Bench scale           ~^^_
Plant: 167                                          Pilot scale           	
References:  3-85, pp. 199,  227                     Full scale           	x_
Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified           Type  of sedimentation:  Lagoon
Chemical dosages(s):  Unspecified            Hydraulic  loading rate:  Unspeci-
Mix detention time:  Unspecified              fied
Flocculation Detention time:  Unspecified    Weir  loading rate:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  47% of effluent is
  recycled
                                 REMOVAL DATA

Sampling:  3 day, 24-hour composite
	and grab	Analysis;   Data set 2  (V.7.3.15)

                              Concentration (a)      Percent   Detection
 Pollutant/parameter	Influent	Effluent	removal	limit
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Arsenic
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Zinc

150
470
120
87
27
1,100
63
240

<24
250
79
37
<1.2
610
87
180

>84
47
34
57
>96
45
NM
25
Blanks indicate data not available.
NM, not meaningful.
(a)Values are combined for wastes from HF and A1F3.
   Concentration data is calculated from pollutant flow
   in m3/Mg and pollutant loading in kg/Mg.
Date:   9/25/81              III.3.1.3-58
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
Chemical Precipitation With Filtration
(Lime)
Data  source-.   Effluent Guidelines
Point source:   Steam  electric
Subcategory:   Ash transport water
Plant:  See below
References:   3-86, pp.  219,220,222
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Chem. Ppt.
                              Data source status:
                                 Not specified
                                 Bench  scale
                                 Pilot  scale
                                 Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
Wastewater  flow rate:   Unspecified
Chemical dosages(s):   Add to  pH >11.0
Mix  detention time:   Unspecified
Unit configuration:   FGD scrubber waste
  pond
                     Type of  sedimentation:  Unspecified
                     Hydraulic  loading rate :   Unspecified
                     Hydraulic  detention time:   Unspeci-
                        fied
                     Weir loading rate:   Unspecified
                                        REMOVAL DATA
            Unsoec I fiod
     Pol lutant/piirninetor
                        	Shovneo l*i
                          Cuncontra'tTonlal
                        Influent	Effluent
                                     Power Plnnt A*
             	ShawfiRC I'owor Plant It	
              Percent   DC toe t ion    Conccntrat'lonial"   Percent   OaiaeCion
              reniova I	1 iBl t	Influent   Effluent   removal	[ imi L	
     Classical pollutant*, mg/L:
      COD
      TSS
 NA
 NA
31*
IM*
NA
160
55*
57
I1H
MM
Toxic pollutants, |ig/L:
Arsenic
Load
Mercury
Solenlun

2't*
H90*«
0. l*«
5**

II* 5'l
23* 95
0.5* NM
3* HO

NA 6* NM
NA OH* HM
NA 1* HM
NA >l 1 * NM


Pol lutant/oa remoter

Concent™
Influent
Shawnoe Power plant; D
tiqnfal Percent Detection
Effluent renova 1 liMi^


     Classical pollutants, mg/L:
      COD                  NA      51*
      TSS                  NA     690*

     Toxic pollutants, |ig/L:
      Arson Ic                2
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Chemical  Precipitation With Filtration
                       (Lime)

Data source:  Effluent Guidelines                 Data source status:
Point source:  Steam electric                       Not specified
Subcategory:  Cooling tower  blowdown                Bench scale
Plant:  5604                                       Pilot scale
References:  3-86,  Appendix  E, p.  20                Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Chem. Ppt., Filtration

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:   Unspecified
Chemical dosages(s):  Add to pH  >11.0
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Jar test
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling: Unspecified
Analysis: Data set 2 (V.7.3.31)
Concentration
Pollutant/parameter
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Chromium
Copper
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
Beryllium
Cadmium
Lead
Mercury
Selenium
Thallium
Vanadium
Influent

5
7
2
180
6
3
780
<0.5
<0.5
<3
<0.2
<2
<1
24
Effluent

3
<1
<2
48
12
4
140
<0.5
<0.5
<3
<0.2
<2
<1
77
Percent Detection
removal limit

40
>86
NM
73
NM
NM
82
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
Blanks indicate data not available.
NM, not meaningful.
 Date:   9/25/81               III.3,1.3-60
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
          Chemical Precipitation With Filtration
          (Lime)
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory.
Plant:  1226
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Steam electric
 Cooling tower blowdown

3-86,  Appendix E,  p.  20
      Data source status;
        Not specified
        Bench scale
        Pilot scale
        Full scale
                     x
Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Chem.  Ppt.,  Filtration

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Chemical dosages(s):  Add to pH >11.0
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Jar test
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling;  Unspecified
                                Analysis:  Data set 2  (V.7.3.31)
  Pollutant/parameter
                    Concentration      Percent   Detection
                 Influent    Effluent   removal     limit
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  TOC
                    <20
<20
NM
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
Selenium
Thallium
Vanadium

7
4
<0.5
1.8
4
47
3
0.2
6.0
0.7
26
<2
<1
27

4
3
0.9
3.0
9
18
5
0.7
2.9
0.9
2
<2
<1
6

43
25
NM
NM
NM
62
NM
NM
52
NM
92
NM
NM
78
Blanks indicate data not available.
NM, not meaningful.
Date:   9/25/81
                     III.3.1.3-61
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
          Chemical Precipitation With Filtration
          (Lime)
Data source:
Point source
Subcategory:
Plant:  1226
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Steam electric
 Ash transport water
                                                 Data source status:
                                                   Not specified
                                                   Bench scale
                                                   Pilot scale
                                                   Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:   Sed.  (ash pond)/Chem. Ppt., Filtration
3-86,  Appendix E,  p.  20
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Chemical dosages(s):  Add to pH >11.0
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Jar test
Sampling;  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
                                 Analysis;   Data  set 2  (V.7.3.31)
  Pollutant/parameter
                    Concentration      Percent    Detection
                 InfluentEffluent   removal      limit
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  TOC
                     <20
                                            <20
NM
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Zinc
Beryllium
Thallium
Vanadium

7
9
2.0
6
14
4
<0.2
5.5
8
0.5
7
<0.5
<1
78

, 10
1
2.0
11
10
<3
0.3
6.0
8
0.4
2
<0.5
<1
78

NM
89
0
NM
29
>25
NM
NM
0
20
71
NM
NM
0
Blanks indicate data not available.
NM, not meaningful.
Date:   9/25/81
                     III.3.1.3-62
-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Chemical  Precipitation With Sedimentation
                        (Lime)

 Data source:   Effluent Guidelines                 Data source status:
 Point source:  Textile mills                        Not specified         	
 Subcategory:   Knit fabric  finishing                Bench scale           	«
 Plant:  Unspecified                                Pilot scale           	
 References:   3-68, p.  VII-48                        Full scale            	
 Pretreatment/treatment: Unspecified/Chem. Ppt.

 DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

 Wastewater flow rate:   Unspecified          Type of sedimentation:
 Chemical dosages(s):  Unspecified              Unspecified
 Mix detention time: Unspecified            Hydraulic loading rate:
 Flocculation  detention time:  Unspecified     Unspecified
 Unit configuration: Unspecified            Hydraulic detention time:
                                               Unspecified
                                             Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL DATA

 Sampling;  Unspecified	Analysis;  Data set 2  (V.7.3.32)

                                Concentration	     Percent     Detection
    Pollutant/parameter	Influent (a)   Effluent	removal	limit
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
10
930
500
100
50
50
3,200
ND
80
30
ND
ND
ND
110
>99
91
94
>99
>99
>99
97
 Blanks indicate data not available.
 ND, not detected.
 (a)Sample taken from aeration basin  at plant.
Date:   9/25/81               III.3.1.3-63
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
         Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
         (Lime, Polymer)
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  33077
References:  3-113
Pretreatment/treatment
EGD Combined Data Base
 Porcelain
Alum
           Equal./Chem. Ppt., Sed.
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  965 m3/day
Chemical dosages(s):  Lime:  47,200 kg/yr;
  polymer:  320 kg/yr
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention time:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Continuous operation
  (16 hr/day)
 Data source status:
   Not specified
   Bench scale
   Pilot scale
   Full scale
(tube/plate settler)
                               Type of sedimentation:  Tube/
                                 plate settler
                               Hydraulic loading  rate:
                                 Unspecified
                               Hydraulic detention  time:
                                 Unspecified
                               Weir loading rate:   Unspecified
                                   REMOVAL DATA
    Sampling:  16-hr composite, flow
              proportion (one hr)
                               Analysis;  Data  set 2 (V.7.3.16)
Concentration
Pol 1 utant/oa rameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
pH, minimum
pH, maximum
Fluorides
Phosphorus
TSS
1 ron
Titanium
Manganese
Phenols, total
Aluminum
Barium
Toxic pollutants, (ig/L:
Cadmium
Chromium, total
Copper
Lead
Zinc
Cyanide, total
Selenium
Influent

8.9
10.5
1.8
12
53
2.0
1.2
0.017
0.006
1.2
.23

2,900
11
U.O
1,200
220
160
300
Effluent

9.U
10.0
2.0
0.89
NO
0.038
NO
NO
NO
NO
0.20

57
ND
NO
ND
540
ND
ND
Pe rcent
remova I



NM
92
>99
98
>99
>99
>99
>99
13

98
>99
>99
>99
NM
>99
>99
Detection
1 i m i t



0.1
0.003
5.0
0.005

0.005
0.005
O.OU


2.0
3.0
1.0
30
1.0
5.0

    Blanks  indicate data not available.
    ND,  not detected.
    NM,  not meaningful.
Date:   9/25/81
                 III.3.1.3-64
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
                         (Lime,  Polymer)
Data  source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Ore mining and dressing
Subcategory:  See  below
Plant:  See below
References: 3-66,  pp. VI-60-61, 77-80,  86-87,
  101-102
Pretreatment/treatment:  None (unless  otherwise
  specified)/Chem. Ppt.
                                                       Data source status:
                                                         Not specified
                                                         Bench  scale
                                                         Pilot  scale
                                                         Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow  rate:  Unspecified
Chemical dosages(s):  Unspecified
Mix  detention  time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention time:  Un-
  specified
Unit configuration:  Unspecified
                                           Type of  sedimentation:   Unspecified
                                           Hydraulic  loading  rate:  Unspecified
                                           Hydraulic  detention  time:  Unspecified
                                           Weir loading rate:   Unspecified
                                        REMOVAL DATA
        llnft!  Variable
                                                        Analysis:  D«t« cat It IV. 7. 3. 231
Subcateoorv
Base Betel Bine
Base Beta! Bine
Lead/zinc Bine
Lead/zinc Bine/Bill
Lead/zinc Bine/Bill
SBeltor/reflnery
Base Beta! Bine
Base swtal Bine
Lead/zinc Bine
Lead/zinc Bine/Bill
Lead/zinc Bine/Bill
SB>I tar/refinery
Base Betal Bine
Base Betal Bine
Lead/zinc Bine
Lead/zinc Bine/Bill
Lead/zinc Bine/Bill
welter/ refinery
Plant
Mine No. 1 of Canadian
pilot plan study
Nino No. 2 of Canadian
pilot plan study
3113(a)
3121(b)
310?
Nine No. i of Canadian
pi lot plan study
Nine NO. 2 of Canadian
pilot plan study
51111. 1
3121(6)
3107
Nine No. I of Canadian
pilot plan study
Nine No. 2 of Canadian
pilot plan study
3ll3(a)
3l2l(b)
3107

Concent n
Influent
110
1.5
16
Concent n
Influent
3,900
1.200
88
210
130
10,000
17,000
1,500
100
31
TSS
it Ion Bd/L
10
17
6
Lead
itlon uo/L
Effluent
180
110
<20
80
70
10
50
50
50
15

Percent
reemval
91
NM
62
Percent
95
63
>77
62
16
>99
>99
97
50
52
Cf ami urn
Concentration. uo/L
Influent Effluent
230 15

120 60
Zinc
Concentration ua/L
Influent Effluent
1,200,000 330
510,000 150
71,000 1,100
710 380
2,900 1,000






Percent
roBov^t

SO
Percent
reBoyfll
>99
>99
9«
19
66





     Blanks Indicate data not available.
     NN, not Beanlngful.
     (a)pH In clarlfler: •.•-9.6.
     (b)Use In systea:  secondary,  tailing pond was used In pretreatBant of Influent; pH In clanriar: 9.2-11.3.
     (c)Use In sytteB:  tertiary, pretraatBent of Influent Included tailing pond, I IBS precipitation, aeration, flocculatlon,
       and clarification; pH In clarlfler: 8.1-8.7.
  Date:   9/25/81
                                    III.3.1.3-65
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
(Lime, Polymer)
Data source: Effluent Guidelines
Point source: Ore mining and dressing
Subcategory:  Copper mill
Plant: 2122
References: 3-66, pp. VI-90,93
Pretreatment/treatment: Sed./Chem.  Ppt.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Chemical dosages(s):  Unspecified
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention time: Un-
  specified
Unit configuration:  Unspecified
pH in clarifier:  9.3-9.9
                           Data source  status:
                             Not specified
                             Bench scale
                             Pilot scale
                             Full scale
                 Type of sedimentation:   Unspecified
                 Hydraulic loading rate:   Unspecified
                 Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
                 Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling;  9 days
                       Analysis:  Data set 4 (V.7.3.23)
  Pollutant/parameter
                                  Concentration(a)
        Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
  limit
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  TSS

Toxic pollutants, -\ig/Li
          2,600
   36
Blanks indicate data not available.
(a)Average values:  TSS (54 observations),
                    Metals (46 observations).
   99
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
190
2,000
160
190
100
32
38
75
45
25
83
98
53
76
75
Date:   9/25/81
        III.3.1.3-66
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Chemical  Precipitation With  Sedimentation
                        (Lime,  Polymer)

Data source:   EGD Combined Data  Base              Data source status:
Point source:   Metal finishing                      Not specified          	
Subcategory:   Common metal                           Bench scale            	
Plant:   12061-15-0,1,2                               Pilot scale            	
References:   3-113                                   Full scale               x
Pretreatment/treatment:  Equal./Chem.  Ppt. with Aeration, Sed. (clarifier,
  lagoon)

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater  flow rate:  26,000  m3/day         Type of  sedimentation:  Clarifier
Chemical dosage(s):  Ca(OH)2:  176,000  kg/yr       and lagoon
Mix detention time:  Unspecified             Hydraulic loading rate:
Flocculation  detention time:   Unspecified      Clarifier:  3.4 to 3.8 hr
Unit configuration:  Continuous  operation      Lagoon:  132 hr
  (24 hr/day)                                  Hydraulic detention time:
Weir loading  rate:  Unspecified                 Clarifier:  844 L/hr/m2
                                                 Lagoon:  10.2 L/hr/m2
                                    REMOVAL DATA

             Sampling:  24-hr composite, flow
                     proportion lone hrl	Analysis:  Data set H7.3.13llal
Concentration
Pol lutant/oaraneter
Classical pollutants, ng/L:
pH, minimum
pH, max ilium
Fluorides
Phosphorus
TSS
Iron
Oi 1 and grease
Phenols, total
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Cadmium
Ch rom 1 urn
Coppe r
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Cyanide, total
Carbon tetrachloride
1,1, 1-Trichloroethane
Chloroform
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Dl ethyl phthalate
Trichloroethylene
Anthracene
Phananthrene
1, 1,2-Trichloroethane
Naphthalene
influent

2.1*
8.3
1.U
5.29
672.0
270
BDL
.009

4
130
1,900
690
5MO
65,000
5.0»
BDL
ND
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
0.1»
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
Effluent

8.0
8.5
1.1
1.25
ND
0.29
ND
.009

ND
NO
38
ND
55
26,000
5.0*
BDL
0.1»
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
0.1»
ND
ND
ND
BDL
Percent
remove 1



0
76
>99
>99
NM
0

>99
>99
98
>99
90
60
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
Detection
Unit



0.1
0.003
5.0
0.005
5.0
0.005

2.0
3.0
1.0
30
6.0
1.0
5.0
1.O
0.1
1.0
10
10
10
10
0.1
10
10
1.0
10
             Blanks indicate data not available.
             BDL, below detection Unit.
             NM, not meaningful.
             * Approximate value.
             (a) Original source of data:  BAT Verification Sampling 1978-1979IHS).
Date:   9/25/81               III.3.1.3-67
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
(Lime, Alum)
Data source:  EGD Combined Data Base
Point source:  Metal finishing
Subcategory:  Common metals; oil
Plant:  33617
References:  3-113
Pretreatment/treatment:  Neutral
  Sed.(lagoon)

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
                           Data source  status:
                             Not specified
                             Bench  scale
                             Pilot  scale
                             Full scale
            Equal./Chem. Ppt., Sed.(clarifier),
Wastewater flow rate:
  Influent:  56,000 m3/day*;
  effluent:  46,400 m3/day*
Chemical dosage(s):  Lime:   134,000 kg/yr;
  alum: 14,000 kg/yr
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention  time:   Unspecified
Unit configuration:   Continuous operation (24 hr/day)
                      Type  of  sedimentation:  Clarifier
                         and lagoon
                      Hydraulic  loading rate:  Un-
                         specified
                      Hydraulic  detention rate:  Un-
                         specified
                      Weir  loading rate:  Unspecified
                                       REMOVAL DATA
    Sampling: 24-hr composite,
             flow proportion (one hrl
                     Analysis;   Data set KV.7.3.13Ha ]
Concentration
Pol lutant/parameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
pH, minimum
pH, maximum
Fluorides
Phosphorus
TSS
Ti tan ium
1 ron
Coba 1 t
Oil and grease
Phenols, total
Aluminum
Manganese
Toxic pollutants, u,g/L:
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Beryl 1 ium
Arsen ic
Influent

4.5
5.9
0.14
14
1,700
2.0
150
4.1
15
0.16
24
6.0

5.0
570
560
280
10,800
2,800
70
62
Effluent

7.0
8.2
23
1.5
16.0
ND
0.85
0.08
12
.012
ND
0.35

ND
ND
9.0
ND
10,400
32
ND
ND
Percent
remova I



NM
89
99
>99
99
98
20
92
>99
94

>99
>99
98
>99
4
99
>99
>99
Detection
I imit



0.1
0.003
5.0

0.005

5.0
0.005
0.04
0.005

2.0
3.0
1.0
30
6.0
1.0
1.0
0.1/10
    Blanks indicate data not available.
    ND, not detected.
    NM, not meaningful.
    * Approximate value.
    (a) Original source of data:  BAT Verification sampling 1978-1979 (HS).
 Date:   9/25/81
         III.3.1.3-68
-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
                       Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
                       (Lime,  Polyelectrolyte)
               Effluent Guidelines
                Ore mining  and  dressing
               Copper mine/mill/smelter/re-
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
  finery
Plant:  2121
References:  3-66,  pp.  V-45,46
Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Chem.  Ppt.
       Data source status:
         Not specified
         Bench scale
         Pilot scale
         Full scale
 DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

 Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
 Chemical dosages(s):  Unspecified
 Mix detention time:  Unspecified
 Flocculation detention time:  Un-
   specified
 Unit configuration:  Unspecified
                                        Type of sedimentation:   Unspecified
                                        Hydraulic  loading rate:   Unspecified
                                        Hydraulic  detention time:   Unspecified
                                        Weir loading rate:   Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA

 Sampling;   24-hr  composite  and grab	Analysis-.  Data set 1  (V.7.3.23)
                                 Concentration
   Pollutant/parameter
                               Influent
Effluent
Percent   Detection
removal     limit
 Classical  pollutants, mg/L:
   COD                              960            2      99            2
   TOC                                9            7      22            1
   TSS                          210,000            5      99            1

 Toxic pollutants  yg/L
   Asbestos,  fibers/L           3.0 x 1011   8.2 x 106     99     2.2 x 10(5)
   Copper                        190,000           90      99           10
   Zinc                          28,000           40      99            5
   Bis(2-ethylhexyl)
     phthalate(a)                    0.1           12      NM          0.2
 Blanks  indicate  data not available.
 (a)Possibly from the tubing  in  sampling apparatus.
Date:   9/25/81
                              III.3.1.3-69
-------
TREATMENT  TECHNOLOGY:
Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
(Lime, Polyelectrolyte)
Data source:   EGD Combined Data  Base
Point source:   Metal finishing
Subcategory:   Common metals;  hexavalent chromium;
  cyanide;  oils
Plant: 12075
References:   3-113
Pretreatment/treatment:  Equal./Chem. Ppt., Sed.(clarifier)
                            Data  source status:
                              Not specified
                              Bench scale
                              Pilot scale
                              Full scale
DESIGN OR  OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:
  Effluent:  161,000 m3/day;
  influent:  180,000 m3/day
Chemical dosage(s):  Ca(OH)2: 7,900 kg/yr;
  polyelectrolyte: 6,800 kg/yr
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention time:  Unspecified
                       Type of  sedimentation:  Clarifier
                       Hydraulic  loading rate:  159  L/
                         hr/m.2
                       Hydraulic  detention time:
                         2.8 hr
                       Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Continuous  operation (24 hr/day)
                                     REMOVAL DATA
               Sampling: Effluent:  grab; influent:
                      24-hr composite, flow
                                             Analysis:  Data set KV.7.3. !3Hal
Pol lutant/oaraneter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
pH, minimum
?H, maximum
luorides
Phosphorus
TSS
Iron
Tin
01 1 and grease
Phenols, total
Toxic pollutants, |ig/L:
Cadmium
Ch rom i urn
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Cyanide, total
Anthracene
Phenanthrene
Chloroform
Bi s( 2-ethy Ihexy 1 )phtha late
Butyl benzyl ph thai ate
Dl-n-butyl phthalate
Tetrachloroethylene
Si Iver
Naphthalene
Arsenic
Methyl one chloride
Concentre
Influent 1

3.1
3.8
940
1 .7
99
59
625
1,900
0.007

37
70
570
100
142
ISO
2, 100
BOL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
•BDL
BDL
10
BDL
mo
BDL
ition
[f fluent

12
12
200
0.86
93
5.1
100
5U
0.015

NO
NO
56
NO
34
13
5,500
BOL
BOL
BDL
BOL
NO
NO
ND
ND
BDL
ND
BDL
Percent
remova 1


79
49
6
91
83
97
NH

>99
>99
90
>99
19
93
NM
NH
NH
NH
NH
NH
NH
NM
>99
NM
>99
NH
Detection
Unit


O.I
0.003
5.0
0.005

5.0
0.005

2.0
3.0
1.0
30
6.0
1.0
5.0
10
10
1.0
10
10
10
1.0
0. 1/1.0
10
0.1/10
1.0
               Blanks indicate data not avallable.
               BDL, below detection limit.
               ND, not detected.
               NH, not meaningful.
               (a) Original source of data:  BAT Verification Sampling 1978-1979 (HS).
Date:   9/25/81
       III.3.1.3-70
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Chemical Precipitation With Filtration
                       (Fe2+,  Lime)

Data source:  Effluent Guidelines                 Data source status:
Point source:  Steam electric                       Not specified
Subcategory:  Cooling tower blowdown               Bench scale
Plant:  5604                                       Pilot scale
References:  3-86,  Appendix E,  p.  22               Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Chem. Ppt., Filtration

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:   Unspecified
Chemical dosages(s):  Add to pH >11.0
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Jar test
                                 REMOVAL  DATA
Sampling: Unspecified
Analysis: Data set 2 (V.7.3.31)
Concentration
Pollutant/parameter
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Arsenic
Copper
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
Antimony
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Lead
Mercury
Selenium
Thallium
Vanadium
Influent
7
180
6
3
780
5
<0.5
<0.5
2
<3
<0.2
<2
<1
24
Effluent
<1
26
3
10
36
5
<0.5
<0.5
<2
<3
<0.2
<2
<1
41
.Percent Detection
removal limit
>86
86
50
NM
95
NM
NM
NM
>0
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
Blanks indicate data not available.
NM, not meaningful.
 Date:   9/25/81                III.3.1.3-71
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
          Chemical  Precipitation With Sedimentation
          (Fe2+,  Lime)
Data source:
Point source
Subcategory:
Plant:  5604
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Steam electric
 Ash transport water
                                                 Data source status:
                                                   Not specified
                                                   Bench scale
                                                   Pilot scale
                                                   Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:   Sed.  (ash pond)/Chem. Ppt., Filtration
3-86, Appendix E,  p.  22
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:   Unspecified
Chemical dosages(s):  Add to pH >11.0
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Jar test
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling;  Unspecified
                                Analysis-.  Data set 2  (V.7.3.31)
  Pollutant/parameter
                    Concentration      Percent   Detection
                 Influent   Effluent   removal      limit
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Antimony
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
Arsenic
Lead
Mercury
Selenium
Thallium
Vanadium

6
2.5
1
4
80
9.5
5.5
300
<1
<3
<0.2
3
<1
27

30
0.5
<0.5
2
23
<0.5
5
25
<1
<3
<0.2
3
<1
17

NM
80
>50
50
80
>95
9
92
NM
NM
NM
0
NM
37
Blanks indicate data not available.
NM, not meaningful.
Date:   9/25/81
                   III.3.1.3-72
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
          Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
          (Fe2+,  Lime)
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  1226
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Steam electric
 Cooling tower blowdown

3-86,  Appendix E,  p. 22
     Data source status:
       Not specified
       Bench scale
       Pilot scale
       Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Chem. Ppt.,  Filtration

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Chemical dosages(s):  Add to pH >11.0
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Jar test
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling;  Unspecified
                                Analysis;  Data set 2 (V.7.3.31)
  Pollutant/parameter
                    Concentration      Percent   Detection
                 Influent    Effluent   removal     limit
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  TOC
                     <20
<20
NM
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
Selenium
Thallium
Vanadium
Total organic carbon

7
4
1.8
5
47
3
0.2
6
0.7
26
<2
<1
27
<20,000

9
3
1.6
3
4
<3
0.2
6
0.4
2
<2
<1
12
<20,000

NM
25
11
40
92
>0
0
0
43
92
NM
NM
56
NM
Blanks indicate data not available.
NM, not meaningful.
Date:  9/25/81
                    III.3.1.3-73
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
                       Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
                       (Fe2+,  Lime)
              Effluent Guidelines
               Steam electric
              Ash transport water
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  1226
References:  3-86,  Appendix E, pp. 22
       Data source  status:
         Not specified
         Bench scale
         Pilot scale
         Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:   Sed.  (ash pond)/Chem. Ppt.,  Filtration

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Chemical dosages(s):  Add to pH >11.0
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Jar test
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling;  Unspecified
                                             Analysis;  Data set 4  (V.7.3.31)
  Pollutant/parameter
                                 Concentration     Percent   Detection
                              Influent    Effluent   removal     limit
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  TOC
                                <20
<20
Blanks indicate data not available.
NM, not meaningful.
NM
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Selenium
Silver
Zinc
Thallium
Vanadium

7
9
2.0
6
14
4
8
0.5
7
<1
78

9
3
3.2
4
7
<3
7
0.6
6
<1
82

NM
67
NM
33
50
>25
13
NM
14
NM
NM
 Date:   9/25/81
                                  III.3,1.3-74
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
                       (Sulfur Dioxide, Lime)

Data source:  EGD Combined Data Base              Data  source  status:
Point source:  Coil coating                         Not specified         	
Subcategory:  Alum                                  Bench  scale            	
Plant:  1057                                        Pilot  scale            	
References:  3-113                                  Full scale            	x
Pretreatment/treatment:  Equal., Chem. Red.  (Cr)/Chem.  Ppt., CoagFloc.,
  Sed. (lagoon)

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Influent:  60,500     Type of  sedimentation:   Lagoon
  m3/day; effluent:  181,000 m3/day          Hydraulic  loading rate:
Chemical dosages(s):  S02:  5,440 kg/day;       Unspecified
  lime:  14,500 kg/day                       Hydraulic  detention  time:
Mix detention time:  Unspecified                Unspecified
Flocculation detention time:  Unspecified    Weir loading  rate:   Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Chem. Red. (Cr)  (0.7  hr/day), Chem. Ppt.  (CN)
  (0.6 hr/day), Coagulant Addition  (inorganic),  continuous operation
  (24 hr/day)
                                  REMOVAL DATA

    Sampling:  Unspecified composite,  flow
              proportion I one h r1     	 	Ana lysis:  Data set 2 (V.7.3.91
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
pH, minimum
pH, maximum
Fluorides
Phosphorus
TSS
1 ron
Oi 1 and grease
Phenols, total
Manganese
Toxic pollutants, u,g/L;
Chromium
Copper
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Di ethyl phthalate
Concentration

Influent Effluent

5.4
6.7
22
0
56
1.5 0
5.0
NO 0
0.05 0.

15,000
11
930
NO
40

6.5
7.8
16
.06
6.0
.36
22
.08
054

7.0
NO
360
BDL
50
Percent
remova I



27

89
76
NM
NM
NM

>99
>99
61
NM
NM
Detect ion
1 i m i t



0.1
0.003
5.0
0.005
5.0
0.005


3.0
1.0
1.0
10
10-
    Blanks indicate data not available.
    BDL, below detection limit.
    ND, not detected.
    NM, not meaningful.
    *Approximate  value.
  Date:   9/25/81              III.3.1.3-75
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
Chemical  Precipitation with Sedimentation
(Lime,  Calcium Hydroxide)
Data  source:  EGD Combined Data Base
                             Data  source status:
Point  source:  Metal  finishing
Subcategory:  Common  metals; precious metals;
  cyanide
Plant:   36623
References:  3-113
Pretreatment/treatment:   Chem. Ox.  (CN), Skimming, Equal./Chem. Ppt.,  Sed.
  (clarifier)
                               Not  specified
                               Bench scale
                               Pilot scale
                               Full scale
DESIGN  OR OPERATING  PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:   Influent:   709,000
  m3/day; effluent:   1,420,000 m3/day
Chemical dosage(s):   Unspecified
Mix detention time:   Unspecified
Flocculation detention time:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:   Continuous operation
  (24 hr/day)
                        Type of sedimentation:   Clarifier
                        Hydraulic  loading rate:
                          Unspecified
                        Hydraulic  detention  time:
                          Unspecified
                        Weir loading rate:   Unspecified
                                      REMOVAL DATA

         Sa IBP 11 no:  2i|-hr composite, flow proportion (one hr)
                                  Concentration
                                                     Analysis: Data set KV.7.3.13)(al
Influent Strea
Po 1 lutant/Darameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
pH, minimum
pH, max 1 mum
Fluorides
Phosphorus
TSS
IDS
1 ron
Tin
Ol 1 and grease
Phenols, total
Gold
Toxic pollutants, M9/L:
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Nickel
Zinc
Cyanide, total
Chloroform
Bis(2-ethylhexyl (phthalate
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
O I ethyl phthalate
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Si Iver
Napthalene
Anthracene
201

3.1
7.2
18
0.90
3.9
170
1.0
0.51
0.3
NO
13

ND
100
790
7.2
780
33
2.0
BOL
ND
BDL
BDL
BOL
ND
BDL
BOL
218

5.5
7.9
0.98
0.31*
1.3
96
0.087
ND
1.5
0.005
750

ND
ND
72
0.39
50
88
BDL
BDL
ND
BDL
BDL
BDL
130
NO
ND
m(b>
Averaae

1.1
7.6
9.5
0.62
2.6
130
1.0
0.27
2.1
0.0025
380

NO
50
130
3.8
120
60
1.2
BDL
ND
BDL
BDL
BDL
65
BDL
BDL
Effluent

7.9
9.1
28
0.68
2,1
120
0.029
ND
2.3
0.005
25

7.0
ND
180
1.0
28
20
ND
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
ND
ND
BDL
BDL
Percent
removal



NH
NM
8
NH
97
>99
1
NH
93

NH
>99
58
71
93
67
>99
NH
NH
NH
NH
NH
>99
NH
NM
Detection
1 inlt



0.1
0.003
5.0
5.0
0.005

5.0
0.005


2.0
3.0
1.0
6.0
1.0

1.0
10
10
10
10
10
0.1/1.0
10
10
         Blanks indicate data not available.
         BOL, below detection limit.
         ND, not detected.
         NH, not meaningful.
         •Approximate value.
         (a)Origlnal source of data:  BAT Verification Sampling 1978-1979(HS).
         (b)Influent stream coded 218 is pre-cyanide treatment (continuous) and stream coded 201 is a
           continuous raw waste stream.
Date:    9/25/81
         III.3.1.3-76
-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
        Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
        (Sodium Hydroxide)
 Data source:   EGD Combined Data Base
 Point source:  Copper
 Subcategory:   Pickle; anneal; hot  roll
 Plant:   36070
 References:  3-113
                                    Data source status:
                                      Not specified
                                      Bench scale
                                      Pilot scale
                                      Full scale
 Pretreatment/treatment:  Neutral./Equal.,  Chem. Ppt., Sed.  (clarifier)
 DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
 Wastewater flow rate:  Influent:   144,000
   m3/day; effluent:  163,000 m3/day
 Chemical dosages(s):  Sodium hydroxide:
   1,630 kg/yr
 Mix detention time:  Unspecified
 Flocculation detention time:   Unspecified
                               Type of sedimentation:  Clarifier
                               Hydraulic loading rate:
                                 Unspecified
                               Hydraulic detention time:
                                 Unspecified
                               Weir loading rate.-  Unspecified
 Unit configuration:  Continuous  operation (24 hr/day)
                                      REMOVAL DATA
      Samp I ing:
24-hr  composite,  flow
proportion (one hr)
                                                 Analysis:  Data set 1 (V.7.3.13)
        Pollutant/parameter
                                     Concentration
                   Influent
Effluent
Percent
remova1
      Classical pollutants, mg/L:
        pH,  minimum                    5.1         7.0
        pH,  maximum                    8.3         9.3
        Fluorides                      1.2         1.2
        Phosphorus                    O.OU        0.59
        TSS                            5.0          31
        Iron                         0.07        0.54
        OiI  and grease                 6.0          15
        Phenols, total                 0.2        0.02
        Manganese                   0.0018       0.019
      Blanks  indicate data not available.
      BOL,  below detection limit.
      NO,  not detected.
      NM,  not meaningful.
      *Approximate value.
                                            0
                                           NM
                                           NM
                                           NM
                                           NM
                                           90
                                           NM
Detection
  I imit
                         0.1
                       0.003
                         5.0
                       0.005
                         5.0
                       0.005
                       0.005
Toxic pollutants, u,g/L:
Copper
Zinc
Cyanide, total
Tet rach 1 o roe thy 1 ene
1,1, 1-Trichloroethane
Ch loroform
Bis(2-ethylhexyl )phthalate
Phenanthrene
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Diethyl phthalate
Naphtha I ene
S i I ve r
Anthracene
Benzene
Methylene chloride
To luene

1,690
530
BDL
7.0
4.0
11
BDL
BDL
BDL
ND
ND
ND
BDL
1,000
10
BDL

3,480
81
BDL
ND
ND
5
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
1.0
11
BDL
2.0
1.0
ND

NM
85
NM
>99
>99
91
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
>99
90
NM

1.0
1.0
5.0
1.0
0.1
1.0
10
10
10
10
0.1
0.1/1.0
10
1.0
1.0
5.0
Date:   9/25/81
                III.3.1.3-77
-------
TREATMENT  TECHNOLOGY:
Chemical Precipitation With  Sedimentation
(Sodium Hydroxide)
Data source:   EGD Combined  Data Base
                             Data source status:
Point source:   Metal finishing
Subcategory:   Common metals;  hexavalent chromium
  cyanide;  oil
Plant:   38052
References:  3-113
Pretreatment/treatment:  Chem.  Red. (Cr)/Chem.  Ppt.
                               Not specified
                               Bench scale
                               Pilot scale
                               Full scale

                                Sed. (clarifier)
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Influent:  40,200
  m3/day;  effluent:  80,400  m3/day
Chemical  dosages (s):  Sodium bisulfite:
  908,000 1/yr; Sodium hydroxide:  320
  m3/hr
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention time:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Continuous operation,
  (14 hr/day)
                       Type  of sedimentation:   Clarifier
                       Hydraulic loading  rate:  Un-
                          specified
                       Hydraulic detention  time:  Un-
                          specified
                       Weir  loading rate:   Unspecified
                                     REMOVAL DATA

      Sampling:  16-hr composite, flow proportion (one hr)
                                                   Analysis: Data set KV.7.3.13)(a )
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
pH, minimum
pH, max! HUD
Fluorides
Phosphorus
TSS
TDS
iron
Tin
Oi 1 and grease
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Cyanide, total
Bis(Z-ethylhexyl)
ph thai ate
Df-n-butyl phthalate
Diethyl phthalate
Trlchloroethylene
Naphthalene
Hexavalent chromium
Arsenic
Methyl one chloride
influent Streamlb)
200

7.2
12
0.68
3.0
56
19,000
7.2
0.19
25

1,100
1,500
500,000
90
NO
20,000
2.1(00,000

59
NO
1(1
8.0
NO

50*
NO
201

2.5
3.6
0.78
2.0
26
1,100
29
0.08*
17

1.UOO
520,000
110,000
DDL
8
26,000
2,500

7I|
BDL
170
5.0
1.0*
88,000

NO
Average

1.8
7.8
0.73
2.5
HI
10,000
18
0.13*
21

1,200
260.000
300,000
52
BDL
23,000
1,200,000

66
BDL
100
6.5
0.5*


ND
Effluent

6.3
8.5
0.90
0.23
24
5,100
0.60
ND
299
NM
98
>99

92*
NM
95*
NM
NM


NM
Detection
1 imlt



0.1
0.003
5.0
5.0
0.005

5.0

2.0
3.0
1.0
30
6.0
1.0
5.0

10
10
10
0.1
0.1/1.0
5.0
0.1/1.0
1.0
      Blanks Indicate data not available.
      BDL, below detection Unit.
      ND, not detected.
      NM, not meaningful.
      •Approximate value.
      (a) Original source of data BAT verification sampling 1978-1979 (HS).
      (b) Influent stream* 200 and 201 are continuous raw waste streams.
Date:   9/25/81
          III.3.1.3-78
-------
TREATMENT  TECHNOLOGY:
Chemical  Precipitation  With Sedimentation
(Sodium Hydroxide)
Data source:   EGD Combined Data Base
Point  source:  Metal  finishing
Subcategory:   Common  metals; precious  metals;
  hexavalent chromium;  cyanide
Plant:   21003
References:  3-113
Pretreatment/treatment:   Equal./Chem.  Ppt., Sed.(lagoon)(b)
                             Data source status>
                               Not  specified
                               Bench  scale
                               Pilot  scale
                               Full scale
DESIGN  OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:   15,000 m3/day
Chemical  dosage(s):  Sodium hydroxide:
  9,460 kg/yr; lime:   272 kg/yr
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention time:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Continuous operation
  (8 hr/day)
                        Type of sedimentation:  Lagoon
                        Hydraulic  loading rate:   Un-
                          specified
                        Hydraulic  detention time:
                          48.0 hr
                        Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
REMOVAL DATA
Sampling: 8-hr composite,
flow orooortion (one

Pol latent/Parameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
pH, minimum
pH, maximum
Fluorides
Phosphorus
TDS
1 ron
01 1 and grease
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Cadmium
Ch rom 1 urn
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Cyanide, total
Carbon tetrachloride
1, 1, 1-Trlchloroethane
Bls(2-ethylhexyl Jphthalate
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Dl-n-butyl phthalate
Diethyl phthalate
Phenanthrene
Silver
Hexavalent chromium
1, 1,2-Trlchloroethane
Naphthalene
Anthracene

hr)
Concent
Influent(b)

7.5
7.5
1.8
1.3
590
1.3
18

BI»
170
250
15
50
350
280
1.0»
1.0
10
BDL
11
BOL
BDL
270
92
2.0
BDL
BDL

Analysis:
ration
Effluent

8.0
8.0
1.2
0.75
680
0.61
2.0

27
35
160
NO
210
70
ND
NO
1.0





6M
25
1.0



Data
Percent
remova 1



33
1)2
NH
53
89

68
79
36
>99
NM
80
>99
NM
0





76
73
50



set 1(V. 7. 3.13)18)
Detection
limit



0.1
0.003
5.0
0.005
5.0

2.0
3.0
1.0
30
6.0
1.0
5.0
1.0
0.1
10
10
10
10
10
0.1/1.0
5.0
1.0
10
10
              Blanks indicate data not available.
              BDL, below detection limit.
              ND, not detected.
              NM, not meaningful.
              * Approximate value.
              (a) Original source of data: BAT Verification Sampling 1978-1979 (HS).
              (b) Influent is a combination of five waste streams.  Three are raw waste-
                 water, one has received chem. ox.(CN), chem. ppt. and sed.; another
                 received chem. red.(Cr), chem. ppt., and sed.
 Date:    9/25/81
           III.3.1.3-79
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
Chemical Precipitation With  Sedimentation
(Sodium Hydroxide; Lime)
Data source:  EGD Combined Data Base
Point source:  Coil coating
Subcategory:  Alum
Plant:  13029
References:  3-113
                            Data source status:
                              Not specified
                              Bench scale
                              Pilot scale
                              Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:
  (tube/plate)
  None/Chem. Red.  (Cr),  Chem.  Ppt.,  Sed.
DESIGN OR OPERATING  PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow  rate:   3,930  L/day
Chemical dosages(s):   NaOH:   8,700 kg/yr;
  Ca(OH)2:  4,300  kg/yr
Mix detention  time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention time:   Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Tube/plate settler-
  continuous operation
                       Type  of sedimentation:  Tube/
                         plate settler
                       Hydraulic loading rate:
                         Unspecified
                       Hydraulic detention time:
                         Unspecified
                       Weir  loading rate:  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Samp lino: 24-hr composite, flow proportion tone
hr)
Analyses:
Data set 2 IV. 7. 3. 91
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, ng/L:
pH, minimum
pH, maximum
Fluorides
Phosphorus
TSS
Iron
Oi I and grease
Phenols, total
Aluminum
Manganese
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Cadmium
Ch rom i urn
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Anthracene
Bis(2-ethyhexyl ) ph thai ate
Fluorene
Ol-n-butyl phthalate
Diethyl phthalate
Hexavalent chromium
Naphthalene
Influent stream
200 201 Averaoe

11
11
0.43
91
970
0.61
2,800
0.14
970
1.5

3.0
180
210
60
NO
280
BDL
220
BDL
12
410
NO
NO

3.1
5.4
340

99
14
8.0
ND
99
0.76

8.0
660,000
230
170
190
38,000
BOL
62
BDL
BDL
68
290,000
BDL

7.0
6.2
170
16
530
7.3
1,400
0.07
530
1.1

5.5
330,000
220
115
95
19,000
BDL
140
BDL
BDL
240
140,000
BDL
Effluent

8.3
8.7
44
1.3
37
0.1
20
0.2
5.1
0.011.

ND
2,500
10
ND
NO
£9
ND
BDL
ND
ND
3.0
ND
BDL
Percent
remova 1



74
97
93
99
98
71
99
99

>99
99
95
>99
>99
>99
NH
96«
NH
NH
99
>99
NM
Detection
1 init



0.1
0.003
5.0
0.005
5.0
0.005
0.04
0.005

2.0
3.0
1.0
30
6.0
1.0
10
10
10
10
10
5.0
10
           Blanks indicate data not available.
           BDL, below detection limit.
           ND, not detected.
           NH, not meaningful.
           •Approximate value.
Date:   9/25/31
         III.3.1.3-80
-------
TREATMENT  TECHNOLOGY:   Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
                        (Lime, Sodium Hydroxide)

Data source:   EGD Combined Data Base               Data source status:
Point  source:   Metal finishing                      Not specified         	
Subcateogory:   Common metals; precious metals;      Bench scale           ^^
  complexed metals;  cyanide; oils; solvents         Pilot scale              "
Plant-.   31032                                        Full scale            ~x~
References:  3-113
Pretreatment/treatment:  Equal., Chem. Ppt.[Ca(OH)2],  Ultrafiltration,
  RO,  Ion.  Exch./Equal.,  Chem. Ppt., Coag Floe,  (polyelectrolyte),
  Sed.  (tank)

DESIGN  OR  OPERATING  PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:   587,000 m3/day        Type  of  sedimentation:  Settling
Chemical dosage(s):  NaOH: 1,200 kg/yr         tank
Mix detention  time:  Unspecified             Hydraulic loading rate:  Un-
Flocculation detention time:  Unspecified      specified
Unit configuration:  Raw  waste - batch       Hydraulic detention time:  Un-
  operation (16 hr/day)                        specified
                                              Weir  loading rate:  Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL DATA
Sa,Mot tna: Grab
Pol lutant /parameter
Classical pollutants, ng/L:
pH, minimum
pH, maximum
Fluorides
TSS
1 ran
Tin
01 1 and grease
Phenols, total
Pal ladluni
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Cyanide, total
Carbon tetrachloride
1,1,1-Trlchloroe thane
Chloroform
Bis(2-ethylhexyl Jphthaiate
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Dlethyl phthalate
Trlchloroetnylene

Concent
Influent

2.8
U.2
8.0
70
81
1.1
950
0.27
53


62
73,000
200
670
980
880
BDL
12
BOL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
0.1*
Analysis
ration
Effluent

11
12
10
12
0.16
NO
68
NO
ND


NO
400
ND
ND
63
U20
NO
28
BDL
BDL
NO
ND
ND
ND
; Data
Pe rcent
removal



MM
83
>99
>99
93
>99
>99


>99
99
>99
>99
9U
52
NH
NH
NM
NH
NH
NH
NH
NH
set 1(V. 7. 3.13>(a)
Detection
limit



0.1
5.0
0.005

5.0
0.005


2.0
3.0
1.0
30
6.0
1.0
5.0
1.0
0.1
1.0
10
10
10
10
0.1
             BDL, below detection I(Kit.
             ND, not detected.
             NH, not meaningful.
             * Approximate value.
             (a) Original source of data: BAT verification sampling 1978-1979 (HS).
Date:   9/25/81               III.3.1.3-81
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
(Sodium Hydroxide,  Coagulant)
Data source-.  EGD  Combined Data Base
Point source:  Coil  coating
Subcategory:  Galvanizing
Plant:  38053
References:  3-113
Pretreatment/treatment:   Chem.  Red. (Cr)/Chem. Ppt.
                            Data source status:
                              Not specified          	
                              Bench scale            	
                              Pilot scale            	
                              Full scale               x
                               Sed. (clarifier,  tank)
DESIGN OR OPERATING  PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow  rate:   Influent:  56,900
  m3/day; effluent:   114,000 m3/day
Chemical dosages(s):   Coagulating agents:
  145 kg/yr; NaOH:   635 kg/yr
Mix detention  time:   Unspecified
Flocculation detention time:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:   Continuous operation
  (24 hr/day)
                       Type of sedimentation:
                         Settling tank, clarifier
                       Hydraulic loading rates
                         4,660 L/hr/m2-clarifier
                       Hydraulic detention time:
                         0.2 hr-clarifier
                       Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                       Hydraulic loading rate:
                         3.99 L/hr/m2  (tank)
                       Hydraulic detention time:
                         6.8 hr (tank)
                                         REHOVAL DATA
Sanollna: 24-hr comoosite.
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, ag/L:
pH, minimum
pH, maximum
Fluorides
Phosphorus
TSS
1 ron
Oi 1 and grease
Phenols, total
A 1 ura I nun
Manganese
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Chrysene
Anthracene
Fluorene
Phenantnrene
Bls(2-ethyhexyl ) ph thai ate
Butyl benzyl phthalata
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Oi ethyl phthalate
Hexavalent chromium
Naphthalene
1 , 2-benzanthracene
flow oroD<
Ct
Inl
200

2.4
12
1.4
56
170
18
420
0.048
4.8
0.32

56
61
56
2,200
ND
123,000
27
ND
85
ND
340
ND
170
420
ND
38
27
>rtfon (one
incentratlon
hr)



Fluent stream(a)
201

2.4
3.3
9.2
54
130
7.8
10
0.02
1.3
0.35

8.0
770
26
530
4,300
520,000
ND
BDL
ND
BDL
45
BDL
BDL
79
280
BDL
ND
Averaae

2.4
7.6
5.3
55
92
13
220
0.034
3.0
0.34

32
420
41
1,400
2,200
320,000
14
BDL
42
BDL
192
BDL
BDL
250
140
22
14
Effluent

7.1
12
ND
1.0
30
0.31
12
0.066
0.54
0.009

ND
280
4.0
ND
ND
560
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
52
ND
ND
92
ND
BDL
BDL

Percent
remova 1



>99
98
67
98
94
NM
82
97

>99
33
90
>99
>99
>99
64»
NM
88*
NM
73
NM
NM
63
>99
77»
64»
(V.7.3.9)
Detection
Unit



0.1
0.003
5.0
0.005
5.0
0.005
0.04
0.005

2.0
3.0
1.0
30
6.0
1.0
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
5.0
10
10
        Blanks indicate data not available.
        BDL, below detection Halt.
        ND, not detected.
        NM, not meaningful.
        (a)lnfluent stream 200 and 201 are coded as continuous waste streans.
        •Approximate value.
 Date:   9/25/81
          III.3.1.3-82
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
Chemical Precipitation With  Sedimentation
(Sodium Hydroxide, Polyelectrolyte)
Data source:   EGD Combined Data Base
Point source:   Metal finishing
Subcategory:   Common Metals;  hexavalent chromium
Plant:   9052
References:   3-113
                            Data source status:
                               Not specified
                               Bench scale
                               Pilot scale
                               Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Chem. Ppt., Sed.  (clarifier)
DESIGN OR  OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Influent:  516,000
  m3/day;  effluent:  1,030,000 m3/day
Chemical dosages (s):  NaOH:   680 kg/yr
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention time:   Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Clarifier - continuous
  (24 hr/day)
                        Type  of sedimentation:   Clari-
                        Hydraulic loading rate:   277
                          L/hr/m2
                        Hydraulic detention  time:  8.2
                        Weir  loading rate:   Unspecified
       Saam 11 na;
                                     REMOVAL DATA

               2U-hr coupes Ite. tl«e proportion lone hrl
                                                    Analysis; Data set KV.7.3.13Ua 1
Concentration
Influent Strean(b)
Pol lutant/oa master
Classical pollutants. «g/L:
Fluorides
Phosphorus
TSS
TDS
Iron
01 1 and grease
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Chronltn
Copper
Lead
Zinc
Bls(z-ethylhexyl) phthalate
Oi-n-butyl phthalate
Dlethyl phthalate
Si Iver
Hexavalent chroaluai
Anthracene
Phenanthrene
200

0.66
2.3
73
20,000
310
7.6

690
15
NO
HO
BDL
BDL
NO
NO
250
BDL
BDL
201

ND
6.0
19
21,000
310
7.9

130
28
38
26
BDL
BDL
BDL
ND
ND
BDL
BDL
Averaae

0.33
U.2
<*6
20,000
310
7.8

410
22
19
33
BDL
BOL
BDL
ND
120
BOL
BDL
Effluent

ND
2.0
19
19,000
310
3.0

18
1.0«
ND
U.4
BOL
BDL
ND
17
ND
ND
NO
Percent
reaova 1

>99
52
59
5
0
62

96
95»
>99
NH
MM
NM
NM
NM
>99
NM
NM
Detection
1 (Bit

0.1
0.003
5.0
5.0
0.005
5.0

3.0
1.0
30
1.0
10
10
0.1/1.0
5.0
10
10
       BDL, below detection Matt.
       ND, not detected.
       NM, not Meaningful.
       •Approximate value.
       (a) Original source of data BAT verification (sapling 1978-1979 (HS).
       (b) Influent streams coded 200 and 201 are continuous raw waste streaas.
Date:   9/25/81
          III.3.1.3-83
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
                       (Alum)

Data source:  Effluent Guidelines                 Data  source  status:
Point source:  Textile mills                        Not specified         	
Subcategory:  Wool finishing                        Bench scale            ]^
Plant:  B                                           Pilot scale            ~~x
References:  3-68, pp. VII-39-41                    Full scale            	
Pretreatment/treatment:  Screen., Equal., Act. Sl./Chem. Ppt.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified           Type of  sedimentation:
Chemical dosages(s):  27-35 mg/L alum  (Al+3)   Unspecified
Mix detention time:  Unspecified             Hydraulic  loading rate:
Flocculation detention time:  Unspecified      0.19-0.24 L/d/m2
Unit configuration:  Reactor/clarifier       Hydraulic  detention  time:
                                               Unspecified
                                             Weir loading rate:   Unspecified

                                  REMOVAL DATA
     Sampling:  Average of 3 experimental runs;
              21 samples for conventional
              pollutants and single 24-hr
composite sample for
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
BODS
COD
TOC
TSS
Toxic pollutants, |ig/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Ch rom i urn
Copper
Lead
Nickel
S i 1 ve r
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
1 , 2-D i ch 1 o robenzene
Toluene
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
toxics
Ana 1 ys i s :
Concentration
Influent

170
990
320
240

22
60
120
23
30
76
110
6,400
32
20
31
1,600
Effluent

33
210
72
20

23
62
41
16
30
57
170
5,700
44
ND
14
150
Data set 1 (V.7.3.32)
Percent Detection
remova 1 limit

81
79
78
92

NM
NM
66
30
0
25
NM
1 1
NM
>99
55
91
     Blanks indicate data not available.
     ND, not detected.
     NM, not meaningful.
 Date:   9/25/81               III.3.1.3-84
-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
          Chemical Precipitation With  Sedimentation
          (Lime)
 Data source:
 Point source:
 Subcategory:
 Plant:  I
 References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Iron and steel
 Combination acid

3-9, pp.  257,297,303
       Data source status:
         Not specified
         Bench scale
         Pilot scale
         Full scale
 Pretreatment/treatment:   Neutral./Chem. Ppt., Sed.
 DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

 Wastewater flow rate:   69.4 L/s
 Chemical dosages(s):  Unspecified
 Mix detention time: Unspecified
 Flocculation detention time:  Unspecified
 Unit configuration: Continuous  operation
                                Type  of  sedimentation:  Settling
                                  lagoon
                                Hydraulic  loading  rate:  Unspeci-
                                  fied
                                Hydraulic  detention  time:  Un-
                                  specified
                                Weir  loading rate:   Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
 Sampling;   Unspecified
                                Analysis;  Data  set 2  (V.7.3.5)
                                  Concentration
     Pollutant/parameter
                  Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
  limit
 Classical pollutants, mg/L:
   TSS                             560
   Oil and grease                   0.7
   Dissolved iron                   62
   Fluoride                        33

 Toxic pollutants,  yg/L:
   Chromium                     17,000
   Copper                          150
   Nickel                        6,000
   Zinc                            750
                                 130
                                 1.5
                                  24
                                 9.1
                                ,800
                                 ND
                                ,200
                                 240
               77
               NM
               61
               72
               89
              100
               13
               68
.Blanks  indicate  data  not  available.
 ND,  not detected.
 NM,  not meaningful.
 Date:   9/25/81
                  III.3.1.3-85
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
Chemical Precipitation With  Sedimentation
(Lime)
Data source:   EGD Combined Data Base
Point source:   Metal finishing
Subcategory:   Common metals;  hexavalent
   chromium; oils
Plant:   44062
References:  3-113
Pretreatment/treatment:   None/Skimming, Equal.
   Chem. Ppt.,  Sed. (clarifier)

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
                              Data source  status:
                                Not specified
                                Bench scale
                                Pilot scale
                                Full scale

                           Chem.  Red.  (Cr),
Wastewater flow rate:  Effluent:   286,000
  m3/day*; influent:  71,600 m3/day*
Chemical dosage(s):  NaOH:   4,760  kg/yr;
  sulfur dioxide:  10,900  kg/yr; phosphoric
  acid:  3,800 kg/yr
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Flocculation  detention time:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Continuous (24 hr/day);
  (24 hr/day)
                        Type  of sedimentation:   Clarifier
                        Hydraulic loading rate:
                          Unspecified
                        Hydraulic detention time:
                          Unspecified
                        Weir  loading rate:  Unspecified

                        post  Cr treatment - continuous
                                      REMOVAL DATA
      Sample: 24-hr composite, time proportion fone hrl
                                                          Analysis: Data set llv.7.3.13llal
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
pH, minimum
pH, maximum
Fluorides
Phosphorus
TSS
TDS
1 ron
Tin
01 1 and grease
Phenols, total
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Cyanide, total
Pheno 1
Carbon tetrachlorlde
1, 1, 1-Trlchloroethane
Chloroform
Bis(2-etnylhexyi )phthalate
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Oi-n-butyl phthalate
Oiethyl phthalate
Trichloroethylene
Phenanthrene
Hexavalent chromium
Naphthalene
Ol-n-octyl phthalate
Anthracene

zoo

6.1
7.2
19
1.1
«60

0.12

590
0.019


1,500
16
ND

36
6.0

ND
0.1*
BOL
47

BDL
39
MO
BDL
1,100
BDL
NO
BOL
InrilM
Ml

6.0
6.9
32
1.6
7.0

0.35

35
0.009


6,600
3B
NO

U"i
110

ND
0.1*
NO
62

BOL
««
HO
ND
6,000
BDL
BOL
ND
mt Streai
202

7.5
8.5
6.2
0.51
11

0.051

19
0.005*


ND
10
NO

11
S.O*

ND
0.1*
BDL
35

ND
31
ND
ND
ND
BDL
ND
ND
Kb)
203

6.9
7.8
4.2
20
19

0.061

6.0
ND


8,400
34
140

33
5.0*

BOL
0.1*
BOL
71

BDL
43
0.1*
BOL
8/000
BDL
NO
BDL

Avo.lc)

6.7
7.6
18
11
173

.16

226
0.01*


4,400
26
BOL

35
36*

BDL
0.1*
BDL
56

BDL
42
BDL
BDL
4,000
BOL
BDL
BDL
Effluent

7.8
9.1
22
0.41
23

0.067

16
0.005*


39
16
ND

13
ND

ND
1.2
BDL
BOL

NO
73
ND
BDL
ND
ND
NO
BDL
Percent
removal



NM
96
87

58

93
NM


99
38
NM

63
>99*

NM
NM
NM
91*

NM
NM
NM
NM
>99
NM
NM
NM
Detect ion
limit



0.1
0.003
5.0
5.0
0.005

5.0
0.005

2.0
3.0
1.0
3.0
6.0
1.0
5.0
10
1.0
0.1
1.0
10
10
10
10
0.1
10
5.0
10
10
10
      Blanks indicate data not available.
      BDL, below detection limit.
      NO, not detected.
      NM, not meaningful.
      •Approximate value.
      (a)Origlnal source of data: BAT Verification Sampling 1978-1979(HS).
      (b)lnfluent streams 200, 201, 202 and 203 are coded as continuous raw waste streams, with flows reported as
        approximate values.
      (c)AII parameters except pH are presented as a flow weighted average.
Date:   9/25/81
         III.3.1.3-86
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
(Alum)
Data source:  Government report
Point source:  Organic and inorganic wastes
Subcategory:  Unspecified
Plant:  Reichhold Chemical,  Inc.
References:  3-113, p. 46
Pretreatment/treatment:  Equal./Chem. Ppt.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:   Unspecified
Chemical dosages(s):  650 mg/L (alum)
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Flocculation Detention time:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Unspecified
                           Data source status:
                             Not specified
                             Bench scale
                             Pilot scale
                             Full scale
                      Type of sedimentation:
                        Unspecified
                      Hydraulic loading rate:
                        Unspecified
                      Hydraulic detention time:
                        Unspecified
                      Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling;  24-hour composite
                       Analysis;  Data set 2 (V.7.3.35)
                                  Concentration
   Pollutant/parameter
        Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
   limit
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
BOD 5
COD
Total phenol
Total phosphorus
SS
TS
DS
Sulfate
Sulfite
Iron
Nitrate

2,400
3,600
320
49
140
4,600
4,400
750
40
40
320

2,200
3,500
220
43
28
4,300
4,300
830
10
ND
310

8
3
31
12
80
6
2
NM
75
>99
3
Blanks indicate data not available.
ND, not detected.
NM, not meaningful.
Date;   9/25/81
        HI.3.1.3-87
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
          Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
          (Alum)
Data  source:
Point source;
Subcategory:
Plant:   2
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Paint manufacturing
 Unspecified

3-20, pp. VI-10-11, Appendix  G
Data source status;
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
 Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Chem. Ppt.

 DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

 Wastewater flow rate:  0.04-0.26 L/S
 Chemical dosages(s):  Unspecified
 Mix detention time:  Unspecified
 Flocculation detention time:  Un-
   specified
 Unit configuration:  Batch operation
                              Type of sedimentation:  Unspecified
                              Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
                              Hydraulic detention time:  Un-
                                specified
                              Weir loading fate:  Unspecified
                                    REMOVAL DATA
Samel ina: Grab and composite
Pol lutant/parameter
Classical pollutants, a>g/L:
B00(5)
COD
TOC
TSS
Oi 1 and grease
Total phenol
TS
TDS
TVS
VSS
Ca 1 c i urn
Magnesium
Sodium
Aluminum
Ba r i urn
Coba 1 t
1 ron
Manganese
Molybdenum
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Antimony
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Si Iver
Thallium
Zinc
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Pheno 1
Ethyl benzene
Nitrobenzene
Toluene
Chloroform
1 , l-Dichloroethane
1,2-Olchloroe thane
Methylene chloride
Tetrachloroethylene
Trlchloroethylene
Analysis: Data set 1 (V. 7. 3. 251
Concentration(a)
Influent

2,800
26,000
7,500
9,500
1,800
<0.076
18,000
8,400
9,300
6,700
340
70
280
160
34
1
93
0.4
0.19

<|Q
<|0
130
< 1 , 700
470
<20
<400
<5
<90
99
99
8
52
NM
60
>99
29
36
NM
99
>99
>97
>98
NM
>80

NM
NM
>88
NM
>77
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
>88
>99
>99
NM
68
NM
NM
NM
NM
>99
NH
10
               Blanks indicate data not available.
               ND, not detected.
               NM, not meaningful.
               (a)Average of several samples-
Date:   9/25/81
                  III.3.1.3-88
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
                       (Alum)

Data source:  Effluent Guidelines                 Data source  status:
Point source:  Textile mills                        Not specified        	
Subcategory:  Knit fabric finishing                 Bench scale           	
Plant:  Unspecified                                 Pilot scale           	
References:  3-68, pp. VII-38                       Full scale           	s
Pretreatment/treatment:  Equal., Lagoon (aerated), Sed. (clarifier)/
  Chem. Ppt.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified           Type of sedimentation:
Chemical dosages(s):  Unspecified              Unspecified
Mix detention time:  Unspecified             Hydraulic loading rate:
Flocculation detention time:  Unspecified      Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Unspecified             Hydraulic detention  time:
                                               Unspecified
                                             Weir loading rate:   Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA

Sampling:  Daily samples for one year,
           phenol and metals sampled once
	per month	Analysis;   Data set  1  (V.7.3.32)

                                     Concentration      Percent    Detection
    Pollutant/parameter	Influent   Effluent   removal	limit

Conventional pollutants, mg/L:
  BOD5                               120         33        73
  COD                              1,100        420        61
  TOC                                200        100        50
  TSS                                370        120        67
  Total phenol                     0.030      0.040        NM
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Zinc

360
30
28
1.8
10
220

280
ND
23
1.7
10
110

22
>99
18
6
0
50
Blanks indicate data not available.
ND, not detected.
NM, not meaningful.
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.3-89
-------
TREATMENT  TECHNOLOGY:
                        Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
                        (Alum,  Lime)
               Effluent Guidelines
                Paint manufacturing
               Unspecified

              3-20, pp. VI-10-11, Appendix G
Data source:
Point source
Subcategory:
Plant:  5
References:
Pretreatment/treatment:   None/Chem Ppt.,  Oil Sep.
Data source status:
  Not  specified
  Bench  scale
  Pilot  scale
  Full scale
DESIGN  OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:   0.04-0.26 L/s
Chemical dosages(s):   Unspecified
Mix  detention time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention time:  Un-
  specified
Unit configuration:  Batch operation
                                           Type of sedimentation:  Unspecified
                                           Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
                                           Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
                                           Weir loading  rate:  Unspecified
                                      RCMOVAL DATA
                Stapling; Crab and composite
                                                Analysis:  Pita tat I CV.7.3.251
                 Pollutant/oaraaeter
                                      Concentration -	
                                      .fluent   Effluent
                                                   Percent
                                                   removal
     Detection
      llult
Classical pollutants. ng/L (a):
B00<5)
COD
TOC
TSS
01 1 and grease
Total phenol
TS
TDS
TVS
vss
Calclua
Magnet tun
Sod 1 un
A 1 UK 1 nun
Bariun
Cobalt
Iron
Manganese
Molybdenum
Tin
Tltanlu*
Toxic pollutants, M9/L:
Ant loony
Beryl Hun
c*amlum
Chromium
Coppe r
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Silver
Thai Mm
Zinc
Bls(2-ethylhexyi) phthalate
0 1 -n-buty 1 phtha 1 a te
Pentach 1 oropheno 1
Phenol
Benzene
Cthylbenzene
Nitrobenzene
To 1 uene
Naphthalene
Carbon tetrachlorlde
1,2-Dlchloroethane
1, l-Dlchlorethylene
Methyl one chloride
Trlchloroethylene
Isophorone
1, 1,2-Trichloroethane
1, l-Dlchloroethylene
l.2-Tran«-dlehloroethylene

U8,000
00,000
a, ooo
13,000
1,300
0.100
26,000
11,000
7,600
1,200
650
14
1,500
60
16
1
38
I.I
<0. 1
0.5
0.67

<35
<9
<20
27,000
<620
110
l99
98
23
67
14
87
99
3 It
14
40
83
>38
NM
>88
34
NN
>70
>76

NM
NM
NM
37
NM
NM
0
69
NH
NM
NM
68
80
98
99
NM
NM
NM
>99
NM
86
NM
>99
NM
94
>99
NM
NM
NM
NM
                 Blanks Indicate data not available.
                 ND, not detected.
                 NM, not Meaningful.
                 (a) Average or four saiaples.
Date:   9/25/81
                                 III.3.1.3-90
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
                       Chemical  Precipitation With Sedimentation
                       (Alum,  Lime)
              Effluent Guidelines
               Paint manufacturing
              Unspecified

             3-20, pp. VI-10-11,  Appendix G
Pretreatment/treatment:   Oil Sep./Chem Ppt.
Data source:
Point source;
Subcategory:
Plant:  4
References:
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:   0.04-0.26 L/s
Chemical dosages(s):   Unspecified
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention time:   Un-
  specified
Unit configuration:  Batch operation
                                          Type of sedimentation:  Unspecified
                                          Hydraulic loading rate:   Unspecified
                                          Hydraulic detention time:   Unspeci-
                                            fied
                                          Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL DATA
Semolina: Grab and comoosite
Pollutant/aerometer
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
B00(5)
COD
TOC
TSS
01 1 and grease
Total phenol
TS
TOS
TVS
VSS
Calcium
Magnesium
Sod i urn
A 1 urn 1 nun
Barium
Coba 1 1
Iron
Manganese
Molybdenum
Tin
Titanium
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Antimony
Beryllium
Cadm i urn
Ch rom i urn
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Silver
Thallium
Zinc
Oi-n-butyl phthalate
Pheno 1
Benzene
Ethy 1 benzene
To 1 uene
Naphthalene
Carbon tetrachloride
Chloroform
1 ,2-Dichloropropane
Methylene chloride
1,1,1 Trichloroethane
Tetrachioroethylene
1, 1,2-Trichloroethane
Trichloroethylene

Concent n
Influent

3,300
150,000
13.000
14,000
830
1. 1
66,000
52,000
17,000
11,000
1,300
35
230
37
4.3
<0.07
12 .
0. 10
<0.06
0.46
3.3

<25

<47
<57
500
98
NM
93
92
90
96
48
79
NM
79
>99
NM
>83
>M8
NM
>78
>94

NM
NM
NM
NM
>87
NM
NM
78
NM
NM
NM
>99
>99
96
50
98
96
70
>99
NM
58
13
NM
95
>99
>99

             ND, not detected.
             NM, not Meaningful.
             (a)Average of three samples, except organlcs:
                                        two samples.
 Date:   9/25/81
                                 III.3.1.3-91
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
(Alum, Polymer)
Data source: Effluent  Guidelines
Point source: Auto  and other laundries
Subcategory:  Power laundries
Plant: N
References: 3-84, Appendix C
Pretreatment/treatment:   Screen, Equal./Chem. Ppt.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
                            Data source status:
                              Not specified
                              Bench scale
                              Pilot scale
                              Full scale
Wastewater  flow rate:   15.1 m3/d
Chemical dosages(s): Alum-2,800 mg/L,
  polymer-200  mg/L
Mix detention  time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention time: Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Circular clarifier, 4.92
  m3 with mix  tank
                     Type of sedimentation:  Clarifier
                     Hydraulic loading rate: Unspecified
                     Hydraulic detention time: 0.33  day
                     Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                   REMOVAL DATA
       Sampling;  Composite and grab
          Pol Iutant/parameter
                    Analysis:  Data  set  I (V.7.3.1)
              Concentration
           Influent   Effluent
Percent
removaI
       Classical pollutants, mg/L:
         BOD{5)                        160       57
         COD                         240       130
         TOC                          63       40
         TSS                          HO       46
         Oil and grease                15        4
         Total phenol               0.038     0.028
         Total phosphorus              7.0       1.6
       Blanks indicate data  not available.
       BDL,  below detection  limit.
       ND, not detected.
       NM, not meaningful.
                                 64
                                 46
                                 37
                                 NM
                                 73
                                 26
                                 77
Detection
  limit
Toxic pollutants, u.g/L:
Cadmium
Ch rom i urn
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Si 1 ve r
Zinc
Phenol
Toluene
Tetrachloroethylene
T r i ch 1 o roe thy 1 ene
Cyanide
Chloroform
Methyl chloride
Ch 1 orod i b romome thane
Bis (2-ethylhexyl Jphtha late
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Di-n-octyl phthalate

51
39
140
71
55
14
610
ND
5
2
0.5
<2
ND
ND
BDL
ND
ND
ND
ND

12
34
31
66
50
1 1
240
2
3
100
12
<2
70
38
ND
67
36
7
5

76
13
78
7
9
21
61
NM
40
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM

2
4
4
22
36
5
1
0.07
0. 1

0.5

5
0.4
0.9
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.89
  Date:   9/25/81
         III.3.1.3-92
-------
TREATMENT  TECHNOLOGY:
                        Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
                        (Alum,  Polymer)
               Effluent Guidelines
                Paint manufacturing
               Unspecified
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  15
References:  3-20, pp.  VI-10-11,  Appendix G
Pretreatment/treatment:   None/Chem Ppt.
Data source status-.
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
DESIGN OR  OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  0.004-0.02 L/s
Chemical dosages(s):  Unspecified
Mix  detention time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention time:  Un-
  specified
Unit configuration:  Continuous operation
                                          Type of sedimentation:   Unspecified
                                          Hydraulic loading rate:   Unspecified
                                          Hydraulic detention time:  Unspeci-
                                            fied
                                          Weir loading  rate:   Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL DATA
Sampling: Grab and composite
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
BOD(5)
COD
TOC
TSS
Oi 1 and grease
Total phenol
Total solids
TDS
TVS
Calcium
Magnesium
Sod I urn
A 1 urn i num
Ba r i urn
Coba 1 1
Iron
Manganese
Molybdenum
Tin
Titanium
Toxic pollutants, M9/L:
Antimony
Beryl 1 iun
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Si Iyer
Tha 1 1 i urn
Zinc
Di-n-butyl ph thai ate
Carbon tetrachloride
Chloroform
Pheno I
1 , l-Dichloroethylene
1 , 2-Trans-d i ch 1 o roe thy 1 ene
Methyl ene chloride
Analysis: Data set 1 (V.7.3.25)
Concent rat
Influent

8, MOO
18,000
9,300
14,000
1.800
0.23
18,000
4,000
11,000
74
22
72
170
40
0.83
37
0.23
0.23
0.9
8.3

45
50
NM
65
91
43
86
56
65
48
48

NM
NM
38
95
38
NM
86
93
NM
NM
NM
78
>99
94
NM
NM
>99
27
92
          Blanks indicate data not available.
          ND, not detected.
          NM, not meaningful.
          (a)Average of three samples, only one sample for organics.
Date:   9/25/81
                                III.3.1.3-93
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
(Alum, Polymer)
Data source:   Effluent Guidelines
Point source:   Paint manufacturing
Subcategory:   Unspecified
Plant:  8
References:  3-20,  pp. VI-10-11, Appendix G
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Chem. Ppt.
                            Data source  status:
                              Not specified
                              Bench scale
                              Pilot scale
                              Full scale
DESIGN OR  OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  0.04-0.26 L/s
Chemical dosages(s):  Unspecified
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention time:  Unspeci-
  fied
Unit configuration:  Batch operation
                  Type of sedimentation:   Unspecified
                  Hydraulic loading  rate:   Unspecified
                  Hydraulic detention  time:  Unspecified
                  Weir loading rate:   Unspecified
                                   REMOVAL DATA
Semolina: Grab and composite
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
800(5)
COD
TOC
TSS
01 1 and grease(b)
Total phenol
TS
TDS
TVS
VSS
Calcium
Magnesium
Sod i un
A 1 urn i num
Ba r i urn
Cobalt
1 ron
Manganese
Molybdenum
Tin
Titanium
Toxic pollutants. ug/L:
Antlmony(c)
Beryl 1 i UM
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
SI Iver
Thai 1 ium
Zinc
Benzene
Ethyl benzene
To 1 uene
Chloroform
1 ,2-Dichloroethane
Methylene chloride
Tetrachloroe thy Lena
1, 1, l-Trlchloroethane

Concentrat
Influent

3,900
It 1,000
8,500
16,000
610
0.25
17.000
1,700
7,600
6,200
370
71
180
130
7.6
99
93
NM
84
NM
NM
>36
>97

NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
88
NM
NM
NM
>75
NM
>99
NM
NM
NM
NM
NH
NM
             Blanks indicate data not available.
             ND, not detected.
             NM, not meaningful.
             (a)Average of three samples, only one sample for organics.
             (b)Average of two  samples.
 Date:   9/25/81
         III.3.1.3-94
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
(Alum,  Polymer)
Data  source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point sources  Paint  manufacturing
Subcategorys  Unspecified
Plant:   1
References:  3-20, pp. VI-10-11,  Appendix G
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Chem Ppt.
                             Data  source status:
                               Not specified
                               Bench scale
                               Pilot scale
                               Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING  PARAMETERS
Wastewater flow rate:   0.04-0.26  L/s
Chemical dosages(s):   Unspecified
Mix detention time:   Unspecified
Flocculation detention time:  Un-
  specified
Unit  configuration:   Batch operation
                  Type of sedimentation:  Unspecified
                  Hydraulic loading rates  Unspecified
                  Hydraulic detention times   Unspecified
                  Weir loading  rates  Unspecified
                                     REMOVAL DATA
                      Crab and coaooalte
                                                       Data sat I IV.7.3.251
                Pol lutant/oaraaeter
                                        mtrmttantml
                                                   Percent
                                                      il
                                 Detection
                                  I lelt
Classical pollutants, ng/L:
BOO! 9)
COO
TOC
TSS
Oi I and greaee
Total phenol
TS
TDS
TVS
VSS(b)
Calciusj
MagnesluD
Sodlin
AluainiM
Barluei
Cobalt
Iron
Manganese
Molybdenue
Tin
Tltanlwa
Toxic pollutanta, |ig/L:
Antlnony
Beryllluai
Cadalu*
Ch roe, lull
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Si Iver
Thai lule
Zinc
Benzene
Ethyl benzene
Toluene
Chlorofona
l,2-D!chloroa thane
Me thy lane chloride
Tetrachloroethyiene
1,1 , l-Trlchloroethane
1,1 Dlchloroethylene
1,1 Dichloropropano
Bla(z-ethylhexyi) phthalate
Trlchloroethylen*

3,000
51. 000
10,000
11,000
1,200
<0.055
16,000
5,100
11,000
5.300
80
>90
>99

NM
NM
NM
89
80
NM
>96
51
18
NM
65
>99
70
73
>99
>99
98
>99
NM
NM
>99
NM
93
               Blanks Indicate data not available.
               NO, not detected.
               NM, not s»anlngrul.
               (a)Metal* and olaaaloal pollution concentrations represent an average or
                 three saeples, only one saeple for organlca.
               (b)Average or two Maples.
 Date:   9/25/81
          III.3.1.3-95
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
                       (Alum,  Anionic  Polymer)

Data source:  Effluent Guidelines                 Data source status:
Point source:  Textile mills                       Not specified         	
Subcategory:  Knit fabric finishing                Bench scale           	
Plant:  Q                                          Pilot scale           	a
References:  3-68, pp. VII-41-43                   Full scale            	
Pretreatment/treatment:  Screen.,  Equal., Act.  Sl.,/Chem. Ppt.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:   Unspecified          Type of  sedimentation:
Chemical dosages(s):  20-30 mg/L alum           Unspecified
  (A1+3); 0.75-1.0 mg/L anionic polymer     Hydraulic loading rate:
Mix detention time:  Unspecified               0.15-0.19 L/d/m2
Flocculation detention time:  Unspecified   Hydraulic detention time:
Unit configuration:  6.25 m3 reactor/           Unspecified
  clarifier                                 Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA

Sampling:  24-hr composite,  pilot
	study sampling	Analysis;   Data  set  1  (V.7.3.32)

                                 Concentration(a)      Percent    Detection
   Pollutant/parameter	Influent    Effluent    removal	limit

Classical pollutants, mg/L:
BOD 5
COD
TOC
TSS
8.2
270
30
45
4.3
180
22
65
48
33
27
MM
Blanks indicate data not available.
NM, not meaningful.
(a)Average of three experimental runs,  19 samples.
 Date:   9/25/81                III.3.1.3-96
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant: 6
References:  329,
         (Alum,  Lime,

Effluent Guidelines
 Paint manufacturing
Unspecified
                                      olymer)
    pp.
VI-10-11, Apper
: Unspecified/
dix G
Chem. Ppt.
                Data source status:
                  Not specified
                  Bench scale
                  Pilot scale
                  Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow  rate:   0.04-0.26 L/s
Chemical dosages(s):  Unspecified
Mix detention  time: Unspecified
Flocculation detention time:  Un-
  specified
Unit configuration: Batch operation
                            Type of sedimentation:   Unspecified
                            Hydraulic loading  rate:   Unspecified
                            Hydraulic detention  time:  Unspeci-
                              fied
                            Weir loading rate:   Unspecified
                                     I EMOVAL DATA
Saieollna: Grab and caanoslt*
concent r
Pol lutant/oaraattter In 'luant
Classical pollutant*, »9/L:
B00(5)
COD 3
TOC
TSS :
Oil and grease
Total phenol
TS 1
TDS
TVS 1
VSS
CalcliM
Magma iua
Sod lim
AliMlniM
Barlua
Cobalt
Iron
Manganese
Holybdenun
Tin
Tltaniu*
Toxic po Mutants, tig/L:
Antimony
Beryl 1 Iua
Cadnluei
Chroolua
Copper
Cyanide
Nickel
Sliver
Than Iua
Zinc 3
Phenol
Benzene
Cthylbenzerw
To 1 uene
Naphthalene
Carbon tetrachlorlde
Chlororona
1, l-Dfchloroathylene

,100
,000
'.800 •
1,000
980
0.27
1,000
..100
i.OOO
1,500
300
HZ
250
230
0.23
0.83
130
0.87
0.13
0.6
6.7

<25
99
98
18
60
6
93
85
30
55
NM
>99
>78
>OI|
>99
NM
>87
>67
>97

NM
NM
NM
NM
77
NM
NM
NM
NM
91
>33
90
>99
81
>33
>99
91
>99
NM
NM
>99
NM
NM
NM
>99
                Blanks Indicate data not available.
                NO, not detected.
                NM. not Meaningful.
                (a)Average or three samples, except
                                     organlcs: two samples.
Date:   9/25/81
                  III
.3.1.3-97
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
                       (Alum, Lime, Ferric  Chloride)

Data source:  Effluent Guidelines                  Data source status:
Point source:  Paint manufacturing                  Not specified         	
Subcategory:  Unspecified                           Bench scale           	
Plant:  20                                          Pilot scale           ^^
References:  3-20, pp. VI-10-11, Appendix G        Full scale            	x_
Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Chem.  Ppt.,  Sed.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  0.02-0.04 L/s      Type of  sedimentation:  Unspecified
Chemical dosages(s):  Unspecified         Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Mix detention time:  Unspecified          Hydraulic detention time:  Unspeci-
Flocculation detention time:  Un-           fied
  specified                               Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Batch  operation
Sampling: Grab and composite
Pol lutant/DJirameter 1

UOD(5)
COO
IOC
ISS
Oil a nil grease
Total phenol
Tota 1 sol ids
TI)S
TVS
Ca Icium
Mngncs i um
Sod i um
A 1 um i num
Bar Him
Coba 1 t
1 ron
Manganese
Mo 1 ybdenum
Tin
T i tan turn
Ant imony
Be ry 1 1 i um
Cadmium
Ch rom i um
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Si Ivor
Thai 1 u m
Zinc
Di-n-butyl phthalnte
Bcnzenf-
Ethyl benzene
To 1 uene
Carbon tetrachloride
Ch lo reform
MclhylGno chloride
Tetrachlorocthylene
I.I.I -Tnchloroe thane
1 . 1 ,?-T richlo roe thane
1 , 2-0 ichlo roe thane
Trichloroethylene
Blanks indicate data not available
REMOVAL DATA
Analysis: Data set 1 (V. 7. 3. 251
Concent
nfluent

1,700
20, 000
'1.700
11,000
100
<0.09
19,000
5,000
7,500
1,500
18

110
3,800
19
55
1
510
NO
2.800
39
NM
77
NM
NM
NM
NM
13
NM
NM
80
>25
NM
>38
NM
>97
NM
>99
NM
>99
NM
NM
>99
NM
>99
NM
NM

               ND. not detected.
               NM, not meaningful.
               (aJAverage or three samples, two tamples for organic*.
  Date:   9/25/81              III.3.1,3^98
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
(Alum, Aluminum Sulfate, Polymer)
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point sources  Paint manufacturing
Subcategory:  Unspecified
Plant:  24
References:  3-20, pp. VI-10-11, Appendix G
                           Data source status;
                             Not specified
                             Bench scale
                             Pilot scale
                             Full scale
Pretreatment/treatments  Neutral., Oil Sep./Chem. Ppt.,  Sed.
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  0.26-0.52 L/s
Chemical dosages(s):  Unspecified
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention time:  Un-
  specified
Unit configuration:  Batch operation
                 Type of sedimentation:  Unspecified
                 Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
                 Hydraulic detention  time:  Unspecified
                 Weir loading rate:   Unspecified
                                REMOVAL DATA
    Sampling;  Grab and composite
                      Analysis:   Data set I  (V.7.3.25)
Concent rat ion (a )
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
BOD(5)
COD
Total phenol
Tota 1 sol ids
Toxic pollutants, jig/L:
Ethyl benzene
Toluene
Chloroform
Methyl ene chloride
1, 1,2-Trichloroethane
1,1, l-Trichloroethane
Phenol
Bi s(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Tetrachloroethylene
T r i ch 1 o roethy 1 ene
Influent

16,000
36,000
0.20
41

1,900
2,900
US
130,000
<7
380
ND
99
>99
>99
   Blanks indicate data not available.
   NM, not meaningful.
   (a)Average of three samples, except  total phenol: two samples.
 Date:   9/25/81
          III.3.1.3-99
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
(Alum, NaOH, H2S04)
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Foundry Industry
Subcategory:  Aluminum foundry-die casting
Plant:  574-C
References:  3-83, pp. V-13, VI-49-56, VII-45
                           Data source status:
                             Not specified
                             Bench scale
                             Pilot scale
                             Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  Emulsion Breaking/Chem. Ppt.
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  4.3 L/s
Chemical dosages(s):  Unspecified
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention time:  Un-
  specified
Unit configuration:  Continuous operation
                 Type of sedimentation:  Basin
                 Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
                 Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
                 Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL DATA
Same I i no : Unsoec if ted

Ana lysis:
Concentration
Po 1 1 utant/oa rameter
Toxic pollutants, ng/L:
Cyanide
Lead
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Di ethyl phthalate
2, 4-D i methy 1 pheno 1
Phenol
p-Ch 1 o ro-m-c reso 1
Anthracene/phenanthrene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Chrysene
Fluoranthene
Fluorene
Naphtha lene
Pyrene
Chloroform
Methy lene chloride
1,1, l-Trichloroethana
Acenaphtha lene
Benzo(a )anthracene
Tet rach I o roethy 1 ene
Trichloroethylene
Xylene
Ch rom i urn
Influent

BDL
200
1,300
5,500
690
74
730
41
16
1 10
BDL
53
780
370
800
160
80
BDL
BDL
NO
20
NO
ND
ND
75
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
                        Chemical Precipitation With  Sedimentation
                        (Polymer)
              Effluent Guidelines
               Paint  manufacturing
              Unspecified
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  14
References:  3-20, pp.  VI-10-11, Appendix G
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Chem. Ppt.
DESIGN OR OPERATING  PARAMETERS
Data source  status;
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
Wastewater flow  rate:   0.004-0.02 L/s
Chemical dosages(s):   Unspecified
Mix detention  time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention time:  Unspeci-
  fied
Unit configuration:  Batch operation
                                           Type of  sedimentation:  Unspecified
                                           Hydraulic  loading rate:  Unspecified
                                           Hydraulic  detention time:  Unspeci-
                                              fied
                                           Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                     REMOVAL DATA
Sampling: Grab and composite
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants. Mg/L:
B00(5|
COO
TOC
TSS
Oi 1 and grease
Total phenol
TS
TDS
TVS
VSS
Calcium
Magnesium
Sod i u*
A 1 it* 1 num
Ba r i urn
Coba 1 t
( ron
Manganese
Ho 1 ybdenum
Tin
Titanium
Toxic pollutants, U.9/L:
Antimony
Beryl 1 ium
Cadmium
Ch row i urn
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Nicker
SI Iver
Thallium
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl Iphthalate
Oi-n-buty! ph thai ate
Pheno I
Ethyl benzene
Toluene
Chloroform
1 , 2-J_rans-dichtoroetny(ene
Methyl one chloride
T r i ch 1 o roe t hy 1 ene
Benzene
Carbon tetrachloride
Tetrachloroetnytene

ConceQ
1 nf 1 uent

14,800
28,000
9,300
12,000
1,100
0.71
17,000
5. 100
13,000
8,300
ISO
II
<63
85
1.5
0.08
60
10
0.08
0.2
6,5

<25
<6
45
95
550
<20
5,000
9,400
<20
99
98
58
94
82
96
>99
>89
51
NM
99
80
75
99
99
76
75
9ft

<28
<33
NM
>74
27
NM
97
99
NM
NM
NM
89
>97
>99
NM
81
39
NM
NM
NM
NM
35
>99
NM
                  Blanks indicate data not avallable,
                  NO, not detected.
                  NH, not Meaningful.
                  (a{Average or two  samples, except organic* and VSS; one sample.
  Date:   9/25/81
                                  III.3.1.3-101
-------
TREATMENT  TECHNOLOGY:
       Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
       (BaCl2)
Data source:   Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Ore mining and dressing
Subcategory:   Uranium mine
Plant:   See below
References:  3-66, pp. V-90,91
Pretreatment/treatment:   None/Chem. Ppt.
                                    Data source status:
                                      Not specified
                                      Bench  scale
                                      Pilot  scale
                                      Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Chemical  dosages(s):  See  below
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention time:   Un-
  specified
Unit configuration:  Unspecified
                        Type  of sedimentation:   Unspecified
                        Hydraulic loading  rate:   Unspecified
                        Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
                        Weir  loading rate:   Unspecified
                                     REMOVAL DATA
        Samp 11 no:  2U-hr composite
                                             Analysis:  Data set I  IV.7.3.231
                                  Total radlun
              Chemical dosage, Concentration.   oCl/l
                                             Percent Concentrat
                                                           Issolved
                                                           Ion! pCI,
                                                                 radium
        9412
        994
        Blanks Indicate data not available.
        (a)Use In system: tertiary.
  Date:   9/25/81
                  III.3.1.3-102
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:     Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
                          (BaCl2)

Data source: Effluent Guidelines                  Data source status:
Point source: Ore mining and dressing               Not specified         	
Subcategory: Uranium mine/mill                      Bench scale           	
Plant: 9411                                         Pilot scale           _
References: 3-66, pp. V-86,87                       Full scale            	
Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Chem. Ppt.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified   Type of sedimentation:  Unspecified
Chemical dosages(s):  Unspecified    Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Mix detention time:  Unspecified     Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention time:  Un-    Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
  specified
Unit configuration:  Unspecified

                                  REMOVAL DATA
Semolina: 24-hr composite and
qrab
Ana Ivsii
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
COD
TOC
TSS
Toxic pollutants, u.g/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Asbestos, fibers/L
Ch rom i urn
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Se 1 en i urn
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phtha-
late(a)
Radium(226) (total), pCi/L
Influent

37
8
280

50
3
2.3E9
50
40
UO
3.8
5
60

l»7
57
Effluent

17
88
98

NM
>33
75
50
>50
NM
87
NM
50

95
>96
set 1 (V.7.3.23)
Detection
limit

2
1
1

200
2
2.2E5
20
10
50
0.5
5


0.2
1
     NM, not meaningful.
     (a)Possibly due to tubing in sampling apparatus.
 Date:   9/25/81                III.3.1.3-103
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation  (BaCl2)
Data source: Effluent Guidelines
Point source: Ore mining and dressing
Subcategory:  Uranium mine
Plant: 9408
References: 3-66, pp. V-84,85
Pretreatment/treatment: Unspecified/Chem. Ppt.
                    Data source status:
                      Not specified
                      Bench scale
                      Pilot scale
                      Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate: Unspecified
Chemical dosages(s):  Unspecified
Mix detention time: Unspecified
Flocculation detention time: Unspeci-
  fied
Unit configuration: Unspecified
          Type of sedimentation: Unspecified
          Hydraulic loading rate: Unspecified
          Hydraulic detention time: Unspecified
          Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                   REMOVAL DATA
     Sampling;  24-hr composite and grab
                Analysis;  Data set I  (V.7.3.231
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
COD
TOC
TSS
Total phenol
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Arsenic
Asbestos, fibers/L
Ch rom i urn
Copper
Lead
Silver
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl )
phthalate (a)
Radium( 226) (total), pCi/L
Radium(226) (dissolved), pCi
Influent

12
9
270
0.01

8
I.6E9
450
110
180
99
Detection
1 imit

2
1
1
0.002

2
2.2E5
20
10
50
10
5

0.2
1
1
     NM,  not meaningful.
     (a)Possibly due to tubing used in  sampling apparatus.
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.3-104
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
(Sodium Carbonate)
Data source:   EGD Combined Data Base
Point source:   Copper
Subcategory:   Pickle
Plant:  37032
References:  3-113
Pretreatment/treatment:  Neutral./Chem.  Ppt.,  Sed
                            Data source  status:
                              Not  specified
                              Bench  scale
                              Pilot  scale
                              Full scale
                            , (clarifier)
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater  flow rate:  322,000 m3/day
Chemical dosages(s):  Na2C03:  73,000
  kg/yr; sodium hydroxide:  450 kg/yr
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention times  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Continuous operation
  (24 hr/day)
                       Type of sedimentation:  Clarifier
                       Hydraulic  loading rate:
                         Unspecified
                       Hydraulic  detention time:
                         Unspecified
                       Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                     REMOVAL DATA
                 Snpllng:
                       24-hr composite, flow
                       proportion lone hrl
                                            Anatvall! Data let 1 IV.7.3.131
Pol lutant/oaraaMter
Classical pollutants, «g/L:
pH, UlnfSHM
pH, anxious)
Fluorides
Phosphorus
TSS
Iron
01 1 snd grease
Phenols, total
Manganese
Cobalt
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Cadei lust
ChrostiiM
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Cyanide, total
Phenol
Chlorofona
Bls(2-e thy the xyl)ph the late
Ol-n-butyl phthalate
Dlethyl phthalate
T r 1 ch 1 oroethy 1 one
SI Iver
Hexavalent chromiM
Ant lawny
Arsenic
Berylllua
Mercury
Selenlua
Thai Hun
2,4-Olcnlorophenol
Methylene chloride
Tetrachloroathylene
Toluene
Concent
Influent

2.5
9.4
1.0
0.38
5.0*
0.01
BDL
0.005*
0.0018
0.0013

12
0.9
7,700
270
2.0
2,000
10
BDL
3.0
NO
BDL
ND
ND
5.6
ND
1.3
IS
0.6
1 1*
730
0.9
1.0
13
3.0
BOL
ration
Effluent

B.4
B.9
0.9B
0.14
5.0*
0.11
BOL
0.005*

0.0088

4.0
430
1,300
15

330
5.0*
ND
2.0
BDL
BDL
BDL
1.0
22
520
57
6B
11
11
280
41
ND
31
17
BDL
Percent
resttva 1



2
63
NH
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM

67
NM
B3
94
NH
«4
NH
NM
33
NH
NM
NM
NH
NH
NH
NH
NM
NM
NM
96
NM
>99
NM
NH
NH
Detection
1 l»lt



0.1
0.003
5.0
0.005
5.0
O.O05
0.005


2.0
3.0
1.0
30
6.0
1.0
5.0
10
1.0
10
10
10
0.1
0.1/1.0
5.0
0.1/100
0.1/10
0.1

0.1/200
0.1/40
1.0/10
1.0
1.0
5.0
                Blanks Indicate data not available.
                BOL, below detection Unit.
                NM, not Meaningful.
                •Approximate value.
 Date:   9/25/81
          III.3.1.3-105
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
                         Chemical Precipitation With Sedimentation
                         (Sodium Carbonate)
Data  source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:   Electrical and electronic
  components
Subcategory:  Unspecified
Plant:   30172
References:  3-31, pp. IX-25-28, 63
Pretreatment/treatment:   None/Chem.  Ppt.
                                                       Data source  status:
                                                          Not specified
                                                          Bench scale
                                                          Pilot scale
                                                          Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
Wastewater flow rate:   3.77 m3/day
Chemical dosages (s):  Sodium carbonate
Mix  detention  time:  Unspecified
Flocculation Detention  time:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  6,610 liter  tank
                                                  Type of sedimentation:
                                                    Unspecified
                                                  Hydraulic loading rate:
                                                    Unspecified
                                                  Hydraulic detention time:
                                                    Unspecified
                                                  Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                      REMOVAL DATA
                 Saamllna: Three 2U-hour coamo.ltes
                                              .*.na|y».t»!  Data set t IY.7.MII
                   Pol lutant/oaraeteter
  Concyntratl
Influent
itlpnla)
Affluent
                                                      Percent
                                                      removal
                 Classical pollutants, ag/L:
                  Oil and grease
                  TOC
                  BOD
                                                  14
                                                 160
                                                             Detection
                                                              Unit
TSS
Phenol
Fluoride
pN, pH units
Calcluai
Magneslusi
Sodlun
A 1 am 1 nun
Manganese
Vanadluai
Boron
Barluai
Holybdenuia
Tin
Yttriuai
CoBa 1 t
Iron
Tltaniun
Palladlm
TellurluK
Platlnu*
Gold
Toxic pollutants, M9/L:
Antlsnny
Arsenic
Beryllium
Cadnluai
Chroalua
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Thai lluai
Zinc
Cyanide
190
0.01
160
<2
86
31
640
12
5.9
0.16
350
200
1.6
3.0
17
2.6
1,900
0.31
0.32
0.29
0.09


92
250
4
1,100
4,700
<50
690,000

18,000
<20
60
2
1,500,000
<5
17
0.08
76
7.3
29
18
13,000,000
0.68
0.55
0.024
400,000
12,000
0.17
0.39
99
>95
99
86
>99
96
78


>84
96
>75
>99
99
NM
99
NM
96
NM
>97
NM
99
NM
                 Blanks indicate data not available.
                 NM, not weanlngful.
                 (a(Values presented as "less than" the reported concentration are below
                   detectable Halts. They are not reported as BDL because the detection
                   I lilts are variable In this Industry.
Date:    9/25/81
                                    III.3.1.3-106
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Chemical Precipitation With  Sedimentation
                       (Sulfide)

Data source:  Effluent Guidelines                Data  source  status:
Point source:  Textile mills                        Not specified         	
Subcategory:  Knit fabric finishing                 Bench  scale           	a
Plant:  Unspecified                                 Pilot  scale           	
References:  3-68, p. VII-48                        Full scale           	
Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Chem.  Ppt.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified           Type of sedimentation:
Chemical dosages(s):  Unspecified             Unspecified
Mix detention time:  Unspecified             Hydraulic  loading rate:
Flocculation detention time:  Unspecified     Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Unspecified             Hydraulic  detention time:
                                              Unspecified
                                             Weir loading  rate:  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA

Sampling;  Unspecified	Analysis;   Data  set 2  (V.7.3.32)

                              Concentration	    Percent    Detection
  Pollutant/parameter	Influent (a)     Effluent    removal	limit	
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
10
930
500
100
50
50
3,200
ND
50
10
ND
ND
ND
90
>99
95
98
>99
>99
>99
97
Blanks indicate data not available.
ND, not detected.
(a)Sample taken from aeration basin  at plant.
Date:   9/25/81              III.3.1.3-107
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
Chemical Precipitation With Filtration
(Unspecified)
Data source:  EGD  Combined Data Base
                            Data source status:
Point source:  Metal  finishing
Subcategory:  Common  metals;  hexavalent
  chromium; oil
Plant:  6731
References:  3-113
Pretreatment/treatment:   Chem. Red. (Cr)/Chem. Ppt.,  Filter
                              Not specified
                              Bench scale
                              Pilot scale
                              Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
Wastewater flow rate:   Influent:
  261,000 m3/day;  effluent:  175,000
  m3/day
Chemical dosage(s):   Unspecified
Mix detenton  time:  Unspecified
Flocculation  detention time:
  Unspecified
Unit configuration:   Continuous operation
                  Filtration rate (hydraulic loading):
                    Unspecified
                  Backwash rate:  Unspecified
                  Bed depth:  Unspecified
                  Media (top to bottom):  Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL DATA
    Sampling:  24-hr composite,  fjow
    	proportion (unspecified)
                     Analysis:  Data set 1 (V.7.3.13Ua )
      Pollutant/parameter
                                  Concentration
         Influent
Effluent
Percent
removaI
    Classical pollutants, mg/L
      pH, minimum
      pH, maximum
           3.6
                      8.3
Detection
  limit
Fluorides
Phosphorus
TSS
IDS
1 ron
Tin
Oil and grease
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Cadmium
Chromium, total
Hexavalent chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Cyanide, total
1.2
1.9
17
1,400
4.0
0.09
42

17
1,100
140
940
36
2,200
9,900
5.0
1.6
0.1
1.0
1,800
0.14
0.09


6.0
130
130
260
BDL
1,000
890
5.0
NM
95
94
NM
96
0


65
88
7
72
58*
54
91
0
0.1
0.003
5.0
5.0
0.005

5.0

2.0
3.0
5.0
1.0
30
6.0
1.0
5.0
    Blanks  indicate data not available.
    BDL,  below detection limit.
    NM,  not meaningful.
    *Approximate value.
    (a)Original source of data:   Electroplating Pretreatment 1976-1977(HS).
 Date:   9/25/81
         III.3.1.3-108
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY;
Chemical Precipitation With Filtration
(Lime,  Sodium Hydroxide)
Data  source:  EGD  Combined Data  Base
                             Data  source status;
Point  source:  Metal finishing
Subcategory:  Common metals; hexavalent chromium
Plant:   19068
References:  3-113
Pretreatment/treatment:   Chem. Red.  (Cr)/Chem.  Ppt.
                               Not  specified
                               Bench scale
                               Pilot scale
                               Full scale
                                Filter
x
DESIGN  OR OPERATING  PARAMETERS
Wastewater flow rate:   Influent:
  44,900  m3/day; effluent:  90,600
  m3/day
Chemical  dosage(s):  Lime:  2,200
  kg/yr;  sodium hydroxide:  38,000
  kg/yr
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention time:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Continuous operation  (8  hr/day)
                  Filtration rate  (hydraulic  loading):
                    Unspecified
                  Backwash rate:   Unspecified
                  Bed depth:  Unspecified
                  Media (top to bottom):  Unspecified
                                      REMOVAL DATA

       Sampling!  8-hr composite, tine proportion (one hr)
                                                    Analysis:  Data set 1IV.7.3.13llal
Concentration
Influent Stream! b)
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
Fluorides
Phosphorus
TSS
TDS
1 ron
Osmium
01 1 and grease
Gold
Platinum
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Cadmium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Pheno 1
Bls(2-ethylhexyl Jphthalate
Butyl benzyl ph thai ate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Diethyl phthalate
SI Iver
Phenanthrene
Naphthalene
Anthracene
319

12

21
2,800
10
1.2
14.0
14.0
0.62

11(6,000
580
NO
76
230
5.0
BDL

BDL
32
15
BDL
BDL
BDL
201

19
7.3
13
2,900
180
NO
7.0
NO
NO

2,300
1,900
220
1 1 , 000
2,200
5.0
190

BDL
99
15
BDL
BDL
BDL
Average

16

17
2,800
95
0.6
5.5
2.0
0.31

7I»,000
1,200
110
5,500
1,200
5.0
98

BOL
66
15
BDL
BDL
BDL
Effluent

10
0.58
17
1»,800
0.19
ND
8.0
ND
ND

ND
16
ND
ND
10
13
BOL

BDL
ND
9.0
ND
BDL
ND
Percent
remova 1

38

0
NM
>99
>99
NM
>99
>99

>99
99
>99
>99
99
NM
95*

NM
>99
UO
NM
NM
NM
Detection
1 imlt

0.1
0.003
5.0
5.0
0.005

5.0



2.0
1.0
30
6.0
1.0
10
10
10
10
10
0.1/1.0
10
10
10
       Blanks indicate data not available.
       BDL, below detection limit.
       ND, not detected.
       NM, not meaningful.
       *App roxI ma te vaIue.
       (a)Orlglnal source of data:  BAT Verification Sampling 1978-1979IHS).
       (b)Influent stream coded 319 is post chromium treatment(continuous), and Influent stream coded 201
         Is a continuous raw waste stream.
  Date:   9/25/81
           III.3.1.3-109
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
Chemical Precipitation With Filtration
(Unspecified)
Data source:  EGD Combined Data Base
                           Data  source  status:
Point source:  Metal finishing
Subcategory:  Common metals; hexavalent  chromium;
  cyanide; oils
Plant: 36041
References:  3-113
Pretreatment/treatment: Chem. Ox.  (CN),  Chem.  Red.  (Cr)/Chem.  Ppt., Filter
                             Not  specified
                             Bench  scale
                             Pilot  scale
                             Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  229,000 m3/day
Chemical dosage(s):  Unspecified
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Media (top to bottom):  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Batch chem. ox.;
  batch chem. red.; continuous chem.
  ppt. and filter
                 Filtration  rate  (hydraulic loading):
                   Unspecified
                 Backwash  rate:   Unspecified
                 Bed  depth:   Unspecified
                 Flocculation detention time:
                   Unspecified
                                   REMOVAL DATA
     Sampling:  24-hr composite, flow
               proportion (unspecified)
                      Analysis: Data set 1(7.7.3.131(8)
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
pH, maximum
Fluorides
Phosphorus
TSS
TDS
1 ron
Tin
Oi 1 and grease
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Cadmium
Chromi urn
Hexavalent chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Cyanide, total
Influent

11
2.5
1.2
520
1,1*00
5.8
2.0
46

42
12,000
5.0
7,500
140
2,600
13,000
2,000
Effluent

11
3.9
0.05
10
1,600
0.25
0.14
5.0

6.0
610
5.0
440
32
44
140
400
Percent
remova 1


NM
96
98
NM
96
93
89

86
95
0
94
77
98
99
80
Detection
1 imit


0.1
0.003
5.0
5.0
0.005

5.0

2.0
3.0
5.0
1.0
30
6.0
1.0
5.0
     Blanks  indicate data not available.
     NM,  not meaningful.
     (a)Original source of data:  Electroplating Pretreatment  1976-1977(HS).
 Date:   9/25/81
       III.3.1.3-110
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
Chemical Precipitation With Filtration
(FeCl3)
Data source:   Effluent Guidelines
Point source:   Textile mills
Subcategory:   Woven fabric finishing
Plant:  V
References:   3-89,  pp. 70-74
Pretreatment/treatment  None(a)/Chem.  Ppt.
                            Data source  status:
                              Not specified
                              Bench  scale
                              Pilot  scale
                              Full scale
DESIGN OR  OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Chemical dosage (s):  16 mg/L (FeCl3)
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention time:
  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Unspecified
                  Filtration rate  (hydraulic loading):
                    Unspecified
                  Backwash rate:   Unspecified
                  Bed depth:  Unspecified
                  Media (top to bottom):   Unspecified
                                    REMOVAL DATA
Saawl 1 no: 24-hr composite
Pol lutant/oeraattter
Classical pollutantt, mg/L:
Aluminum
Barluai
Boron
Calcium
Coba 1 t
Iron
Magnesluei
Manganese
Molybdenum
Sodium
Phosphorus
Silicon
Strontiuai
Tin
Titanium
Vanadium
Phenol
Ammonia
Nitrate
COO
TSS
pH
Toxic pollutants. M8/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
Mercury
Selenium
Thallium
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
Oi-n-butyl phthalate
Anthracene
Butyl benzyl ph thai ate
Methyiene chloride
Toluene
Trichloroethylene
1, l-Dichloroethane
Benzene
Ethyl benzene
Chloroform
Trans- 1,2-Olchloroethylene

Concentr
Influential

0.13
0.01
0.73
5.1
<0.006
0.21
2.2
O.OB

'54
1.2
4.6
0.03
<0.02
0.001
0.01
0.03
0.42
1.3
93
12
7.7

75
NM
NH
NH
NM
NH
NM
NM
NH
NM
NH
NH
NM
NM
5
50
NM
42
0
NM
NH
NH
NM
NM
NH
1 IV. 7. 3. 321
Detection
limit






































0.04
0.02
0.01
0.03
0.4
O.I
0.5
3.0
0.2
0.2
5.0
2.0
                Blanks indicate data not available.
                BOL, below detection lla>it.
                (a|lnf'uentnis9taken rron final treatment effluent and It then run through
                  pilot process.
Date:   9/25/81
      III.3.1.3-111
-------
III.3.1.4  Chemical Reduction

     Description

Reduction is a chemical reaction in which one or more electrons
are transferred to the chemical being reduced from the chemical
initiating the transfer (the reducing agent).  Chemical reduction
may be necessary to convert metals from a higher valence state to
a lower one to decrease toxicity or to encourage a given chemical
reaction.  As an example,  chromium is a very toxic material when
in its hexavalent state (Cr*6).  Reducing hexavalent chromium to
trivalent chromium (Cr+3)  causes a substantial decrease in the
metal's toxicity and also  enables precipitation of the chromium
as the hydroxide in alkaline solution (hexavalent chromium and
divalent chromium (Cr+2) will not form a precipitate).  See
Section III.3.1.3 for a discussion on chemical precipitation.

The first step of the chemical reduction process is usually the
adjustment of the pH of the solution.  With sulfur dioxide treat-
ment of hexavalent chromium, for instance, the reaction requires
a pH in the range of 2 to  3.  The pH adjustment is done with the
appropriate acid (e.g., sulfuric).  This is followed by the
addition of the reducing agent.  Mixing is provided to improve
contact between the reducing agent and the waste.  The agent can
be in the form of a gas (sulfur dioxide), a solution (sodium
bisulfite), or as a finely divided powder if there is adequate
mixing.  Reaction times vary for different wastes, reducing
agents, temperatures, pH's, and concentrations.  In commercial-
scale operations treating chromium wastes, reaction times are on
the order of minutes.  Additional time is usually allowed to
ensure complete mixing and reduction.  Once reacted, the reduced
solution is generally subjected to some form of treatment to
settle or precipitate the  reduced material.  The pH of the re-
action medium is typically increased so that the reduced material
will precipitate from the  solution.  A treatment for the removal
of what remains of the reducing agent may be included.  This can
be unused reducing agent or the reducing agent in its oxidized
state.  Filters or clarifiers are often used to improve separa-
tion of suspended solids from the treated wastewater (Sections
III.3.1.9 and III.3.I.18).

     Representative Types  and Modifications

A number of chemicals are  used as reducing agents.  The most
common chemicals used for reduction of chromium are sulfur di-
oxide, sodium metabisulfite, sodium bisulfite, and ferrous salts.
Other reducing agents used or which can be potentially used for
wastewater treatment include sodium borohydride to reduce ionic
mercury to metallic mercury and alkali metal hydride to alter the
chemical form of lead so that it can be precipitated and also to
recover silver.  The common chemicals used as reducing agents are
discussed on the following page:


Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.4-1
-------
     (1)   Reduction Using Sulfur  Dioxide.   Gaseous  sulfur dioxide
          is a widely used reducing agent.   The reduction occurs
          when sulfurous acid,  produced through the reaction of
          sulfur dioxide and water,  reacts  with chromic  acid as
          follows:

          3S02 + 3H2O  =  3H2S03

          3H2S03 +  2H2Cr04 = Cr2(SO4)3  + 5H2O

          The reduction reaction  is highly  dependent on  both pH
          and temperature.  A pH  of from 2  to 3 is  normal for
          situations requiring complete reduction.   At pH levels
          above 5,  the reduction  rate is slow.   Oxidizing agents
          such as dissolved oxygen and ferric iron  interfere with
          the reduction process by consuming the reducing agent.

          A typical treatment consists of mixing sulfur  dioxide
          with wastewater in a reaction tank and providing a
          retention time of about 45 minutes to ensure complete
          mixing and reduction.  The reaction tank  has an elec-
          tronic recorder-controller device to control process
          conditions with respect to pH and oxidation-reduction
          potential (ORP).  Gaseous sulfur  dioxide  is metered to
          the reaction tank to maintain the ORP within the range
          of 250 to 300 millivolts.   Sulfuric acid  is added to
          maintain  a pH level of  1.8 to 2.0.  The reaction tank
          is equipped with a propeller agitator designed to
          provide approximately one turnover per minute.  A
          typical wastewater treatment facility for reducing
          chromates is shown in Figure 3.1.4-1.

     (2)   Reduction With Sodium Metabisulfite and Sodium Bi-
          sulfite:   Metabisulfite and bisulfite are used for
          reduction of chromium.   Metabisulfite hydrolyzes to
          sodium bisulfite, and bisulfite in turn dissociates to
          sulfurous acid, which reduces the chromium. The re-
          action with metabisulfite and bisulfite occurs as
          follows:

          3Na2S205  + 3H20 = 6NaHS03

          4H2Cr04+6NaHS03+6H2S04  = 2Cr2(S04)3+6NaHS04+10H20

          The reduction reaction  is highly dependent on  both pH
          and temperature.  The dissociation of sodium bisulfite
          (NaHS03 + H2O •* H2S03 + NaOH) produces sodium  hydroxide
          (NaOH) thereby requiring acid addition for pH  control
          during the reaction.
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.4-2
-------
                           SULFUR 1C   SULFUR
                              AGIO   DIOXIDE
r-
PH CONTROLLER! 1
1 	 I"



RAW WASTE
(HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM)



1
	 j
	 1
1
1
1
1
|j
*« 	 • i IT***
1 1

»



c


o

1
4



D


D

r
i








-








__! lORP CONTROLLER







(TRIVALENT CHROMIUM)
                            REACTION TANK
  FIGURE  3.1.4-1.   HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM REDUCTION WITH SULFUR
                    DIOXIDE [3-31]
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.4-3
-------
          A common batch system for  chromium  reduction with
          sodium bisulfite  consists  of  a  collection tank and a
          reaction tank with a four-hour  retention time.   Sodium
          bisulfite solution is metered into  the  reaction tank
          and the pH is controlled by sulfuric  acid addition.

     (3)   Reduction With Ferrous Sulfate.   Ferrous ion (Fe++)
          reacts with hexavalent chromium,  reducing the chromium
          to a trivalent state and oxidizing  the  ferrous ion to
          the ferric state.   The reaction occurs  as follows:

          2H2Cr04+6FeSC>4+7H20+6H2S04  =  Cr2(SO4)3+3Fe2(SO4)3+15H20

          The above reaction occurs  rapidly at  pH levels below 3.
          Because the acidic properties of ferrous sulfate are
          low at high dilutions,  acid must be added for pH adjust-
          ment.   The ferrous sulfate reducing process  generates
          large volumes of  sludge and thus its  use is  rare in
          large-scale treatment facilities.   In addition, the use
          of ferrous sulfate to treat chromate  wastes  containing
          cyanide results in the formation of very stable ferro-
          cyanide complexes, which prevent subsequent  effective
          cyanide treatment.

     (4)   Reduction With Sodium Borohydride.   Sodium borohydride
          is a mild but effective reducing agent and is used to
          reduce soluble mercury ion to metallic mercury, which
          can be removed from solution.  The  reaction  occurs as
          follows:

          4Hg+ + + BIT4 + 8(OH~) = 4Hg + B(OH)'4  + 4H20

          If the mercury solution is in the form of an organic
          complex, the driving force of the reduction  reaction
          may not be sufficient to break  the  complex.   In that
          case,  the wastewater must  be  chlorinated prior to the
          reduction step in order to break down the metal-organic
          bond.

          Sodium borohydrite is also reported to be effective in
          removing silver,  gold, lead,  and cadmium [3-4].  How-
          ever,  this technology is only being applied  in limited
          cases because of the high  cost  of chemicals.

     Technology Status

Technology for large-scale application  of chemical reduction is
well developed.  The reduction of chromium waste by sulfur di-
oxide is a classic process and is in use  by numerous plants
employing chromium compounds in operations such as electroplat-
ing.
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.4-4
-------
     Applications

The major application of chemical reduction is for treatment of
chromium wastes.  Numerous industrial plants employing chromium
in their manufacturing operations use the process to reduce
hexavalent chromium to its trivalent form.  The chromium reduc-
tion process is widely used in the following industries:

          - Metal Finishing,
          - Inorganic Chemicals Manufacturing,
          - Coil Coating, and
          - Battery Manufacturing.

The following industries use chemical reduction on a limited
basis:

          - Iron and Steel Manufacturing,
          - Aluminum Forming,
          - Electrical and Electronic Components,
          - Porcelain Enameling, and
          - Pharmaceutical Manufacturing.

Wastewaters from metal plating and finishing operations contain
chromium in rinse waters and spent baths.  Chromium containing
waste streams are usually first treated for chromium reduction
and then mixed with other waste streams for subsequent treatment.
Chromium reduction is used in the Aluminum Forming and Coil
Coating industries for treating rinses of chromic acid etching
solutions.  In the Battery Manufacturing industry, chromium
reduction is used for treating chromium-containing cell wash
solutions and heat paper production subcategory wastewater.

The chemical reduction process is also being used on a limited
basis to remove mercury and lead from wastewater.  Sodium boro-
hydride is currently used in some chlor-alkali plants (Inorganic
Chemicals Manufacturing) to reduce the soluble mercury ion to
metallic mercury, which is then removed from solution by carbon
adsorption [3-4].

     Advantages and Limitations

The major advantage of chemical reduction when used to reduce
hexavalent chromium is that it is a fully proven technology based
on many years of experience.   Operation at ambient conditions
results in minimal energy consumption, and the process is well
suited to automatic control especially when using sulfur dioxide.
Furthermore, the equipment is readily obtainable from many sup-
pliers, and operation is straightforward.

One limitation of chemical reduction of hexavalent chromium is
that for high concentrations of chromium the cost of treatment
chemicals may be prohibitive.  When this situation occurs, other


Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.4-5
-------
treatment techniques are likely to be more economical.   Chemical
interference by oxidizing agents is possible in the treatment of
mixed wastes, and the treatment itself may introduce pollutants
if not properly controlled.   Storage and handling of sulfur
dioxide is somewhat hazardous.

     Reliability

The chemical reduction process is highly reliable for chrome
reduction.  The process, however, requires proper monitoring and
control and proper pretreatment to control interfering substances.

     Chemicals Required

The most common chemicals used for chromium reduction are sulfur
dioxide (S02), sodium metabisulfite (Na2S205),  sodium bisulfite
(NaHS03),  and sulfuric acid (H2S04).

     Residuals Generated

The reduction process normally generates only small amounts of
sludge due to minor shifts in the solubility of the contaminants.
The reduced chromium and other metal ions are precipitated and
removed in the subsequent precipitation-sedimentation process.
An exception would be hexavalent chromium reduction with ferrous
sulfate, where sludge generation may be significant.

     Design Criteria

The reduction process can be employed as batch treatment or
continuous treatment.  For small daily volumes of waste [less
than 150,000 liters (40,000 gallons)] the most economical system
is batch treatment in which two tanks are provided, each with a
capacity of one day's flow.   Reduction, precipitation,  and sedi-
mentation are carried out in one tank, while the other is used to
collect the waste.  In a typical batch system,  the required
dosage of acid and sodium metabisulfite is added to the tank and
the contents are mixed for 15 minutes to ensure complete reduc-
tion of the chromium.

Continuous treatment requires a tank for acidification and re-
duction with separate tanks for precipitation and sedimentation.
The retention time in the reduction tank is dependent on the pH
employed but should be at least four times the theoretical time
for complete reduction.  In cases where the chrome content of the
wastewater varies markedly,  equalization should be provided prior
to the reduction tank to minimize fluctuations in the chemical
feed system.  Successful operation of a continuous chrome reduc-
tion process requires instrumentation and automatic control.
Redox and pH control should also be provided.
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.4-6
-------
The chemical reducing agent dosages will vary with the specific
waste as a result of the reducing potential or other charac-
teristics of the chemicals, and therefore, the dosages should be
determined experimentally.

     Performance

A study of an operational waste treatment facility that chem-
ically reduces hexavalent chromium has shown that 99.7% reduction
efficiency is easily achieved [3-12].  Final concentrations of
0.05 mg/L are readily attained,  and concentrations of 0.01 mg/L
are considered to be attainable by properly maintained and oper-
ated equipment.

Performance data on the use of chemical reduction are included in
the following data sheets:

          - Metal Finishing,
          - Aluminum Forming,
          - Electrical and Electronic Components, and
          - Inorganic Chemicals Manufacturing.

     References

3-3, 3-4, 3-5, 3-12, 3-16, 3-27, 3-36, 3-44.
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.4-7
-------


















z
o
—
t-
0
Z3
a
UJ
eg

~j
^£
0
-™
2
Ul
X
u

o
u.
>
CC.



V)
^
§
O
z
•x.
u
Ul
1-

jj
o
ec
H
Z
8






















s*

U
S
u
£
o>

—
co
^
O
E
CD
CC.
C
o
.p
CO
s_
p
c
0)
o
c
o
o

+J
c
CD
2
—
^.

O

a.

















.p
C
CO
*
«•
£
ZlSSCfSX.^'SS^'SS — ZIZC'-SXIESSSSr^JE
ZZZCMZZVOZZ — ZZOZZ3-ZZZZZZZ — Z














r*- O O lA lA ro f> CO co CM ON O OCV1.^CMCOC\JOC\JO lA CM IA CM
ojto -r 	 ar-o — co -oo — CM • -co — ir\vooo
— coo— -o •ooro -a -oir\— • -oo
o -o • • o -o • o o • •
o o oo o o oo
V




CM
ooo
it -CO
c-o —

1 1 1

h-OMA
• oo\

.
o

























II
O)
E

«r
  W
o c L- e
^L 0) O^ Q) £ 3 ^3 6
•COEUE E 3CCD3E
— O.TJ "030)3 3 EE— 0> -0—3
eo-^ C— CC— E — SBWETJ^PCS-C
oir\ — co s- —  3 J3 — o 3 —
— ^ co o E o>co— c eo o ^ o c— >>co a— *»-o
Moacou-p— 33cct-oc4J«.*>— cn-o — A u — co —
(OOOWOO — — — cococo' 	 O*>COCOOOO30)— O

o
SSS^'COir\SOJ3E3ESS-^'ts^£SZ
ZZZvOlTMTvZvOZZZZOvOOZZZ



O\ 4:
C^ C7N P""
A 00 \O

1 1 1

00— lA
— CM CM



P— ^ "~ iA O CO lA CMf^lA~~i^™"™"»JCMO
•—V -O • V VO V — VVCMQOVO
fO — OO V V CD •
•. o
CO
t~

0 0
o o
o o o
•> « o
O O 1T\
CM COIA C\J IA -
v 	 — v —

1 1 1 1 1 1

-Jo-i evj— —
QOQ VO V CM
CD DO

























0)
CO
co
^J
•• .c
_i a
01 ~~ v
3. — -0

« X '-
(0 0) O

C — £
CO >> O
•P £
3 E -P 0)
— >> 3 E EEO)C
— CO— E 3 tB >» 3 3 1 O
OO 	 3 — «- T3 ' 	 « 	 CM 	
a£c 	 ecD— ncDco)— *~o >>
— 0)X£OO.C-OW-*CD>— O C£
— c<-a>>a>cOH-Ncaa.2
o
























































•
CD

CO

CO
co +>
•P E
O —
C —
co c
4J O • •
CO •— — 0)
•0 -P 3 3
Od 	
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
                       Chemical Reduction With Sedimentation
                       (Unspecified)
              Effluent Guidelines
               Aluminum forming
              Unspecified
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  L
References:  3-27, pp. 97, 320-321
Pretreatment/treatment  None/Chem. Red.
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Chemical dosage (s):  Unspecified
pH in clarifier:  See below
Clarifier detention time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Unspecified
Data source status;
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
                                         (Cr)
                                        Weir loading  rate:   Unspecified
                                        Media  (top  to bottom):   Not applicable
                                        Bed depth:  Not applicable
                                        Filtration  rate (hydraulic loading):
                                          Not  applicable
                                        Backwash  rate:   Not applicable
                                  REMOVAL DATA
    Samp I ing:
              Three 24-hour or one
              72-hour composite
                                              Analysis:  Data set 2 (V.7.3.7)
Concentration
Pol 1 utant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
Oi 1 and grease
Suspended sol ids
COD
TOC
Phenol
pH, pH units
Toxic pollutants, pg/L:
Cadmium
Ch rom i urn
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Zinc
Methyl one chloride
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Influent

5
<2
20
13
0.003
2.6

2.8
100,000
l»0
30
3.»»
110
30
ND
Effluent

<95
<5
30
9.7
0.009
9.8

BDL
90
BDL
BDL
<5
BDL
60
BDL
Percent
remove 1

NM
NM
NM
23
NM
NM

6U*
>99
89*
67*
NM
77*
NM
NM
Detection
limit








2
5
9
20
0.1
50
10
10
    Blanks indicate data not available.
    BDL, below detection limit.
    ND, not detected.
    NM, not meaningful.
    *Approximate value.
 Date:   9/25/81
                             III.3.1.4-9
-------
          TREATMENT  TECHNOLOGY>
Chemical Reduction With Sedimentation
(Sulfuric Acid, Sodium Bisulfite)
          Data  source:   Effluent Guidelines
          Point source:   Electrical and electronic
          Subcategory:   Electron tube
          Plant:   30172
          References:  3-31,  pp. IV-25-28,31,32,35-37
                           Data source  status:
                             Not specified
                             Bench scale
                             Pilot scale
                             Full scale
          Pretreatment/treatment  None/Chem Red.,  Sed. (holding tank)
          DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

          Wastewater flow rate:   10.6 m*/day
          Chemical dosage (s):  Sulfuric acid,
             sodium bisulfite
          pH in  clarifier:   5.1
          Clarifier detention time:  Unspecified
          Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
          Unit configuration:  Unspecified
                 Heir loading  rate:  Not  applicable
                 Media  (top  to bottom):   Not  applicable
                 Bed depth:  Not applicable
                 Filtration  rate (hydraulic loading):
                   Not  applicable
                 Backwash  ratet  Not applicable
                                            REMOVAL DATA
Samol (no: Three 21-hour composites
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
Oi 1 and grease
TOC
BOO
TSS
Phenol
Fluoride
pH, pH units
Calcium
Magnesium
Sodium
Aluminum
Manganese
Vanadium
Boron
Barium
Molybdenum
Tin
Yttrium
Cobalt
Iron
Titanium
Palladium
Tel lurium
Platinum
Cold
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Thallium
Zinc
Cyanide
Benzene
1,1, l-Trichloroethane
Fluroanthene
Methyiene chloride
Napthalene
Bis(2-ethylnexyt) phthaiate
Butyl benzyl phthaiate
Anthracene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
Toluene
Trichloroethylene
Concent rat
Influent

33
110
8

0.013
1.2
5.1
2.8
0.68
8.1
0.037
0.006
0.011
<0. 12
0.03
0.099
0. 1
0.012
<0.58
O.I
<0.005
<0.003
<0. 003
0.006
<0.002

<3.3
6.0
1.0
<2
89.OOO
19
I7
NM

NM
NM
NM
NM
18
21
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
>91
NM
NM











                    Blanks  Indicate data not available.
                    NM, not wanlngful.
                    (a)Value» presented as "less than" the reported concentration are below
                      detectable Halts.  They are not reported as BOL because the detection
                      lleilts are variable In this Industry.
Date:    9/25/81
       III.3.1.4-10
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
Chemical Reduction With Filtration
(Sulfur Dioxide,  Acid,  Caustic)
Data source: Effluent Guidelines
Point source: Inorganic chemicals
Subcategory: Chrome pigment
Plant: 002
References: 3-85, pp. 396-397
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Neutral.,  Chem.  Red.
                           Data source  status:
                             Not specified
                             Bench scale
                             Pilot scale
                             Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate: 85.6 m3/Mg
Chemical dosage (s): Unspecified
pH in clarifier: Not applicable
Clarifier detention time: Not
   applicable
Hydraulic loading rate: Unspecified
Unit configuration: Unspecified
                 Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                 Media (top to bottom):  Unspecified
                 Bed depth: Unspecified
                 Filtration rate (hydraulic loading)
                    Unspecified
                 Backwash rate: Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling:  3 day, 24-hr composite
	and grab	
                Analysis;   Data set 2 (V.7.3.15)
Pollutant/parameter
                           Concentration(a)
 Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
  limit
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Chromium
Lead
Zinc
310,000
160,000
54,000
130,000
120,000
1,500
58
25
97
Blanks indicate data not available.
(a)Concentration is calculated from  pollutant flow in
   m3/Mg and pollutant loading in kg/Mg.
Date:   9/25/81
        III.3.1.4-11
-------
TREATMENT  TECHNOLOGY:  Chemical Reduction With  Sedimentation
                        (Lime)

Data source:   EGD Combined Data Base               Data source status:
Point source:   Metal finishing                       Not specified         	
Subcategory:   Common metals; precious metals;        Bench scale            	
  complexed metals; hexavalent chromium; solvents    Pilot scale            	
Plant:   4071                                           Full scale             	3
References:  3-113
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Chem.  Red.,Sed.  (tanks), Chem. Ppt.  (lime),
  Coag.  Floe,  (polyelectrolyte), Filter.

DESIGN OR  OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  352,000 m3/day   Filtration rate (hydraulic loading):
Chemical dosage (s):  Lime:  16,000       Unspecified
  kg/yr; coagulating agents:   290 kg/yr Backwash rate:  Unspecified
Mix detention time:  Unspecified        Bed  depth:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention time:             Media  (top to bottom):   Unspecified
  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Continuous
  operation (24 hr/day)
                                     REMOVAL DATA

              Sampling:  24-hr composite, flow
                      proportion lone hrl	Analysis: Data set I (V.7.3. I3lla I
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
pH, minimum
pH, maximum
Fluorides
Phosphorus
TSS
1 ron
Tin
01 1 and grease
Gold
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Carbon tetrachloride
1, 1, l-Trichloroethane
Chloroform
Bis(2-ethylhexyl )ph(halate
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Diethyl phthalate
Trichloroethylene
Anthracene
Phenanthrene
Methylene chloride
Naphthalene
Influent

6.0
7.2
1 1
8.6
44
0.22
1.4
BDL
70

90
5,900
300
550
56
NO
1.2
NO
54
BDL
BDL
100
ND
BDL
1.0
BDL
BDL
Effluent

6.1
7.5
5.0
It. 7
10
0.046
ND
BDL
140

45
960
ND
290
10
BDL
0.3
BOL
84
BOL
BDL
75
0. l»
ND
ND
ND
ND
Percent
remova 1



54
45
77
79
>99
NM
43

50
84
>99
47
82
NM
75
NM
NM
NM
NM
25
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
Detection
limit



O.I
0.003
5.0
0.005

5.0


3.0
1.0
30
6.0
1.0
1.0
0. 1
1.0
10
10
10
10
0. 1
10
10
1.0
10
              Blanks Indicate data not available.
              BDL, below detection limit.
              ND, not detected.
              NM, not meaningful.
              •Approximate value.
              (a)Original source of data:  BAT verification sampling 1978-19791HS).
  Date:   9/25/81                III.3.1.4-12
-------
           TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
Chemical Reduction With Sedimentation
(Sodium Hydroxide, Lime)
           Data source:   EGD  Combined Data  Base
           Point source:   Metal finishing
           Subcategory:   Common metals;  hexavalent  chromium
           Plant:   19068
           References:  3-113
                           Data source status:
                             Not specified
                             Bench scale
                             Pilot scale
                             Full scale
           Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Chem.Red.(Cr),  Chem.  Ppt.,  Filter
            Filter
           DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

           Wastewater flow  rate:   89,700 m3/day
           Chemical  dosage(s):  Lime:   2,200
             kg/yr,-  NaOH:   38,000  kg/yr; calcium
             chloride:   11,000  kg/yr;  sodium
             metabisulfite:  3,400 kg/yr
           Mix detention time:  Unspecified
           Flocculation  detention  time:  Unspecified
           Unit configuration:  Continuous operation  (8 hr/day)
                 Filtration rate (hydraulic loading):
                   Unspecified
                 Backwash rate:   Unspecified
                 Bed depth:  Unspecified
                 Media (top to bottom):  Unspecified
Sampling: 8-hr composite, tine
orooortlon tons hr)
Pol lutant/parameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
Fluorides
Phosphorus
TSS
TDS
1 ron
Tin
01 1 and grease
Phenols, total
Aluminum
Barium
Boron
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Molybdenum
Titanium
Gold
p 1 a 1 1 nun
Palladium
Rhod i urn
Irldlum
Osmium
Sodium
Ca 1 c 1 urn
Coba 1 t
Vanadium
Yttrium
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
zinc
Cyanide, total
1,1, l-Trichloroethane
Chloroform
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)ph thai ate
Dl-b-butyl ph thai ate
Dlethyl ph thai ate
Trfchloroethylene
Silver
Antimony
Arsenic
Berryll lum
Selenium
Thallium
Benzene
Methylene chloride
To 1 uene
REMOVAL
Concent
Influent

21
2.5
16
1,500
52
0.052
BDL
0.11
100
0.035
2.2
II
.027
0.30
0.17
0.01
0.10
0.12
0.06
0.32
0.08*
0.10
110
26
0.035
0.01
0.02

2.0
50,000
700
BDL
52
510
250





59
6.0
6.0
1.0
16
50



DATA
Analysis:
l ra 1 1 on
Effluent

15
1.6
22
5,500
0.20
0.005
BDL
ND
1.0
0.005
3.0
3.7
0.02
0.10
0.80
0.02
0. 11
1.2
0. 11
0. 10
0.08*
ND
500
no
0.005
0.01
0.02

2.0
5.0
600
BDL
BDL
60
190
1.0*
2.0
BDL
BDL
BDL
1.0
31
HO
M.O
1.0
10
50
l.0»
16
BDL
Data set 1
Percent
remova 1

28
36
NH
NM
>99
90
NM
>99
99
8>l
NM
66
92
67
NM
50
NM
NM
NM
69
NM
>99
NM
NM
86
0
0

0
>99
ll»
NM
9U •
89
21





12
NM
33
0
NM
0



IV.7.},l3)fa1
Detection
limit

O.t
0.003
5.0
5.0
0.005

5.0
0.005
0.01)



















2.0
3.0
1.0
30
6.0
1.0
5.0
0. 1
1.0
10
10
10
0. 1
0.1/1.0
0. 1/100
0. 1/10
1.0
0. 1/200
0. 1/10
1.0
1.0
5.0
                Blanks Indicate data not avaflab Ie.
                BDL, below detection limit.
                ND, not detected.
                NM, not meaningful.
                Iftor°gln1|esourcTof.d.ta:  BAT Screen Sampling I978-I979(HS).
Date:    9/25/81
     III.3.1.4-13
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
         Chemical  Reduction With Filtration
         (Unspecified)
Data source:  EGD Combined Data Base
                                    Data source status;
Point source:  Metal finishing
Subcategory:  Common metals, precious metals,
  cyanide
Plant:  27044
References:  3-113
Pretreatment/treatment:  Chem. Ox.  (CN)/Chem. Red.,
  Filter (pressure)
                                      Not specified
                                      Bench scale
                                      Pilot scale
                                      Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  65,400 m3/day
Chemical dosage(s):  Unspecified
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Media (top to bottom):  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Continuous
  operation
                          Filtration rate (hydraulic loading)
                            Unspecified
                          Backwash rate:  Unspecified
                          Bed depth:  Unspecified
                          Flocculation detention time:  Un-
                            specified
                                  REMOVAL DATA
     Samp I ing:
24-hr composite,
flow proportion
Concentration
Pol lutant/parameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
pH, minimum
pH, maximum
Fl uor ides
Phosphorus
TSS
TDS
1 ron
Tin
Oil and Grease
Gold
Rhod i urn
Toxic pollutants, u.g/L:
Cadmium
Chromium
Hexavalent chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Cyanide, total
Influent

3.9

0.32
4.6
BDL
1,000
1.5
0.19
BDL
0.34
0.07

22
16
5.0
7,800
360
3,200
320
200
Effluent


7.7
1.0
0.85
7.0
3,900
0.14
0.06
BDL
0.15
0.01

19
8.0
5.0
160
67
730
12
120
Percent
remova I



NM
82
NM
NM
91
68
NM
56
86

14
50
0
98
81
77
96
40
Detection
1 i m i t



0.1
0.003
5.0
5.0
0.005

5.0



2.0
3.0
5.0
1.0
30
6.0
1.0
5.0
     Blanks  indicate data not available.
     NM,  not meaningful.
     (a)  Original  source of data:  Electroplating Pretreatment 1976-1977 (HS).
 Date:   9/25/81
                  III.3.1.4-14
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
Chemical Reduction With Filtration
(Unspecified)
Data source:  EGD Combined Data  Base
Point source:  Metal finishing
Subcategory:  Common metals; hexavalent chromium
Plant:  31020
References:  3-113
                           Data  source  status:
                             Not specified
                             Bench  scale
                             Pilot  scale
                             Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Chem.  Red.(Cr),  Chem.  Ppt., Filter
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  11,400 m3/day
Chemical dosage(s):  Unspecified
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Media (top to bottom):  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Batch chem.  red.
  and chem. ppt., continuous filter
                 Filtration rate  (hydraulic  loading):
                   specified
                 Backwash rate:   Unspecified
                 Bed depth:  Unspecified
                 Flocculation detention time:   Un-
                   specified
Un-
                                 REMOVAL DATA
    Sampling:  Effluent:  24-hr composite,
              flow proportion;
              influent:  grab
                      Analysis: Data set 1 tV.7.3.13Ha >
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
pH, minimum
pH, maximum
Fluorides
Phosphorus
TSS
TDS
1 ron
Tin
Oi 1 and grease
Toxic pollutants, u.g/L:
Cadmium
Ch rom i urn
Hexa va lent ch rom i urn
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Cyanide, total
Influent

1.2

1.3
0.02
1,000
1.200
260
0.14
1 1

21
116,000
5.0
110,000
800
28,000
19,000
20
Effluent


8.4
1.1
8.0
16
5,700
0.17
0.14
6.2

18
18
5.0
1,000
68
120
18
20
Percent
remova I



15
NM
98
NM
>99
0
44

14
>99
0
99
92
>99
>99
0
Detection
1 imit



0.1
0.003
5.0
5.0
0.005

5.0

2.0
3.0
5.0
1 .0
30
6.0
1.0
5.0
    Blanks indicate data not available.
    NM, not meaningful.
    (a) Original source of data:   Electroplating Pretreatment 1976-1977 (HS).
 Date:   9/25/81
         III.3.1.4-15
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Chemical Reduction With Filtration (Unspecified)

Data source:  EGD Combined Data Base               Data source status:
Point source:  Metal finishing                       Not specified
Subcategory:  Common metals; precious metals;  com-  Bench scale
  plexed metals; hexavalent chromium; cyanide        Pilot scale
Plant:  40062                                        Full scale
References:  3-113
Pretreatment/treatment:   Chem. Ox.(CN)/Chem. Red.(Cr), Sed. (lagoon)
  Chem. Ppt., Filter
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow  rate:   216,000  m3/day
Chemical dosage  (s):  Unspecified
Mix detention  time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention  time:  Un-
  specified
Unit configurator  Batch operation
                            Filtration rate (hydraulic loading):
                              Unspecified
                            Backwash rate:   Unspecified
                            Bed depth:  Unspecified
                            Media (top to bottom):  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL OATA(a)
   Samp I ing:
24-hr composite,
flow proportion
                                            Analysis; Data set KV.7.3.13Ha )
Concentration
Pol lutant/parameter
Classical pollutants, rog/L:
pH, minimum
pH, maximum
Fluorides
Phosphorus
TSS
IDS
1 ron
Tin
Gold
Pa 1 lad i urn
Toxic pollutants, ng/L:
Cadmium
Ch rom i urn
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Cyanide, total
Si Iver
Hexavalent chromium
Influent

2.5

1.0
57
28
2,600
8.6
0.16
0.024
0.11

8.0
290.000
50,000
540
88,000
200
5.0
20
5.0
Effluent


9.1
3.4
52
30
2,756
4.7
0.75
0.022
0.032

6.0
2,200
1,700
40
1,700
19
5.0
4.5
338
Percent
remove I



NM
9
NM
NM
45
NM
8
71

25
99
97
92
99
90
0
78
NM
Detection
1 imit



0.1
0.003
5.0
5.0
0.005




2.0
3.0
1.0
30
6.0
1.0
5.0
0.1/1.0
5.0
   Blanks indicate data not available.
   NM, not meaningful.
   (a) Sampling data are the average of two consecutive days.
   (b) Original source of data:   Printed Circuit Boards & Electroless Plating
       1975-1976 (HS).
  Date:   9/25/81
                     III.3.1.4-16
-------
III.3.1.5  Coagulation and Flocculation

     Description

Chemical coagulation and flocculation are terms often used inter-
changeably to describe the physiochemical process of suspended
particle aggregation resulting from chemical additions to waste-
water.  Technically, coagulation involves the reduction of elec-
trostatic surface charges and the formation of complex hydrous
oxides.  Coagulation is essentially instantaneous in that the
only time required is that necessary for dispersing the chemicals
in solution.  Flocculation is the time-dependant physical process
of the aggregation of wastewater solids into particles large
enough to be separated by sedimentation (Section III.3.1.18),
flotation (Section III.3.1.10), or filtration (Section III.3.1.9).

For particles in the colloidal and fine supracolloidal size
ranges (less than 1 to 2 micrometers), natural stabilizing forces
(electrostatic repulsion and physical repulsion by absorbed
surface-water layers) predominate over the natural aggregating
forces (van der Waals) and the natural mechanism that tends to
cause particle contact (Brownian motion).

The purpose of coagulation is to overcome the above repulsive
forces and cause small particles to agglomerate into larger par-
ticles, so that gravitational and inertial forces will predom-
inate and effect the settling of the particles.  The process can
be grouped into two sequential mechanisms:

     (1)  Chemically induced destabilization of the repulsive
          surface related forces, thus allowing particles to
          stick together when contact between particles is made.

     (2)  Chemical bridging and physical enmeshment between the
          non-repelling particles, thus allowing for the forma-
          tion of large particles.

     Representative Types and Modifications

There are three different types of coagulants:  inorganic elec-
trolytes, natural organic polymers, and synthetic polyelectro-
lytes.

     (1)  Inorganic electrolytes are salts or multivalent ions
          such as alum (aluminum sulfate), lime, ferric chloride
          and ferrous sulfate.  The inorganic coagulants act by
          neutralizing the charged double layer of colloidal
          particles and by precipitation reactions.  Alum is
          typically added to the waste stream as a solution.  At
          an alkaline pH and upon mixing, the alum hydrolyzes and
          forms fluffy gelatinous precipitates of aluminum hy-
          droxide.  These precipitates, partially as a result of


Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.5-1
-------
          their large surface area,  act to enmesh small particles
          and thereby create large particles.   Lime and iron
          salts,  as well as alum,  are used as  flocculants pri-
          marily because of this tendency to form large fluffy
          precipitates of "floe" particles.

     (2)  Natural organic polymers derived from starch, vegetable
          materials,  or monogalactose act to agglomerate col-
          loidal particles through hydrogen bonding and elec-
          trostatic forces. These are often used as coagulant
          aids to enhance the efficiency of inorganic coagulants.

     (3)  Synthetic polyelectrolytes are polymers that incor-
          porate ionic or other functional groups along the
          carbon chain in the molecule.  The functional groups
          can be either anionic (attract positively charged
          species), cationic (attract negatively charged species),
          or neutral.  Polyelectrolytes function by electrostatic
          bonding and the formation of physical bridges between
          particles,  thereby causing them to agglomerate.  These
          are also most often used as coagulant aids to improve
          floe formation.

     The coagulation/flocculation and sedimentation process
entails the following steps:

     - Addition of the coagulating agent to the liquid.

     - Rapid mixing to dispense the coagulating agent through-
       out the liquid.

     - Slow and gentle mixing to allow for contact between
       small particles and agglomeration into  larger particles.

The above steps can be accomplished by using two basic types of
equipment:

     (1)  The conventional coagulation/flocculation system that
          uses a rapid-mix tank, followed by a flocculation tank
          containing longitudinal paddles or a rotary verticle
          shaft turbine unit that provides slow mixing.  The
          flocculated mixture can then be settled in a settling
          basin.

     (2)  The solids-contact process that combines chemical
          mixing, flocculation, and sedimentation in a single
          unit.  The process also uses previously formed floe to
          increase the rate of agglomeration.   Solids contact
          units are of two general types: slurry recirculation
          and sludge-blanket.  In the former,  the floe volume
          concentration is maintained by recirculation of the
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.5-2
-------
          floe from the clarification to the flocculation zone.
          In the latter,  the floe solids are maintained in a
          fluidized blanket through which the wastewater under
          treatment flows upward after leaving the mechanically
          stirred flocculating compartment.

     Technology Status

Coagulation/flocculation is a well-developed process currently
being used for treatment of many industrial  wastewaters con-
taining suspended and colloidal solids.

     Applications

Coagulation and flocculation are used for the clarification of
industrial wastes containing colloidal and suspended solids.
Coagulants are most commonly added upstream  of sedimentation
ponds, clarifiers, or filter units to increase the efficiency of
solids separation.  This practice has also been shown to improve
dissolved metal removal as a result of the formation of denser,
rapidly settling floes, which appear to be more effective in
absorbing and adsorbing fine metal hydroxide precipitates. Coagu-
lation may also be used to remove emulsified oil from industrial
wastewaters.  Emulsified oil and grease is aggregated by chemical
addition through the processes of coagulation and/or acidifica-
tion in conjunction with flocculation.

This treatment technology is widely applied in treating indus-
trial wastewater.  Coagulation and flocculation are widely used
in the following industries:

     - Pharmaceutical Manufacturing,
     - Steam Electric Power Plants,
     - Iron and Steel Manufacturing,
     - Rubber Processing,
     - Aluminum Forming,
     - Ore Mining and Dressing,
     - Petroleum Refining,
     - Nonferrous Metals Manufacturing,
     - Pulp and Paper Mills, and
     - Textile Mills.

The following industries use coagulation and flocculation on a
limited basis:

     - Auto and Other Laundries,
     - Coal Mining,
     - Inorganic Chemicals Manufacturing,
     - Battery Manufacturing,
     - Photographic Equipment and Supplies,
     - Porcelain Enameling,
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.5-3
-------
     - Gum and Wood Chemicals,
     - Paint and Ink Formulation,  and
     - Timber Products Processing.

Soluble and colloidal heavy metals contained in industrial waste-
waters (e.g., for the Metal Finishing,  Iron and Steel,  and In-
organic Chemical industries) are primarily removed by precipi-
tation followed by coagulation,  flocculation,  and sedimentation.
Many industries (e.g., Textile Mills, Organic Chemicals, and Pulp
and Paper) use some form of biological treatment for the treat-
ment of wastewater.  Very often, some form of sedimentation with
coagulation is used after the biological treatment step to effect
additional removal of pollutants and to remove excess biomass.
Wastewater effluents from certain pulp and paper mills and textile
mills contain organic colloidals that are highly colored.  Several
pulp and paper mills employ precipitation, flocculation, and
sedimentation for the removal of such particles.

     Advantages and Limitations

The primary advantage of coagulation and flocculation is that
they improve the performance of the sedimentation process and
remove some materials that cannot be removed by sedimentation
alone.  In most cases, coagulation can be used with minor modifi-
cations and additions to existing treatment systems.  Another
advantage is that the process has been in use for many years and
therefore a large volume of performance data exists.  Relatively
simple and readily available equipment and the relative ease of
operation of the process are also distinct advantages.

Among the limitations of the process is the fact that alum and
ferric chloride, which are used as coagulants, are corrosive
materials and must be stored and transported in special corrosion
resistant equipment.  In addition, alum and ferric chloride
dosages must be frequently rechecked to optimize performance.  A
limitation of polymer addition is the requirement of frequent jar
tests to assure proper dosages; overdoses can sometimes work
against the treatment process.

     Reliability

Coagulation and flocculation are highly reliable from a process
stand-point.  However, because of the complex reactions involved,
laboratory experimentation is essential to establish the optimum
pH and dosage for coagulation of waste.

     Chemicals Required

Alum  (or filter alum, A12(S04)3 • 14H20) is available either  in
dry or liquid form.  The choice between liquid or dry alum use is
dependent upon factors such as availability of storage  space,
method of feeding, and economics.  In general, the purchase of


Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.5-4
-------
liquid alum is justified only when the supplier is close enough
to make differences in transportation costs negligible.   Dry alum
must be dissolved,  forming a concentrated solution,  before addi-
tion to wastewater.

Ferric chloride (FeCl3) is available.in either dry or liquid
form.  Dry ferric chloride may be dissolved on site before use in
treatment.

Ferrous chloride (FeCl2) as a liquid is available in the form of
waste pickle liquor from steel processing.   Thus its use is li-
mited to treatment facilities in proximity to steel processing
plants.

Ferric sulfate [(Fe2(S02)3 • 7H20)]  is available as dry, partial-
ly hydrated granules and is dissolved on site before use in treat-
ment.

Ferrous sulfate (FeSO4 • 7H20) or copperas is a byproduct of
pickling steel and is produced as granules, crystals, powder, and
lumps.

Polymers are available in predissolved liquid or dry form.  Dry
polymers must be dissolved on site prior to use.

Lime is available as quicklime (CaO) or as hydrated lime
[Ca(OH)2].  Lime is usually prepared as a slurry before use in
treatment.

     Residuals Generated

Coagulation increases sludge production in sedimentation units as
a result of greater removal of influent suspended solids and the
insoluble reaction products of the coagulation itself.

     Design Criteria

Selection of coagulants should be based on jar testing of the
actual wastewater to determine dosages and effectiveness, and on
consideration of the cost and availability of different coagu-
lants.  Optimum coagulant dosage can be determined by either
jar-test procedure or zeta potential measurements.  The jar test
attempts to simulate the full-scale, coagulation-flocculation
process and is the most commonly used test to determine coagulant
dosage.  Zeta potential is determined by measurements of the
mobility of colloidal particles across a cell, as viewed through
a microscope.  Addition of coagulants lowers the zeta potential
and optimum coagulation will occur when the zeta potential is
zero.  Chemical mixing and flocculation are important mechanical
steps in the overall coagulation process, and are designed on the
basis of detention time and velocity gradient (G, a measure of
shear intensity in m/sec/m or sec"1).  Chemical mixing facilities


Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.5-5
-------
should be designed to provide a thorough and complete dispersal
of the chemical throughout the wastewater being treated.  The
intensity and duration of mixing of coagulant with wastewater
must be controlled to avoid overmixing or undermixing.  The most
common mixing device is the high speed mixer.  Flocculation units
should have multiple compartments and should be equipped with
adjustable speed mechanical stirring devices to permit optimum
operation if conditions change.  The mechanical flocculators are
most commonly used and can be either oscillating or rotary types.
The oscillating types are most applicable to flocculation pro-
cesses where very gentle flocculation is required.  The rotary
types consist of the paddle wheel and turbine designs.  Typical
design values for mixing and flocculation are show in
Table 3.1.5-1.

     TABLE 3.1.5-1.  MIXING AND FLOCCULATION DESIGN CRITERIA
                     [3-38, 3-43]

                         Detention time      Velocity gradient (G)
                           (minutes)           (m/s/m or sec"1)

  Mixing                   0.2-2               300 - 1500
  Flocculation              20 - 30               10 - 100
  Fragile floes (e.g.,
    biological floes)          -                  10-30
  Medium strength floes
    (e.g., floes as en-
    countered in turbidity
    removal)                   -                  20-50
  High strength chemical
  floes (e.g., floes encoun-
  tered in precipitation       -                  40 - 100
  processes)

     Performance

The effectiveness and performance of individual flocculation
systems may vary over a substantial range with respect to
suspended-solids removal and accessory removal of soluble com-
ponents by adsorptive phenomena.  Specific system performance
must be analyzed and optimized with respect to mixing time,
chemical coagulant dosage, retention time in the flocculation
basin (if used), peripheral paddle speed, settling retention
time, thermal and wind-induced mixing, and other factors.  In
general, chemical coagulation results in higher removal of
suspended solids, BOD5, precipitated dissolved metals, and other
colloidal organic compounds.  Subsequent data sheets provide
performance data from studies on the following industries and/or
waste streams:
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.5-6
-------
     - Electrical and Electronic Components,
     - Iron and Steel Manufacturing,
     - Textile Mills, and
     - Aluminum Forming.

     References

3-1, 3-11, 3-17, 3-18, 3-19, 3-20, 3-22, 3-24, 3-25, 3-34, 3-36,
3-38, 3-43.
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.5-7
-------


















0

rf-
5
O
O
8
-J
Lt_
O
2
^

jj
0
h-
<
_J
3
U
o
0

cc
o
u.

o:
^
£
^
CO

^.
3

o
z

u
u
1-
0
cc
i-
ZT
o
o





















SfS


>
o
c
0)
o
£
CO

—
TO
>
o
E
CO
cc
c
o
4J
CO
c.
P
c
ID
o
c
o

4J
c
CD
3
*-

C
—
o
a
TO
P
TO
a






























c
TO

"0
CO
Z




CO
o
c
TO
CC



C
TO
^
CO
s






CO
o
c
TO
CC






CO

TO
U
U!
-
^
U.




CO

TO
O
CO

C
a.




















•P
c
TO
P
O
a.
2inr~-oinfs-^moNCMi^ON^-j-oh- -oo • • -o 'inco— 'O m — •
OO O • -OOO -O O ' V O
V OO O V O
V V V




















CMCM CM CM CM CM CO CM CM CM CM CM — CM CM CM CM






• •
— '
t

•t
I/I
4}
C u) in
CO 3 -O
^ i. 0!
3 O  C t- E
a OCOOiCO E3-OEE E
.C.C CO E U E E 3 C MO) 33E 3
— a a~O •O3C03 3 E— CO VOE 	 3 C —
CO — C— CC— E — 3B)S-a-PPC3^t-C OP
Oin 	 TO« 	 TOT33 CC— (1)3^— TOO)— TO3— OC
•—•**• on OEoico — c TOOOC — Xco'-o.i- — — wo— o
eOQQOTOPP— 33CCS-OCP! 	 WO — ^-PW-P 	 TO 	 S-
cOOOCOOOO 	 TOTOTO! 	 OTOraOOO— S-PTOCB— O— P
^ ^ ZC" >• h- U C/J
o
— OSONCMOOOOVO
inifNZONONOovovn — ON
A V






CM ON ON ON ON
ON ON ON ON ON

1 1 1 1 1

o CMin o CM

A

o 	 ojjfrr-.d'co.a-NO
— v v vo— A in -co
V— . Y/
^P v




o o
o o
o CMOCO o in
— VO CM V -^00 V — V CM

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

— OOQ 	 oo -a
ca -co v cocooca
o
V









— po — co vo vo cvi in  3 E
— co— S3 co >,
OO 	 3 — «- -o « 	
a E c 	 so)— 3co
— ci-coeo.co>>coco —
o

sozoo'a-^-oz
z — zvomoN z







CO-
ON ON

1 1

— VO



inm — mm-ico_i
• v v CMCM o -a
^r — CQ in co




o
o
l~- vo
i-- m^t o

1 II 1

— _l_l _l
v aa a
CO CO CO











— 	 VOCNJ — — • —











CM CMCM —



CO
P
TO

TO
^—
4J 0)
£ -p
an co
— 4J
•^ea TO
— £— 4)
X-P TO -P
x ^z .c ro
CO Q.P —
£ £ a
	 a£
>»>> *>
£ N — £
P C >>Q.
E E CO 0) 4->
3 3 1 £> 3 —
— « — CM a >>
C fl) — 	 1 J=
CO >— O >sC P
	 TO c w *> r co
CD — £ 	 3 	


Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.5-8
-------











o
1-
3



_J
U.

O
1

1

H
3
00
O 3
e
ce —
O-P
u. c
o
1"
y
a
M

>•
0
O
z
X
u
UJ
1-
1
o
ce
i-
§











M

6
o
u
»
«
«
^
§
ej
c
o
w
2
4J
C
CD
U
C
0
o
4J
c
41
—
V
U







10
4J
C

o
o
CO
(0
O




















c
(D
•o
1


CD
O
c
CO
ce

c
ce
I







e
o
c
09
ce




09
_•
CO
o
u>
a
u.




CD
(0
U


1

Ift
r-


ZOQQQQ «f- inZOOQ
^0 ~ 0





ft}
tf> •&
** 	
1 III

O QQQ
CO CO CO CO


















— CM CMCMCM— —








— c
CD O CD
•P CON
m o c c
— — C 0> CD
c« o a N J3
£ C p C O
+>— CD >- CD <-
C. OS. 0 A 0
ac a — OCD — o>
CD O C «- C £ C
— £ <- U OCD UCDCD CD
^fc Q_ rt ,^ ^ K| , ^ f f*
^k U> W IN *^ J» fc» b
4J O— t- CC (.UCDCDCD
O«-.C t- CD O O CDH£ O C —
O O O— 1 C — A C 1 O.COCDCO
1 •• W O ^O 0) O •• CD A CO ^* » »3 >C£O-P
1 OCCD^CCMC — M CO -P 3 a
— ICD£ -0) - -P O « O C — (0
Q W 1. Q. CM CO — UJI 	 «U.Z


jrzZZZZZZvTiSZvOZ — Z£vOrf
zzzzzzzzr-zziftzoszzr^vo










DQQQQOOOQMrocOOQQQQQ
^
CVJ





o
o

1
o




















••» ^. ^ V. «•









CD
C CD
(4 CD C
£ -a o
*J 	
0) 0) «- >»
E -D 0£
VO — CVJ CM CO .SO i <-£CD
O CM CM CM CM CM CM <- E — <- <-
— OOC — XOQQ —
t.l.t-4-t.5-S_T3w*iaw a
^i w Ito te »• w W t« j^ £i Q) O V "~" W •» *» QJ
a-<«««oozz(-wjQ^a-x
















































•
CD
£
(0

10
a J
O "~
c —

CO C
•P O • •
CO— — CD
•a -P -33
CD CD CD C7) 00
4J PW C >
CD 0> O —
U-0 CD C CD
•D > CD CD (0
c o-o e s
(AjQ O O O
JC C C «-
c« a
TO-! o «a
-QOZ<
CQCOZZ*
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.5-9
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
                       Coagulation  and  Flocculation With Sedimentation
                       (Lime,  Coagulant Aids)
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
               Iron and steel
              Combination acid
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  C
References:  3-9,  pp.  256-257,  294,  299
Pretreatment/treatment:   Equal./Coag.  Floe., Sed.
       Data source status:
         Not specified
         Bench scale
         Pilot scale
         Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:   0.378 L/s
Chemical dosage:   Unspecified
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention time:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Batch operation
                                             Clarifier detention time:  Un-
                                               specified
                                             Hydraulic loading rate:  Un-
                                               specified
                                             Weir  loading  rate:  Unspecified
                                             Media:  Not applicable
                                             Bed depth:  Not applicable
                                             Backwash:  Not applicable
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling;  Unspecified
                                              Analysis;  Data  set 2  (V.7.3.5)
                                  Concentration
    Pollutant/parameter
                               Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
  limit
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  TSS                              110          31
  Oil and grease                     5         0.3
  Fluoride                   1,700,000     130,000
  Iron (dissolved)             220,000       8,500
  Nitrates                      39,000      48,000
NM, not meaningful.
                                                          71
                                                          94
                                                          92
                                                          96
                                                          NM
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Chromium
Nickel (dissolved)
Copper
Zinc

140,000
240,000
6,300
870

1,300
2,500
80
35

99
99
99
96
  Date:   9/25/81
                                 III.3.1.5-10
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
Coagulation and Flocculation With Sedimentation
or Filtration (Lime,  Polymer)
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Iron and steel
Subcategory:  Hot forming
Plant:  087
References:  3-8, pp.  153,172,216
Pretreatment/treatment:  Sed./Coag.  Floe.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:   1750 L/s
Chemical dosage:  Unspecified
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention time:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Continuous operation,
  clarification of overflow, filtration
  of underflow
                           Data source status:
                             Not specified
                             Bench scale
                             Pilot scale
                             Full scale
                      Clarifier detention time:   Un-
                        specified
                      Hydraulic loading rate:  Un-
                        specified
                      Weir loading rate:   Unspecified
                      Media:  Unspecified
                      Bed depth:  Unspecified
                      Backwash:  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA

Sampling;  24-hour composite and grab	Analysis;   Data  set  1  (V.7.3.5)
                                  Concentration
    Pollutant/parameter
        Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
  limit
Classical pollutants,  mg/L:
  TSS
  Oil and grease
             66
              5
     38
      4
Blanks indicate data not available.
MM, not meaningful.
   42
   20
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc

240
65
800
500
250

43
31


210

82
52
NM
NM
16
Date:   9/25/81
        III.3.1.5-11
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
          Chemical Precipitation With  Sedimentation
          (Lime)
Data source:
Point source
Subcategory:
Plant:  093
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Iron and steel
 Hydrochloric acid

3-9, pp.  261, 283-284
       Data source  status:
         Not specified
         Bench scale
         Pilot scale
         Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:   Neutral./Chem.  Ppt.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:   17.4 L/S
Chemical dosages(s):  Unspecified
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention time:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Continuous operation
                                Type  of sedimentation:   Clarifier
                                Hydraulic  loading rate:   Unspeci-
                                  fied
                                Hydraulic  detention time:  Un-
                                  specified
                                Weir  loading rate:   Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling;  Unspecified
                                 Analysis;   Data set 2 (V.7.3.5)
                                  Concentration
    Pollutant/parameter
                  Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
  limit
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  TSS                             490
  Oil and grease                  250
  Dissolved iron                3,500
                                  43
                                 5.5
                                 5.1
Blanks indicate data not available.
BDL, below detection limit.
NM, not meaningful.
               91
               98
              >99
Toxic pollutants, vig/L:
Chloroform
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
BDL
45
BDL
790
690
430
480
27
1,500
BDL
BDL
20
75
170
580
270
90
250
NM
89
NM
91
75
NM
44
NM
83
 Date:   9/25/81
                   III.3.1.5-12
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
          Coagulation and Floccuiation With Sedimentation
          (Lime,  Polymer)
Data source:
Point source
Subcategory:
Plant:  123
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Iron and steel
 Combination acid

3-9, pp.  262,295,332
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:   46.2 L/s
Chemical dosage:  Unspecified
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Floccuiation detention time:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Batch operation
       Data source status:
         Not specified
         Bench scale
         Pilot scale
         Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:   Equal.,/Coag.  Floe.,  Sed.
                                                          Un-
  Clarifier detention time:
    specified
  Hydraulic loading rate :   Un-
    specified
  Weir loading rate:   Unspecified
  Media:  Not applicable
  Bed depth:  Not applicable
  Backwash:  Not applicable
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling:  Unspecified
                                  Analysis;   Data  set  2  (V.7.3.5)
                                  Concentration
    Pollutant/parameter
                  Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
  limit
Classical pollutants,  mg/L;
  Oil and grease
  TSS
  Iron (dissolved)
                       5
                      36
                      46
   8.5
    28
  0.46
Blanks indicate data not available.
BDL, below detection limit.
*Approximate value.
   NM
   21
   99
Toxic pollutants, ]ig/L:
Arsenic
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc

10
3,200
260
100
7,600
80

BDL
360
30
100
330
120

50*
89
88
0
96
NM
 Date:   9/25/81
                   III.3.1.5-13
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
                        Coagulation and  Flocculation With Sedimentation
                        (Alum, Lime)
               Effluent Guidelines
                Textile mills
               Wool finishing
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  A
References:  3-89,  pp.  39-43
Pretreatment/treatment:  None(a)/Coag.  Floe.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Chemical dosage:   35 mg/L Alum  (AsAl+3)
Mix detention  time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention time:  Unspecified
Unit configuration: 6.25 m3 reactor/
  clarifier
pH in clarifier:   6.1
Data source  status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
                                               Clarifier  detention time:
                                                 Unspecified
                                               Hydraulic  loading rate:
                                                 16-21 m3/d/m2
                                               Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                               Media:  Not  applicable
                                               Bed depth:  Not applicable
                                               Backwash:  Not applicable
                                    REMOVAL DATA
SamDlino: 2l|-hr comoosfte
Pollutant/parameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
Aluminum
Ba r i urn
Boron
Calcium
Cobalt
1 ron
Magnesium
Manganese
Molybdenum
Phosphorus
Sodium
Sll Icon
Strontium
Tin
Titanium
Vanadium
Phenol
Toxic pollutants, M9/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Beryll ium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
B!s(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Heptachlor
1 , 2-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,2,11-Trichlorobenzene
Alpha-BHC
ll.V-DOT
To 1 uene
Ethyl benzene
Pheno 1

Concent
Influent) a)

0.23
0.02
0.27
36
0.02
Z.O
5.0
0.09
75
0
7
NM
NM
33
NM
17

NM
NM
NM
NM
72
35
>60
NM
NM
NM
1 1
NM
614*
99*
91
91"
76"
55
98*
NM
1 (V. 7. 3. 321
Detection
limit






























O.OU
1.0
0.05
0.09
1.0
1.0
O.I
0.2
0.07
                Blanks indicate data not available.
                BOL, below detection limit.
                NM, not meaningful.
                *Approximate value.
                (a)lnfluent Is taken from final treatment effluent and is then run through
                  pi lot process.
  Date:   9/25/81
                                   III.3.1.5-14
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
Coagulation and Flocculation With Sedimentation
(Alum)
Data  source:   Effluent  Guidelines
Point source:  Textile  mills
Subcategory:   Woven fabric finishing
Plant:   C
References:  3-89, pp.  45-48
Pretreatment/treatment:   None(a)/Coag.  Floe.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:   Unspecified
Chemical dosage:  40 mg/L alum
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention  time:  Unspecified
Unit  configuration: 6.25 m3 reactor/
  clarifier
pH in clarifier:  6.9
                             Data source status:
                               Not specified
                               Bench scale
                               Pilot scale
                               Full scale
                       Clarifier detention  time:
                         Unspecified
                       Hydraulic loading  rates
                         16 m3/d/m*
                       Weir loading rate:   Unspecified
                       Media:   Not applicable
                       Bed depth:  Not applicable
                       Backwash:  Not applicable
                                     REMOVAL DATA
                 Sampling:  24-hr composite
                                             Analysis: Data set I (V.7.3.32)
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
A 1 urn 1 num
Barium
Boron
Calcium
Cobalt
1 ron
Hagnesium
Manganese
Holybdenum
Nickel
Phosphorus
Si 1 Icon
Strontium
Tin
Titanium
Vanadium
Phenol
Toxic pollutants, |ig/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Beryllium
Cadmium
Ch rom 1 urn
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
Sliver
Zinc
Di-n-butyl pht ha late
Bls(2-ethylhexyl) pht ha late
Anthracene
Pentach 1 oropheno 1
Pheno 1
To I uene
Dibromochloromethane
1 ,2-Dichlorobenzene
Ethylbenzene
Methylene chloride
Influent!*)

O.I
0.07
0.05
5.2
<0.006
0.23
3.7
0.02
40
NM
NM
NM
81
NM
NM
NH
IO
NH
0
NM
NM
NM
91*
93
75*
NM
NM
56
limit.






























0.02
0.04
0.01
0.4
0.07
O.I
0.3
0.05
0.2
0.4
                 Blanks indicate data not available.
                 BDL, below detection liialt.
                 NM, not meaningful.
                 •Approximate value.
                 (a)lnfluent Is taken from final treatment effluent and is then run through
                  pilot process.
Date:   9/25/81
        III.3.1.5-15
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
                       Coagulation and Flocculation With Sedimentation
                       (Unspecified)
Data source:
Point source
Subcategory:
Plant:  D
References:
              Effluent Guidelines
               Aluminum  forming
              Unspecified
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
             3-27, pp. 90,  294-303                  Full scale             _x
Pretreatment/treatment:   Oil  Sep., Chem.  Red. (Cr)/Neutral., Sed  (clarifier]
  with Oil Sep., Coag. Floe.,  Sed. (clarifier)
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:   Unspecified
Chemical dosage:  Unspecified
Mix detention time:  Unspecified
Flocculation detention  time:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Unspecified
                                              Clarifier detention  time:
                                                Unspecified
                                              Hydraulic loading  rate:
                                                Unspecified
                                              Weir loading rate:   Unspecified
                                              Media:  Not applicable
                                              Bed depth:  Not applicable
                                              Backwash:  Not applicable
                                    REMOVAL DATA
Sampling: Three 214-hour or
one 72-hour composite
Po 1 1 utant/oa rameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
0(1 and grease
Suspended solids
COD
TOC
Phenol
pH, pH units
Toxic pollutants, U9/L:
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Coppe r
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Zinc
Acenapthene
Benzene
2,1,6-Trlchlorophenol
Chloroform
2-Chlorophenol
Methylene chloride
Napthalene
Phenol
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Dl-n-butyl phthalate
Dl-n-octyl phthalate
Dlethyl phthalate
Fluorene
Pyrene
Tetrachloroethylene
To 1 uene
1,1 '-DDE
Beta-BHC
PCB-1212, 1251, 1221
PCB-1232, 1218, 1260, 1016
Concent ri
Influent

6H
180
85
50
0.16
7.0

BOL
BDL
1,600
10
BDL
BDL
<0.1
BDL
<70
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
<200
ND
<20
56
<90
BDL
50
BDL
NO
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
Analysis
it Ion
Effluent

10
<5.3
27
11
0.31
7.1

BDL
BDL
30
<10
BDL
BDL
<0. 1
BDL
BDL
NO
BDL
BDL
25
BDL
<630
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
ND
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
: Data
Percent
remova 1

8M
>99
68
78
26
NM

MM
NM
98
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
61*
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
75»

9U«
NM
90"
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
set 2 (V.7.3.7I
Detection
limit








10
2
5
9
100
20
0.1
5
50
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
5
5
5
5
                Blanks indicate data not available.
                BOL, below detection Unit.
                ND, not detected.
                NM, not meaningful.
                •Approximate value.
 Date:   9/25/81
                                 III.3.1.5-16
-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
 Data source:
 Point source:
 Subcategory:
 Plant:  K
 References:
          Coagulation  and Flocculation With Sedimentation
          (Cationic Flocculant)
 Effluent Guidelines
  Aluminum forming
 Unspecified

3-27, pp. 96, 318-319
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
 Pretreatment/ treatment:  Neutral. /Coag. Floe., Sed.
 DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
 Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
 Chemical dosage:  Cationic  flocculant
 Mix detention time:  Unspecified
 Flocculation detention time:   Unspecified
 Unit configuration:  Unspecified
                                 Clarifier detention time:
                                   Unspecified
                                 Hydraulic loading rate:
                                   Unspecified
                                 Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                 Media:  Not applicable
                                 Bed depth:  Not applicable
                                 Backwash:  Not applicable
                                  REMOVAL DATA
    Samp I ing:
Three 24-hour or
one 72-hour composite
                                               Analysis;  Data set  2  (V.7.3.7)
       Pol 1 utant/oarameter
                     Concentration       Percent   Detection
                   Influent   Effluent    removal	I imit
    Classical pollutants, mg/L:
      Oil  a nd grea se                  611
      Suspended solids               170         10
      COD                            56         22
      TOC                            22         11
      Phenol                      0.006      0.013
      pH,  pH units                  7.0        7.9
    Blanks  indicate data not available.
    BDL,  below detection limit.
    NO,  not detected.
    NM,  not meaningful.
    "Approximate value.
                                           NM
                                           94
                                           61
                                           50
                                           NM
                                           NM
Toxic pollutants, uxj/L:
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Zinc
Methylene chloride
Bi s(2-ethy Ihexy I ) ph thai ate

<10
1,200
100
<50
1
85
970
19

<10
85
<20
<50
0.3
BDL
100
16

NM
93
>80
NM
70
71*
NM
16

2
5
9
20
0.1
50
10
10
Date:   9/25/81
                  III.3.1.5-17
-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
Coagulation  and Flocculation With  Filtration
(Lime, CaCl2,  Sodium Bisulfite, Polyelectrolyte)
 Data source:  Effluent  Guidelines
 Point source:  Electrical and electronic
   components
 Subcategory:  Electron  tube
 Plant:  30172
 References:  3-31, pp.  IX-27,28,33,34,37,38,63
 Pretreatment/treatment:  Chem. Red.  (Cr),  Chem.  Ppt., Equal./
   Coag. Floe., Filter
                            Data  source status:
                              Not specified
                              Bench scale
                              Pilot scale
                              Full scale
 DESIGN OR OPERATING  PARAMETERS
 Wastewater flow  rate:   310 m3/day
 Chemical dosage:  Lime,  CaCl2,  sodium
   bisulfite, polyelectrolyte
 Mix detention time:   Unspecified
 Flocculation detention time:  Not
   applicable
 Unit configuration:   Continuous
 Backwash:  Unspecified
                       Clarifier  detention time:
                         Not applicable.
                       Hydraulic  loading rate:
                         Unspecified
                       Weir loading rate:  Not
                         applicable
                       Media: Unspecified
                       Bed depth:   Unspecified
                                     REMOVAL DATA
SamDlina: Three 21-hour composites
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants. ng/L:
01 1 and grease
TOC
BOD
TSS
Pheno 1
fluoride
pH, pH units
Ca 1 c i urn
Magnesium
Sod i urn
A 1 urn i num
Manganese
Vanadium
Boron
Ba r i un
Molybdenum
Tin
Yttrium
Coba 1 t
1 ron
Titanium
palladium
Tel lurium
Platinum
Cold
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Ant imony
Arsenic
Beryl 1 ium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nlcket
Selenium
Si Iver
Thallium
Zinc
Cyanide
Analysis
Concentration^ )
Influent

12
U9
67
77
78
NM
NM
99
NM
97
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM

51
92
NM
>99
92
79
99
NM
82
NM
NM
NM
98
NM
                 Blanks indicate data not available.
                 NH, not Meaningful.
                 (aJValues presented as "less than" the reported concentration are below
                  detectable  limits.  They are not reported as 8DL because the detection
                  Units are variables In this industry.
Date:   9/25/81
        III.3.1.5-18
-------
III.3.1.6  Distillation

     Description

Distillation is a unit process usually employed to separate
volatile components of a waste stream or to purify liquid organic
product streams.  The process involves boiling a liquid solution
and collecting and condensing the vapor, thus separating the
components of the solution.  The process relies upon the differ-
ences in vapor-pressure exhibited by materials at various temper-
atures.  If one component of a mixture has a higher vapor pressure
than the others at a certain temperature,  then boiling the mixture
at this temperature will concentrate the more volatile components
in the vapor phase.  The vapor is collected in a vessel (accumu-
lator) where it is condensed, resulting in a separation of mate-
rials in the feed stream into two streams of different composi-
tion.  If there are only two components in the liquid, one con-
centrates in the condensed vapor (condensate) and the other in
the residue liquid (bottoms).  If there are more than two com-
ponents, the less volatile components concentrate in the residual
liquid and the more volatile in the vapor or vapor condensate.
If the vapor is condensed and then reboiled, a vapor stream with
a different composition may be obtained, allowing further separa-
tion of the material.  This is the basis for multi-stage distilla-
tion operations (e.g., packed columns or tray distillation).

The ease with which a component is vaporized is called its vola-
tility, and the relative volatilities of the components determine
their vapor-liquid equilibrium relationships.  If one of the two
components in a mixture is more volatile than the other, it will
be more concentrated in the vapor phase and leaner in the liquid
phase.  The degree to which the separation will take place under
a given set of equalibrium conditions depends on how far the
volatilities of the components vary from each other.  If the
volatilities of two components are the same, the mixture is
azeotropic (i.e.,  there will be no difference in the composition
between the liquid and the vapor at equilibrium) and it cannot be
separated by ordinary distillation methods.

     Representative Types and Modifications

There are five general types of distillation described below:

     (1)  Batch Distillation.  The simplest form of distillation
          is a single equilibrium (vapor/liquid contact) stage
          operation carried out in a "still".  The liquid is
          heated to a sufficient temperature to volatilize the
          lower boiling material with the vapor condensed and
          collected in an accumulator.  If the residual liquid is
          the product, then the operation continues until the
          desired purity of the liquid phase has been obtained.
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.6-1
-------
          Batch  distillation is the most common type of process
          used for  industrial waste and particularly for  solvent
          recovery.  A  typical solvent recovery distillation unit
          consists  of a boiling chamber into which contaminated
          solvent is pumped, steam jacket and boiler to supply
          the  heat, vapor  collector and condensing unit,  and
          instrumentation.

     (2)   Continuous Fractional Distillation.  The fractional
          distillation  process is used when the liquid feed is to
          be separated  into more than one product or when a
          nearly pure product is required.  The process consists
          of returning  part of the condensate or overhead product
          back to the distillation process.  The returned con-
          densate liquid or reflux is introduced at the top of
          the  column and as it flows down it is brought into
          intimate  contact with the rising vapor stream.   This
          process enriches the rising vapor stream and results in
          nearly pure overhead product.  The intimate contact
          between vapor and reflux is achieved by having  a number
          of perforated plates or trays, or packing material in
          the  column.   The bottom product can also be purified by
          introducing the  feed in a central portion of the column
          rather than to the still.  The feed material flows down
          through the column and some of the volatile components
          are  stripped  before it reaches the still.  The  stripped
          feed is further  boiled in the still, also referred to
          as reboilers, and is continuously withdrawn as  a liquid
          bottom product.  Figure 3.1.6-1 presents a schematic of
          a continuous  fractional distillation column.

     (3)   Azeotropic Distillation.  An azeotrope is a liquid
          mixture whose components have the same volatility and
          thus produce  a vapor phase of the same composition as
          that of the liquid.  Separation of an azeotrope is
          often  achieved by adding an additive to the mixture to
          form a new boiling-point azeotrope with one of  the
          original  constituents.  The volatility of the new
          azeotrope is  such that it may be easily separated from
          the other original constituents.  Azeotropic distilla-
          tion does not find extensive use because of the dif-
          ficulty of finding a solvent that forms a new azeotrope
          with the  necessary properties  (e.g., volatility, easily
          recovered from the new azeotrope, relatively inexpen-
          sive,  non-toxic, non-corrosive, and non-reactive).

     (4)   Extractive Distillation.  This is a distillation pro-
          cess where a  non-volatile  separating  agent is added to
          a mixture that is difficult or impossible to  separate
          by ordinary means due to the relative volatility of the
          components of the mixture.  The solvent alters  the
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.6-2
-------
      FEED


DISTILLATION COLUMN
\
-^
REFLUX


jiMutNitn •
| ] ACCUMULATOR
(K
XPUMP
>r-— STEAM
*— » \
                        REBOILER
                   CONDENSATE
                               BOTTOMS
                               PRODUCT
     FIGURE 3.1.6-1.
SCHEMATIC OF A CONTINUOUS  FRACTIONAL
DISTILLATION COLUMN
Date:  9/25/81
    III.3.1.6-3
-------
          relative volatility of the original constituents,  thus
          permitting separation.  The added solvent is of low
          volatility and is not appreciably vaporized.  The
          solvent and the component with the reduced volatility
          are removed as the liquid stream.   Further treatment of
          the liquid stream is required to separate the agent
          from the liquid for reuse.

     (5)  Molecular Distillation.  Molecular distillation is a
          form of a very low pressure distillation conducted at
          absolute pressures in the order of 0.003 mm of mercury.
          The process is useful when a heat sensitive material is
          involved or when the volatility of the materials is
          very low.

     Technology Status

Distillation is well developed for processing applications.
Industrial wastewater applications are less numerous and less
demonstrated.

     Applications

Treatment of wastes by distillation is not widespread, perhaps
because of the cost of energy requirements.   The distillation
process is currently being used to recover solvents and chemicals
from industrial wastes, where such recovery is economical.  The
use of distillation for treatment may increase as regulations for
discharge become stricter making the cost of byproducts recovery
through distillation a more competitive means of waste solvent
recovery.  Other means of reclamation competitive to distillation
include steam stripping (Section III.3.1.19) and evaporation
(Section III.3.1.8).

Typical industrial wastes that can be handled by distillation
include the following:

     - Plating wastes containing an organic component
        (usually the solvents are evaporated and the organic
       vapors distilled).

     - Organic effluents from printed circuit boards are
       adsorbed on activated carbon.  Regeneration of the
       activated carbon gives a liquid which is distillable
       for recovery of the organic component.

     - Methylene chloride that contains contaminants is a dis-
       posal problem, but it can be salvaged for industrial
       application by distilling.

     - Methylene chloride can be recovered from polyurethane
       waste.
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.6-4
-------
     - The separation of ethylbenzene from styrene and recovery
       of both.

     - Waste solvents for reuse in cleaning industrial equipment;
       this is usually a mixture of acetone,  ketones,  or alcohols,
       and some aromatics.

     - Recovery of acetone from a waste stream that was created
       by the regeneration of a carbon adsorption bed used to
       remove acetone vapor from the offgas in plastic filter
       products.

     - The production of antibiotics (e.g., pencillin) results
       in the generation of large quantities of wastes con-
       taining butyl acetate.  The waste is distilled, and
       a portion of the butyl acetate can be recycled.  The
       still bottoms, however, are hazardous wastes, which
       contain 50% butyl acetate and 50% dissolved organics
       (fats and protein).  These are disposed of by
       incineration.

     - Waste motor oil from local service stations and from
       industrial locations can be re-refined to produce
       regenerated lube oil or fuel oil with the aid of
       distillation.

     Advantages and Limitations

Distillation can recover materials that otherwise would be
destroyed by waste treatment.  It can separate, segregate, or
purify to high quality standards.  This could mean that the
recovered solvent may be directly recyclable or salable.

Distillation has many limitations as listed below:

     - The equipment is expensive, and is often complex,
       requiring operation by highly skilled personnel.

     - Recovery is energy-intensive.

     - Its application to feed is limited in that it will handle
       only liquid solutions which are relatively "clean" and of
       a consistent composition.

     - Materials being distilled should not contain appreciable
       quantities of solids or non-volatile materials.

     - Feeds that tend to polymerize should be avoided.

     - Still bottoms sometimes contain tars and sludges which
       must be disposed by landfilling or incineration.
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.6-5
-------
     Reliability

This process is highly reliable for proven applications when
properly operated and maintained.

     Chemicals Required

Solvents may be required in some distillation processes.

     Residuals Generated

The condensate stream or the liquid bottoms stream will contain
the concentrated pollutants which require subsequent handling.

     Design Criteria

The design criteria for a specific application will be dependent
upon the physical properties of the waste stream and the required
effectiveness of the separation.  The key properties will relate
to the relative volatilities of the pollutants and the stream
matrix (e.g., water or a recoverable solvent).

     Performance

No performance data are available for distillation as a waste-
water control technology.

     References

3-11, 3-36.
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.6-6
-------
III.3.1.7  Electrodialysis

     Description

Conventional electrodialysis systems consist of an anode
(positively charged) and a cathode (negatively charged) separated
by an anion permeable membrane near the anode and a cation perme-
able membrane near the cathode.  This combination forms an anode
chamber, a cathode chamber, and a center chamber.  Industrial
wastewater containing metallic salts enters the center chamber
where an electrical charge is applied.  This draws the cations
(positive ions) to the cathode and the anions (negative ions) to
the anode.  The result is a significant reduction in salt concen-
tration in the center cell with an increase in solution concen-
trations in the adjacent cells.  Thus, the water in the center
cell is purified,  cations (e.g., metal ions) are concentrated in
the cathode cell,  and anions (e.g., sulfates and chlorides) are
concentrated in the anode cell.  The concentrated streams or the
purified water are drawn off from the individual chambers for
recovery or for further treatment.

Electrodialysis cells in practice are made very thin and are
assembled as stacks of cells in parallel.  To achieve a high feed
rate, each stack often consists of more than 100 cells.  Feed
material is first filtered to remove suspended particulate matter
that could clog the system or foul the membrane.  Pretreatment by
activated carbon adsorption (Section III.3.1.1) or filtration
(Section III.3.1.9) may be used to remove oxidizing materials,
ferrous or manganous ions, zinc, organics, and other materials
that can damage the membrane.  Antiscaling additives may be
necessary to prevent the chemical precipitation of salts.  Also,
the input stream is commonly acidified to offset the increase in
pH normally occuring within the cell.  Membrane life, although
dependent on service conditions, is frequently as much as five
years.

Electrodialysis differs from reverse osmosis (Section III.3.1.16)
and ultrafiltration (Section III.3.1.21) because it uses electro-
potential differences as a driving force; pressure differences
are used in the latter two processes.  A schematic of an electro-
dialysis process is shown in Figure 3.1.7-1.

     Representative Types and Modifications

The type of membrane chosen to treat a particular waste stream
represents the major variation in the type of electrodialytic
process.  Most of the electrodialysis membranes are thin sheets
of divinyl-benzene-styrene copolymers with ion-exchange groups
reinforced by a synthetic fiber backing.  The cation membranes
are mostly of the sulfonic type, while the anion membranes are of
the quarternary ammonium type, usually reinforced with plastic
fibers.  Newer membranes of perfluorosulfonic acid polymers,


Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.7-1
-------
* (TO RINSE
TANKS)


o-
CATHODE
DILUTING
CIRCUIT



•^


1
I
AfcfAfc


*'-.

I
/
i"*
<
^J,
*

X"
^*
t

<
~>
t

wunuc.ni KAIC.U ru«im
DRAG-OUT (TO PLATING
\ f


-M+
X"'
1
1 f
CONCENTRATING
t
^M*
^^
^T
t




r


-0
ANODE
*— CONTAMINATED
RINSE
FEED
C * CAT ION- SELECTIVE ME*


A - ANION-SELECTIVE MEMB
                                        = CATIONS

                                        « ANIONS
    FIGURE 3.1.7-1.  ELECTRODIALYSIS UNIT FLOW SCHEMATIC
                      [3-121]
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.7-2
-------
which have improved stability and chemical resistance,  are also
available.

Most membranes permit operation up to 50°C (122°F), although
membrane development activity is attempting to raise that limit.
The ability of the different types of membranes to withstand pH
extremes varies considerably.  Generally,  electrodialysis works
best on acidic streams containing a single principle metal ion
(such as acid nickel baths).  At alkaline pH's, membrane life may
diminish, but the system has been reported usuable up to pH 14
under special circumstances.

     Technology Status

Electrodialysis is a mature technology with well-known per-
formance characteristics.  The process is well established for
purifying brackish water, and recently for recovery of metal
salts from plating rinse.

     Applications

Electrodialysis is not widely used, but when developed further
through pilot operations its use may increase.  The ability of
this process to concentrate ionic materials allows consideration
of its applicability to systems that accomplish the following
separations:

     - reduction of brine water stream volumes,
     - recovery of inorganic salts,
     - removal of inorganic salts from waste streams to
       facilitate further treatment, and
     - separation and recovery of ionic materials from complex
       aqueous solutions containing neutral organics.

Currently, the electroplating subcategory of the Metal Finishing
industry utilizes electrodialysis as a treatment/recovery tech-
nology.  It has been shown to be an effective method for concen-
trating metal salts from rinse waters for reuse.  The natural
evaporation taking place in a plating bath will often be suffi-
cient to allow electrodialysis to be used to provide adequate
dissolved materials removal to allow for a complete recycle
system without the addition of an evaporator.

     Advantages and Limitations

The advantages of electrodialysis include its capability to
recover valuable waste materials that are soluble.  The process
also can be designed for the recovery of a specific material.
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.7-3
-------
Fouling of the membrane is the primary limitation of electro-
dialysis.  The physical configuration of the electrodialysis
stack affects its susceptibility to solids fouling.   Fouling can
occur through organics and metal ion interference or scaling as a
result of exceeding solubility limits.  It is rarely practical to
produce a product water of less than about 250 mg/L total dis-
solved solids.  Suspended organic matter needs to be removed down
to 50-100 y;  iron and manganese should be limited to 0.2 mg/L
combined.  Trivalent ions, such as aluminum and phosphate can
also cause increased electrical resistance [3-11].

Other limitations to this process include high initial costs, the
requirement for skilled labor, high energy costs, the need for
membrane cleaning and replacement, sophisticated equipment and
instrumentation, and the production of excess brine waters.

     Reliability

Reliability is highly dependant on operator skill, the specific
application,  and the pretreatment used to protect the membrane.

     Chemicals Required

Acid for pH adjustment and antiscaling additives may be used to
improve performance and help extend membrane life.

     Residuals Generated

The process produces a secondary stream of concentrated brine
that may require further treatment.

     Design Criteria

The design of an electrodialysis process is specific to the waste
stream being treated.  To achieve the highest efficiency of
recovery of metals in water rinses, the following criteria are
important:

     - proper selection of the membrane,
     - a large difference in diffusion coefficients of the
       molecules being separated,
     - a high initial concentration of the molecule being
       recovered, and
     - a tolerable concentration of the molecules being
       excluded in the recovery solution.

     Performance

No performance data are available for electrodialysis.

     References

3-3, 3-4, 3-11, 3-23, 3-25, 3-34, 3-121.

Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.7-4
-------
III.3.1.8  Evaporation

     Description

Evaporation is a concentration process involving removal of water
from a solution by vaporization to produce a concentrated resi-
dual solution.  The energy source may be synthetic (steam,  hot
gases, and electricity) or natural (solar and geothermal).   The
process offers the possibility of total wastewater elimination
with only the remaining concentrated solution requiring disposal
and also offers the possibility of recovery and recycle of useful
chemicals from wastewater.

Evaporation differs from drying in that the residue is usually a
highly viscous liquid, and the vapor a single component.  When
the vapor is a mixture, no attempt normally is made in the evapo-
ration step to separate the vapor into different components.

     Representative Types and Modifications

Many types and modifications exist for the evaporation process;
however, the  process can be divided into the broad categories of
steam evaporation and solar evaporation.

     (1)  Steam Evaporation.  In this process, steam is used as a
          source of heat to raise the temperature of solution to
          its boiling point.  The process is carried out either
          at a pressure less than atmospheric (vacuum evapora-
          tion) or at atmospheric pressure (atmospheric evapora-
          tion) .

          (a)  Vacuum evaporation.  In this modification, the
          evaporation pressure is lowered to cause the liquid to
          boil at reduced temperature and to protect any organic
          fraction of the evaporating solution from thermal
          decomposition.  All of the water vapor is condensed
          and, to maintain the vacuum condition, noncondensible
          gases (air in particular) are removed by a vacuum pump.
          Vacuum evaporation may be either single or multiple
          effect.  For example, in double effect evaporation, the
          water vapor from the first evaporator is used to supply
          heat to a second evaporator operated at a lower pres-
          sure.  Roughly equal quantities of wastewater are
          removed in each evaporator; thus, the double effect
          system removes twice the water of a single effect
          system,  at nearly the same cost in energy but with
          added capital cost and complexity.  Thermal or mechan-
          ical vapor recompression is another energy conservation
          technique available, which enables heat transfer from
          the condensing water vapor to the evaporating waste-
          water.
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.8-1
-------
          Vacuum evaporating equipment  may be  classified as  sub-
          merged tube or rising (climbing)  film.   A brief des-
          cription of the two follows:

          (i)   Submerged tube - In most commonly  used submerged
          tube evaporators,  the heating and condensing coils are
          contained in a single vessel  to  reduce  capital cost.
          The  vacuum in the  vessel is maintained  by an eductor-
          type pump,  which creates the  required vacuum by the
          flow of the condenser cooling water  through a venturi.
          Wastewater accumulates in the bottom of the vessel and
          is evaporated by means of submerged  steam coils.   The
          resulting water vapor condenses  as it contacts the
          condensing coils in the top of the vessel.   The conden-
          sate then drips off the condensing coils into a collec-
          tion trough that carries it out  of the  vessel.   Concen-
          trate is removed from the bottom of  the vessel.

          (ii) Rising film - The major  elements of the rising
          film evaporator are the evaporator,  the separator, the
          condenser,  and the vacuum pump.   Wastewater is "drawn"
          into the system by the vacuum so that a constant liquid
          level is maintained in the separator.  Liquid from the
          separator enters the steam-jacketed  evaporator tubes
          and is partially evaporated.   A  mixture of vapor and
          liquid returns to  the separator,  with the liquid re-
          moved by mesh entrainment and continuously circulated
          from the separator back to the evaporator.   The vapor
          entering the separator flows  into the condenser where
          it is condensed as it flows down through the condenser
          tubes.  The condensate, along with any  entrained air,
          is pumped out of the bottom of the condenser by a
          liquid ring vacuum pump.  Thus,  the  liquid seal pro-
          vided by the condensate keeps the vacuum in the system
          from being broken.

          (b)   Atmospheric evaporation. Atmospheric evaporators
          do not recover the distillate for reuse and do not
          operate under a vacuum.  Wastewater  is  evaporated by
          using it to humidify air flowing through a packed
          tower.  The humidified air is exhausted to the atmos-
          phere eliminating  the need for a condenser.

     (2)  Solar Evaporation.  Natural evaporation from wastewater
          impoundments located in arid  regions is a technique
          practiced at many  operations  to  reduce  discharges to
          zero or nearly zero.  Successful employment depends on
          favorable climatic conditions (net evaporation) and on
          the availability of land.  Land  requirements can be
          significant in areas where the net evaporation value  is
          small and a large  surface area of water must be ex-
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.8-2
-------
          posed. In some instances where impoundment is not
          practical for the total wastewat'er discharge, impound-
          ment of smaller, highly contaminated wastewaters from
          specific processes may afford significant advantages.

          Solar evaporation can be substantially increased by a
          variety of techniques that mechanically improve mass
          transfer rates, such as spraying.  The wastewater is
          sprayed under pressure through nozzles producing fine
          aerosols, which are evaporated in the atmosphere.  The
          driving force for this evaporation is the difference in
          relative humidity between the atmosphere and the humid-
          ity within the spray area.  Temperature, wind speed,
          spray nozzle height, and pressure are all variables
          that affect the amount of wastewater that can be evapo-
          rated.

     Technology Status

Evaporation is a well-defined and well-established process.  The
technology is proven and its application is expanding.

     Applications

Evaporation can be used for a variety of purposes including
dehydration, recovery, separation, and concentration.   Evapora-
tion is especially useful in the treatment and disposal of speci-
fic high-strength, low volume process waste streams.  The follow-
ing industries utilize some type of evaporation for waste treat-
ment and/or recovery of chemicals on a widespread basis:

     - Metal Finishing,
     - Explosives Manufacturing, and
     - Timber Products Processing.

The following industries use evaporation on a limited basis:

     - Inorganic Chemicals Manufacturing,
     - Aluminum Forming,
     - Battery Manufacturing,
     - Pharmaceutical Manufacturing,
     - Nonferrous Metals Manufacturing,
     - Organic Chemicals Manufacturing,
     - Paint and Ink Formulation,
     - Petroleum Refining,
     - Rubber Processing, and
     - Textile Mills.

In the Metal Finishing industry, evaporation is a common tech-
nology for recovery of plating chemicals from rinse water.
Evaporation achieves recovery by distilling the wastewater until
there is sufficient concentration of plating chemicals to allow


Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.8-3
-------
reuse in the plating operation.    The water vapor is condensed
and returned to the rinse tank.   In the Pulp and Paper industry,
evaporation is used to concentrate the spent liquor into a vis-
cous mass called "strong black liquor."  The strong black liquor
is then burned to recover heat and chemicals.

     Advantages and Limitations

Evaporation can greatly reduce the volume of wastewater requiring
disposal.  The water recovered from evaporation (distillate)  is
of high purity; therefore, the process can be used to convert
waste effluent to pure or process water where other water sup-
plies are inadequate or nonexistent.  In the electroplating
subcategory of the Metal Finishing industry, evaporation has  the
advantage of permitting recovery of a wide variety of plating and
other process chemicals.

The evaporation process consumes relatively large amounts of
energy.  However, the recovery of waste heat from many industrial
processes to provide a source of heat can alleviate the costs.
Moreover, the equipment is sometimes highly specialized and thus
can be expensive.  Another limitation is that, in some cases,
pretreatment may be required to remove solids and/or bacteria
that tend to cause fouling in the condenser or evaporator.

The build-up of scale on the evaporator plates reduces the heat
transfer efficiency and may present a maintenance problem or
increase operating cost.  However, it has been demonstrated that
fouling on the heat transfer surfaces can be avoided or minimized
for certain dissolved solids by maintaining a seed slurry, which
provides preferential sites for precipitate deposition.  In
addition, low temperature differences in the evaporator will
eliminate nucleate boiling and supersaturation effects.

Steam distillable impurities in the process stream are carried
over with the product water and must be handled by pre- or post-
treatment if they cannot be tolerated.

     Reliability

Evaporation is a reliable process that generally does not require
extensive operator attention.

     Chemicals Required

No chemicals are required in this process.
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.8-4
-------
     Residuals Generated

Evaporator liquids,  usually considered the product,  must be
further treated for recovery or disposal if they are not already
in recoverable form.  When ponding is used, the solid residues
generated must also be disposed.

     Design Criteria

The evaporation process is designed on the basis of the quantity
of water to be evaporated, the quantity of heat required to
evaporate water from solution, and the heat transfer rate.   The
necessary heat transfer rate can be calculated on the basis of
the required evaporation rate.  The evaporator and operating
conditions for the evaporator can then be selected to achieve the
computed overall heat transfer rate.

     Performance

No performance data are available on evaporation.

     References

3-3, 3-14, 3-24, 3-25, 3-26, 3-36.
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.8-5
-------
III.3.1.9  Filtration

     Description

Filtration is a process used for the removal of suspended solids
from wastewaters.  The separation is accomplished by the passage
of water through a physically restrictive medium with resulting
entrapment of suspended particulate matter.   The flow pattern is
usually top-to-bottom, but other patterns are sometimes used
(e.g., upflow, horizontal flow, and biflow).   The media used for
filtration include sand, coal, garnet and diatomaceous earth.

During the service cycle of filter operation, particulate matter
removed from the applied wastewater accumulates on the surface of
the grains of the media and in the pore spaces between grains.
Continued filtration reduces the porosity of the bed; this re-
duces the filtration rate if the filter is operated at constant
pressure or increases the pressure necessary to maintain the
desired wastewater flow rate through the filter.  The solids must
be removed before the filter becomes completely clogged.  For
downflow granular media filters, this is accomplished by "back-
washing"; a wash water stream is forced through the filter bed in
the reverse direction of the original fluid flow.  The wash water
is sent through the bed at a velocity sufficiently high so that
the filter bed becomes fluidized and turbulent.  In this condi-
tion, the solids are dislodged from the granular particles and
are discharged in the spent wash water.  When the backwashing
cycle is completed, the filter is returned to service.  The
filter backwash cycle may be on a timed basis, a pressure drop
basis, or a solids carryover basis from turbidity monitoring of
the outlet stream.

An important feature for successful filtration and backwashing is
the underdrain.  This is the support structure for the bed.  The
underdrain provides an area for collection of the filtered water
without clogging from either the filtered solids or the media
grains.  In addition, the underdrain prevents loss of the media
with the water, and during the backwash cycle it provides even
flow distribution over the bed.

Several standard approaches are employed for filter underdrains.
The simplest one consists of parallel porous pipes imbedded under
a layer of coarse gravel and manifolded to a header pipe for
effluent removal.  Other approaches to the underdrain system
incorporate false concrete bottoms with specific porosity con-
figurations to provide drainage and velocity head dissipation.
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.9-1
-------
     Representative Types and Modifications

Filtration processes can be placed in two general categories:
diatomaceous earth filtration (also known as surface filtration)
and granular media filtration (also known as in-depth filtra-
tion) .   Granular media filters can be further subdivided into
single- and multi-media filters using gravity or positive pres-
sure to produce the pressure differential required to move fluid
through the bed.

     (1)  Diatomaceous earth filters.  The essential parts of  a
          diatomaceous earth filter consists of septa, which
          support the filter medium and conduct the filtrate to a
          collection manifold; the filter medium (diatomite);  a
          filter housing; and a pump to provide energy to pass
          the water through the septa, medium, and appurtenant
          piping.  The operation of the system consists of three
          steps:  precoat application, filtration of water usually
          accompanied by the application of body feed (diatomite),
          and the removal of the spent filter cake.

          Precoating consists of the application of a thin layer
          of filter aid to the septum to form the filter medium.
          During filtration, the suspended solids are removed  on
          the precoat surface resulting in an increasing pressure
          drop across the filter.  Due to hydraulic compression
          of the solids on the precoat, the filter cycles may be
          very short.  To extend the filter cycle, additional
          filter aid (body feed) is added to the filter feed
          during the filtration period.  This results in a filter
          cake of solids mixed with filter aid which is more
          porous, thus allowing longer filter cycles.  At the  end
          of the filtration cycle, the filter influent is stopped,
          the filter is cleaned, and the cycle is restarted.

          Diatomaceous earth filters may be pressure filters in
          which the raw water is pumped into and through a filter
          contained in a pressure vessel, or vacuum filters in
          which suction is created on the filtered water side of
          the septum.

     (2)  Granular media filters.  Granular media filters utilize
          a bed of granular particles as the filter medium.
          These filters may use a single medium such as sand,  or
          a combination of media such as anthracite coal, acti-
          vated carbon, and sand.  Granular filters generally
          consist of 46 to 76 cm (18 to 30 in) of filter medium
          supported on an underdrain system.  The filter may be
          open to the atmosphere or enclosed completely in a
          pressure vessel.  The former are called gravity filters
          and the latter are called pressure filters.
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.9-2
-------
          Granular media filters can also be classifed according
          to hydraulic loading rates.  Traditionally, these
          classifications are slow sand, rapid sand, and high-
          rate mixed media.  Slow sand filters operate at hydrau-
          lic loadings of 2 to 4 Iiters/m2/min (0.05 to 0.10
          gpm/ft2}.   The slow sand filter is land and labor
          intensive and is rarely used in industrial applica-
          tions.  The rapid sand filters are designed to operate
          at hydraulic loadings of 80 to 200 Iiters/m2/min (2 to
          5 gpm/ft2).  A typical rapid sand filter consists of a
          sand layer 10 to 91 cm (4 to 36 inches) in thickness
          supported by a gravel layer from 30 to 61 cm (12 to 24
          in) in thickness.

          The high rate filters are designed to operate at hy-
          draulic loading rates of 200 to 400 Iiters/m2/min (5 to
          10 gpm/ft2) and are usually dual media or multimedia.
          In dual media filters, the coarse layer at the top
          (usually anthracite coal) acts as a roughing filter and
          the bottom sand layer performs the polishing function.
          The multimedia filters consist of three layers of
          filter material of different specific gravity, the top
          layer being the coarsest, the middle layer being of
          intermediate size, and the bottom layer being of very
          fine media.  The usual configuration is garnet at the
          bottom of the bed, sand in the middle, and anthracite
          coal at the top.  Some mixing of these layers occurs
          but this is desirable in that it provides an improved
          bed porosity distribution.  The dual and multimedia
          filters allow materials to be removed and stored through-
          out the full depth of the bed in contrast to the same
          functions in a sand bed which occur only in the top few
          inches of sand.  The vast storage capacity of the mixed
          media bed greatly increases the length of filter run
          before terminal head loss is reached.

          Rapid sand and high rate filters are cleaned by hydrau-
          lic backwashing in which the flow through the filter is
          reversed to expand and scour the media.  This hydraulic
          cleaning process can be supplemented by water jet
          agitation of the expanded media, mechanical stirring,
          or by injecting air into the bed before or during
          backwashing to thoroughly clean granular beds at all
          depths.

     Technology Status

Filtration is an established wastewater treatment technology
currently in full scale use for industrial waste treatment.
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.9-3
-------
     Applications

Filtration is applicable to the following areas:

        Removal of residual biological floe from settled treat-
        ment process effluents,

        Removal of residual chemically-coagulated floe from
        physical/chemical treatment process effluents,

        Removal of oil from API separator and dissolved air
        flotation effluents,

        Pretreatment prior to processes such as activated carbon
        adsorption, steam stripping, ion exchange, and chemical
        oxidation with ozone (Sections III.3.1.1, III.3.1.19,
        111.3.1.12, and 111.3.1.2 respectively).

Filtration has potential application to nearly all industrial
plants because of its versatility as a treatment technology for
solids removal.  Diatomaceous earth filtration is not nearly as
widely used as granular media filtration for industrial waste
treatment.

The Battery Manufacturing Industry uses filtration on a wide-
spread basis.  The following industries use some type of filtra-
tion on a limited basis:

     - Auto and Other Laundries,
     - Inorganic Chemicals Manufacturing,
     - Electrical and Electronic Components,
     - Iron and Steel Manufacturing,
     - Foundries,
     - Photographic Equipment and Supplies,
     - Porcelain Enameling,
     - Pharmaceutical Manufacturing,
     - Nonferrous Metals Manufacturing,
     - Petroleum Refining,
     - Textile Mills,
     - Metal Finishing,
     - Aluminum Forming,
     - Gum and Wood Chemicals,
     - Ore Mining and Dressing,
     - Paint and Ink Formulation,
     - Pulp and Paper Mills,
     - Rubber Processing,
     - Steam Electric Power Plants, and
     - Timber Products Processing.
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.9-4
-------
     Advantages and Limitations

The principal advantage to using a diatomaceous earth filter is
the reduction in size of the waste treatment system compared to a
system using a clarifier.  The filter system can be installed
within an existing plant structure even in cases where very
little free floor space is available.  The filter system's per-
formance is comparable with that of a clarifier.  One additional
advantage is the sludge removed from the filter is much drier
than that removed from a clarifier (approximately 50% solids).
This high solids content can significantly reduce the cost of
ultimate disposal.

The major limitation to the use of a filter system is an increase
in operation and maintenance costs.  In some cases this increase
in 0 & M costs is offset by the lower capital costs required when
not investing in land and outside construction.

Granular bed filtration has the advantage of low initial and
operating costs, reduced land requirements over other methods to
achieve the same level of solids removal, and elimination of
chemical additions to the discharge stream.  As limitations, the
filter may require pretreatment if the suspended solids level is
over 100 mg/L.  Operators must be somewhat skilled because of the
controls and periodic backwashing involved.  Also, the backwash
water requires disposal.

     Reliability

The recent improvements in filter technology have significantly
improved filtration reliability.  Control systems, improved de-
signs, and good operating procedures have made filtration a
highly reliable method of water treatment.

     Chemicals Required

Alum salts, iron salts, and polymers can be added as coagulants
or coagulant aids directly ahead of filtration units.  This will
generally improve solids capture by the filter, but at the ex-
pense of reduced run lengths.

     Residuals Generated

The residue cleaned from diatomaceous earth filters requires dis-
posal.  Backwash water (generally 2 to 10% of the throughput)
from the cleaning of granular media filters requires further
treatment and disposal; spent backwash often is returned to the
head of the plant for treatment or, where possible, is discharged
to a sanitary sewer.
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.9-5
-------
     Design Criteria

Whenever possible,  designs should be based on pilot filtration
studies of the actual wastewater to be treated.   Such studies are
the best way to assure:  (1) representative cost comparisons
between different filter designs capable of equivalent perfor-
mance (i.e., quantity filtered and filtrate quality); (2) selec-
tion of optimal operating parameters, such as filter rate, termi-
nal head loss, and run length for a given medium application; (3)
definite effluent quality performance for a given medium applica-
tion; and (4) determination of the effects of pretreatment varia-
tions.  Final quality of the filtered water will be a function of
the selected operating and system parameters, including at least
the solids particle size, filter medium porosity, filtration
rate, chemical treatment, and filter run length.

Filter media must be selected in conjunction with the filter
design rate. The size and depth of the media is a primary consid-
eration and other important factors are the chemical composition,
sphericity, and hardness of the media chosen.  The presence of
relatively large amounts of oil in the wastewater to be filtered
also affects the selection of the appropriate media.  The most
important physical characteristics of the filter influent are
suspended solids concentration, floe strength, and particle-size
distribution.  These parameters determine the hydraulic loading
rate, filter depth, and type of media required.

The hydraulic loading rate, and type and concentration of sus-
pended solids in the aqueous stream affect effluent quality.  In
filtering biological floe at reasonably low influent solids
concentrations, application rates up to 400 liter/min/m2  (10
gpm/ft2) can be used without adverse effect on effluent quality.
With weaker chemical floes or with high influent concentrations
of biological solids, filter effluent quality tends to degrade at
rates above 200 liter/min/m2 (5 gpm/ft2).

Filtration of strong biological floes at rates in the range of 80
to 325 liter/min/m2 (2 to 8 gpm/ft2) will not affect the quality
of filter effluents.  In practice, typical design criteria for
filtration rates through dual-media filters range from 80 to 400
liter/min/m2  (2 to 10 gpm/ft2), with 200 liter/min/m2 (5 gpm/ft2)
being a commonly accepted average [3-37].
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.I.9-6
-------
Typical operating flow rates for various media types are as
follows [3-31]:

        Type filter	L/m2/min	gal/ft2-min

        Slow sand               2 to 4    0.05 to 0.10
        Rapid sand             40 to 50    1.0 to 1.2
        High rate dual media   80 to 400   2.0 to 10

A filter bed can function properly only if the backwashing system
effectively cleans the material collected within the filter.
Typical backwash (water only) rates are [3-37]:

                                    Minimum Backwash
        Type filter	L/sec/m2   gpm/ft2

        Single-medium              30 to 34   45 to 50
        Dual-media                 14 to 20   20 to 30

For dual- or multi-layered filters, the backwash rate should be
at least 10 L/sec/m2 (15 gpm/ft2) and backwash time should be at
least 7 minutes.  A commonly utilized backwash design value is 14
L/m ft2 (20 gpm/ft2) with duration between 5 and 15 minutes
[3-37].

     Performance

Subsequent data sheets provide performance data from the follow-
ing industries and/or waste streams:

     - Inorganic Chemicals Manufacturing,
     - Iron and Steel Manufacturing,
     - Coil Coating,
     - Foundries,
     - Ore Mining and Dressing,
     - Copper,
     - Organic Wastes,
     - Electrical and Electronic Components,
     - Paint and Ink Formulation,
     - Auto and Other Laundries,
     - Petroleum Refining,
     - Pulp and Paper Mills, and
     - Textile Mills.

     References

3-3, 3-12, 3-18, 3-25, 3-26, 3-27, 3-31, 3-37.
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.9-7
-------


















z
o
—
1-
£
1-
^
«.
LL.

ce
0
u.

0£
2:
(O

^.
o
o
0
z
X
0
LJ
h-
_J
o

J
5
j
0)

co
>
o
E
V
C
0
4->
CO
L
c
4)
O
C
o
o
4J
c
CO
3
—
».
^
bj








in
4->
c

o
a
CO

co
o























c
CO
•o
4>



m
0
c
co
ce.


c
CO
•a
CO
&






CO
0
c
CO
a:





CO
CO
o
in

—
^
Lu




CO

tt
C
u>

43
O
a.













P
c
CO
4.
I
CMd-vojrcvicooNCviJtifNJt^cvuocoifNvoo:
CMCMr- 	 lf\ CM CO <0 CO — CM co CM .» CO |T| I




ON CO ON
en ON ON ON NO o ON to ON eo r>- ON CM \o ON d-
J- U"\ A JCOvD A VOONOOVO A OMAON ON

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

ooovovof-oooinoooooo o


CVJift — d- -O — • • — OOCOOOOOO
o ooooo • » »o
V OCNJ JJ-
—
o
oo o
oooo o
O*OO O CM 00 00
-Oio » ON CMif\ Od"
covo "ifNJtd' «— r~ • • — o «if\ o
CMCMh-CVJ — VOON — d-
CO ^^ C ••• C C ** * E *^ ^O
om 	 «e t— cox> 3 c —
— — . COCO OECftcO— C <0 — 3 3 c c f- o c *> w —
UJOOCOOOO — — — eococol- — — C/9O3
o
                                                             CM
                                                                   CM—   z
                               — OSSOS
                               — mzzco
                                  v
        ON —1~- PO CM it r- r~
        ONf   ------
        A
                                                    OOCM     OlOOOONCMON
                                                    O\ VO \O O f*- co .» OMT> CM
                                                     I  I  I I  I  I  I  I  I  I

                                                    oooooooooo
                                                 ON
                                              WON
                                              ON A

                                               I  I

                                              oo
                                                                                                          ON  OvOsON
                                                                                                          ON ON ON ON ON ON
           I I I  I  I  I  I

           OOOOOcoO
                                                        •COOOCJ •  •  'OOlTiCMOOOO
                                                    l^eo—  -O -COCMCO  -O  • -OOOlft
                                                           O -O       O  -OO • •  •  •>
                                                             O           O     OOOI"-
                                                                          V     V V V
                                                             —         vo
                                                    o   OCNJ—       mcvj
                                                    or--o  • •  irico  •  •
                                                    COcod-OOCM —CMVOO
                                              9
ITlh-OO   CO— CM-3-CM — OlA
         U  ' V COIO — lA  •
         co—           O
                                              00
                                              oo
                                              r	
                 O  00
                 O  00
           O   OlAO —ON
           — r-CM »vo  «  •>
           V ON CO J-CM CM CM
                                                     1  1 1
                                                              1  1  1
                                                                      1
                                                                                                        1  1  1  1
      in — .31 — VOVOCOCMCMCM
       •  U>OOO  -CM —O
      d-      -oo—  •  >  •
            o  •  >   ooo
               oo
                                                                                             oo
                                                                                             coco
                                                                                                        oz v v
                                                                                                        o
                                                                                                        V
                                                                                                                   1  1
                     o  •
                     CQO
                                                               —   CMCVI — —
                                                                                             COCO
                                                                                                        — .* ITS. 00 — CO lT»
                                                d-   ONOONOOOOUMAON
                                                                                                                 — ON 00
                              c c
                              CO CO
                              en en

                              se
                              4J 4J

    E   E   3            E E C C
    3   3   C            33        E
    ._g™   n)     c«o«	coO>E3
  •O'O3(AEXI,coo— ot-o—o«-«-'Pn
{/>	oiXI — .Q '	E-P'	E 4J P co — W
—        oooo— E — *> to s — -P —   "
                                                                                                  w

                                                                                                  CO
                                                                                            3.     ~-**
                                                                                                    o
                                                                                            »     — 10
                                                                                            <«     CO >>
                                                                                            C     	
                                                                                            (0     4J O-l
                                                                                            •p         ^
                                                                                            3      «  -W E
                                                                                            — >»   *>JB— 3— 1. -O
                                                                                            a e c oo w	EO> —
                        &
                        3
                                                                                            x««
                                                                                            o
                                                                                                  .              .
                                                                                                  w «   a>co£O>>«a)
                                                                                                        CQOOOO-IZ
Date:     9/25/81
   III.3.1.9-8
-------
o
(4-
<4-
CO
   CO
   D
CO

OCC


CO
oc
        .PXJ
—   — ZITN
                                        ON-S-iftONONOcoJEONCMOS: —
                              r-i --- \OONVOI--ONON   co z ON co to z •=!• ONIT\ oo o >o  • cozirvzzzcM zcovo   ir\ — CM — CM — CM — ON
                                                A A        A                  A   co
               ON   *    O      ON   CNONON
               O\O—   ON   OOONVOONONON
               A — O\   A   ONAONAAA
                       £    O
                I  I  I  Z  I     I  I  I  I  I  I
               ooo
                              — OJOO*  O
                              CMlfN   IfNONlTl
                                        ON
                                        ON      ON
                                        ON      ON
                                        A      A
                                 ONONO   S ON
                                 ON ON    I  ZON I
                                 A A        A
                                        Is-      CM
                                        O      CM
                       ON   * ON
                       ON   I--ON
                       A   ON A
                      :   co
                      :  i ON  i  i
                       ON
                       CM
                  ON
                  ON
                  A
                                                            ON
                                                            ON
                                                            A
                                             *
                                             ON
                                             ON
                              OifN.
                              — VO
                                                          CO
                                                       O   co
                                                            r-
                                                                                                        I  ZCOVO  I  I
                                      o
                                      CM
                                                                                                                 OO
ON
ON
A
                                                                                        ON
                                                                                        00
                       —-ICMOCMlfNO-IONOir»ONNOONOOir\-JQCMJ-VOOir\OlTl— CMir\lT\fOCOCMOOOOOOOirv
     V—VOCMCM  •      O   O  -O—O  •—   \O  •  •  •  -OZ  • 03  • O  • O  •  •  • O  •  •  •   00 IT\ 00ITN 00 ifN CO —
        V—      CM      CO   OO  •   CO O        OVOJ-coCQ   —   OlTyOcoOOO  • —ITN.O   •=)• VO it VO .3- NO ^
                                .0                                             -        O
                              CNJ                                                 r~
          o   o      o
          o   o   oo
     ooo   oo
O O O O •»    *   co  •.
oo —ir\coovoo  »—
I-	V V — CM	
                I
                       I  I  I  I  I  I  I
               _              -
               OOQ  .— CMQZZZZZ
               CO 00 flQ O      CQ
               o
               o
               o
                «   — OOCO
 • or--   ONCM.*    -or-  •
OCO —CVICVI —<0   —<
                                 I  I  I  I   I  I  I

                                 OQCVIQ-IQO
                                 ZZ   ZQZZ
                                           CO
                                        O
                                        CO
                           -Q
                         OCD
o
o-
CMON —

 I  I  I

ooo
zzz
                                             o
                                             o
                                             o

                                             CM
                                             CO
                                             V
                                             a
                                             Z
                                 00

                                 d

                                  I

                                 CM

                                 d
                                                                              o      o
                                                                              o   oo
                                                                              o   oo
                                                                               «OCM  -ITN
                                                                           COONO  «CM  •
                                                                           ON	co eo co
                                                                                                        I  I
                                                                                                               I
                                                       IP\_I_I OON —
                                                       OOQZO  •
                                                         • CO CD     -O
                                                       o        o
                                                                                        ITI

                                                                                         I

                                                                                        o
               cONOCMinoO   CM-3-CVJ.3-— ro --- CM CM —
                                                                         —   CM — O CM CM — .* —
                                                                                                       CV — IfN. Jf CM to -
               r- o ITN — o cvi ON co i— co CM      	
               	CM
                                                       COCMCMOO   cOJtCMJ'ON   O	VO   CM — co CM    CM co
                              CD
                              4J
                              CO
                                                   CO
                                                   c
  £                   E
  J-) CO             CO CO
  £ .P             C —
   a co co      CD   — >>
E   — -P      JJ   E Q.
3 ^^ CO CO    CO CO   COO	
	.C — CO 4J —   — S-    OO —
E >>-P co -P co to   > a.   ceo
O X££ CO — £   Cl    COCOC
S_ 0) Q.JJ — CO -P   CO C — ££ CO

o	a£ *» a   a— c o — a   — o
                    — -a co s- >> p
                 :N-£  a—
             C -P C >>0.   >
             CO CO CO *>   — -P
o
C         CO
CO         C
£—       CO
0.0       N
   Eta       c
   CO       CO
O i-    CO.O
        C O CO CO
        CO S- C C
                                                                                      CO

                                                                                      CO
                                                                                      N

                                                                                      CO
                                                                                      CO

                                                                                      CD
                                                                                      c.
•O I £ Of t-    U E    N O CO CO
o o  a— 4-> o    —  i     c — N N
IAcao£CO—    l-O    CO£CC
                  3    D    —  I £ 3— >>O    OO«-OE£   H£-COI3OCOCO
               	S	    oj CM   13 >>£ OCO'-'-O	O—  I  OCO — .O .Q
               CO C CO —    > ——  I£WI C4JW — OOCOOVO— C05-O— O
               J£ CO > — o CO    >>C4JCOCCO	£1  I-PC  «£NOI>>'-
               O	COCXW+JI  C06I— CCOd-JfCCOJ-OC —CM£*>
               — CO — £ — CO — D	>> I  I  I  «  « CO £  •> I  CO £  -4* —
               ZC/>CO)-NXa]COOOQOXZZCMCMCMQ.O.CM Q.CQ O — UJ Z
                                                CO

                                      O         CO    C
                                      t-    CO    O  CO CO
                                      O    C    CO  C S-
                                      —  Q} O    ^  Q) O O
                                      £  C—    £  t- 3 C
                                      O  CO >>» *J  >>— CO
                                      — £ £ C C  a<(- £
                                                co'*-^
                            CO
                         CO C

                         S£
                       CO —£
                                                                    CD

                                                                    CO
                                                                    <-                   CO
                                                                    C.                  "O

                                                                    c                   t-
                                                                    co                   O
                                                                    c                  —
                                                                    CO                  £
                                                                    £                   O
                                                                    avo — CM it oo d- o co
                                                                                                                    CDOCMC\J.=CCMC\JC\J-P
                                                                                                                    c ------- co
                                                                                                                    CO                   -P
                                                                    CO h- £ £ O •"- CO J£ C C CO *>
                                                                    c i a a co co —~~ coco£ccocooooooooc
                                                                    CO ^ CO CO ^ *-* OO^-^^COC^^^ — ^^"^^O
                                                                    3  -C C£ N N N O O£ C CO £ O O U U O O O .O
                                                                    — CVICOCO*JCCC33aCO!-*»OOOOOOO'-
                                                                    O  ->OOCCOCOCO	CO£ >»C i- S- £- S- i. S. J- CO
                                                                                   i	<«cocacou-Li-:
Date:     9/25/81
                                           III.3.1.9-9
-------






















z
o
—
^-
cc
i-
j
_
u.

C£
O
u.
cc-o
< 0>
z c
CO J->
c
> 0
c\ t ^
§«
o
z
X
u
Ul
1-
_J
0
ee
1-
z
0
o


























&«

•
>
•J

V
o
1)

—
CO
>
2

2

5

4J
fO
P
5
o
c
o
o
4J
c
01

_
^.
t_
LJ







to
P
c

o
a
CO
•P
CO
o





























c
CO

T3
V
E



01
a
c
CO
cc


c.
CO
—
13
0)






0)
o
c
CO
CC





0)
CO
O
U)
-
^
u.




V

CD
U
ID

4J
O

ex
















•P
c
CD
4-
_
—
O
a.
jEOSOS-d-SONP* 	 XOI^-ScoSONI*- 	 ^r^-SSE
z in zmzvozoN • £t* z cTNZj'ZONr^cNj NO to z z
A O A





ON ON ON ZE O\
ON h^ ON ON Z ON
A in A O A A
OS 2 S S £
iTNZ 1 1 Z Z 1 Z 1 1 1 Z

o CM m ovo o
m oo

J-— . .r- .jJ-Z -CM • . — O • -Z -IfNOCNIOO
in 	 — ON— v 	 o co co coca
*
—

o
o ooo
o ooo
O O OO O * O -5t — O
O O CO COON • — OO— « •> «
in.*— — VO — ro — CM ^ CM CNJ VO VO

III II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

_ j _j o o^ Jor^oQr^o— J ON
oaz zo az .zz zo
COCO CO CO O CO —





















«O — C\J C\J — O Zj" LfNCM — —
— .



0)
C 0)
« c
— eo
>> SI (0
C. P 0) 0) C
0)0) 0)4^0) VCCCO
C C COICCJ) O tt) CO CO £
CD coa)a)a)oa>ca)!-c£i: *J
XI J>T C C ^~ ^ ^ (0 "O O 0} ^ ^ Q) fl)
v -p eo co >> o >> a 	 o> 0) c s
0) 0)£££ — £O^-£>>OOO)O
o o o>  a— co -P o o >> o
E EOOO— OO-CS-0) 	 £3
O O t- S- S-TJ 1- «- O -P O££ *> —
i-e'-oooioo a><-ooa>ci- c
^j!_J3 	 CO 	 0>HO 	 OO O OO) O
"•a°°oo'oiooic\i£KKoo — cix£iSo£
EDO 	 i 	 -.Ol 1 	 d) 1 CO 1 "D O O
I 	 OOOh-QO >»CM co — CM £ £ — Co 1 «1- 1 CO
OO£I 1 1 1 1 l£ -<- -N-OUOfcoEO- U
	 o — CM — CMCVICMP— -p 	 t- a w E — j- a

OOO 	 £ — 1 	 l-l— < COJQ O>O Jt X

























































.
0)
2
CO
CD
^ .
CO -P

p e
0 —
c —

CO C
4-1 O
CO— — 4)
•0 -P -33
0) 0> 0) Ol CO
P +J 4J C >
CO ffi O~
OT3 0) C O
— 4J CD *>
T3 > 0> 0) CO
CO-DEE

«n o o o
J£ C C t.
c . a
a — i « « a.
""" Q O £ ^
cooazz*
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.9-10
-------
                                                    Data  source status:
                                                      Not specified
                                                      Bench scale
                                                      Pilot scale
                                                      Full scale
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Filtration
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Auto and other laundries
Subcategory:  Power laundries
Plant: J
References:  3-84,  Appendix C
Pretreatment/treatment: Screen.,  Equal.,
   Flotation-DAF/Filter

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
Unit configuration: Downflow, multimedia filter
Media  (top  to bottom): Unspecified
Bed depth - total: Unspecified
Wastewater  flow rate: 341 m3/d  operational, 379 m3/d design
Filtration  rate (hydraulic loading):  Unspecified
Backwash rate: Unspecified
                                    REMOVAL DATA

                Sampling;  Composite and grab	Analysis:
                                                   Data set I (V.7.3.II
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
BODS
COD
TOC
TSS
01 1 and grease
Total phenol
Total phosphorus
Toxic pollutants, M9/l_:
Ant imony
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
Bis (2-ethylhexyl ) ph thai ate
Butyl benzyl ph thai ate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Di-n-octyl phthalate
2-Chlorophenol
2-1-Dichlorophenol
2, it-Dime thy 1 phenol
Pentachlorophenol .
Pheno 1
Anthracene/Phenanthrene
f luoranthene
Naphthalene
Pyrene
Ch loroform
Methylene chloride
1, 1 , 2,2-Tetrachloroethane
Tet rach 1 o roe thy 1 ene
T r 1 ch 1 o rof luo rome thane
Influent

110
160
87
32
16
0.39
1.0

61
5
28
50
25
70
63
29
21)0
71
NO
ND
1 1
2
6
28
8
9
0.2
0.5
0.6
0.3
21
22
ND
2
ND
Effluent

120
380
91
10
33
0.26
0.7

BDL
BDL
16
52
II
BDL
BDL
BDL
110
51
6
0.9
1
2
Z
29
10
7
2
0.1
0.9
0.3
12
520
9
2
5
Percent
remova 1

11
17
NH
NM
NM
33
30

92»
80»
13
NM
56
81»
71*
9I«
51
27
NM
NM
61
0
67
NM
NM
22
NM
20
NM
0
50
NH
NM
0
NM
Detection
limit









10
2
1
1

22
36
5
1
0.01
0.03
0.02
0.89
0.09
0. 1
0. 1
0.1
0.07
0.01
0.02
0.007
0. 1
5
0.1
0.6
2
               Blanks Indicate data not available.
               NM, not meaningful.
               BDL, below detection limit.
               ND, not detected.
               •Approximate value.
  Date:   9/25/81
                                  III.3.1.9-11
-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Filtration
 Data source: Effluent Guidelines                   Data source  status:
 Point source: Auto and other laundries               Not specified
 Subcategory: Industrial laundries                    Bench  scale
 Plant: K                                              Pilot  scale
 References: 3-84,  Appendix C                         Full scale
 Pretreatment/treatment: Equal., Flotation/Filter

 DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

 Unit configuration: Downflow multimedia filter
 Media (top  to bottom): Plastic chips,  anthracite, sand, garnet, gravel
 Bed depth - total: Unspecified
 Wastewater  flow rate: 45 m3/day actual; 159 m3/day design
 Filtration  rate (hydraulic loading):  Unspecified
 Backwash rate:  Unspecified
                                      REMOVAL DATA

                  Samp 11 no: 2 day composite and grab	Analysis:
                     Data set I  1V.7.3.I1
Pol lutant/oaramter
Classical pollutants, ing/L:
BOD(5)
COD
TOC
TSS
01 1 and grease
Total phenol
Total phosphorus
Toxic pollutants, ng/L:
Antlnony
Arsenic
Cad* 1 urn
Ch ron 1 u»
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Se 1 en 1 urn
SI Iver
Zinc
Bls(2-ethylhexyl ) ph thai ate
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Oi-n-octyl phthalate
Pheno 1
Ethyl benzene
To 1 uene
Anthracene/Phenanthrene
2-Ch 1 o ronaphtha 1 ene
Carbon tetrachloride
Chloroform
Methylene chloride
Tetrachloroethylene
Naphthalene
1,1, l-Trlchloroethane
Trlchlororiuoro«ethane
Acroleln
Concent ra
Influent E

iao
2, 100 1
540
740
76
0.091 0
12

2, 300 1
3.5
40
360
660
0
19
NM
20
48
NM
>99
10
>99
32
33
NM
65
0
93
NM
NM
NM
86
94
NM
>99
Detection
Mult









10
1
2
4
4

22
0.5
36
1
5
1
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.89
0.07
0.02
0. 1
0.01
0.02
4
5
0.4

0.007
2
2

                  Blanks Indicate data not available.
                  BLD, below detection Unit.
                  ND, not detected.
                  NM, not meaningful.
                  • Approximate value.
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.9-12
-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Filtration
 Data  source: Effluent Guidelines
 Point source: Auto and other laundries
 Subcategory: Power laundries
 Plant:  N
 References: 3-84, Appendix C
 Pretreatment/treatment:   Screen., Equal., Chem.
   Ppt.,  Carbon Adsorp./Filter

 DESIGN  OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

 Unit  configuration:  Unspecified
 Media (top to bottom): Unspecified
 Bed depth - total: Unspecified
 Wastewater flow rate.- 15.1  m3/d
 Filtration rate (hydraulic  loading):  Unspecified
 Backwash rate: Unspecified
                     Data source  status:
                       Not specified
                       Bench  scale
                       Pilot  scale
                       Full scale
                                      REMOVAL DATA

                                            Analysis:  Data set I  1V.7.3.H
Concentration
Pol lutant/oaraneter
Classical pollutants, ag/L:
BODS
COD
TOO
TSS
Oil and grease
Total phenol
Total phosphorus
Toxic pollutants, M9/L:
Cadaiua
Chroalua
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Dl ethyl phthalate
Di-n-octyl phthalate
Pentach 1 o ropheno 1
Pheno 1
To 1 uene
Chlorofona
Hethylene chloride
1, 1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
Tet rach 1 o roe thy 1 ene
Trichloroethylene
Influent

36(a)
140
38
78
8(b)
0.029
2.0

15
36
42
65
BDL
7
210
23
17
5
3
4
3
1
4
IB
3
ND
32
5
Effluent

23(a)
59
21
37
!(•)
0.013
0.9

14
25
32
31
37
7
240
16
4
3
NO
2
ND
ND
6
95
ND
0.7
31
3
Percent
reaova 1

36
57
45
53
87
55
55

7
31
24
52
NM
0
NM
30
76
40
>99
50
>99
>99
NM
NM
99
NM
3
40
Detection
Malts









2
4
4
22
36
5
1
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.03
0.89
0.4
0.07
O.I
5
0.4
0.6

0.5
                 Blanks indicate data not available.
                 (a) Average or four values.
                 (b) Average or three values.
                 NH, not Meaningful.
                 NO, not detected.
                 BDL, below detection llailt.
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.9-13
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Filtration
Data source: Effluent Guidelines
Point source: Inorganic chemicals
Subcategory: Copper sulfate
Plant: 034
References: 3-85,  pp. 499,  502,  508
                                      Data  source status:
                                        Not specified
                                        Bench  scale
                                        Pilot  scale
                                        Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  Neutral.,  Coag.  Floe./Filter.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration: Pressure filter
Media (top to bottom): Unspecified
Bed depth - total: Unspecified
Wastewater flow rate: 2.23 m3/Mg
Filtration rate (hydraulic loading):  Unspecified
Backwash rate: Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling:
72-hr composite
and grab	
                                            Analysis;   Data set 1 (V.7.3.15)
                                  Concentration
  Pollutant/parameter
                 Influent(a)
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
  limit
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  TSS
                    39
   34
   17
Toxic pollutants,
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
Phenol
yg/L:
330
3,500
870
140
l,800,000(b)
180
110,000(b)
<11
11,000
18

36
<20
1
5
4,500(b)
5
240(b)
100
16
12

89
>99
>99
96
>99
97
>99
NM
>99
33
Blanks indicate data not available.
NM, not meaningful.
(a)Infiltration of ground water into the collection sump was sus-
   pected at the time of sampling.
(b)Concentration is calculated from pollutant flow in m3/Mg and
   pollutant loading in kg/Mg.
 Date:   9/25/81
                   III.3.1.9-14
-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Filtration
 Data source: Effluent Guidelines
 Point source: Inorganic chemicals
 Subcategory: Chlorine-Diaphragm cell plant
 Plant:  261
 References: 3-85, pp. 158-162
 Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Filter

 DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

 Unit configuration: Diaphragm cell
 Media (top to bottom): Unspecified
 Bed depth - total: Unspecified
 Wastewater flow  rate: 0.384 m3/Mg of Cl
 Filtration rate  (hydraulic loading): Unspecified
 Backwash rate: Unspecified
                   Data source status:
                     Not specified
                     Bench scale
                     Pilot scale
                     Full scale
 Sampling:   3 day, 24-hr composite
 	and grab	
                                            REMOVAL DATA
        Analysis;  Data set 2 (V.7.3.15)
      Pollutant/parameter
                                         Concentration
    	     Percent
    Influent (a)     Effluent	removal
 Classical pollutants, mg/L:
   TSS

 Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
   Lead
        480
    260,000
75
             98
>99
 (a)Influent  concentration is calculated from flow in m3/Mg C12 and
    pollutant load  in kg/Mg C12.
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.9-15
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Filtration
Data source: Effluent Guidelines                 Data  source status:
Point source: Inorganic chemicals                  Not specified
Subcategory: Chrome pigment                        Bench  scale
Plant: 894                                         Pilot  scale
References: 3-85, pp. 395-396                      Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment: Equal.,  Neutral.,  Chem.
   Ppt./Filter.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration: Two sand filters
Media (top to bottom): Sand
Bed depth - total: Unspecified
Wastewater flow rate: 100 m3/Mg
Filtration rate (hydraulic loading): Unspecified
Backwash rate: Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA

Sampling;  72-hr composite and grab	Analysis;   Data  set  1  (V.7.3.15)


                                Concentration         Percent      Detection
  Pollutant/parameter	Influent	Effluent	removal	limit

Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  TSS                          780         3.9           99
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Antimony
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Zinc

740
900
78,000
3,600
5,100
15,000
4,200

300
8.4
320
40
<66
110
58

59
99
99
99
>99
99
99
Blanks indicate data not available.
Date:   9/25/81               III.3.1.9-16
-------
 TREATMENT.TECHNOLOGY:  Filtration
              Effluent Guidelines
               Iron and steel
              Vacuum degassing
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  AD
References:  3-7,  pp.  325-326,  332
Pretreatment/treatment:  Sed./Filter

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration: High rate  pressure filters
Media (top to bottom):   Unspecified
Bed depth - total:  Unspecified
Wastewater flow rate:   338 L/s
Filtration rate (hydraulic loading):  114 L/s
Backwash rate:  177 L/s
       Data source status:
         Not specified
         Bench scale
         Pilot scale
         Full scale
                                 REMOVAL DATA
 Sampling;   Unspecified
                                               Analysis;  Data  set 2  (V.7.3.5)
                                  Concentration
     Pollutant/parameter
                               Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
  limit
 Classical pollutants, mg/L:
   TSS                             110          22
   Manganese                        16         3.2
   Nitrate                           3         1.6

 Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
   Lead                          1,100         320
   Zinc                          8,700       1,600
                                                          80
                                                          80
                                                          47
                                                          71
                                                          82
 Blanks  indicate data not available.
Date:   9/25/81
                              III.3.1.9-17
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Filtration
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  AF
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Iron and steel
 Continuous casting

3-7, pp.  429,436,439
Pretreatment/treatment:   Equal./Filter

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  High rate pressure  filters
Media (top to bottom):  Unspecified
Bed depth - total:  Unspecified
Wastewater flow rate:  338 L/s
Filtration rate (hydraulic loading):   114  L/s
Backwash rate:  177 L/s
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling: Unspecified
Analysis: Data set 2 (V.7.3.5)
Concentration
Pollutant/parameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
TSS
Oil and grease
Toxic pollutants, yg/Ls
Copper
Zinc
Influent
110
23
370
2,600
Effluent
22
<0.5
250
1,600
Percent Detection
removal limit
80
>98
32
38
Blanks indicate data not available.
Date:   9/25/81
                  III.3.1.9-18
-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Filtration
 Data source:
 Point source:
 Subcategory:
 Plant:  C-2
 References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Iron and steel
 Hot forming

3-8, pp. 147-148,  160,  195
     Data source status:
       Not specified
       Bench scale
       Pilot scale
       Full scale
 Pretreatment/treatments   Equal./Filter

 DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

 Unit configuration:  Pressure deep bed  filter
 Media (top to bottom):   Unspecified
 Bed depth - total:   Unspecified
 Wastewater flow rate:  145 L/s
 Filtration rate (hydraulic loading):  Unspecified
 Backwash rate:  Intermittent flow
 Sampling;  Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL DATA
                                  Analysis;   Data  set  2  (V.7.3.5)
Concentration
Pollutant/parameter
Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
limit
 Classical pollutants,
   TSS
   Oil and grease
   pH, pH units
         mg/L:
                      26
                     8.8
                     8.0
  5
6.7
7.6
81
24
NM
 Blanks indicate data not available.
 NM, not meaningful.
Date:   9/25/81
                 III.3.1.9-19
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Filtration
Data source:   EGD Combined Data Base
Point source:   Coil coating
Subcategory:   Galvanized
Plant:  33056
References:  3-113
                   Data source status:
                     Not specified
                     Bench scale
                     Pilot scale
                     Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  Chem. Red.  (Cr),  Sed./Filter
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS


Unit configuration:  Filter-continuous operation  (24 hr/day)
Media  (top to bottom):  Unspecified
Bed depth - total:  Unspecified
Wastewater flow rate:  174,000  m3/day
Filtration rate (hydraulic  loading):   Unspecified
Backwash rate:  Unspecified
                                    REMOVAL DATA

      Sampling:   Influent:  grab;  effluent:   unspecified
      	composite, time proportion (5 hr)	Analysis:   Data set 2 (V.7.3.9)
       Po11utant/parameter
                                    Concentration
 Influent
Effluent
Percent
removaI
      Blanks indicate data not available.
      BDL, below detection limit.
      NO, not detected.
      NM, not meaningful.
      *Approximate value.
Detection
  limit
     Classical pollutants, mg/L:
       pH, minimum                   7.5        8.2
       pH, maximum                   7.5        8.5
       Fluorides                     9.0        9.0         0.0         0.1
       Phosphorus                     12         14          NM       0.003
       TSS                            20        8.0          60         5.0
       Iron                          1.8       0.95          47       0.005
       Oil and grease                  21         13          38         5.0
       Phenols, total               0.008      0.005*         NM       0.005
       Aluminum                     0.68        1.1          NM        0.04
       Manganese                   0.091      0.041          55       0.005
Toxic pollutants, M9/L:
Cadmium
Ch rom i urn
Zinc
Cyanide, total
1,1, 1-Trichlo roe thane
Anthracene
Bis(2-ethlyhexyl )phtha late
Phenanthrene
Di-n-butyl phthalate
T r i ch 1 o roethy 1 ene
1 , 1 -D i ch 1 o roethy 1 ene
1, 2-Trans-dichlo roethy I ene

42
100
91
90
2,500
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
3,000
40
19

ND
160
170
110
4,400
ND
BDL
ND
ND
ND
64
41

>99
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
>99
NM
NM

2.0
3.0
1.0
5.0
0.1
10
10
10
10
0.1
1.0
1.0
 Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.9-20
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Filtration
Data  source:   EGD Combined Data  Base
Point source:   Copper
Subcategory:   Pickle
Plant:   6070
References:   3-113
Pretreatment/treatment:
None/Skimming,  Filter
                          Data source  status:
                            Not specified
                            Bench  scale
                            Pilot  scale
                            Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS


Unit configuration:  Continuous  operation (24 hr/day)
Media (top to bottom):  Unspecified
Bed depth - total:  Unspecified
Wastewater flow rate:  12,200 m3/day
Filtration rate (hydraulic loading):  Unspecified
Backwash  rate:  Unspecified
                                    REMOVAL DATA
     Sampling:  24-hr composite,  flow
     	proportion (one hr)	
                     Analysis:  Data set I  (V.7.3.131
       Pol Iutant/oarameter
           Concentration       Percent    Detection
       Influent    Effluent    removal	limit
     Classical pollutants, mg/L:
      pH, minimum                   5.0        5.0
      pH, maximum                   6.1        6.9
      Fluorides                     1.5
      TSS                            58        120
      Iron                         0.19       0.32
      Oil and grease                 480         30
      Phenols, total                  ND       0.01
      TOG                            13         19
      Manganese                    0.22       0.21
     Blanks indicate data not available.
     BDL, below detection limit.
     ND, not detected.
     NM, not meaningful.
     *Approximate  value.
                                NM
                                NM
                                94
                                NM
                                NM
                                 4
 0. I
 5.0
.005
 5.0
.005
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Ch rom i urn
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
1,1, l-Trichloroethane
Chloroform
Bis(2-ethylhexyl )phtnalate
Toluene
T r i ch I o roethy 1 ene
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
Naphthalene
N-ni trosod iphenylamine

2.0
220
ND
44
290
0. 1*
BDL
ND
1.0
O.I
54
54
BDL
48

4.0
300
160
38
300
ND
BDL
81
ND
O.I
18
18
BDL
ND

NM
NM
NM
14
NM
>99»
NM
NM
>99
0
67
67
NM
>99

3.0
1.0
30
6.0
1.0
0. 1
1.0
10
1.0
O.I
0.1/1.0
5.0
10
1.0/10
Date:   9/25/81
      III.3.1.9-21
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Filtration
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines                 Data source  status:
Point source:  Electrical  and electronic            Not specified
  components                                         Bench  scale
Subcategory:  Oil  filled capacitors                 Pilot  scale
Plant:  30082                                        Full scale
References:  3-31, pp. VII-27-29, 38, 40
Pretreatment/treatment:  Oil Sep., Filter (multimedia), Carbon Adsorp./
  Filter (diatomaceous earth)

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Diatomaceous earth filter
Media (top to bottom):   Unspecifid
Bed depth - total:  Unspecified
Wastewater flow  rate:  234 m3/day
Filtration rate  (hydraulic loading):  Unspecified
Backwash rate:   Unspecified
                                   REMOVAL DATA

     Sampling;   Three 24-hour composites	Analysis;   Data set 2 (V.7.3.11)
Concent rat ion( a)
Pol lutant/parameter
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
S i 1 ve r
Zinc
2,4-Trichlorobenzene
1, l-Trichloroethane
l-Dich lo roe thane
1 -D i ch 1 o roethy 1 ene
2-trans-Dichloroethylene
Methyl ene chloride
Naptha lene
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Diethyl phthalate
To 1 uene
Tri chid roethy lene
Influent

1.3
2.3
<5
<20
99
0
     Blanks indicate data not available.
     NM, not meaningful.
     ND, not detected.
     (a)Values presented as "less than" the reported  concentration are below
       detectable limits.  They are not  reported as  BDL because  the detection
        limits are variable in this industry.
  Date:   9/25/81               III.3.1.9-22
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Filtration
              Effluent  Guidelines
               Electrical and electronic
Data source:
Point source:
  components
Subcategory:  Oil filled capacitor
Plant:  30082
References:  3-31, pp. VII-27-9,  40
Pretreattnent/treatment:   Oil  Sep./Filter (multimedia)

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Parallel mixed-media filters
Media (top to bottom):   Unspecified
Bed depth - total:  Unspecified
Wastewater flow rate:  234 m3/day
Filtration rate (hydraulic loading):   Unspecified
Backwash rate:  Unspecified
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
                                  REMOVAL DATA
Semolina: Three 24-hour composites
Analysis:
Concentration! a)
Pol lutant/oarameter
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Be ry 1 1 i urn
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Si Iver
Zinc
2, 4-Tr i ch I o robenzene
1 , l-Trichloroethane
l-Dichloroethane
1 -D i ch 1 o roethy 1 ene
2-trans-Dichloroethylene
Methyl ene chloride
Naptha lene
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
01 ethyl phthalate
Toluene
T r i ch 1 o roethy 1 ene
Influent

1.7
2.3

<5
<20
67
<50
-------
          TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Filtration
                        Effluent  Guidelines
                         Electrical and electronic
                  Data source  status:
                    Not specified
                    Bench scale
                    Pilot scale
                    Full scale
Data source:
Point source:
  components
Subcategory:  Electron  tube
Plant:  30172
References:  3-31, pp.  IX-29,30,33,34,37,38,63
Pretreatraent/treatment:   Chem.  Red. (Cr), Chem. Ppt., Equal./Coag.  Floe.
  Sed. (clarifier).  Filter (dual-media)

DESIGN OR OPERATING  PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:   Dual-media
Media (top  to bottom):   Sand,  carbon
Bed depth - total:   Unspecified
Hastewater  flow rate:  310 m3/hr
Filtration  rate (hydraulic loading)>  Unspecified
Backwash rate:   Unspecified
                                              REMOVAL DATA
                    Sanpllno:	Three 24-hour composites
                                                               i	Pita sat 2 (V.7.3.IU
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
Of 1 and grease
TOC
BOO
TSS
Pheno 1
Fluoride
pH, pH units
Calcium
Magnesium
Sodium
A 1 urn i num
Manganese
Vanadium
Boron
Ba r i urn
Molybdenum
Tin
Yttrium
Coba 1 t
Iron
Titanium
Palladium
Te 1 1 u r i urn
Platinum
Cold
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Beryl 1 ium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Si Iver
Thallium
Zinc
Cyanide
Acenapthene
Benzene
1,1, l-Trlchloroe thane
Chloroform
Methylene chloride
Dichlorobromomethane
Chlorod I bromo methane
Napthalene
Phenol
Bls(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Di-n-tautyl phthalate
01 ethyl phthalate
Anthracene
Phenanthrene
To 1 uene
Trichloroethylene
Concent rat Ion) a)
Influent

300
36
3
2.5
<0.02
7.1
7.9
320
7.0
130
0.4
0.007
<0.002
2.0
0. 17
<0.039
0.072
0.006
<0.05
0.23
<0.002
<0.003
0.004
<0.005
<0.002

73
9

<2
240
14
79
50
NM
48
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM

NM
NM
NM
NM
17
NM
NM
NM
NH
NM
NM
NH
112

















                    Blanks indicate data not available.
                    NM, not meaningful.
                    (a)Values presented as "less than" the reported concentration are below
                      detectable  limits. They are not reported as BDL because the detection
                      limits are variable In this Industry.
Date:    9/25/81
III.3.1.9-24
-------
               TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Filtration
               Data source:   Effluent Guidelines
                                                                  Data  source status:
               Point  source:   Foundry industry                     Not  specified
               Subcategory:  Aluminum foundry - Die lube           Bench scale
                  operation                                         Pilot scale
               Plant:   715C                                        Full scale
               References:  3-83,  pp. VII-1-13, VI-57-62, VII-44
               Pretreatment/treatment:  Oil Sep. (skimmer, cyclone separator)/Filter

               DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

               Unit configuration:  Paper filter; 100% recycle, no discharge
               Media  (top to  bottom):  Paper
               Bed depth - total:   Unspecified
               Hastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
               Filtration rate (hydraulic loading):  Unspecified
               Backwash rate:  Unspecified
                                                 REMOVAL DATA
                       Sampling:  Composite and grab
                                                            Analysis:  Data set 2 IV.7.3.121

Classical pollutants, «g/L:
TSS
01 1 and grease
Total phenol
Amonia
Fluoride
Suicide
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Cyanide
Lead
Zinc
Bis(2-ethyhexyl ) ph thai ate
Di-n-butyl phthaiate
01 ethyl phthaiate
Pheno 1
2,1,6-Trichlorophenol
Benzene
Chlorobttnzene
To 1 uene
Anthracene
Fluorene
phenanthrene
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlorofora)
Methyl ene chloride
Te t rach 1 o roe thy 1 ene
1,1, l-Trlchloroethane
T r i ch 1 o roe thy 1 ene
alpha-DIIC
beta-BHC
Cnlordane
Acenaphtha lene
1 2-Dichloroethylene
1 l-Dichlorethane
1 1,2-Trlchloroethane
1 1 ,2-Zotetrachloroethane
2 1-Dichlorophenol
riuoranthene
N-Ni trosodl-n-propylaialne
Pentach I oropheno 1
Dimethyl phthaiate
Benzo( a )a nth racene
Acenaphthy 1 ene
Pyrene
PCB-I1Z1, 1251, 1221
PCB-1232, 1218, 1260, 1016
ga««a-BHC
Xylene
Concent
InD uentf a !

1,700
8, 500
66
22
5.9
3.3

BOL
2,000
1.600
820,000
5,1)00
600
26,000
350
811
250
510
<170
32
<170
180
It 50
2, 1)00
160
16,000
280
26
70
38
18
170
55
ND
NO
5.700
ND
210
1.600
29
ND
NO
ND
810
570
7
17,000
ration
Effluent

1,600
9,900
61
23
2.2
<0.2

10
2,100
1.500
16.000
9,300
11,000
31,000
69
50
170
180
<3,200
10,000
<3,200
55
500
2,500
210
2,200
110
6
55
21
NO
ND
ND
7
18
ND
93
ND
NO
NO
7.330
500
3,200
650
180
BDL
12,000
Percent
rewova 1

6
NM
3
NM
63
91

NM
NN
6
98
NM
NM
NM
80
11
NM
67
NM
NM
NM
89
NM
NM
NM
86
50
77
21
37
>99
>99
>99
NM
NM
>99
NM
>99
>99
>99
NM
NM
NM
20
16
61*
75
Detection
1 in! t








10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
5
5
5
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
5
5
5
5
                       Blanks indicate data not available.
                       BDL, below detection tii.it.
                       ND, not detected.
                       NM, not Meaningful.
                       •Approximate value.
                       (a) Influent concentration is the concentration in the raw waste.
Date:    9/25/81
III.3.1.9-25
-------
                                                 Data  source  status:
                                                   Not specified
                                                   Bench  scale
                                                   Pilot  scale
                                                   Full scale
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Filtration
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Ore mining and dressing
Subcategory:  Copper mill
Plant:  2122
References:  3-66, pp. VI-90, 93
Pretreatment/treatment:  Sed./Filter

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Three dual-media, downflow pressure  filters
Media (top to bottom):  Unspecified
Bed depth - total:  Unspecified
Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Filtration rate (hydraulic loading):  Unspecified
Backwash rate:  Unspecified
                              x
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling;  9 days
                                             Analysis:   Data  set  2  (V.7.3.23)
                                  Concentration
                                                      Percent
   Pollutant/parameter
                              Influent(a)  Effluent(b)  removal
                   Detection
                     limit
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  TSS
                                2,600
7.1
>99
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
190
2,000
160
190
100
30
32
75
50
60
34
98
53
74
40
Blanks indicate data not available.
(a)Average concentration TSS (27 values),  metals (23 values).
(b)Average concentration.
Date:   9/25/81
                              III.3.1.9-26
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Filtration
Data source:
Point source
Subcategory:
Plant:  3113
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Ore mining and dressing
 Lead/zinc mine

3-66, p. VI-102
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:   See  Below/Filter

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Dual-media filter
Media (top to bottom):  Unspecified
Bed depth - total:  Unspecified
Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Filtration rate (hydraulic  loading):   Unspecified
Backwash rate:  Unspecified
ftMBJIn0-* Unauelfled
Pretreatment or (
Sedimentation with
lime and polymer,
••ration, end
flocculatlon(a|
Sedimentation with
lima and polyiaer,
••ration, and
rioeculitlon(b)
Sedimentation with
MM addition,
aeratlon(c)
\
Sedimentation with
lime and polymer,
••ration, and
flocculatlon(a)
Sedimentation with
line and polymer,
••ration, and
flocculat)on(b)
Sedimentation with
lime addition,
•eratlon(c)

TSS
:oncentratlon, ma/L
Influent Effluent
15 <1
6 <1
39 1
Lead
poncantratlon, ua/L
Influent Effluent
<20 <20
80 et 0 (V.7.S.231
Cadmium Coooer
Percent Concentration.^ uo/L Percent Concentration, uo/L Percent

>93 9 <5 >0 20 13 39
>83 20 12 «0 20 <10 >90
97 20 9 79 110 20 82
Zinc
Percent Con.cen.trf tio/L H&Zt Percent
removal Influent EffTuBn.t 	 removal
NM 670 27 96
>79 1,900 190 92
NH 11,100 190 96
    Blank* Indicate data not available.
    KM, not •eenlnaful.
    -a)pH: 9.9.
     b)pH: 8.5.
     ojpH: 9.9.
 Date:   9/25/81
                  III.3.1.9-27
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Filtration
Data  source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Ore  mining and  dressing
Subcategory:  See below
Plant:   See below
References:  3-66,  pp. VI-39,41,43
Pretreatment/treatment:  See Below/Filter

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
Unit  configuration:   See below
Media (top to bottom):  Unspecified
Bed depth - total:   See below
Wastewater flow  rate:  Unspecified
Filtration rate  (hydraulic  loading):
Backwash rate:   Unspecified
                   Data  source status:
                     Not specified
                     Bench scale
                     Pilot scale
                     Full scale
      Unspecified
Semolina: Unsoec [fled
Subcateaorv
Asbestos-cement
processing plant (a)
Asbestos mine(b)
Asbestos inlne(b)
Asbestos Mlne(b)
Asbestos mine
Asbestos mine
Asbestos mine
Chlorine/caustic
facility
-|b)


REMOVAL DATA
Plant
In Bale Verte,
Newfoundland
In Bale Verte,
Newfoundland
In Sale Verte,
Newfoundland
In Asbestos,
Quebec) c)
In Asbestos,
Quebec! c)
In Asbestos,
Quebec) c)
In Micnigan(d)

-(b).(e)
-(b)
Unit
confl Duration
Alum-coated diatomaceous
earth f 1 Iter
Dual media filter
Uncoated diatomaceous
earth f I Iter
Mixed media f I Iter
Coated diatomaceous
earth
Uncoated diatomaceous
earth
Pressure leaf filter
used with flocculants
Alum-coated diatomaceous
ea rth f 1 1 ter
Dual media filtration
Uncoated diatomaceous
earth f 1 Iter


Cone . .
Influent
5E9
IE9
IEIO
IE9
IE9
IE9
IE9
<5E9




Total
fibers/t
Effluent
3.2E9
99
95
>99
97
>99
>99
>99
UEI2
HE 12
4EI2


Chrvsotl le
ribers/t, Percent
Effluent removal







I E5 >99
IE9 >99
3E6 >99
  Blanks Indicate data not available.
  a)Pretreatment or influent: Sedimentation (24 hrj.
  b)Pretreatment of Influent: Sedimentation.
  ,c)Use in system:  tertiary.
  (d)Use In system:  tertiary, full scale; flow rate:  0.095 cu.m./mfn.
  (e)Bed depth: 34.3 cm (13.5 In).
  Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.9-28
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Filtration
Data  source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Ore mining and dressing
Subcategory:  Base metal mine
Plant:   See below
References:  3-66, pp.  VI-59-62
Pretreatment/treatment:  ChemPpt.,  Sed./Filter

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit  configuration:  Unspecified
Media (top to bottom):   Sand
Bed depth - total:  Unspecified
Wastewater flow rate:   Unspecified
Filtration rate (hydraulic loading):  Unspecified
Backwash rate:  Unspecified
                   Data source  status:
                     Not specified
                     Bench scale
                     Pilot scale
                     Full scale
                                        REMOVAL DATA
     Saemllno: Unspecified
                                                         Analysis;  Data set U IV.7.3.231
                                                                   Zinc
                   Concentr«t(pi). uo/L  Percent  Concentf«yion. UQ/\.  Percent  Concan^r^yjon, ug/i,.  Percent

                   1nfluent  Ef f i uent  re»ov»t  InfIuant  EffIuent  r»«oviI  InfIuent  EffIuent  re»ovaI
Mine 1 of Canadian
pilot plant study
Mine 2 of Canadian
pi lot plant study
Mine 3 of Canadian
pilot plant study

40

30

70

30

30

30

25

0

57

210

290

110

ISO

290

ao

29

0

27

290

220

220

390

150

120

NM

32

15
     NM, not neanlngfui.
  Date:    9/25/81
III.3.1.9-29
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Filtration
Data  source:   Effluent Guidelines
Point source:   Ore mining  and dressing
Subcategory:   Lead/zinc mine/mill  and molybdenum
  mine/mill
Plant:   See below
References:   3-66, pp. VI  17,80,86,87
Pretreatment/treatment:  See Below/Filter
                   Data source status:
                     Not specified
                     Bench scale
                     Pilot scale
                     Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING  PARAMETERS

Unit  configuration:   Unspecified
Media (top  to bottom):  Unspecified
Bed depth -  total:   Unspecified
Wastewater  flow rate:  Unspecified
Filtration  rate (hydraulic  loading):
Backwash rate:  Unspecified
      Unspecified
                                         REMOVAL DATA
Santo 1 Ina:

24 -hour and 72-hour composite and


TSS
Concentration. mo/L
Plant
3l2l(a)
3l2l(a)
3l07(b)
6I02JC)
OH
9.2
11.3
3. 1-3.7
Influent
17
16
62
Effluent
1
<5
arab

Percent
remova 1
94
>93
>92
Analysis: Data set 1. 3 1V.7.3.23I

Cadmium
Concentration. ug/L Percent
Influent Effluent removal
120
35 71

Concent rati
influent
50
30
31
Coooe r
fn. UQ/L
f fluent
20
20
16

Percent
renova 1
60
33
48
                            Lead
                                                    Zinc

3l2l(a)
3l2l(a)
3l07(b)
6l02(c)

9.2
M.3
3.1-3.7
Concentration. iiq/L
Influent Effluent
80 10
50 60
130 61
Percent
remova 1
50
NH
53
Concentration. uo/L
Influent Effluent
380 160
130 80
2,900 <|2
80 60
Percent
remova 1
58
t2
99
25
Blanks indicate data not available.
NM, not meaningful.
(a)Pretreatment of influent:  tailing pond,  line and polymer addition,  flocculation, settling.
(b)Pretreatment of Influent:  tailing pond,  lime addition, aeration, flocculatlon,  and
  clarification; unit configuration: dual  media granular pressure filter.
(c)Pretreatinent of Influent:  Sedimentation, ion exchange,  lime precipitation, electro-
  coagulation, alkaline chlorination; unit  configuration:  four individual filters; anthracite,
  garnet, and pea gravel were used as media.
  Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.9-30
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Filtration
Data source:  Government report
Point source:  Organic and inorganic wastes
Subcategory:  Unspecified
Plant:  Reichhold Chemical,  Inc.
References:  3-113, p. 57
Pretreatment/treatment:  Equal.,  Neutral., Sed.
  Act. Si., Oxidation Column,  Sed.  (clarifier),

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
                 Data source status;
                   Not specified
                   Bench scale
                   Pilot scale
                   Full scale
               (clarifier)/
               Filtration (sand)
Unit configuration:  Diameter - 50.8 mm
Media (top to bottom):  Sand
Bed depth - total:  0.61 m
Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Filtration rate (hydraulic loading):  7 x 105 m3/min/m2
Backwash rate:  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling;  24-hr composite
            Analysis;   Data set 2  (V.7.3.35)
Concentration( a)
Pollutant/parameter
Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
limit
Classical pollutant,  mg/L:
  COD
850
700
18
Blanks indicate data not available.
(a)Average of seven samples.
  Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.9-31
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Filtration
Data source:   Effluent Guidelines                  Data  source status:
Point source:   Paint manufacturing                  Not specified
Subcategory:   Unspecified                            Bench scale
Plant:  17                                            Pilot scale
References: 3-20, pp. VI-10-11, Appendix G          Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  Coag. Floe,  (lime),
  Neutral./Filter

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Unspecified
Media (top  and bottom):  Unspecified
Bed depth - total:  Unspecified
Wastewater  flow rate:  0.044-0.263 L/s
Filtration  rate (hydraulic  loading) -.  Unspecified
Backwash rate:  Unspecified
                                    REMOVAL DATA

                Saaallno! Co«mo»Ite and orab	Analysis; Data set I IV.7.3.251
Pol lutant/paraewter
Classical pollutants, «9/L:
B00(5)
COD
TOC
TSS
01 1 and grease
Total phenol
Total solids
TDS
TVS
Calclu*
Magnesium
Sod 1 ua
Aluofnu*
BarluiR
Cobalt
Iron
Manganese
Molybdenun
Tin
Tltanlusi
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Ant iwooy
Beryllium
Cedsilua
Chromium
Copper
cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Silver
Thai HIM
Zinc
Dl-n-butyl phthalate
Benzene
Nitrobenzene
Toluene
Mpthalene
Carbon tetrachlorlde
Chloroform
1, l-Dlchloroethane
1,2-Ofchtoroetnane
l,Z-Trans-dlchloroethylene
Methylene chloride
Tetrachloroethylene
1,1, l-Trlchloroetnane
1, 1,2-Trlchloroe thane
Trlchloroethylene
Concent rai
Influent 1

6,100
29,000
7,100
15,000
1,000
0.35
22.000
7,700
12,000
1,500
61
< |1|0
57
11
6
NM

NM
NM
NM
0
30
NM
NM
86
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
>99
>99
>99
>99
>99
NM
NH
NM
NM
>99
>99
>99
NM
>99
                 Blank* indicate data not available.
                 NO* not detected,
                 NM. not Maningfui.
                 (a) Average or several samples.
   Date:   9/25/81               III.3.1.9-32
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Filtration
Data source: Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Paint manufacturing
Subcategory:  Unspecified
Plant: 27
References: 3-20, pp. VI 10-11, Appendix G
Pretreatment/treatment: Coag.  Floe,  (polymer)/
  Filter, Lagoon  (evaporation)

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Unspecified
Media (top to bottom):  Unspecified
Bed depth - total:  Unspecified
Wastewater flow rate: 0.004-0.022  L/s
Filtration rate (hydraulic  loading):   Unspecified
Backwash rate:  Unspecified
                   Data source status:
                     Not specified
                     Bench scale
                     Pilot scale
                     Full scale
                                     REMOVAL DATA
Samollna: Comooslte and a tab

Analysis:
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, ng/L:
B00(5)
COD
TOC
TSS
Total phenol
Calcium
Magnesium
Sod i urn
Aluminum
Barium
Coba 1 t
1 ron
Manganese
Tin
Titanium
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Antimony
Beryl Hum
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Silver
The 1 1 1 urn
Zinc
Benzene
Ethyl benzene
Toluene
Chloroform
Methylene chloride
Tet rach 1 o roe thy 1 ene
1,1, l-Trichloroethane
Pentach 1 oropheno 1
Pheno 1
Dl-n-butyl ph thai ate
Influent

25,000
70,000
7,500
1(6,000
0.0012
364
17
334
300
5.6
0. 16
6. 1
0.33
1. 1
6.7

99
70
85
88
56
99

<83
71
55
93
54
99
86
>99
NM
NM
93
29
>99
31
NM
NM
77
NM
NM
NM
NM
               Blanks Indicate data not available.
               NO, not detected.
               NM, not meaningful.
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.9-33
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Filtration
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  B
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Petroleum refining
 Unspecified

3-21, pp. VI 36-42
       Data source  status:
         Not specified
         Bench scale
         Pilot scale
         Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  Flotation  (DAF)/Filter

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Multimedia  filter
Media (top to bottom):  Unspecified
Bed depth - total:  Unspecified
Wastewater flow  rate:  Unspecified
Filtration rate  (hydraulic  loading):   Unspecified
Backwash rate:   Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
     Sampli ng:
 Average of three daily samples
 and a composite sample
Analysis:  Data  sets 1,2 (V.7.3.26)
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
COD
TOC
TSS
Oi I and grease
Total phenol
Toxic pollutants, Mg/L:
Beryl 1 (urn
Cadmium
Ch rom i urn
Chromium (plus 6)
Cyanide
Se 1 en i urn
Zinc
S i 1 ve r
Coppe r
Nickel
Lead
Arsenic
Ant i mony
Tha 1 1 i urn
Influent

110
U3
29
6
0.024

2
3
37
20
50
62
25
<3
<6
<10
<18
<20
<25
<15
Effluent

100
1*0
21
8
0.022

2
<1
30
20
50
56
65
<3
<6
<10
<18
<20
<25
<15
Percent Detection
remove 1 limit

8
7
28
0
8

0
>67
19
0
0
10
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
     Blanks indicate data  not available,
     NM, not meaningful.
 Date:   9/25/81
                  III.3.1.9-34
-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Filtration
 Data source:
 Point source
 Subcategory:
 Plant:  H
 References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Petroleum refining
 Unspecified

3-21, pp. VI 36-42
       Data source status:
         Not specified
         Bench scale
         Pilot scale
         Full scale
 Pretreatment/treatment:  Oil Sep. (API), Unspecified/Filter

 DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

 Unit configuration:  Multimedia filter
 Media (top to bottom):  Unspecified
 Bed depth - total:  Unspecified
 Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
 Filtration rate (hydraulic loading):  Unspecified
 Backwash rate:  Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL DATA
      Samp I ing:
 Average of three dally samples
 and a composite sample
Analysis:  Data  sets 1,2 (V.7.3.26)
Concentration
Pol Intent/parameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
COD
TOC
TSS
Oil and grease
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Cadmium
Chromium
Chromium (plus 6)
Copper
Lead
Zinc
Silver
Be ry I I i urn
Nickel
Arsenic
Antimony
Selenium
Tha I I i urn
Me rcu ry
Influent

34
22
7
10

5
7
<20
21
17
15
<3
<2
<10
<20
<25
<20
<15
<0.5
Effluent

29
19
4
8

<1
7
20
12
23
20
<3
<2
<10
<20
<25
<20
<15
<0.5
Percent Detection
remova I limit:

15
Ik
43
20

>80
0
NM
43
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
      Blanks indicate data not available.
      NM, not meaningful.
Date:  9/25/81
                 III.3.1.9-35
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Filtration
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  K
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Petroleum refining
 Unspecified

3-21, pp. VI 36-42
       Data source status:
         Not specified
         Bench scale
         Pilot scale
         Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  Flotation  (DAF)/Filter

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Multimedia filter
Media (top to bottom):  Unspecified
Bed depth - total:  Unspecified
Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Filtration rate (hydraulic loading):  Unspecified
Backwash rate:  Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL DATA
     Samp I ing:
 Average of three daily samples
 and a composite sample
Analysis:  Data  sets 1,2 (V.7.3.26)
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
COD
TOC
TSS
Oil and grease
Tota I pheno I
Toxic pollutants, (ig/L:
Chromium
Copper
Mercury
Zinc
Si I ve r
Beryl I ium
Cadmium
Nickel
Lead
Arsenic
Antimony
Tha I I i urn
Influent

no
U3
50
35
0.02/t

200
28
0.8
200
<3
<2
<1.5
<10
<18
<20
<25
<15
Effluent

56
22
H
6
0.023

34
7
<0.5
92
<3
<2
<1.5
<10
<18
<20
<25
<15
Percent
remova I

59
U9
92
83
U

83
75
>37
55
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
Detection
limit



















     Blanks indicate data not available.
     NM, not meaningful.
 Date:   9/25/81
                   III.3.1.9-36
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Filtration
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Petroleum refining
Subcategory:  Unspecified
Plant:  M
References:  3-21, pp. VI 36-42
Pretreatment/treatment:  Flotation/Filter

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Multimedia  filter
Media (top to bottom):  Unspecified
Bed depth - total:  Unspecified
Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Filtration rate (hydraulic loading):  Unspecified
Backwash rate:  Unspecified
                  Data source status:
                    Not specified
                    Bench scale
                    Pilot scale
                    Full scale
                                  REMOVAL DATA
     Sampling:  Average of three 1-day
               composites and a 3-day
               composite sample
           Analysis:  Data sets 1,2 (V.7.3.26)
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
COD
TOC
TSS
Oi I and grease
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Cadmium
Ch rom i urn
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Se I en i urn
Si Iver
Zinc
Arsenic
Antimony
Tha 1 1 i urn
Influent

110
18
9
12

H
62
12
40
37
0.8
8
25
5
92
<20
<25
<15
Effluent

55
17
3
12

<1
48
7
42
22
<0.5
9
26
5
200
<20
<25
<15
Percent Detection
remova 1 limit

49
6
67
0

>75
23
42
NM
41
>37
NM
NM
0
NM
NM
NM
NM
     Blanks indicate data not available.
     NM, not meaningful.
 Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.9-37
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Filtration
Data source:
Point source
Subcategory:
Plant:  0
References:
              Effluent Guidelines
               Petroleum refining
              Unspecified

             3-21, pp. VI 36-42
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  Flotation/Filter

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Multimedia  filter
Media (top to bottom):  Unspecified
Bed depth - total:  Unspecified
Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Filtration rate (hydraulic  loading):  Unspecified
Backwash rate:  Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL DATA
     Sampling:  Average of three 1-day
               composites and a 3-day
               composite sample
                                            Analysis:   Data sets 1,2 (V.7.3.26)
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
BOD(5)
COD
TOC
TSS
Oi 1 and grease
Total phenol
Toxic pollutants, u.g/L:
Chromium
Copper
Si Iver
Beryl 1 ium
Cadmium
Nickel
Lead
Zinc
Arsenic
Ant imony
Se 1 en i urn
Thai 1 ium
Influent

11
120
38
32
18
0.028

70
9
<3
<2
<1 . 5
<10
<18
<30
<20
<25
<20
<15
Effluent

19
120
4U
18
11
0.032

60
7
<3
<2
<1 , 5
<10
<18
<30
<20
<25
<20
<15
Percent Detection
remova I limit

NM
U
NM
UU
39
NM

It
22
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
     Blanks  indicate  data not available.
     NM,  not meaningful.
 Date:   9/25/81
                               III.3.1.9-38
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Filtration
Data source:
Point source
Subcategory:
Plant:  P
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Petroleum refining
 Unspecified

3-21, VI 36-42
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  Oil Sep.  (API)/Filter

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Multimedia filter
Media (top to bottom):  Unspecified
Bed depth - total:  Unspecified
Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Filtration rate (hydraulic loading):  Unspecified
Backwash rate:  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
     Sampling:  Average of three 1-day
              composites and a 3-day
              composite sample
                              Analysis:  Data  sets 1,2 (V.7.3.26)
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
BOD(5)
COO
TOC
TSS
Oi I and grease
Tota I pheno I
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Antimony
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Nickel
Zinc
Si I ve r
Be ry 1 1 i urn
Lead
Arsenic
Se I en i urn
Thallium
Concent rat
Influent Ef

12
100
38
17
27
O.OU7 0

U70
1
32
9
U5
10
17
<3
<2
<18
<20
<20
<15
ion
fluent

13
130
U5
1«*
17
.051

430
1
27
8
U2
10
30
<3
<2
<18
<20
<20
<15
Percent Detection
remove I limit

NM
NM
NM
18
37
NM

9
0
16
11
7
0
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
    Blanks indicate data not available.
    NM, not meaningful.
  Date:   9/25/81
                  III.3.1.9-39
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Filtration
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Pulp, paper  and paperboard
Subcategory:  See below
Plant:  See below
References:  3-18, p. 338
                          Data source status:
                            Not specified
                            Bench scale
                            Pilot scale
                            Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:
  specified)/Filter
Act. SI. (unless otherwise
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  See  below
Media (top to bottom):  See  below
Bed depth - total:  See below
Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Filtration rate (hydraulic loading):
Backwash rate:  Unspecified
             See below
Safpljnq: Crib
Subcf teaorv
M*n-Mtfe fiber
p rootling
Pulp Bill
Oil refinery



Plant Sell*
A-U FUI 1
-(•) Pilot
A-l Full
Han-wde fiber
preceding
Pulp Bill
Oil refinery

Unit
conflau ration
i fllt»r«

3 filter*
Concentration,
Influent
50
HO
II
REMOVAL DATA
Madia
(tpo to bottoa))
Coal, *and, garnet
Coarte coal, mdlus
tand, coarie tend
Coal and tand
TSS
•9/L
Effluent
16
21
5.9
AnalvaK: Data set 1 (V.7.3.2*,!
Bad Filtration
dooth*total rate
91* mm O.OA7 cu.«./eln/«q.e.
3«l mm 0.0»7« - 0. l»7 cu.e./«ln/«q.».
6M mm 0.130 cu.»./eln/«q.a).
Percent
reaoval
66
M
M
   Blank* Indicate data not available.
   (a(Aerated lagoon vat uted In the pretreatMnt of influent.
 Date:   9/25/81
       III.3.1.9-40
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Filtration
Data source:
Point source;
Subcategory:
Plant:  A
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Textile mills
 Wool finishing

3-89, pp. 39-43
Pretreatment/treatment:  None(a)/Coag. Floe., Sed
DESIGN OR  OPERATING PARAMETERS
Data source status:
   Not specified
   Bench scale
   Pilot scale
   Full scale
,,  Filter
Unit configuration:  Multimedia
Media  (top  to bottom):  Unspecified
Bed depth - total:  Unspecified
Wastewater  flow rate:  Unspecified
Filtration  rate (hydraulic loading):
Backwash rate:  Unspecified
                          Unspecified
Same Una: 21-hr comooslte
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
A I urn I nun
Barium
Boron
Calcium
Coba 1 1
1 ron
Magnesium
Manganese
Molybdenum
Sodium
Phosphorus
Silicon
Strontium
Tin
Titanium
Vanadium
Pheno 1
Toxic pollutants, |ig/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Beryl 1 Kim
Cadmium
Ch rom I urn
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Heptachlor
1 , 2- D 1 en I o robenzene
1,2,1-Trichlorobenzene
alpha BHC
1,1 '-DOT
Toluene
Ethyl benzene
Pheno 1
Benzol a )pyrene
N-n 1 1 rosod 1 pheny t am I ne
2, 1-DI methyl phenol
Pentachloropheno!
REMOVAL DATA
Analysis:
Concent
Influential

1.6
0.02
0.27
70
0.02
2.8
1.9
0. 1
50
20
NM

NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
68
NM
NM
37
NM
NM
11
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
Detect ion
limit






























0.01
1.0
. 0.05
0.09
1.0
1.0
0. 1
0.2
0.07
0.02

0. 1
0.1
                  Blanks Indicate data not available.
                  BDL, below detection limit.
                  NM, not meaningful.
                  (a) Influent is taken from final treatment effluent and is then run through
                     pi lot process.
 Date:   9/25/81
                    III.3.1.9-41
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Filtration
Data source:
Point source
Subcategory:
Plant:   C
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Textile mills
 Woven fabric  finishing

3-89, pp. 45-48
Data source  status:
  Not specified
  Bench  scale
  Pilot  scale
  Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  None(a)/Coag. Floe.,  Filter

DESIGN  OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Multimedia
Media  (top to bottom):   Unspecified
Bed depth - total:  Unspecified
Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Filtration rate (hydraulic loading):  Unspecified
Backwash rate:  Unspecified
                                     REMOVAL DATA
Samollna: 21-hr comoosite
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, ng/L:
Aluminum
Barium
Boron
Ca 1 c i urn
Coba 1 1
1 ron
Magnes 1 urn
Manganese
Molybdenum
Nickel
Phosphorus
Si 1 Icon
Strontium
Tin
Titanium
Vanadium
Pheno 1
Toxic pollutants, |ig/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Beryl I lum
Cadmium
Ch rom i urn
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
Anthracene
Pentachlorophenol
Pheno 1
Toluene
Dlbromochloromethane
1 , 2-0 i ch 1 o robenzene
Ethyl benzene
Methylene chloride

Concent
Influential

13
0.07
0.06
5.7
<0.006
0.93
3.7
0.02
0.02
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Filtration
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines                 Data  source  status:
Point source:  Textile mills                       Not specified        	
Subcategory:  Woven fabric/stock yarn finishing    Bench  scale           	
Plant:  DD                                         Pilot  scale           	x_
References:  3-24,  p.  262                          Full scale           	
Pretreatment/treatment:  Screen, Neutral.,  Act.  Si.,  Coag.  Floe./
  Filter (multimedia)

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Downflow multimedia filter preceded by coagulation with
  alum (20 mg/L Al+3)
Media (top to bottom):  Anthracite,  sand,  gravel
Bed depth - total:   1,000 mm
Wastewater flow rate:   5.76 - 28.8 m3/day
Filtration rate (hydraulic loading):  0.0004-0.002 m3/min/m2
Backwash rate:  Unspecified
Bed depth:  Anthracite:  300 mm; sand:   300 nun;  gravel: 400 mm
Effective size of media:  Anthracite:  0.9-1.5  mm; sand:  0.4  -  0.8 mm;
  gravel:  6-16 mm
                                 REMOVAL DATA

Sampling;  8-hr composite	Analysis;   Data  set  1  (V.7.3.32)


                                 Concentration      Percent    Detection
  Pollutant/parameter	Influent   Effluent   removal	limit
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Silver
Zinc

58
59
37
72
25
190

110
28
31
67
28
280

NM
52
16
7
NM
NM
Blanks indicate data not available.
NM, not meaningful.
 Date:   9/25/81              III.3.1.9-43
-------
           TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY!   Filtration
           Data source:  Effluent  Guidelines
           Point source:  Textile  mills
           Subcategorys  Wool  finishing
           Plant:  N
           References:   3-89,  pp.  65-68
           Pretreatment/treatment:  None(a)/Sed.,  Coag. Floe.

           DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

           Unit configuration:  Unspecified
           Media  (top  to bottom):   Unspecified
           Bed depth -  total:   Unspecified
           Wastewater  flow  rate:  Unspecified
           Filtration  rate  (hydraulic loading):  Unspecified
           Backwash  rate:   Unspecified
                   Data source  status:
                     Not specified
                     Bench  scale
                     Pilot  scale
                     Full scale
                   ., Filter
                                              REMOVAL DATA
                      Sampling;  24-hr composite
                                                          Analysis:  Data set I IV.7.3.321
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
Aluminum
Ba r i urn
Boron
ca 1 c i un
Coba 1 t
1 ron
Magnesium
Manganese
Molybdenum
Sod 1 urn
Phosphorus
Si 1 Icon
Stront ium
Tin
Titanium
Vanadium
Pheno 1
Sulfide
Ammon 1 a
N i t ra te
COO
TSS
pH, pH units
Toxic pollutants, Mg/L'
Antimony
Arsenic
Be ry 1 1 i urn
Cadmi urn
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
Si Iver
Zinc
Mercury
Selenium
Thall ium
Bi s(2-ethylhexyl J phthalate
f ene
Oi phthalate
01- tyl phthalate
Heth. ne chloride
To 1 ue.
1 , 2-DU ilorobenzene
Dimethyl phthalate
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Fluorene
2 , U-D i ch 1 o ropheno 1
Phenanthrene
1 ,2-Dichloropropane
Te t rach 1 o roe thy 1 ene
Ethyl benzene
Conci
Influentl

0. 12
0.006
0.009
7.1
0.01
0.72
1. 1
0.21
50
0
33
>50
6
0
NM
89
NM

>44
>66
NM
NM
80
NM
NM
NM
NM
>9
66
NM
NM
NM
87
0
62
0
39
0
44
99.
29
10
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
89*
Detection
limit







































0.04
0.01
0.03
0.02
0.4
0. 1
0.05
0.03
0.02
0.01
0.02
0. 1
0.01
0.7

0.2
                      Blanks indicate data not available.
                      BDL, below detection limit.
                      NM, not meaningful.
                      "Approximate value.
                      (a) Influent is taken from final treatment effluent and is then run through
                         pi lot process.
Date:    9/25/81
III.3.1.9-44
-------
TREATMENT  TECHNOLOGY:  Filtration
Data source:
Point source;
Subcategory:
Plant:  P
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Textile mills
 Knit fabric  finishing

3-89, pp. 60-63
Data source  status:
  Not specified
  Bench  scale
  Pilot  scale
  Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  None(a)/Filter
DESIGN OR  OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Multimedia
Media (top to bottom):  Unspecified
Bed depth  - total:  Unspecified
Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Filtration rate (hydraulic  loading):
Backwash rate:  Unspecified
                          Unspecified
                                   REMOVAL DATA
Samplinq: 24-hr comoosite
Pol lutant/parameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
Phenol
A 1 urn i num
Ba r i urn
Boron
Ca 1 c i urn
Coba 1 1
1 ran
Magnesium
Manganese
Mo lybdcnum
Sodium
Si 1 icon
Tin
Stront mm
I i tan i urn
Vanad i urn
Ammonia nitr(..ji!n
N 1 1 ra tc n 1 1 ro'jon
Phosphate phosphorus
Toxic pu I lutanls. IJO/L:
Ant imnny
Arson »e
Beryl 1 mm
Cadmium
Ctiromi urn
Copper
Cyan ido
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Se 1 en i urn
Si 1 ver
lha 1 1 mm
Z i nc
Bis|?-l Uiylhexyl )
phth.i late
Oi-n-butyl phthalatc
Utcthyl phthalate
Anthracene
Pnerio 1
Ch 1 oroform
T r i ch 1 o roe thy 1 ene
Toluene '
Benzene
N-ni trosod i -n-propylamine
Ethy (benzene
Methylcne chloride

Ana 1 vs f
Concentration
Influential

0.082
0.02
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Filtration
Data source:
Point source;
Subcategory:
Plant:  Q
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Textile mills
 Knit fabric finishing

3-68, p. VII-58
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:   Screen.,  Equal.,  Act. SI./Filter

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Downflow multimedia pressure filter
Media (top to bottom):   Unspecified
Bed depth - total:  Unspecified
Wastewater flow rate:  9,500 m3/day
Filtration rate (hydraulic loading):  0.0012 ms/min/m2
Backwash rate:  Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL DATA

    Sampling:  Classical pollutant influent is a 48-hr
              composite sample, toxic pollutant influent
              is  an average of two 24-hr grab samples,
              effluents are the average of two 24-hr
              composite samples	Ana IvsIs;
                                          Data set 1  (V.7.3.32)
Concentration
Pol 1 utant/Da rameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
COD
TSS
Oi 1 and grease
Total phenol
Toxic pollutants, u.g/L:
Antimony
Ch rom i urn
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Selenium
S i 1 ve r
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Tetrachloroethylene
Influent

310
28
300
0.059

670
32
100
ND
48
41
13
48
15
17
Effluent

230
6
480
0.048

700
32
79
10
33
100
8
84
12
17
Percent Detection
remova 1 limit

25
79
NM
19

NM
0
24
NM
31
NM
38
NM
20
0
    Blanks  indicate data not available.
    ND,  not detected.
    NM,  not meaningful.
Date:   9/25/81
                  III.3.1.9-46
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY!  Filtration
               Effluent Guidelines
                Textile mills
               Knit fabric finishing
Data  source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:   S
References:  3-89,  p.  55-58
Pretreatment/treatment:  None(a)/Filter
Data  source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
Unit configuration:   Multimedia
Media  (top to bottom):  Unspecified
Bed depth - total:   Unspecified
Wastewater flow  rate:  Unspecified
Filtration rate  (hydraulic  loading):
Backwash rate:   Unspecified
                                         Unspecified
                                     REMOVAL DATA
                                              Analysis; Bate sat I IV.7.1.181
                   Pollutant/paraeater
                                       Concentration
                                      if luentfat  Ef fluent
                                                     Percent
                                                        a I
     Detectie
      Unit
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
Aluminum
Barium
Boron
Calcium
Cobalt
1 ron
Magnesium
Manganese
Molybdenum
Sodium
Phosphorus
SI 1 Icon
Strontium
Ammonia
Titanium
Vanadium
Phenol
Nitrate
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cyan 1 de
Lead
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
Mercury
Selenium
Thallium
Bls(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
Acenaptbene
Ol-n-butyl phthalate
Phenol
2,*-Dlmethyl phenol
2,*-Dlchloropnenol
P-Chloro-m-cresol
Chloroform
Toluene
Hethylene chloride

0.69
0.008
I.I
5.9
0.01
O.I
1.6
0.01
0.01
180
1.7
II
0.02
6.6
0.00*
0.06
0.02
0.25

610
L
MM.
1 ,g
12

0.*5
0.006
I.I
6.2
0.007
0.15
1.5
0.01
0.01
190
2.1
II
0.02
0.06
0.00*
0.02

0.12

620
-------
          TREATMENT TECHNOLOGYt  Filtration
          Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
          Point source:  Textile mills
          Subcategory:  Woven fabric finishing
          Plant:  T
          References:  3-89, pp. 77-81
          Pretreatment/treatment:  None(a)/Sed.,  Coag,

          DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
                  Data source statusi
                    Not specified
                    Bench scale
                    Pilot scale
                    Full scale
             Floe., Filter
          Unit configuration:  Unspecified
          Media (top to bottom):  Unspecified
          Bed depth - total:  Unspecified
          Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
          Filtration rate (hydraulic  loading):   Unspecified
          Backwash rate:  Unspecified
                                            REMOVAL DATA
                    Sampling:  2*i-hr composite
                                                        Analysis:  Data set I  rv.7.3.32.
Pollutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
Aluminum
Barium
Boron
Ca 1 c 1 urn
Coba 1 t
Iron
Magnesium
Manganese
Mo 1 ybdenum
Sodium
Phosphorus
Si 1 icon
Strontium
Tin
T 1 tan i urn
Vanadium
Phenol
Ammonia
Nitrate
COO
TSS
Sulfide
pH, pH units
Toxic pollutants, Mg/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Beryllium
Cadmium
Ch rom i urn
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
Mercury
Se 1 en i urn
Tha 1 1 i urn
Benzene
Chlorobenzene
1, l-Oichloroethylene
Para chloro-meta-cretot
1 , l-Dichloroethane
Ethyl benzene
Methylene chloride
Trlchlorof luoromethane
Phenol
Bls(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Tetrachloroethylene
To 1 uene
Trlchloroethylene
Concent
Influential

0.16
0.01
0.27
12
<0.006
0.52
3
0.69
-------
             TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Filtration
             Data sourcei  Effluent Guidelines                  Data source status:
             Point source:  Textile mills                         Not specified
             Subcategoryi  Woven fabric  finishing                Bench scale
             Plant:  T                                            Pilot scale
             References:  3-89,  pp.  76-82                         Full scale
             Pretreatment/treatment:   None(a)/Filter (multimedia)

             DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

             Unit configurationi  Downflow multimedia filter
             Media (top to bottom):   Anthracite,  sand,  gravel
             Bed depth - total:   1,000 mm, anthracite:   300 mm;  sand: 300 mm;  gravel:
               400 mm
             Wastewater flow  rate:   Unspecified
             Filtration rate  (hydraulic  loading):   Unspecified
             Backwash rate:   Unspecified
             Effective size of media:  Anthracite:   0.9-1.5 mm,-  sand:  0.4-0.8 mm;
               gravel:  6-16  mm
                                           REMOVAL DATA
Sampling: 2M-hr composite samples, volatile
oraanlcs were arab samoled Analysis:

Classical pollutants, moVL:
COD
TSS
Total phenol
Total phosphorus
A 1 UK i nun
Barium
Boron
Calcium
Coba 1 t
Iron
Magnesium
Manganese
Molybdenum
Sodium
Silicon
Strontium
Tin
T I tan i uat
Vanadium
Ammonia
Nitrate
Suicide
pH, pH'units
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Ant imxmy
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
Se 1 en i urn
Si Iver
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Pheno 1
p-Chloro-m-cresol
Benzene
Chlorobenzene
Ethylbenzene
Toluene
1 . l-Dichloroethylene
Methylene chlorjde
Beryl HUB
Mercury
Thallium
1, l-Olchloroethane
Trlchlorof luorome thane
Tetrachloroethylene
Trlchloroethylene
Concent
Influent! a )

630
20
0.026
iu
0.16
0.007
0.27
12
<0.006
0.52
3
0.69
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Filtration
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory.
Plant:  V
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Textile mills
 Woven fabric finishing

3-89, pp. 70-75
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  None(a)/Filter

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Downflow multimedia filter with FeCl3 precoagulation
  (16 mg/L)
Media (top to bottom):  Anthracite, sand, gravel
Bed depth - total:  1,000 mm; anthracite:  300 mm; sand:  300 mm; gravel:
  400 mm
Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Filtration rate (hydraulic loading):  Unspecified
Backwash rate:  Unspecified
Effective size of media:  Anthracite:  0.9-1.5 mm; sand:  0.4-0.8 mm;
  gravel:  6-16 mm

REMOVAL DATA



Sampling: 24- hr composite, volatile
orqanics were arab

Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
COO
TSS
Total phenol
Total phosphorus
Toxic pollutants, M9/U:
Antimony
Arsenic
Ch rom i um
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl Jphthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
To 1 uene
Anthracene/phenanthrene
Methylene chloride
Trichloroethylene
samoled
Concent
Inf luent(a)

93
12
0.029
1.2

75
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
5
0
50
42
NM
(V.7.3.32)
Detection
1 imit















0.04
0.02
0. 1
0.01
0.4
0.5
    Blanks  indicate data not available.
    NM,  not meaningful.
    (a)Influent is taken from final  treatment  effluent and is then  run through
      pi lot process.
  Date:   9/25/81
                    III.3.1.9-50
-------
             TREATMENT  TECHNOLOGY:   Filtration
                           Effluent Guidelines
                            Textile mills
                           Woven fabric finishing
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory >
Plant:  V
References:  3-89, pp. 70-74
Pretreatment/treatment:  None(a)/Filter

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Multimedia
Media (top to bottom):  Unspecified
Bed depth - total>  Unspecified
Hastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Filtration rate (hydraulic loading):  Unspecified
Backwash rate:  Unspecified
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
Semolina: 24-hr comnosite
Pol ly^ent/pa. remoter
Classical pollutants, »g/L:
Aluminum
Barium
Boron
Calcium
Cobs 1 1
Iron
Magnesium
Manganese
Molybdenum
Sodium
Phosphorus
Silicon
Strontium
Tin
Titanium
Vanadium
Phenol
Ammonia
Nitrate
COO
TSS
pH, pH units
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Beryllium
Cadi urn
Chromium
Copper.
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
Mercury
Selenium
Thallium
8ls(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
Dl-n-butyl phthalate
Anthracene
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Hethylene chloride
Toluene
Trichloroethylene
1, l-Dichloroethane
Benzene
Ethyl benzene
Chloroform
Trans- 1 ,2-dichloroethylene
REMOVAL
Cot
Inriuei

0.13
0.01
0.73
5.1
<0.006
0.21
2.2
0.08
7
12
87
NM
NM
NM
21
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NH
NM ,
46
NM
43
NM
NM
NH
NM
NH
IV. 7. 3.1?)
Detection
limit






































0.04
0.02
0.01
0.0}
0.4
O.I
0.5
3.0
0.2
0.2
5.0
2.0
                      Blanks Indicate data not available.
                      BDL, below detection limit.
                      NM, not meaningful.
                      (a)lnfluent is taken from final treatment effluent and Is then run through
                       pilot process.
Date:    9/25/81
                             III.3.1.9-51
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Filtration
Data  source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Textile mills
Subcategory:  Wool  scouring
Plant:   W
References:  3-89,  pp. 50-54
Pretreatment/treatment:  None(a)/Sed., Filter
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit  configuration:  Multimedia
Media (top to bottom):  Unspecified
Bed depth - total:   Unspecified
Wastewater flow  rate:  Unspecified
Filtration rate  (hydraulic loading):
Backwash rate:   Unspecified
                    Data  source status:
                      Not specified
                      Bench scale
                      Pilot scale
                      Full scale
       Unspecified
                                    REMOVAL DATA
                 SamolInQ!—81-tlf WWVlItt
                                             Analysis:  Data set I fV.7.3.32)

Classical pollutants, mg/L:
Aluminum
Barium
Boron
Ca 1 c i urn
Coba 1 t
1 ron
Magnesium
Manganese
Molybdenum
Sodium
Phosphorus
silicon
Strontium
Ammonia
Titanium
Vanadium
Phenol
Nitrate
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
SI Iver
Zinc
Bls(2-ethylhexyl )phthalate
Anthracene
Fluoranthene
Benzof a ) pyrene
Pyrene
Benzo (k) fluoranthene
To 1 uene
Ethylbenzene
Methylene chloride
concent r
Influentf a 1

4.7
0.12
0.«4
31
<0.04
3.4
6.6
0.07
<0.2
56
0.21
3.2
0.16
3
0.11
0.12
0.05
7.1

<200
39
<2
-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Filtration
 Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
 Point source:  Textile mills
 Subcategory:  Woven and knit  fabric finishing
 Plant:  See below
 References:  3-68, pp. VII-62,  66-69
 Pretreatment/treatment:  Screen.,  Equal., Act. SI.
   specified)/Filter (multimedia)

 DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

 Unit configuration:  Downflow multimedia filter
 Media (top to bottom):  Anthracite, sand, gravel
 Bed depth - total:  1,000 mm
 Wastewater flow rate:  See below
 Filtration rate (hydraulic loading):  See below
 Backwash rate:  Unspecified
                     Data source  status:
                       Not specified
                       Bench  scale
                       Pilot  scale
                       Full scale
                      (unless otherwise
                        Bed depth:   Anthracite:
                          300 mm;  sand:  300 mm.
                          gravel:   400 mm
                        Effective  size of media:
                          Anthracite:   0.9-1.5
                          mm; sand: 0.4-0.8 mm;
                          gravel:  6-16 mm
                                      REMOVAL DATA
Sampling: Unspecified
Plant
D{a)
P(b)
Q(c)
Q(d)

BODS
Concentration. mq/L
Influent Effluent
2«t
12
10
8.2
19
15
7
4

Percent
remove I
21
NM
30
51
Ana lysis;

: Data set '
COD
Concentration. mq/L
Influent Effluent
810
100
3UO
270
630
110
260
200
1 (V.7.3.32)

Percent
remove 1
23
NM
2U
26


TOG
Concentration. roq/L
Influent Effluent
D(a)
P(b)
Q(c)
Qtd)
180
30
18
27
160
25
18
22

Percent
remova I
11
17
0
19

TSS
Concentration. mg/L
Influent Effluent
290
70
77
46
85
16
28
U.2

Percent
remova 1
71
77
6H
91
     NM,  not meaningful.
     (a)FiItration rate:  0.18 cu.m/min/sq.m; wastewater flow:  0.017 cu.m/min;
        neutralization was used in pretreatment of  influent in  lieu of
        equaIization.
     (b)FiItration rate:  0.1-0.3 cu.m/min/sq.m; wastewater flow:
        0.01-0.03 cu.m/min; neutralization was also  included in pretreat-
        ment of effluent.
     (c)FiItration rate:  0.1 cu.m/min/sq.m, wastewater flow:  0.0095 cu.m/min.
     (d)FiItration rate:  0.08 cu.m/min/sq.m; wastewater flow: 0.0076 cu.m/min.
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.9-53
-------
III.3.1.10  Flotation

     Description

Flotation is a process by which suspended solids, free and emul-
sified oils, and grease are separated from wastewater by re-
leasing gas bubbles into the wastewater.   The gas bubbles attach
to the solids, increasing their buoyancy and causing them to
float.  A surface layer of sludge forms,  and is usually con-
tinuously skimmed off for disposal.

Flotation is used primarily in the treatment of wastewater streams
that carry heavy loads of finely divided suspended solids or oil.
Solids having a specific gravity only slightly greater than
water, which would require abnormally long sedimentation times,
may be removed in much less time by flotation.  The process is
sometimes used when existing clarifiers are overloaded hydrauli-
cally or when land is scarce, because converting to flotation
requires less surface area.  Flotation coupled with chemical
addition is sometimes used for removing suspended and colloidal
solids.

     Representative Types and Modifications

Flotation may be performed in several ways including foam (froth),
dispersed air, dissolved air, vacuum flotation, and flotation
with chemical addition.  The principle difference between the
variations is the method of generation of the minute gas bubbles
in a suspension of water and small particles.  Flotation tech-
niques and the method of bubble generation include:

     (I)  Foam (Froth) Flotation.  Foam flotation is based on the
          utilization of differences in the physiochemical prop-
          erties of various particles.  Wettability and surface
          properties affect the particles' ability to attach
          themselves to gas bubbles in an aqueous medium.  In
          froth flotation, air is blown through the solution
          containing flotation reagents.   The particles with
          water repellant surfaces adhere to air bubbles as they
          rise and are brought to the surface.  A mineralized
          froth layer with mineral particles attached to air
          bubbles is formed.  Particles of other minerals that
          are readily wetted by water do not adhere to air bubbles
          and remain in suspension.

     (2)  Dispersed Air Flotation.  In dispersed air flotation,
          gas bubbles are generated by introducing the air by
          means of mechanical agitation with impellers or by
          forcing air through porous media.
Date:  9/25/81             III.3.1.10-1
-------
     (3)  Dissolved Air Flotation (DAF).   This system generates  a
          supersaturated solution of wastewater and air by pressur-
          izing wastewater at 276,000 to 552,000 Pascals  (40  to
          80 psi)  [3-1,  3-24] and introducing compressed  air.
          This "supersaturated"  wastewater flows to a large
          flotation tank where the pressure is released,  thereby
          generating  numerous small air bubbles.  These effect
          the flotation of the solids or oils being removed in
          three ways:   (1) the air bubbles adhere to the  mate-
          rials,  (2)  the air bubbles become trapped in the floc-
          culant  structure formed by the materials, or (3) the
          air bubbles adsorb to  the flocculant structure.

          The principal components of a dissolved air flotation
          system  are  a pressurizing pump, air injection facil-
          ities,  a retention tank, a back pressure regulating
          device,  and a flotation unit.  The pressurizing pump
          creates  an  elevated pressure to increase the solubility
          of air.   Air is usually added through an injector on
          the suction side of the pump.  Of the total air induced,
          30 to 45% will usually be dissolved.  A schematic of a
          typical  DAF is shown in Figure 3.1.10-1.
     FIGURE 3.1.10-1.
              TYPICAL DISSOLVED AIR FLOTATION SYSTEM
              [3-23]
       Chemical
              Surface Sludge   Bottom Sludge
               To Disposal     To Disposal
                  A      A(if required)
Addition
1
Influent 1
r~ — ^

Pressure xv*
Regulator


ff
1

^


k, j
^ •• ^ «



.* .• ^ •
x— x
r >







V
Vy
Tl
/\
X




Flotation Tank


/"-\
- -., — 	 .r4 J 	 *=












J


Effluent
ff i

Optiona
/J
.— J
Pressuri
 Tank
                                    t,
                                     |
                                    Centrifugal Pump
                                     stream
Date:  9/25/81
                  III.3.1.10-2
-------
     (4)  Vacuum Flotation.  This process consists of saturating
          the wastewater with air either directly in an aeration
          tank, or by permitting air to enter on the suction of a
          wastewater pump.  A partial vacuum is applied, which
          causes the dissolved air to come out of solution as
          minute bubbles.  The bubbles attach to solid particles
          and rise to the surface to form a scum blanket, which
          is normally removed by a skimming mechanism.   Grit and
          other heavy solids that settle to the bottom are gen-
          erally raked to a central sludge pump for removal.  A
          typical vacuum flotation unit consists of a covered
          cylindrical tank in which a partial vacuum is main-
          tained.  The tank is equipped with scum and sludge
          removal mechanisms.  The floating material is con-
          tinuously swept to the tank periphery, automatically
          discharged into a scum trough, and removed from the
          unit by a pump that is also under partial vacuum.
          Auxiliary equipment includes an aeration tank for
          saturating the wastewater with air, a tank with a short
          retention time for removal of large air bubbles, vacuum
          pumps, and sludge and scum pumps.

     (5)  Flotation with Chemical Addition.  All of the above
          techniques can be used in conjunction with chemical
          addition.  This technique is similar to the treatment
          technology described for chemical coagulation and
          flocculation (Section III.3.1.5) used with sedimenta-
          tion except that gas flotation is utilized instead of
          sedimentation.  By coagulation of the suspended matter
          prior to treatment, the effectiveness of flotation is
          improved.  Aluminum and iron salts, and activated
          silica can all be used to increase the flocculant
          structure of the floated particles and hence facilitate
          the capture of gas bubbles.  A variety of organic
          chemicals (polymers) may also be used to change the
          nature of the air-liquid interface, the solid-liquid
          interface, or both.  These chemicals are essentially
          removed in the flotation unit, thereby adding little or
          no load to the downstream waste treatment systems.
          However, the resulting float and sludge may become a
          less desirable raw material for recycling as a result
          of chemical coagulation.

     Technology Status

Flotation is a fully developed process and is commonly used in
industrial operations to remove emulsified oils and grease as
well as suspended solids with a specific gravity close to that of
water.
Date:  9/25/81             III.3.1.10-3
-------
     Applications

Flotation is a widely used technology in the following in-
dustries:

     - Metal Finishing,
     - Petroleum Refining, and
     - Rubber Processing.

Flotation is also used on a limited basis in the following in-
dustries:

     - Auto and Other Laundries,
     - Iron and Steel Manufacturing,
     - Aluminum Forming,
     - Battery Manufacturing,
     - Explosives Manufacturing,
     - Gum and Wood Chemicals,
     - Pharmaceutical Manufacturing,
     - Paint and Ink Formulation,
     - Pulp and Paper Mills,
     - Soap and Detergent Manufacturing, and
     - Textile Mills.

Pretreatment of wastewater using dissolved air flotation is being
practiced at a number of industrial and linen supply laundries.
Dissolved air flotation units have also been used successfully in
treatment schemes to reclaim oils for direct reuse and/or use as
power plant fuels in the Metal Finishing industry.

     Advantages and Limitations

Some advantages of the flotation process are the high levels of
solids separation achieved in many applications, the relatively
low energy requirements, and the adaptability to meet the treat-
ment requirements of different waste types.  When the process is
used for oily waste flotation subsequent to emulsion breaking, it
can provide better performance with a shorter detention period
(and therefore smaller flotation tanks) than emulsion breaking
without flotation.  A small reduction in the quantity of chemical
required for emulsion breaking is also possible.

The limitations of flotation are that it often requires chemical
addition to enhance process performance, it generates large
quantities of solid waste, and the process will only be effective
on particles with densities near to or less than that of water.
The effluent from flotation with chemical addition may require
additional solids removal (e.g., by filtration, Section
III.3.1.9).  Odor may be a problem with certain waste streams.
Date:  9/25/81             III.3.1.10-4
-------
     Reliability

Flotation systems normally are very reliable with proper main-
tenance of the sludge collector mechanism and the motors and
pumps used for aeration.  The feed rate and process conditions
also must be maintained at the proper levels at all times to
ensure this reliability.

     Chemicals Required

     Certain chemicals can be added to improve the performance of
flotation.  These include aluminum and iron salts, activated
silica, and polymers.

     Residuals Generated

The surface sludge layer coupled with sludge collected from the
bottom of the flotation tank form a large volume of sludge that
must be disposed of properly.

     Design Criteria

The flotation characteristics of the wastewater vary with the
nature of the solids in the feed.  These characteristics can be
estimated by the use of a laboratory flotation cell.  The primary
variables for flotation design are pressure, surface hydraulic
loading, recycle ratio, solids loading, air-to-solids ratio, and
detention time.  The range of values for the above parameters are
summarized below:
Criteria
Pressure

Surface hydraulic loading

Recycle (where employed)
Solids loading

Air-to-solids ratio
Detention time
Units
Pascals
(psi)
L/day/m2
(gpd/ft2)
percent
kg/m2/hr
(Ib/ft2/hr)
mass/mass
minutes
Value/Range
276,000 - 552,000
(40 - 80)
20,400 - 326,000
(500 - 8,000)
5 - 120
2.4 - 24
(0.5 - 5)
1:10
20 - 60
     Performance

The performance of a flotation unit is related to the air-to-
solids ratio, which is defined as kilograms of air released per
kilogram of solids in the influent waste.  Sufficient air bubbles
must be present to float essentially all of the suspended solids.
An insufficient quantity of air will result in only partial
flotation of the solids, and excessive air will yield no improve-
ment.  Flotation with chemical addition will improve performance.


Date:  9/25/81             III.3.1.10-5
-------
Subsequent data sheets provide performance data on the following
industries and/or waste streams:

     - Textile Mills,
     - Pulp and Paper Mills,
     - Auto and Other Laundries,  and
     - Petroleum Refining.

     References

3-1, 3-3, 3-5, 3-12,  3-15,  3-16,  3-17,  3-23,  3-24, 3-26,  3-27.
Date:  9/25/81             III.3.1.10-6
-------










NOI1VK
u.
g
|
i
5
UJ
1














c
\
£
—
I
C
c
*J
z
4*
c
e
o
i
!»-
UJ

M
«J
C
g
«J
s














c
•o
e
g
a
c
«
r
£



B

\
"a
•*.


s
c
GL






4J
C
CD
*J
3


o

SSSS2!?

o\.»
i-« on-
to A A»

* in" m
inoco*o —
MOOr-%ozzov — if\zzr r--vo*^zzr- oo
A A A A

* Ovt7»O» tNO^ Os O\ O\ Ov W •> *>O\ Ov CO
AAAA(M>VA«OA AOtAA A A CO AA A A

O» O — ro JT
ft™*O OcOlAl^Otf ^~"OOZ*O Z NZ~"W<0 ^"~l^ CSJ iA^ ^ flO » — ^ . ^ — •
V ooin »— o o -3-000 — 000
•CO •tl^-(M»*0 * * !*• *VO OJMOJ w CXIOAM v co — *o
OQQJOJlAOO-JO-J-l-JOOO-IQ O O OlAA iTt . 0- C CO)

s 1^1 illlllhll 1 .1 11
c — — * i o o.£ a a— c— a — CNO o Q..C
CD >*>»»- Ot- « --0 « >>0 £ * C C C 0 ^.a
*» .CN-^E^O— £ — 'ptJ.tf'V o NOO « C OCB
a ** c o «-.o— xaxooa^o — C^ONC « cc
— X • • g c a>**o p£ ** *»« « o «— «- ooc w »0 C 1. 0~ U- 1 CgOAC«0)£OnO
u^S — •S°a«^^'u — — IDC w5€5 oif S f ceo A c o* c — o.c*2 § §'a£'5o


o
1-


















o
10
ID
* —
i"
•0 C
wo

indicate d
elow detect
t detected.
t meaningfu
xinate valu
.S c e S
c » a

— oo z <
mcazz*
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.10-7
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Flotation With Cationic Polymer
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Textile mills
Subcategory:  Woven fabric finishing
Plant:  Unspecified
References:  3-24, pp. 283,284                       Full scale            	x
Pretreatment/treatment:  Equal., Grit Removal,  Screen.,  Chem.  Ppt./Flotation
                    Data source  status:
                      Not specified
                      Bench  scale
                      Pilot  scale
                      Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Process type:  Dissolved air flotation
Wastewater flow rate:  1,730 m3/day
Chemical dosage(s):  Unspecified
pH in flotation chamber:  Unspecified
Detention time:  Unspecified
             Hydraulic loading  rate:   Unspeci-
               fied
             Solids  loading  rate:   Unspecified
             Gas-to-solids ratio:   Unspecified
             Pressure:  Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL DATA
     Sample;   Average of two 2U-hr samples
                Analysis;   Data set 1  (V.7.3.32)
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
BOD(5)
COD
TSS
Total phenol
Toxic pollutants, Mg/L:
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Tha II i urn
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl )phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Pentachlorophenol
Pheno 1
Benzene
Ethyl benzene
Toluene
Naphthalene
Methyl chloride
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
Influent

too
1,000
200
0.092

320
1«t
28
T
25
570
13
37
9k
18
460
320
250
26
11
Effluent

<200
720
32
0.026

81
NO
32
1U
T
«*5
ND
30
26
12
160
130
ND
30
T
Percent Detection
reroova 1 limit

>50
28
84
72

75
>99
NM
NM
NM
92
>99
19
72
33
65
59
>99
NM
NM
     Blanks indicate data  not available.
     ND, not detected.
     NM, not meaningful.
     T, trace;  assumed to  be <10
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.10-3
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
Flotation With Chemical  Addition (Calcium
Chloride, Polymer)
Data source: Effluent  Guidelines
Point source: Auto  and other laundries
Subcategory: Industrial laundries
Plant: A
References: 3-84, Appendix C
                            Data source status:
                              Not specified
                              Bench scale
                              Pilot scale
                              Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  Screen.,  Equal., Oil Sep./Flotation

DESIGN OR OPERATING  PARAMETERS

Process type: Dissolved  air flotation (DAF)  Hydraulic  loading rate: 0.038
Wastewater flow  rate:   0.27 m3/min
  operation, 0.57 m3/min design
Chemical dosage(s):  CaCl2-l,800 mg/L,
  polymer-2 mg/L
pH in flotation  chamber: 11.6
Detention time:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Rectangular DAF unit,
  recycle pressurization
                         m3/min/m2
                       Percent recycle: 50
                       Solids loading rates Unspecified
                       Gas-to-solids ratio: 0.0097
                       Pressure:  476 kPa
                       Percent solids in sludge: 5
                       Sludge overflow:  0.0076 m3/min
                                     REMOVAL DATA
*""•"" HIM. 	 K. «.«..» *,V*~IV9 t re «..»
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
COD
TOG
TSS
Oil and grease(a)
Total phenol
Total phosphorus
Toxic pollutants. Mg/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadm i urn
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
Selenium
Thai Hun
Zinc
Bls(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Dl-n-octyl phthalate
2, it-Dimethyl phenol
Pen tach 1 o ropheno 1
Phenol
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
Benzene
0 i ch 1 o ro benzene
Ethyl benzene
Toluene
Anthracene/phenanthrene
Naphtha lene
Carbon tetrachloride
Chlorofona
Methylene chloride
Tetrachloroe thy lene
1, 1, 1-Tr fen to roe thane
Trlchloroethylene
• Tt' °" 	
Concent n
Influent 1

6, MOO
1,700
390
700
0.78
42

9>l
10
110
1)80
1,500
57
1,800
350
BDL
BDL
3,700
1,200
310
92
150
460
ND
98
ND
3
1,100
25
360
380
4,800
BDL
BDL
2
320
18
4
""*• * -'
itlon
~.t r 1 uent

3,200
690
98
110
0.76
1.7

BDL
2
BDL
270
500
51
130
250
2
50
230
220
ND
19
33
ND
27
42
3
5
260
44
380
66
840
BDL
BDL
2
330
14
6
• *• * •»* — "** »•'
Percent
remove 1

50
59
75
80
3
96

95«
80
>99*
MU
67
5
97
29
NM
NM
94
8?
>99
79
78
>99
NM
5?
NM
NM
76
NM
NM
83
83
NM
NM
0
NM
22
NM
' •*" *• ' 	 »T.t.J..J
Detection
limit








10
1
2
M
14

22
36
1
50
1
o.ot
0.03
0.02
0.89
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.2

0.2
0.1
0.01
0.007
4
5
0.4

2
0.5
                  Blanks Indicate data not available.
                  BDL, below detection limit.
                  NM, not meaningful.
                  •Approximate value.
                  (a)Average of four saiaples.
 Date:   9/25/81
          111.3.1,10-9
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
Flotation With Chemical Addition  (Calcium
Chloride, Polymer)
Data source: Effluent Guidelines                   Data source status:
Point source: Auto and other laundries               Not specified         	
Subcategory: Industrial laundries                    Bench scale           ^^
Plant: B                                             Pilot scale           ^^
References: 3-84, Appendix C                         Full scale            	x_
Pretreatment/treatment: Screen., Equal./Flotation

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Process type: Dissolved air flotation  (DAF)  Hydraulic loading rate: Unspecified
Wastewater flow rate: Unspecified
Chemical dosage(s): Unspecified
pH in flotation chamber:  11.6
Detention time: Unspecified
                      Percent recycle:  Unspecified
                      Solids loading rate:  Unspecified
                      Gas-to-solids  ratio:  Unspecified
                      Pressure: Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL DATA
    Sampling:  Composite and grab	Analysis;	Data set '  (Y.7,3,1)
                                  Concentration
                            Percent   Detection
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
COD
TSS
Oi 1 and grease
Tota 1 pheno 1
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Zinc
Di-n-butyl ph thai ate
N-nitrosodiphenylamine
Pheno 1
Ethyl benzene
To 1 uene
Naphthalene
Chloroform
Methyl ene chloride
Tet rach 1 o roethy I ene
Tr 1 ch 1 o roethy 1 ene
Isophorone
Tha 1 1 1 urn
Influent

3,800
700
440
0.016

41
12
170
270
1,600
9,400
2
150
4,500
ND
1,800
600
250
750
4,000
10
540
880
210
190
BDL
Effluent

1,300
48
190
<0.001

<20
<10
23
<130
330
230
BDL
<50
200
290
620
120
110
790
790
8
500
1,000
30
ND
BDL
remova I

66
93
57
>94

>51
>17
86
>52
79
98
88*
>67
96
NM
66
80
58
NM
80
20
7
NM
86
>99
NM
limit






10
1
2
4
4
22
0.5
36
1
0.02
0.7
0.07
0.2
0.1
0.007
5
0.4

0.5
0.6
50
    Blanks indicate data not available.
    BDL, below detection limit.
    ND, not detected.
    NM, not meaningful.
    "Approximate value.
Date:   9/25/81
        III.3.1.10-10
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY!
Flotation With Chemical  Addition (Calcium
Chloride, Polymer)
Data source: Effluent Guidelines
Point source: Auto and  other laundries
Subcategory: Industrial laundries
Plant: C
References: 3-84, Appendix C
Pretreatment/treatment:  Screen., Equal./Flotation
                            Data source status:
                              Not specified
                              Bench scale
                              Pilot scale
                              Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
Process type: Dissolved  air flotation (DAF)
Wastewater flow rate: Unspecified
Chemical dosage(s): Unspecified
pH in flotation chamber:  11.3
Detention time: Unspecified
                       Hydraulic loading rate: Unspecified
                       Percent recycle: Unspecified
                       Solids loading rate: Unspecified
                       Gas-to-solids ratio: Unspecified
                       Pressure: Unspecified
     Sampling:  Composite and grab
                                   REMOVAL DATA
                       Analysis;   Data set I  (V.7.3.11
          Pollutant/parameter
     Classical pollutants, mg/L:
       COD
       TSS
       OiI and grease
       Total phenol
                                        Concentration
              Influent
Effluent
Percent
removaI
              3,200
                520
                760
              0.028
 1,200
    6k
   170
  0.56
     Blanks  indicate data not available.
     BDL, below detection limit.
     NO,  not detected.
     NM,  not meaningful.
     "Approximate value.
  63
  88
  78
  NM
Detection
  I imit
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Ant imo/iy
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
S i 1 ve r
Zinc
Phenol
Ethyl benzene
Toluene
Naphtha lene
Chloroform
Methylene chloride
Tetrachloroethylene

<25
13
54
1,200
1,200
4,400
1
50
<29
2,600
100
1,000
2,400
ND
35
110
84

<20
12
BDL
620
340
67
BDL
<50
<15
<68
100
970
2,100
480
9
6,000
5

NM
8
98*
48
72
98
75*
NM
NM
>97
0
3
13
NM
74
NM
94

10
1
2
4
4
22
0.5
36
5
1
0.07
0.2
0.1
0.007
5
0.4

 Date:   9/25/81
          III.3.1.10-11
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
Flotation With Chemical Addition (Calcium
Chloride, Polymer)
Data source: Effluent Guidelines                  Data source status:
Point source: Auto and other laundries              Not specified         	
Subcategory: Industrial laundries                   Bench scale           	
Plant: D                                            Pilot scale           	
References: 3-84, Appendix C                        Full scale              x
Pretreatment/treatment: Screen., Equal./Flotation

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Process type: Dissolved air flotation (DAF)  Hydraulic loading rate: Unspecified
Wastewater flow rate: Unspecified
Chemical dosage(s): Unspecified
pH in flotation chamber: 11.7
Detention time: Unspecified
Unit configuration: Rectangular DAF unit,
   recycle pressurization
                      Percent recycle: Unspecified
                      Solids loading rate: Unspecified
                      Gas-to-solids ratio: Unspecified
                      Pressure: Unspecified
     Samp I ing;  Composite and  grab
                                   REMOVAL DATA
                       Analysis;  Data  set I  (V.7.3.11
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
BOD(5)
COO
TOC
TSS
Oil and grease
Toxic pollutants, u.g/L:
Antimony
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Bis (2-ethylhexyl)
phtha late
Benzene
Ethyl benzene
Toluene
Tet rach 1 o roethy 1 ene
Influent

2,400
7,100
1,800
940
1,600

160
70
980
1,700
280
5,400
80
2,700

2,600
130
18,000
2,600
30
Effluent

1,000
2,000
500
100
230

310
3
570
150
290
110
NO
NO

1,000
200
NO
900
980
Percent
remova I

58
72
72
89
86

NM
96
42
91
NM
98
>99
>99

62
NM
>99
65
NM
Detection
limit







10
2
4
4

22
36
1

0.04
0.2
0.2
0.1

     Blanks  indicate data not  available.
     NO,  not detected.
     NM,  not meaningful.
 Date:   9/25/81
        III.3.1.10-12
-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
Flotation With Chemical Addition  (Calcium
Chloride, Polymer)
 Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
 Point source: Auto and other laundries
 Subcategory:  Industrial laundries
 Plant: E
 References: 3-84,  Appendix C
 Pretreatment/treatment: Screen., Equal./Flotation
                           Data source  status:
                             Not specified
                             Bench scale
                             Pilot scale
                             Full scale
 DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

 Process type.- Dissolved air flotation (DAF)
 Wastewater flow rate: Unspecified
 Chemical dosage(s): Unspecified
 pH in flotation chamber: Unspecified
 Detention time: Unspecified
 Unit configuration: Rectangular DAF unit,
    recycle pressurization
                      Hydraulic  loading  rate:  Unspecified
                      Percent recycle: Unspecified
                      Solids loading  rate: Unspecified
                      Gas-to-solids ratio: Unspecified
                      Pressure:  Unspecified
     Sampling;  Composite and grab
                                   REMOVAL DATA
                       Analysis;   Data set I  (V.7.3.11
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
BOD(5)
COD
TOC
TSS
Oi 1 and grease
Total phenol
Total phosphorus
Toxic pollutants, jig/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
Influent

1,700
4,900
460
900
230
0.10
13

120
11
60
300
1,000
240
3,000
<3
80
8
2,000
Effluent

540
1,100
270
18
84
0.32
23

29
ND
BDL
100
200
530
70
2
BDL
19
60
Percent
remova I

68
78
41
98
63
NM
NM

76
>99
98*
67
80
NM
98
NM
78
NM
97
Detection
limit









10
1
2
4
4
-
22
0.5
36
5
1
     Blanks  indicate data not available.
     BDL,  below detection limit.
     ND, not detected.
     NM, not meaningful.
     "Approximate values.
Date:  9/25/81
      III.3.1.10-13
-------
TREATMENT  TECHNOLOGY:   Flotation With Chemical Addition (Calcium
                        Chloride, Polymer)
Data source: Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Auto and other laundries
Subcategory: Industrial laundries
Plant: F
References: 3-84,  Appendix C
Pretreatment/treatment: Screen., Equal./Flotation
                     Data source status-.
                       Not specified
                       Bench scale
                       Pilot scale
                       Full scale
DESIGN OR  OPERATING PARAMETERS
Process  type:  Dissolved air flotation

Wastewater  flow rate:  0.38 m3
   operational, 0.78 m3/min design
Chemical dosage(s):   CaCl2-l,600 mg/L,
   polymer-2 mg/L
pH in flotation chamber:  Unspecified
Detention time: Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Rectangular DAF unit,
   recycle  pressurization
                Hydraulic loading rate: 0.0027
                   m3/min/m2
                Percent recycle: Unspecified
                Solids loading rate:  Unspecified
                Gas-to-solids ratio:  Unspecified
                Pressure:  Unspecified
                Percent solids in sludge:   3-5
                                   REMOVAL DATA
        Sampling;   5 day composite and grab
              Analysis:  Data set I  (V.7.3.1)
          Pollutant/oarameter
      Concentrat ion(a)    Percent   Detection
    Influent   Effluent   removal	limit
       Classical  pollutants,  mg/L:
         BOD(5)                       880       320        64
         TOG                          1l»0       160        NM
         TSS                          790       140        82
         Oil and  grease                510        53        90

       Toxic pollutants, u.g/L:
         Cadmium                       <48       <72        NM           2
         Chromium                     650       290        55           4
         Lead                       5,400      <300       >94          22
         Zinc                       2,900       310        89           1
         Mercury                       BDL       BDL        NM         0.5
         Nickel                       BDL       BDL        NM          36

       Blanks  indicate data not available.
       BDL, below detection limit.
       NM, not meaningful.
       (a)Average of  five samples.
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.10-14
-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Flotation With Chemical Addition (Polymer)
 Data source: Effluent Guidelines
 Point source: Auto  and other laundries
 Subcategory: Power  laundries
 Plant: J
 References: 3-84, Appendix C
 Pretreatment/treatment: Screen., Equal./Flotation
                      Data source  status:
                        Not specified
                        Bench scale
                        Pilot scale
                        Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
Process type: Dissolved air flotation (DAF)  Hydraulic loading rate:  0.11
Wastewater flow  rate:   341 m3/d,
   operational, 379  m3/d design
Chemical dosage(s):  60 mg/L-
   polyelectrolyte
pH in flotation  chamber:  10.3-10.6
Detention time:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Rectangular DAF
   unit,  recycle  pressurization
                  m3/min/m2
                Percent recycle:   50
                Solids loading rate:   Unspecified
                Gas-to-solids ratio:   0.5
                Pressure:  517 kPa
                Sludge overflow:   0.11 m3/d
                Percent solids in  sludge:  7.5
                  Sampling:
                                      REMOVAL DATA
                        2 day composite and grab	Analysis:  Data set I  IV.7.3.l>
                    Pollutant/oarameter
                                    	Concent rnI op
                                    Influent  Effluen
                  Percent
                  renovaI
                  Blanks Indicate data not available.
                  BDL, below detection limit.
                  NO, not detected.
                  NH, not •enningful.
                  (a)Average or four samples.
Detection
 Halt
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
BOD(5)(a)
COD
TOC
TSS
01 t and greasefa)
Total phenol
Total phosphorus
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Antimony
Cadmium
Ch rom i urn
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
Bis 2-ethyibenzyl phthalate
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthatate
Di-n-octyl phthalate
2-chlorophenol
2 , i*-D 1 ch 1 o ropheno 1
2,M-Oimethylphenol
Pontach lo ropheno 1
Phenol
Anth racene/phenanth rene
F luoranthene
Naptna Jane
Pyrene
Chloroform
Hethylene chloride
Tetrachloroethylene
1,1, 1-Trichloroethane

110
500
mo
50
39
0.13
0.8

BDL
BDL
26
55
29
BDL
BDL
BOL
290
82
17
2
28
0.3
1
2
3
2
0.9
0.3
0.9
0.3
Ml
57
2
2

140
1(60
87
32
16
0.39
1.0

6l|
5
28
50
25
70
63
29
ZilO
7U
ND
ND
11
2
6
28
8
9
0.2
0.5
0.6
0.3
2U
22
2
ND

NH
8
38
36
59
9
NH

NH
NH
NH
9
11
NH
NH
NH
17
10
<99
<99
61
NH
NH
NH
NM
NH
78
NH
33
0
41
61
0
>99









10
2
1
l|

22
36
5
1

0.03
0.02
0.89
0.09
0.1
0.1
O.U
0.07
0.01
0.02
0.007
0.01
5
O.U

2
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.10-15
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Flotation With Chemical Addition  (Alum, Polymer)
Data source: Effluent  Guidelines
Point source: Auto  and other laundries
Subcategory: Industrial laundries
Plant: K
References: 3-84, Appendix C
Pretreatment/treatment: Screen., Equal./Flotation
                 Data source  status:
                   Not  specified
                   Bench  scale
                   Pilot  scale
                   Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING  PARAMETERS
Process type: Dissolved air flotation (DAF)
Wastewater flow  rate:  45 m3/d operational,
                       159 m3/d design
Chemical dosage(s):  Alum 1,200 mg/L,
                     polymer 80 mg
pH in flotation  chamber: 5-6
Detention time:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Circular DAF unit, no recycle
            Hydraulic  loading rate: Unspecified
            Percent  recycle:  0
            Solids loading rate:   Unspecified
            Gas-to-solids  ratio;
            Pressure:  552  kPa
Unspecified
                                    REMOVAL DATA
Semolina: Composite and qrab
Analysis: Data
Concentration
Pol lutant/parameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
600(5)
COD
TOC
TSS
01 1 and grease
Total phenol
Total phosphorus
Toxic pollutants, M9/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Ch rom i urn
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Se 1 en i urn
Si Iver
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Di-n-octyl phthslate
Phenol
Ethyl benzene
Toluene
Anthracene/phenanthrene
Naphthalene
2-Chloronaphthalene
Carbon tetrachloride
Chloroform! a)
D ichlo rob romome thane
Hethylene chloride
Tetrachloroethylene(a)
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
Trichlorof luoromethane(a)
Ac ro 1 e i n
Influent

350
2,600
730
500
210
0.11
21.0

2,100
9
10
150
810
26
1,100
1.5
160
BDL
120
2,600
120
NO
300
ND
20
1.5
5.0
7.5
23
17
850
6.0
6.0
19
1.0
3,300
1.0
ND
Effluent

180
2,100
5MO
710
76
0.091
12

2,300
3.5
10
360
660
<10
1,000
1.0
270
BDL
66
2,300
90
1*1
300
11
28
3.0
1.5
10
11
17
210
19
ND
8.0
ND
860
ND
360
Percent
remove 1

19
19
26
NM
61
15
50

1
61
0
20
19
<62
9
33
11
NM
15
12
25
NM
0
NM
NM
NM
10
NM
52
0
75
NM
<99
81
<99
71
<99
NH
set 1 (V.7.3.M
Detection
limit









10
1
2
1
1

22
0.5
36
1
5
1
0.01
0.03
0.02
0.89
0.07
0.02
0.1
0.01
0.007
0.02
1
5
0.3
0.1

2
2

             Blanks indicate data not available.
             BDL, below detection limit.
             ND, not detected.
             NM, not meaningful.
             (a)Data from one sampling day.
  Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.10-16
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
Flotation With Chemical Addition (Ferrous  Sulfate,
Lime, Polymer)
Data source: Effluent Guidelines
Point source: Auto and other laundries
Subcategory: Industrial laundries
Plant: L
References: 3-84,  Appendix C
                            Data source status:
                              Not specified
                              Bench scale
                              Pilot scale
                              Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  Screen./Coag. Floe.,  Flotation
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Process type: Dissolved air flotation (DAF)
Wastewater flow  rate:  83 m3/d-design
Chemical dosage(s): FeS04-300 mg/L;
  cationic polymer-2 mg/L
pH in flotation  chamber: Unspecified
Detention time:  Unspecified
Unit configuration: Rectangular DAF unit,
                     recycle pressurization
                       Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
                       Percent recycle: Unspecified
                       Solids loading rate:  Unspecified
                       Gas-to-solids ratio:  Unspecified
                       Pressure: Unspecified
                                     REMOVAL DATA

              Sampling;  3 day composite and grab	Analysis;  Data set
                                                             (V.7.3.11
Pol lutant/parameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
BODS
COD
TOC
TSS
Ol 1 and grease
Total phenol
Tota 1 phosphorus
Toxic pollutants, M9/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
Bls(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Di-n-octyl phthalate
N-n 1 t rosod 1 pheny 1 a»l ne
Pentach 1 oropheno 1
Pheno 1
Benzene
Chlorooenzene
Dichloro benzene
Anthracene/Phenanthrene
Fluoranthene
Fluorene
Naphthalene
Pyrene
Carbon tetrachloride
Oichlorobromomethane
1,2-Dichloropropane
Concent r
Influent

1,1400
3,600
1,300
520
630
0.44
23

170
25
60
600
4,000
20
9,000
2
100
BDL
14,000
5,100
1,500
660
410
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
470
ND
ND
410
NO
ND

ND
at ion
Effluent

250
920
200
1140
26
1.0
<0.05

16
18
BOL
<5
100
20
<20
BDL
<5
BDL
200
110
42
21
ND
84
13
190
120
57
18
<10
<10
14
96
18
36

930
Percent
removal

82
74
85
73
96
•NM
>99

89
28
98"
>99
98
0
>99
88
>95
NM
95
98
97
97
>99
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NH
NM
77
NN
NM
NM
NM
Detection
limit









10
1
2
4
4

22
0.5
36
5
1
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.89
0.07
0.4
0.07
0.2
0.2

0.01
0.02
0.02
0.007
o.ot
4

0.7
              Blanks indicate data not available.
              BDL, below detection limit.
              ND, not detected.
              NM, not meaningful.
              •Approximate value.
 Date:   9/25/81
         III.3.1.10-17
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:
                       Flotation With Chemical Addition  (Ferric
                       Sulfate, Polymer)
                                                  Data  source  status:
                                                    Not specified
                                                    Bench  scale
                                                    Pilot  scale
                                                    Full scale
Data source: Effluent Guidelines
Point source: Auto and other laundries
Subcategory: Linen supply
Plant:  M
References: 3-84, Appendix C                                               	
Pretreatment/treatment: Screen., Equal./Flotation

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Process type: Dissolved air flotation  (DAF)  Hydraulic  loading rate:  Unspecified
Wastewater flow rate: 170 m3/d, design
Chemical dosage(s):  Fe2(S04)3-l,200 mg/L,
   anionic polymer-25 mg/L
pH in flotation chamber: 6
Detention time: 29 min
Unit configuration: Rectangular DAF unit,
   full flow pressurization
                                             Percent  recycle:  0
                                             Solids loading rate:  Unspecified
                                             Gas-to-solids  ratio:   Unspecified
                                             Pressure:  Unspecified
                                   REMOVAL DATA

        Sampling:   3 day composite and grab	Analysis;  Data set  I (V.7.3.M
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
BOD(5)
COD
TOC
TSS
Oi 1 and grease
Total phenol
Total phosphorus
Toxic pollutants, Mg/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Zinc
Influent

1,900
3,200
1,000
800
570
0.030
10

BOL
7
200
200
BOL
0.6
600
Effluent

250
MO
170
23
18
0.032
<0.05

NO
11
<5
too
BDL
BDL
1,000
Percent
remove 1

87
86
83
97
97
NM
>99

NM
NM
>98
NM
NM
58*
NM
Detection
1 imit









10
1
H
H
22
0.5
1
        Blanks indicate data  not available.
        BDL, below detection  limit.
        ND, not detected.
        NM, not meaningful.
        "Approximate value.
Date:   9/25/81
                              III.3.1.10-18
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Flotation -  Without Chemical Addition
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source: Pulp, paper.and paperboard
Subcategory: Nonintegrated tissue
Plant: Unspecified
References: 3-82, pp. A-104-107
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Flotation,  Aeration
                                     Data source status:
                                       Not specified
                                       Bench scale
                                       Pilot scale
                                       Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
Process type: Dissolved air  flotation
Wastewater flow rate: Unspecified
Chemical dosage(s): Unspecified
pH in flotation chamber: Unspecified
Detention time: Unspecified
                           Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
                           Percent recycle:  Unspecified
                           Solids loading rate:  Unspecified
                           Gas-to-solids ratio:  Unspecified
                           Pressure:  Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL DATA
    Samp I ing:
3-day, 24-hour
composite and grab
                                            Analysis;  Data set  I (V.7.3.28)
      Pollutant/parameter
                     Concentration^)     Percent    Detection
                  Influent    Effluent    removal	I Imit
    Classical pollutants, mg/L:
      COD
                      UOO
18
    Blanks  indicate data not available.
    ND, not detected.
    NM, not meaningful.
    (a)Average concentration.
96
Toxic pollutants, (ig/L:
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phtnalate
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Diethyl phthalate
Phenol
Ethyl benzene
Toluene
Naptha lene
Chloroform
Xylene

15
45
1 1
1
92
8
800
12
1
13,000
130
46
3
14,000

2
19
2
2
53,000
30
ND
ND
5
ND
ND
60
ND
ND

87
58
82
NM
NM
NM
>99
>99
NM
>99
>99
NM
>99
>99
  Date:   9/25/81
                   III.3.1.10-19
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Flotation - Without  Chemical Addition

Data source:  Effluent Guidelines                  Data source status:
Point source:  Petroleum refining                    Not specified         	
Subcategory:  Unspecified                            Bench scale           ^^
Plant:  G                                            Pilot scale           	
References:  3-21, pp. IV 36-63                      Full scale              x
Pretreatment/treatment:  Oil Sep.  (API)/Flotation

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Process type:  Dissolved air flotation        Hydraulic loading rate:  Un-
Wastewater flow rate:  3.2 MOD                  specified
Chemical dosage(s):  Unspecified              Percent recycle:  Unspecified
pH in flotation chamber:  Unspecified        Solids loading rate:  Unspecified
Detention time:  Unspecified                  Gas-to-solids ratio:  Unspecified
                                              Pressure:  Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL DATA

    Sampling;  3-dallv grab and composite	Analysis:  Data sets 1. 2(V.7.3.261
Concentration
Pol 1 utant/oa rameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
BOD(5)
COD
TOC
TSS
Oil and grease
Total phenol
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl Jphthalate
Phenol
Anthracene/phenanthrene(a )
Naphtha lene
Aroclor 1016
Aroclor 12U2
Influent

260
8UO
230
mo
93
2k

720
16
1,300
250
0.2
U7
7.8
110
770
4,900
1,100
1,100
1.8
0.5
Effluent

250
1,000
280
131
220
23

570
5
2,300
210
0.6
52
8.5
83
1,100
2,400
600
700
7.9
0.5
Percent Detection
remova 1 limit

H
NM
NM
6
NM
U

21
69
NM
16
NM
NM
NM
22
NM
51
H5
36
NM
NM
    Blanks indicate data not available.
    NM, not meaningful.
    (a) Concentrations  represent  sums for these two compounds which elute
        simultaneously  and have the same major ions for GC/MS.
Date:   9/25/81              III.3.1.10-20
-------
III.3.1.11  Flow Equalization

     Description

Flow equalization is used to balance the quantity and the quality
of wastewater before subsequent downstream treatment.  Industrial
discharges that result from a diversity of processes can often be
treated more effectively when equalization is practiced as an
initial treatment step.  This is because subsequent physical unit
operations and chemical and biological unit processes are more
efficient if operated at or near uniform hydraulic, organic, and
solids loading rates.  Equalization of a variable nature dis-
charge may be accomplished by holding the waste for a period of
time corresponding to the repetitive processes of the manufac-
turing.  For example, facilities that discharge a variable waste
over an eight-hour period need to provide up to eight hours of
storage.  Similar facilities that operate on two or three shifts
may need to provide equalization up to a corresponding time
period.

     Representative Types and Modifications

Equalization basins may be designed as either in-line or side-line
units (see Figure 3.1.11-1).  With the in-line design, the basin
receives the wastewater directly from the collection system, and
the discharge from the basin through the treatment plant is kept
essentially at a constant rate.  In the side-line design, flows in
excess of the average are diverted to the equalization basin and,
when the plant flow falls below the average, wastewater from the
basin is discharged to the plant to bring the flow to the average
level.  The basins are sufficiently sized to hold the peak flows
and discharge at a constant rate.

Equalization basins can be manufactured from steel or concrete or
may be excavated and of the lined or unlined earthen variety.
There are various methods for pumping, flow control, and aeration
(used to enhance mixing and maintain aerobic conditions).  Chem-
ical addition for neutralization (Section III.3.1.13) can be done
in the equalization basin; some equalization basins also serve
the dual purpose of providing flow detention for oil separation
(Section III.3.1.14).

Pump stations may or may not be required to discharge into or out
of the equalization basin, depending upon the available head.
Where pumping is found necessary, the energy requirements will be
based on total flow for in-line basins and on excess flow for
side-line basins.

     Technology Status

Flow equalization has been used for years in the industrial
sectors.
Date:  9/25/81             III.3.1.11-1
-------
     FIGURE 3.1.11-1.   FLOW DIAGRAM FOR AN EQUALIZATION BASIN
       IN-LINE

INFLUENT


GRIT
REMOVAL


EQUALIZATION
BASIN
                 CONTROLLED
                FLOW PUMPING
                  STATION
                                           FLOW METER AND
                                           CONTROL DEVICE
                          r^ TO TREATMENT
       SIDE-LINE
    INFLUENT -•
GRIT
REMOVAL


1
OVERFLOW
STRUCTURE
i
r
EQUALIZATION
BASIN

J

FLOW METER AND 1
CONTROL DEVICE I

          CONTROLLED
         FLOW PUMPING
           STATION
                              TO TREATMENT
     Applications

Flow equalization  is  widely used in the following industries:

     - Inorganic Chemicals Manufacturing,
     - Gum  and  Wood Chemicals,
     - Coal Mining,
     - Photographic Equipment and Supplies,
     - Pharmaceutical Manufacturing,
     - Rubber Processing,
     - Soap and Detergent Manufacturing,  and
     - Textile  Mills.

     Advantages and Limitations

By dampening the diurnal flow variation and the concentration and
mass flow of wastewater constituents, equalization can signif-
icantly  improve the performance of an existing treatment facil-
ity.   It can also  reduce the required size  of downstream facil-
ities when  incorporated into new plants.  Two limitations of
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.11-2
-------
equalization are that it may require substantial land area and
some sludge may be accumulated that will require disposal.

     Reliability

Equalization is reliable from both an equipment and process
standpoint and is used to increase the reliability of the flow-
sensitive treatment processes that follow.

     Chemicals Required

No chemicals are required for this process.

     Residuals Generated

As a result of the settling characteristics of influent waste-
water solids, some materials will collect at the bottom of the
basin, and will need to be periodically discarded.  Provisions
must be made to accommodate this need.

     Design Criteria

Design of an equalization basin is highly site-specific and
dependent upon the type and magnitude of the input flow varia-
tions and facility configuration.  The design parameters are
basically the flow rate (detention time) and the land requirement
(basin volume). The tanks or basins usually are fairly large and
most economical when constructed as shallow structures with large
surface areas if space is available.  The pumping and flow con-
trol mode and the mixing and flushing methods are dependent upon
the size and site conditions.

     Performance

No performance data are available for this process.

     References

3-1, 3-11, 3-15, 3-25, 3-39.
Date:  9/25/81             III.3.1.11-3
-------
III.3.1.12  Ion Exchange

     Description

Ion exchange is the process of removing undesirable anions and
cations from a wastewater by bringing the wastewater in contact
with a resin that exchanges the ions in the wastewater with a set
of substitute ions.  This is classified as an adsorption process
because the exchange occurs on the surface of the resin, and the
exchanging ion must undergo a phase transfer from solution phase
to solid phase.  The process has four operations carried out in a
complete cycle:  service, backwash, regeneration, and rinse.

The wastewater generally requires treatment to remove suspended
solids prior to the ion exchange process.  The wastewater is then
passed through a cation and/or anion exchanger containing its
associated resin that removes the undesirable ions.  The waste-
water is passed through the resin until the available exchange
sites are filled and the contaminant appears in the effluent.
This event is defined as the breakthrough point.  When this point
is reached, the treatment or service cycle is stopped and the bed
is backwashed.  Washing with water in reverse direction to the
service cycle expands and resettles the resin bed.  This elim-
inates channeling that might have occured during service and
removes fines or other materials that may be clogging the bed.

Next, the exchanger is regenerated by contacting the resin with a
sufficiently concentrated solution of the substitute ion. This
converts the resin back to the original form.  Finally, the bed
is rinsed to remove excess regeneration solution prior to the
next service step.

The ion exchange process works well with cations and anions, both
inorganic and organic.  However, the organic species frequently
interact with the exchangers (particularly the organic resins)
via both adsorption and ion exchange reactions, often necessitat-
ing the use of extremely high regenerant concentrations and/or
the use of organic solvents to remove the organics.  Consequently,
most of the applications of ion exchange of interest have in-
volved inorganic species.

There is a variety of different cation and anion exchangers that
form salts of more or less different stabilities with a partic-
ular ion.  Thus, choice of a particular ion exchange material
will often allow selective separative removal of an ion in solu-
tion from another, and afford selective removal of an undesirable
ion from a number of innocuous ones.  As a general rule, ions
with a higher charge will form more stable salts with the ex-
changer than those with a lower charge, and hence polyvalent
species can frequently be selectively removed from a solution
containing both polyvalent and monovalent species.
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.12-1
-------
     Representative Types and Modifications

There  are three principal operating modes for ion exchange
systems:   concurrent fixed-bed,  countercurrent fixed-bed, and
continuous countercurrent.   Figure 3.1.12-1 illustrates these
operational modes  for ion exchange.  Most ion exchange installa-
tions  in use today are of the fixed-bed  type, with  countercurrent
operation coming more into  favor, especially for removal (polish-
ing) of traces of  hazardous species from a stream prior to reuse
or discharge.  A comparison summary of three operating modes is
presented in Table 3.1.12-1.
TABLE  3.1.12-1
                        COMPARISON OF
                        MODES  [3-36]
     ION EXCHANGE  OPERATING
Cri teria
Capacity for high feed
flow and concentration
Effluent qua! ity
Concurrent
fixed bed
Least
Fluctuates with
Countercurrent
rixed bed
M i dd 1 e
High, minor
Countercurrent
cont i nuous
Highest
High
    Regenerant and rinse
     requirements
    Equipment complexity
    Equipment for
     continuous operation
    Relative costs (per unit
     voIume)

     Investment

     Operating
                       bed exhaustion

                     Highest
                Simplest; can use
                 manual operation
                Multiple beds,
                 single regenera-
                 tion equipment
                Least

                Highest chemicals
                 and labor;
                 highest resin
                 inventory
                                    fluctuations
                             Somewhat less than
                               concurrent
More complex; automatic
 controls for
 regeneration

Multiple beds,
 single regeneration
 equipment
Middle

Less chemicals, water,
 and labor than
 concurrent
Least, yields most
 concentrated
 regeneration waste

Most complex; completely
 automated
Provides continuous
 se rv i ce
Highest

Least chemicals
 and labor; lowest
 resin inventory
In order to minimize regeneration chemical requirements (i.e.,  to
make  the most efficient use  of the regenerant), many fixed-bed
installations use a technique termed  "staged," or  "proportional,"
regeneration.  The first part of the  regeneration  solution to
exit  from the ion exchange bed is the most enriched in the com-
ponent being removed; the concentration of that component de-
creases in succeeding portions of the exiting regeneration solu-
tion.   In staged regeneration,  the solution is divided (generally
in separate tanks) into two  or more portions.  The first portion
through the bed  is "discarded" (i.e., sent for subsequent treat-
ment),  while the second and  succeeding  portions (less rich in the
species being removed) are retained.  On the next  regeneration
cycle,  the second portion from the preceding cycle is passed
through the bed  first (and then "discarded"), followed by the
succeeding portions, the last of which  is a portion of fresh
regenerant.  In  this way, regenerant  requirements  can be min-
imized.
Date:   9/25/81
                         III.3.1.12-2
-------
                Cocurrent Fixed Bed Mode ae
                                        Regenerant
                                           In  —
                                           Sendee Out

                                     Service Step
                                                        Regenerant Out

                                                 Regeneration Step
                                       Service In
            Countercurrent Fixed Bed Mode -



          Service Out *	-

                     "W
            Rinsing Section*J

         Regenerant In   -HT   ^
                                                Resin Flow    ^/
                                                              3— Wash To Remove Fines


                                                                   Pulse Generation Section
                                                              3^-*.  Regenerant Out
       FIGURE 3.1.12-1.    OPERATIONAL  MODES  FOR  ION  EXCHANGE
                                  [3-36]
Date:   9/25/81
                        III.3.1.12-3
-------
ion exchange is used in several ways.   Ion exchange is certainly
feasible as an end-of-pipe treatment,  but its greatest value is
in recovery applications.   It is commonly used as an integrated
treatment to recover rinse water and process chemicals.  Some
electroplating facilities use ion exchange to concentrate and
purify plating baths.  Also,  many industrial concerns use ion
exchange to reduce salt concentrations in incoming water sources.

The Metal Finishing and Photographic Equipment and Supplies
industries utilize ion exchange systems on a widespread basis.
The following industries apply the process on a limited basis:

     - Inorganic Chemicals Manufacturing,
     - Battery Manufacturing,
     - Ore Mining and Dressing,
     - Iron and Steel Manufacturing, and
     - Textile Mills.

Promising applications include removal of cyanides from mixed
waste streams, and use of new exchangers for selective removal of
heavy metals without complete deionization.

     Advantages and Limitations

An advantage of the ion exchange process is that it concentrates
metals in the regeneration step, providing a potential for their
recovery.  However, if recovery is not feasible, this creates a
secondary stream that needs to be treated.  It is also a versa-
tile technology applicable to a great many situations.  This
flexibility, along with its compact nature and performance, makes
ion exchange an effective method of wastewater treatment.

The resin in the systems is frequently a limitation.  Thermal
limits of the anion resins, generally placed in the vicinity of
60°C (140°F), may prevent their use in certain situations  [3-5].
Also, the resin beds may be fouled by particulates, oxidizing
agents, precipitation within the beds, oil and greases, and
biological growth.  In addition, the stream to be treated  should
contain no materials that cannot be removed by the backwash
operation.  Some organic compounds, particularly aromatics, will
be irreversibly adsorbed by the resins, and this will result in
decreased capacity.  Similarly, nitric acid, chromic acid, and
hydrogen peroxide can all damage the resins as will iron, man-
ganese, and copper when present with sufficient concentrations of
dissolved oxygen.  If more than 25 mg/L of suspended solids
and/or more than 20 mg/L of oil exists in the influent, filtra-
tion is required as pretreatment [3-37].

The regeneration of the resins presents its own problems.  The
cost of the regenerative chemicals can be high.  In addition, the
waste streams originating from the regeneration process are
extremely high in pollutant concentrations, although low in


Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.12-4
-------
volume.  These must be further processed for proper disposal.
The upper concentration limit for the exchangeable ions for
efficient operation is generally 2,500 mg/L, expressed as calcium
carbonate (or 0.05 equivalents/L).   This upper limit is due
primarily to the time requirements of the operation cycle.  A
high concentration of exchangeable ions results in rapid exhaus-
tion during the service cycle, with the results that regeneration
requirements, for both equipment and the percentage of resin
inventory undergoing regeneration at any time, become inordinate-
ly high.

     Reliability

With the exception of occasional clogging or fouling of the
resins, ion exchange is a highly dependable technology.

     Chemicals Required

The following chemicals are used for regeneration of the resins:

     Cation resins - sodium chloride (NaCl); hydrochloric acid
        (HC1); sulfuric acid (H2S04); sodium hydroxide (NaOH).
     Anion resins - sodium hydroxide (NaOH); ammonium hydroxide
        (NH4OH); sodium carbonate (Na2C03); sodium chloride
        (NaCl); hydrochloric acid (HC1).

     Residuals Generated

The concentrated regeneration stream requires further treatment
for recovery and/or disposal.  Spent or degraded ion exchange
materials also require treatment before disposal.

     Design Criteria

Fixed-bed ion exchange operations require a cylindrical ion
exchange bed, tanks for solution storage, and pumps.  The choice
of materials is governed by the chemical environment.  Continuous
ion exchange systems are much more complex, requiring solids
handling equipment and more intricate control systems.  Table
3.1.12-2 gives design parameters and a range of typical design
values  for ion exchange.  The properties and performance specifi-
cations for ion-exchange resins are usually fully detailed by the
resin manufacturer.  However, in most industrial wastewater
treatment, it is necessary to perform laboratory testing to
select  an appropriate resin and to develop design criteria.
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.12-5
-------
        TABLE  3.1.12-2.   ION EXCHANGE DESIGN CRITERIA
  Ion Exchange Operation

  Bed height


  Wastewater loading rate

  Pressure drop


  Cycle  time
    m
   (ft)

bed volume/hour

 cm of water/m
(in of water/ft)

*  bed volumes
** bed volumes
Design Criteria

 1.2  to 1.8
   (4 to 6)

  7.5 to 20

     11
     (8.4)

 100  to 150
 200  to 250
   * For one 1.8 m (6 ft) bed.
  ** For two 1.8 m (6 ft) beds.

  Regeneration

  Solution flow rate


  Total solution volume
bed volumes/hour
liter/sec/m2
(gal/min/ft2)
percent of treated
wastewater (or 10
bed volumes)
Design Criteria

 4 to 10
  3 to 7
 (4 to 8)
 2.5 to 5
Cycle time
Backwash

hours
liter/sec/m2
(gal/min/ft2)
1 to 3
5
(8)
     Performance

Although  widely used in water treatment, ion  exchange application
to industrial wastewater  is  limited, and data on removal of
priority  pollutants is not readily available.   Subsequent data
sheets provide peformance data on the following industries:

           Ore Mining and  Dressing, and
           Organic Chemicals  Manufacturing.

•The  application for ion exchange to a cooling tower blowdown  is
relatively new technology.   In the application summarized in  the
data sheet (p.III.3.1.12-11), blowdown is  filtered and pH ad-
justed before passing through weak base anion exchange vessels
for  chromium removal and  then weak acid cation exchangers for
zinc and  trivalent chrome removal.  Upon regeneration of the
Date:   9/25/81
 III.3.1.12-6
-------
resins, chrome and zinc can be recovered and recycled back to the
cooling towers eliminating a large percent of the make-up chrome
and zinc solutions.  Another advantage of ion exchange is the
elimination of voluminuous metal sludges formed in the precipita-
tion technique commonly employed for chrome-and-zinc removal in
cooling tower blowdown.

     References

3-4, 3-5, 3-12, 3-29, 3-31, 3-36, 3-37.
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.12-7
-------
                                           \O-3-0\O\
                                               \o\
                                                A
                                           OOCVI —
                                           COO -V
                                        _l
                                        •V.
                                        01
    C
    co
    •P
                                             -l a.
                                             o-o
                                             Q.OJ
                                             (0 10
                                             4-> ta
                                           E O —
                                        — 3 0)  « .
                                        O — T3 £ £
                                        O.E.O 3 3
                                          O >> ----
                                        O S--T3T3
                                        •~ 
-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Ion Exchange
 Data source:  Effluent Guidelines                  Data source status:
 Point source: Ore mining and dressing               Not specified
 Subcategory:  Ferroalloy  mine/mill                   Bench scale
 Plant: 6102                                        Pilot scale
 References: 3-66, p. VI-59                          Full scale
 Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Ion exch.

 DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

 Unit configuration: Pulsed bed, counter flow ion exchange unit
 Wastewater flow rate: 0.121-0.125 m3/min
 Type of resin: Unspecified
 Bed height: Unspecified
 Loading rate: Unspecified
 Regeneration flow rate:  Unspecified
 Run length: 41 min
 Resin pulse volume: 1.73 L
                                 REMOVAL DATA

 Sampling:   Average  of six  two-day  samples	Analysis;  Data set 3 (V.7.3.23)

                            Concentration, mg/L      Percent     Detection
 Pollutant/parameter	Influent	Effluent	removal	limit	

 Classical  pollutants:
   Molybdenum              22,000        1,300          94

 Blanks indicate  data  not available.
Date:   9/25/81              III.3.1.12-9
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Ion Exchange
Data source: Effluent Guidelines                  Data  source status:
Point source: Ore mining and dressing              Not specified
Subcategory: Uranium mine                          Bench  scale
Plant: 9452                                        Pilot  scale
References: 3-66, p. VI-48                         Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  Coag.  Floe.,  Chem.  Ppt./Ion Exch.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration: Two  upflcv- ion exchange columns operating in parallel,
   each consisting of fiber-r_^.nforced plastic
Wastewater flow rate: Unspecified
Type of resin: Unspecified
Bed height: Unspecified
Loading rate: Unspecified
Regeneration flow rate:  Unspecified
Resin volume: 11.3 m3
                                 REMOVAL DATA

Sampling;  Unspecified	Analysis;   Data  set  3  (V.7.3.23)

                              Concentration,   pCi/L         Percent   Detection
Pollutant/parameter	Influent	Effluent	removal	limit
Classical pollutants:
Radium (total)
Radium (dissolved)

960
93

7.2 99
<1 >99
Blanks indicate data not available.
  Date:   9/25/81             III.3.1.12-10
-------
TREATMENT  TECHNOLOGY:   Ion Exchange
Data  source:   Cooling  tower  blowdown
Point source:  Organic chemical manufacturing
Subcategory:   Unspecified
Plant:  Monsanto Chemical
References:  3-122
                     Data source status:
                       Not specified
                       Bench scale
                       Pilot scale
                       Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:   Dual-media Filtration,  pH adjust./Ion Exchange

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Dual-media  filtration,  pH adjust. (4.7), anion exchange
                      (chrome  removal),  cation exchange
Wastewater  flow  rate:  25.2 L/s  avg;  63.1 L/s avg. design; 94.6 L/s max.
                       design
Type of  resin:   Anion Rohm and Haas IRA-94,  cation Rohm and Haas DP-1
Bed height:  Anion 112 cm, cation 91.4  cm
Loading  rate:  0.021 kg/day/m2 based on 25.2 L/s @ 40 mg/L TSS
Regeneration flow rate:   Unspecified; recovered zinc and chrome recycled
                          to cooling towers
Average  run length:  Anion 1  regeneration/day; cation 1 regeneration/3 days
                      (based on 25.2 L/s)
Regenerant  used:  5% HC1,  5%  NaOH
Cycle time:  8 hrs./regeneration time
                                   REMOVAL DATA
      Sampling:  See headings
                                                 Analysis: Data set 2 IV.7.3.351
                                Daily Averages Imo/LI
Data
set
Influent
Effluent
Percent
Influent
Effluent
Percent

Cr (total )
Cr (total
remove I
Cr (total
Cr (total )
remova 1
Number of
data oolnts
173
1473
U73
362
362
362
Avg.
L/s
24.
21.
24.
30
22.
22.
22.
flow
Mean
9
9 0
9
Day Ro 1 1
8
8 0
6
1 1
.18
96
ing
1 1
.19
96
Median
9.8
0.38
96
Averaoe
9.6
0.48
95
Min.
O.itl
0.07
83
Ima/Ll
7.7
0.34
96
Max.
42
6.7
84
25
0.72
97
99%
36
2.6
93
25
0.7
97
95%
22
1.2
95
22
0.64
97
90%
17
0.8
95
17
0.6
96
Date;  9/25/81
III.3.1.12-11
-------
III. 3.1.13  Neutralization

     Description

Neutralization is the process of adjusting either an acidic or a
basic waste stream to a pH near neutrality.  Many industries
produce effluents that are acidic or alkaline in nature.
Neutralization of an excessively acidic or basic waste stream is
necessary in a variety of situations, for example:

     - Precipitation of dissolved heavy metals,

     - Preventing metal corrosion and/or damage to other
       construction materials,

     - Preliminary treatment, allowing effective operation of bio-
       logical treatment processes, and

     - Providing neutral pH water for recycle uses and reduce
       detrimental effects in the receiving water.

Neutralization is also used in oil emulsion breaking (Section
III.3.1.14) and in the control of chemical reaction rates (e.g.,
chlorination).

Simply, the process of neutralization is the interaction of an
acid with a base.  The typical properties exhibited by acids in
solution are a result of the hydrogen ion concentration, (H+).
Similarly, alkaline (or basic) properties are a result of the
hydroxyl ion concentration, (OH"). In aqueous solutions, acidity
and alkalinity are defined with respect to pH, where pH = - log
(H+), and pH = 14 - log (OH") (at room temperature), respectively.
In the strict sense, neutralization is the adjustment of pH to 7,
the level at which the concentrations of hydroxyl ion and hydro-
gen ion are equal.  Solutions with excessive hydroxyl ion concen-
tration (pH>7) are said to be basic; solutions with excess hydro-
gen ions (pH<7) are acidic.  Since adjustment of pH to 7 is not
often practical or even desirable in waste treatment, the term
"neutralization" is sometimes used to describe adjustment of pH
to values near neutrality.  A typical neutralization system is
shown in Figure 3.1.13-1.

     Representative Types and Modifications

There are many acceptable methods of neutralizing overacidity or
overalkalinity of wastewaters, such as:

     - Mixing acidic and alkaline wastes so that the net effect
       is a near-neutral pH,
                                                            *
     - Passing acid wastes through beds of limestone,

     - Mixing acid wastes with lime slurries,

Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.13-1
-------
             FIGURE 3.1.13.1.  SCHEMATIC OF A NEUTRALIZATION SYSTEM
   NEUTRALIZING CHEMICAL
     FEED SYSTEM
                             Na'TRALIZINC CHEMICAL
                               FEED SYSTEM
      INCOMING WATER
     - Adding concentrated solutions of  alkalies (e.g.,  caustic
       soda (NaOH) or soda ash  (Na2CO3))  to  acid wastes,

     - Blowing waste boiler flue gas through alkaline wastes,

     - Adding compressed carbon dioxide  (C02)  to alkaline wastes,
       and

     - Adding acid (e.g., sulfuric  or hydrochloric)  to alkaline
       wastes.

The method chosen depends upon  the  wastewater characteristics and
subsequent handling or use.  For example,  mixing of  various
streams is often insufficient as a  preliminary step  to biological
treatment or sanitary sewer discharge.   In this case, supple-
mental chemical addition is generally required to obtain the
proper pH.

The most commonly used chemicals are lime (to raise  the pH) and
sulfuric acid (to lower the pH).  Limestone  is the cheapest
reagent for acidic wastes and is easy to apply but is ineffective
in neutralizing sulfate-bearing wastes because calcium sulfate
will precipitate, thus coating  the  limestone and rendering it
inactive.  Caustic soda or soda ash are  more expensive to use but
can be substituted for lime in  treating  wastes containing sul-
fates.
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.13-2
-------
If the waste stream is nutrient deficient in either nitrogen or
phosphorus, ammonia or trisodium phosphate addition serves the
dual purpose of providing both alkalinity and the deficient
nutrient [3-24].

Mixing of waste streams can be performed in a collection tank,
rapid mix tank (where treatment chemicals may also be added), or
in an equalization tank (Section III.3.1.11).  Chemicals can be
added in a mix tank or directly to a clarifier.  Final pH adjust-
ment in preparation for discharge can be done in a small neutral-
ization tank at the end of the treatment process.

     Technology Status

Neutralization is considered to be a demonstrated technology and
is widely used in industrial waste treatment.

     Applications

Neutralization is widely used as a preliminary treatment or in
preparation for discharge, in the following industries:

     - Battery Manfacturing,
     - Aluminum Forming,
     - Coal Mining,
     - Inorganic Chemicals Manufacturing,
     - Iron and Steel Manufacturing,
     - Photographic Equipment and Supplies,
     - Explosives Manufacturing,
     - Nonferrous Metals Manufacturing,
     - Soap and Detergent Manufacturing,
     - Pharmaceutical Manufacturing,
     - Ore Mining and Dressing,
     - Steam Electric Power Plants, and
     - Textile Mills.

It is also used on a limited basis in the following industries:

     - Auto and Other Laundries,
     - Rubber Processing,
     - Porcelain Enameling,
     - Gum and Wood Chemicals, and
     - Paint and Ink Formulation.

In the steelmaking subcategory of the Iron and Steel industry,
acid is added to the recycle system blowdown from the basic
oxygen furnace (EOF) wet air pollution control system to neutral-
ize the pH of the typically alkaline wastewaters.  Facilities in
this subcategory also use lime addition to neutralize the typi-
cally acidic wastewaters from open hearth furnace operations.  If
central treatment is practiced, neutralization sometimes is
achieved by mixing the acidic scale removal wastes with alkaline
wastes from other sources that are compatible for treatment.

Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.13-3
-------
In the Gum and Wood Chemicals industry,  neutralization is re-
quired to adjust the pH of the waste streams before treatment can
be accomplished.  The pH of the effluent ranges from three to
nine and must be lowered to less than three for oil emulsion
breaking, raised to approximately nine for metals precipitation,
and neutralized to a pH of seven for biological treatment.

     Advantages and Limitations

Neutralization is a technology with proven effectiveness.  Other
advantages include automatic control of the process 3nd operation
at ambient conditions (15-32°C, 60-90°F).

The major limitation of neutralization is that it is subject to
the influence of temperature and the resulting heat effects
common to most chemical reactions.  In neutralization, the re-
action between acid and alkali normally is exothermic (evolves
heat), which will raise the temperature of the wastewater stream
and may create an undesirable condition.  An average value for
heat released during neutralization of dilute solutions of strong
acids and bases is 13,400 cal/g mole of water formed.  By con-
trolling the rate of addition of neutralizing reagent, the heat
produced may be dissipated and the temperature increase mini-
mized.  For each reaction, the final temperature depends on
initial reactant temperatures, chemical species participating in
the reaction (and their heats of solution and reaction), concen-
trations of the reactants, and relative quantities of the re-
actants.  In general, concentrated solutions can produce large
temperature increases as relative quantities of reactants approach
stoichiometric proportions.  This can result in boiling and
splashing of the solution, and accelerated chemical attack on
materials.  In most cases, proper planning of the neutralization
scheme with respect to concentration of neutralizing agent, rate
of addition, reaction time, and equipment design can alleviate
the heating problem.

Neutralization will usually show an increased total dissolved
solids content due to addition of chemical agents.  Anions re-
sulting from neutralization of sulfuric and hydrochloric acids
are sulfate and chloride, respectively, which are not considered
hazardous, but recommended discharge limits exist based primarily
on problems in drinking water.  Common cations present after
neutralization involving caustic soda and lime (or limestone) are
sodium and calcium (possibly magnesium), respectively, which are
not toxic and have no recommended discharge limits.  However,
calcium and magnesium are responsible for water hardness and
accompanying scaling problems.

Acidification of streams containing salts, such as sulfide, will
produce toxic gases.  If there is no satisfactory alternative,
the gas must be removed through scrubbing or some other treatment.


Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.13-4
-------
     Reliability

Neutralization is highly reliable with proper monitoring,  con-
trol, and proper pretreatment to control interfering substances.

     Chemicals Required

Chemicals used in neutralization are specific to the wastewater
being treated.  The following chemicals are frequently used:

     - lime [CaO or Ca(OH)2],
     - limestone (CaCO3),
     - caustic soda (Na2C03),
     - carbon dioxide (CO2),
     - sulfuric acid (H2S04), and
     - hydrochloric acid (HC1).

When treating nutrient deficient wastewaters, the following
chemicals can be used:

     - ammonium phosphate (Na4H2P04),  and
     - trisodium phosphate  (Na3P04).

The selection of a neutralization chemical depends on such fac-
tors as price, availability, and process compatibility.  Sulfuric
acid is the most common acid used for the neutralization of
alkaline waste.  It is less costly than hydrochloric acid, but
tends to form precipitates with calcium-containing alkaline
wastewater.  When hydrochloric acid is used for neutralization,
the compound formed is soluble.   An important consideration in
the use of alkaline reagents for neutralization of acidic waste-
waters in the "basicity factor," which is the number of grams of
calcium oxide equivalent in the neutralizing capacity of a partic-
ular alkali.  Caustic soda has a high basicity factor and high
solubility, but is expensive.  Lime is less costly but has low to
moderate solubility and forms precipitates with acidic waste-
waters containing sulfuric acid, causing disposal and scaling
problems.  Limestone and soda ash have low to moderate basicity
and higher solubility than lime.

     Residuals Generated

Neutralization may be accompanied by reduction in the concentra-
tion of heavy metals if the treatment proceeds to alkaline pH's.
This may result in the generation of residuals that can be re-
moved in subsequent operations.

Where solid products are formed (as in precipitation of calcium
sulfate or heavy metal hydroxides), clarifier/thickeners and
filters must be provided; if the precipitate is of sufficient
purity, it would be a salable product; otherwise, a disposal
scheme must be devised.
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.13-5
-------
     Design Criteria

Depending on the volumes of the wastewater,  either batch treatment
or continuous treatment is used.  A continuous system will employ
automated control systems to reduce pH fluctuations and increase
reaction effectiveness.  A control system measures the pH of the
solution and controls the addition of a neutralizing agent to
maintain the effluent within the acceptable pH limits.  The
operation of the control system is based on such factors as flow,
acid or base strength, and method of adding the neutralizing
agent.

The neutralization system can be designed as a single or multiple
stage.   As a general rule, one stage can be used if the pH of the
raw wastewater is between four and ten.  Two stages are often
required if the pH is as low as two or higher than ten. More than
two stages are generally required if the pH is less than two or
greater than twelve.

The size of the neutralizing vessel depends on the wastewater
volume or flow, reaction time, solubility of the reagent, and the
insoluble precipitates formed from the reaction.

     Performance

One data sheet from the following industry provides performance
data on neutralization:

     - Iron and Steel Manufacturing.

     References

3-3, 3-5, 3-9, 3-15, 3-24, 3-25, 3-29, 3-36, 3-37.
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.13-6
-------




















z
o
— _
1-
N
1

cc
h-
^>
UJ
Z
ec
o
u.
at


3

1

O
X
o
u
t-
_J
o
oc
0
u

























^

•
>
o
c
CO
u
ti-
ll)

—
CO
^
o
CO
cc
c
o

CO
J^_
p
c
CO
o
o
u
.p
c
CO
3

*-
LJ
c
co
._
TJ
0)
•£.



CO
o
c
co
cc


c
co
—
T2
CO
5^





(U
cr
c
CO
cc









U)
p
c
o
a

cc
CO
o





c
CO
JJ
—
—
o
a.
s r^* oo o o oo o\o\
ZVOOON ONON O\O\
A














CM — CMOJ OO OO
^~ ~~ ^5 ^f PO W PO
o



















..._-_« _ ^ — — -















J
Ol
E

CO CTI
P 3-
c
CO o
P CD to
3 CO P
— CO C .
— CO CO
O «- -P '
a o> 3
0) - E

CO C— O-- <- 1 	
u cot- aE o>
*J C
CO —
0 C
— CO
•o a)
C E
«
4J
tf) O
^ c
c
CO «

CQZ
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.13-7
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Neutralization
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  U
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Iron and steel
 Combination acid

3-9, pp.  259,294,315
       Data source status:
         Mot specified
         Bench scale
         Pilot scale
         Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  Equal./Neutral.
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
Unit configuration:
Chemical dosage(s):
pH:  Unspecified
        Three tanks in series
        Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA

Sampling;  24-hour composite and grab	Analysis:   Data set 1 (V.7.3.5)
                                  Concentration
    Pollutant/parameter
                  Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
  limit
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  TSS                                4
  Oil and grease                     3
  Iron  (dissolved)               1,000
  Fluoride                         500
                                    12
                                     1
                                 0.020
                                    12
               NM
               67
              >99
               98
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Chromium
Copper
Nickel
Zinc

150,000
1,400
70,000
5,600

40
30
20
30

>99
98
>99
99
Blanks indicate data not available.
NM, not meaningful.
Date:   9/25/81
                III.3.1.13-8
-------
III.3.1.14  Oil Separation

     Description

Oil separation techniques are used to remove oils and grease from
wastewater.  This separation can require several steps depending
on the character of the wastes involved.  Oil may exist as free
or emulsified oil.   When free, the separation can be accomplished
by a simple gravity separation.  When emulsified, a "breaking"
treatment step is required to generate free oil, which can be
separated from the wastewater by gravity separation.  After the
separation is complete, the free oil can be removed.  This is
usually accomplished by some type of skimming device.

   The separation of free oils and grease by gravity normally
involves retaining the oily waste in a holding tank and allowing
oils and other materials with a specific gravity less than water
to float to the surface, while the liquid flows to an outlet
located below the floating layer.  The oily top layer is skimmed
off the wastewater surface.  Gravity and skimming techniques are
the most common methods employed for oily waste treatment and are
equally effective in removing grease and nonemulsified oils.
Gravity separation can be accomplished in conjunction with flow
equalization (Section III.3.1.11), sedimentation (Section III.
3.1.18), flotation (Section III 3.1.10), and gravity oil separa-
tors designed specifically for oily waste treatment.

Emulsified or dispersed oil will not float "naturally" but re-
quires treatment to break the oil-water emulsion prior to gravity
separation.  After the oil is freed by one of these methods, it
is separated and removed by the simple gravity method described
above.  Emulsions may be broken by chemical or thermal methods.
Emulsified oils can also be separated from wastewater without the
emulsion breaking step by using coalescing devices, by ultrafil-
tration (Section III.3.1.21), and by flotation.

Treatment of oily wastes can be carried out most efficiently if
the oily waste streams are segregated from other waste streams
and treated separately.  Effluent from oil separator processes
may require further treatment prior to disposal.

     Representative Types and Modifications

Oil separation and removal techniques can be categorized as
gravity separation (including the skimming process), emulsion
breaking, and coalescing.  These three categories are described
below:

     (1)  Gravity Separators and Skimmers.  Wastewaters that
          contain significant quantities of oil are particularly
          applicable to treatment by separators.  The API
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.14-1
-------
          separator,  based upon design standards  published by the
          American Petroleum Institute,  is  the  most  common gravity
          oil separator.   The basic  design  is a long,  rectangular
          basin that  provides enough detention  time  for most of
          the oil  to  float to the surface and be  removed.   Most
          API separators  are divided into more  than  one bay to
          maintain laminar flow within the  separator,  thereby
          making the  oil  removal more effective.   API  separators
          are usually equipped with  scrapers to move the oil to
          the downstream  end of the  separator where  the oil is
          collected in a  slotted pipe or on a drum.  On their
          return to the upstream end,  the scrapers travel along
          the bottom  moving the solids to a collection trough for
          subsequent  treatment or disposal.

          After the oil has been separated  from the  wastewater,
          skimming is employed to remove the oily surface layer.
          Common skimming mechanisms include the  rotating drum
          type and belt type skimmer.   The  rotating  drum type
          picks up oil from the surface of  the  water as it ro-
          tates.   A knife edge scrapes oil  from the  drum and
          collects it in  a trough for disposal  or reuse.  The
          water portion is then allowed to  flow under  the rotat-
          ing drum.  Occasionally,  an underflow baffle is in-
          stalled  subsequent to the  drum; this  has the advantage
          of retaining any floating  oil that escapes the drum
          skimmer.  The belt type skimmer is pulled  vertically
          through  the water, collecting oil from  the surface,
          which is again  scraped off and collected in  a tank.

     (2)  Emulsion Breaking.  Emulsion breaking is often used to
          break stable oil-in-water  emulsions.  An oil-in-water
          emulsion consists of oil dispersed in water, stabilized
          by electrical charges and  emulsifying agents.  A stable
          emulsion will not separate or break down without some
          form of  treatment.  The breaking  step can  be performed
          by chemical or  thermal means.

          Chemical.  Chemicals (e.g.,  polymers, ferric chloride,
          and organic emulsion breakers) break  emulsions by
          neutralizing repulsive charges between  particles,
          precipitating or salting out emulsifying agents, or
          altering and breaking the  interfacial film between the
          oil and  water.   Reactive cations  (e.g., H(+l), Al(+3),
          Fe(+3),  and cationic polymers) are particularly effec-
          tive in  breaking dilute oil-in-water  emulsions.  Once
          the emulsion is broken, the small oil droplets and
          suspended solids will be adsorbed on  the surface of the
          flocculant structure that is formed,  or break out and
          float to the top.  Various types  of  emulsion breaking
          chemicals are used for the various types of  oils.  If
          more than one chemical is required,  the sequence of
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.14-2
-------
          addition can make a significant difference in both
          breaking efficiency and chemical dosages.

          Thermal.   Thermal emulsion breaking systems can be
          operated continuously.  However, these systems are
          usually operated intermittently/ as a result of the
          batch dump nature of most emulsified oily wastes.   The
          emulsified raw waste is collected in a holding tank
          until sufficient volume has accumulated to warrant
          operating the thermal emulsion breaking system.  Ini-
          tially, the raw waste flows from the holding tank into
          the main conveyorized chamber.  Warm dry air is passed
          over a large revolving drum that is partially submerged
          in the emulsion.  Some water evaporates from the sur-
          face of the drum and is carried upward through a filter
          and a condensing unit.  The condensed water is dis-
          charged and can be reused as process makeup, while the
          air is reheated and returned to the evaporation stage.
          As the concentration of water in the main conveyorized
          chamber decreases, oil concentration increases and some
          gravity separation occurs.  The oils and other emulsi-
          fied wastes that have separated flow over a weir,  into
          a decanting chamber.  A skimming device picks up oil
          from the surface of this chamber and discharges it for
          possible reprocessing or disposal.   Meanwhile, oily
          water is being drawn from the bottom of the decanting
          chamber,  reheated, and sent back into the main con-
          veyorized chamber.  This aids in increasing the con-
          centration of oil in the main chamber and the amount of
          oil that floats to the top.  Thermal emulsion breaking
          is more commonly used for oil recovery than for oily
          waste removal.

     (3)  Coalescing.  The basic principle of coalescence in-
          volves the preferential wetting of a coalescing medium
          by oil droplets that accumulate on the medium and then
          rise to the surface of the solution as they combine to
          form larger particles.  The most important requirements
          for coalescing media are wettability for oil and large
          surface area.  Monofilament line is sometimes used as a
          coalescing medium.  Parallel plate separators, which
          consist of plates set at a 45° angle in a chamber, are
          also used for coalescing.  The oil droplets coalesce on
          the underside of the plates and travel upwards where
          the oil is collected.

          Coalescing stages may be integrated with gravity oil
          separation devices, and some systems may incorporate
          several coalescing stages.  In general, provision of
          preliminary oil skimming treatment is desirable to
          avoid overloading the coalescer.
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.14-3
-------
     Technology Status

Gravity oil separation is well developed for many industrial
waste treatment applications.   Skimming itself is a common opera-
tion and is considered a standard technique for oily waste treat-
ment.  Coalescing has been fully demonstrated in industries
generating oily wastewater.   Thermal and chemical emulsion break-
ing are also in use for treating oily wastes.

     Applications

Oil separation is used throughout the industry to recover oil for
use as a fuel supplement or for recycle; or to reduce the concen-
tration of oils, which lessens deleterious effects on subsequent
treatment or receiving waters.  Recovery of skimmed oil or grease
from all major types of oily waste is becoming increasingly
common as the value of the recoverable oil is realized.  Fre-
quently, a substantial savings is possible through recovery or
recycle of oily material.  Oil can sometimes have a deleterious
effect on subsequent treatment techniques.  Therefore, efficient
oil-water separation is necessary for effective treatment.  As an
example, in the wood preserving subcategory of the Timber Pro-
ducts Processing industry, oil accounts for a significant part of
the waste stream's oxygen demand and serves as a carrier for
toxic pollutants such as pentachlorophenol in concentrations
that far exceed their respective solubilities in oil-free water.
Oil separation is a widely used process in the following indus-
tries:

     - Iron and Steel Manufacturing,
     - Auto and Other Laundries,
     - Metal Finishing,
     - Aluminum Forming,
     - Battery Manufacturing,
     - Gum and Wood Chemicals,
     - Rubber Processing,
     - Timber Products Processing,
     - Coil Coating, and
     - Soap and Detergent Manufacturing.

Oil separation is also used on a limited basis in the following
industries:

     - Inorganic Chemicals Manufacturing,
     - Electrical and Electronic Components,
     - Porcelain Enameling,
     - Organic Chemicals Manufacturing, and
     - Steam Electric Power Plants.
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.14-4
-------
     Advantages and Limitations

Gravity separation of oil is a simple process that is effective
in removing naturally floating oils and grease.  The main limita-
tion is that dispersed or emulsified oils cannot be separated by
gravity separation alone and require additional treatment.

The advantages of thermal emulsion breaking include an extremely
high percentage of oil removal, the separation of floating oil
from settleable sludge, and the production of distilled water
that is available for process re-use.  In addition, the operation
is fully automatic, which reduces operating costs and maintenance
requirements.  Limitations of this system are the cost of heat to
run the small boiler and the necessary installation of a large
storage tank.

Advantages gained from the use of chemicals for breaking oil-in-
water emulsions are the potential for high removal efficiency and
the possibility of reclaiming the oily waste.  Limitations in-
clude corrosion problems associated with acid-alum systems,
skilled operator requirements for batch treatment, the chemical
sludges produced, and poor cost-effectiveness for low oil concen-
trations.

Coalescing can significantly reduce the residence times (and
therefore separator volumes) required to achieve separation of
oil from some wastes.  Coalescing is not generally effective in
removing soluble or chemically stabilized emulsified oils.   To
avoid plugging, pretreatment must be performed to protect co-
alescers from very high concentrations of free oil and grease and
suspended solids.  Frequent replacement of prefilters may be
necessary when raw waste oil concentrations are high.

     Reliability

Because of its simplicity, gravity separation is a very reliable
technique.

Coalescing is inherently reliable since there are no moving
parts,  and the coalescing substrate (monofilament, etc.) is inert
in the process and therefore not subject to frequent regeneration
or replacement requirements.  Large loads or inadequate pretreat-
ment, however, may result in plugging or bypass of coalescing
stages.  Emulsion breaking is also a reliable process when
properly controlled.

     Chemicals Required

Chemicals are used in chemical emulsion breaking to destabilize
dispersed oil droplets or destroy any emulsifying agents present.
Chemicals used include polymers, ferric chloride (FeCl3), alum,
and sulfuric acid.
Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.14-5
-------
     Residuals Generated

If skimmings cannot be reused,  they are typically disposed by
landfilling, lagooning,  incineration,  or contractor removal.
Because relatively large quantities of water are present in the
collected wastes,  incineration is not always a viable disposal
method.

In emulsion breaking,  surface oil and chemical sludge are pro-
duced.  If the recovered oil has a sufficiently low percentage of
water, it may be burned for its fuel value or processed and
reused.  Coalescing generates no appreciable solid waste.

     Design Criteria

Effective oil removal requires careful consideration of the
physical properties and mechanical relationships of oil and
wastewater.  Properties such as types of oily wastes, specific
gravity, and viscosity,  and mechanical relationships such as rate
of rise, short circuiting factor, turbulence factor, horizontal
velocity, and overflow rate are important in sizing of oil separa-
tion units.  Treatment of emulsified oils requires consideration
of chemical type,  dosage and sequence of addition, pH, mechanical
shear and agitation, heat, and retention time.

Oil separation processes can be designed as batch units or as
continuous flow units.  Selection is dependant upon the volume of
wastewater to be treated, the characteristics of the waste, ease
of operation, and cost.

     Performance

The removal efficiency of oil by gravity separation is partly a
function of the retention time of the water in the tank and the
waste stream's composition.  The performance level of emulsion
breaking is dependent primarily on the raw waste characteristics
and proper maintenance and functioning of the system components.
Some emulsions may contain volatile compounds that could escape
with the distilled water during thermal emulsion breaking.  In
systems where the water is recycled back to process, however,
this problem is essentially eliminated.

Subsequent data sheets provide performance data on the following
industries:

     - Aluminum Forming,
     - Iron and Steel Manufacturing, and
     - Electrical and Electronic Components.

     References

3-5, 3-12, 3-15, 3-16, 3-17, 3-18, 3-22, 3-23, 3-26, 3-27, 3-31.


Date:  9/25/81              III.3.1.14-6
-------






















z
o
H

QJ
^
Q.
LJ
(O

_J

O

or
0
u.
ce


3
C/}

U
O

o
3E
X
o
LJ
1-

_ J
o
oe
^~
z
o
u




















w
•
>
u
c
CO
u
J;
Q>

— •
CO
>
Q
£
CO
C£
c
CO

•o
CD
£




«D
D
C
CO




C C
O

P
£
P
c
CD
u
c
o
u

P
c
Q)
3

Ct.
c^
U
co

•o
1







CO
D
C
co
cc











v>
•P
c
o
0

CO
•P
CO
o





a>
CO
u
in

_
3
U.




CO

co
o
(/>
JJ
o

a.















c
CO
3
o
a.
O Jt Z in 00 ON CM
ONZONON NO







ON ON oo co ON
ON ON ON^ ON

1 1 1 1 1

00 — OOO —
00 O\ON CM


CMOOOONCOO
O in NO CM — l«-
r — CM
« O
^



0 O
o o
moo NO.*
»OlT\VO • •>
CM to 00 JT 	

1 1 1 1 1 1

ONOCMCMCM —
(O — O —
00
o






— CM 
CO -O
3 — in vi
— O— eo
— WOO)
0 c s.
Qm *O CO Ol
— 10 a-o
co^ c c
O ir\ Q) ™~ co
— <-. a co
WOO WO «) J-> —
WOOWO 3 O —
COCOOHh-CAHO
—m
U
£ Z 00 O NO m 00 O NO
ZZONONON— ONOOON
A A





00*
ONON ON
A ON ON

1 1 1

CM«0 *
COON f-
ON

O -1 \f\ O O -1 O — O
ONO CMCMO to ~st
CMCO CO —







OOO O O
™~ C) ^f ^^ **O ^3 O
CO CM CM d" — NO CM ITI

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1 _J Q\ 1 1 1 t 1
oo oaooo








— COCO^COCOCOCMCO





















• •
_J
x^
01
3,
«T
p
c
co
4i
^
— C O E 3 (D >>
OO— 3~4-TJ « 	
ft c f *^ C£ UN -.. ^ m
lAtefc^eW'™ 3w
— >co -P a. N N
XJ: co o c c
CO *J 	 t- CO CO
.cf co o o .a .a
— aj= c — o o co
>> 4-> (D £ i- <- C
£— ££ 0 COCO
4^ i^ & CX *^ "•• ^~ Nl
E » *> o >- fis: c
3 13—1- KCOOOCOCO
~ f- CM XI X O — 1C 	 .DC
C 4) ^^ 1 ^Z ^~ O ^0 QJ CD Q ^ QJ
CD > U C P.C C .N 1 1 >>3
— — c Oo>jtccM CO 3
CO CO W >>0-0 —
(~ (~ P* rt *n &_
^ t w u. w "— "^
jj Q) CQ ^^ C (D ^^
.C O ^"^ (D ^J ^3

C.^ « <^ 	 	 M
ONONO\ONOor~oop~eor-
A ONONONONONONONONON
A A A















Q
— zzz
V









CO NO CO NO CO NO

1 1 1 1 1 1

— J —J _J _J -J _J
oooaoa
CO CO CO CO CO CO







	 CMCM CM CM CM CM




























CD NO — CMCMOOiT
c — CMMj-d-in
Q) OCMCMCMCMCM
C C J-> !- t- i- i. 1- 1-
cococcooooooo
CDC£NN£<-N>>OCCOOOUOUU
— co -P c c a -a c<-3cot-oooooo
Xoccoeo— ca>£ — £>»(.(.(.<.<,(.




Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.14-7
-------



















z
0

f—
^
Q£
^
Q_
LL)
(O

j
—
o

OL
O
•Q
> 0)
CC 3
< C
SC 4J
3 C
W8
o*'
o

o
X
0
LJ
1-
_J
o
OL
K
o
o























b«
^
U

0)
U
Ci-
tC

—
CO
^
O
0>
cc.
c
o

4J
CO
4j
c
0)
o
c
o
o

•p
c
 0) CC
t- C"D 0) 4J
O co •- — 0)

£ +J O£ «-
0 »— 4J O
O CO Of CD —
VO t- <- O Of
CM *» E O 4- O

•P Of C— t-XOQ
<- 4- O COf HCOXQ
o c o 	 o i i ca i
— O t-Q >»co — «0 1-
O A O 1 f *- .£ CO Jf
o ' 	 -P +>— a**
(-COf -CUO •>— 0> -

JD
(0
co
co *>
•p'i
0 —


CO C
*> o
CO— — CD
•a *» • 3 3
OT3«l 	
fl) Q} CD CT* CO
•P *> 4J C >
eo 0) o~
OTJ 0) C 
TJ > U) 0! CO
c O-D e E
0) *>*> X
WJ3 O O O
jc c c «-
C « tl
CO -J « « Q.
~* Q Q S ^
CQCOZZ*
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.14-8
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Oil Separation
Data source:   Effluent Guidelines                  Data source status:
Point source:   Aluminum forming                      Not specified          	
Subcategory.-   Unspecified                             Bench scale            	
Plant:  C                                              Pilot scale            	
References:   3-27, pp. 91,  289-293                   Full scale             	x_
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Oil Sep. (emulsion  breaking)

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Emulsion breaking with polymer,  alum, NaOH addition
Wastewater  flow rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic detention time:   Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Chemical dosage:  Unspecified
                                     REMOVAL DATA
              Samp I ing:
                      Three 24-hour or
                      one 72-hour composite
                                               Analysis: Data set 2 IV.7.3.71
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
Oi 1 and grease
Suspended sol ids
COD
TOC
Pheno 1
pH, pH units
Toxic pollutants, Mg/L:
Arsenic
Cadi urn
Ch rom i urn
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Zinc
Benzene
2,4,6-Trich lorophenol
Chloroform
2-Ch lorophenol
Ethyl benzene
Methylene chloride
Pheno 1
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Tetrachloroethylene
To luene
4,4-DDE
a Ipha-endosul fan
alpha-BHC
beta-BHC
PCB-1242, 1254, 1221
PCB-1232, 121)8, 1260, 1016
Influent

6, 1 00
2,600
20,000
9,100
2.8
6.8

BOL
BOL
50
300
BDL
300
10
BDL
MOO
BDL
1,800
<10
620
BDL
92
ND
1,500
51
BDL
ND
28
18
ND
ND
ND
Effluent

98
46
2,500
850
1.6


BDL
BDL
9
20
BDL
BDL
2
BDL
BDL
ND
NO
66
ND
ND
630
820
130
ND
ND
BDL
ND
BDL
BOL
6
8
Percent
remova 1

98
98
88
91
43
NM

NM
NM
82
93
NM
97»
80
NM
88»
NM
>99
NM
>99
NM
NM
NM
91
>99
NM
NM
>99
86
NM
NM
NM
Detect ion
1 imit








10
2
5
9
100
20
0.1
5
50
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
5
5
5
5
5
5
              Blanks indicate data not available.
              BDL, below detection limit.
              ND, not detected.
              NM, not meaningful.
              *Approximate value.
  Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.14-9
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Oil Separation
Data source:   Effluent Guidelines                  Data source  status:
Point source:   Aluminum forming                      Not specified
Subcategory:   Unspecified                            Bench scale
Plant:  E                                             Pilot scale
References:  3-27,  pp. 89, 304-313                   Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Oil Sep.  (emulsion breaking)

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Unspecified
Wastewater  flow rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Chemical dosage:   Unspecified
                                     REMOVAL DATA


                                             Ana lysis:
Pol lutant/Darometer
Classical pollutants, mg/L.
Suspended sol ids
COD
TOO
Pheno 1
pH, pH units
01 1 and grease
Toxic pol lutants, Mg/L:
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Zinc
Acenapthene
Benzene
Chloroform
Ethyl benzene
Methylene chloride
Phenol
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) ph thai ate
Oi-n-butyl phthalate
Diethyl phthalate
Anthracene
F luorene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
Tetrachtoroethy lene
To 1 uene
4,4-DDE
Endrin-a Idehyde
alpha-BHC
beta-BHC
PCB-1242, 1251, 1221
PCB-1232, 121(8, 1260, 1016
Concentration
Influent

760
80,000
39,000
0.21
NA
18,000

BDL
<200
<1,000
7,000
BDL
<3,000
<70
<1,000
<7,000
5,700
BDL
16
30
F400
90
1,200
1,300
820
700
330
1,000
141
20
30
BDL
114
BDL
ND
76
160
Effluent

12
830
260
0.21
4.8
42

BDL
5
20
BDL
BOL
30
BDL
40
200
6
BDL
20
BDL
330
ND
M4
49
65
ND
ND
ND
ND
14
BDL
BDL
ND
ND
BDL
BDL
BDL
Percent
remove 1

98
99
99
0
NM
99

NM
>98
>98
99»
NM
99
NM
>96
>97
>99
NM
NM
83
>I8
>99
94
94
92
>99
>99
>99
>99
30
83*
NM
>99
NM
NM
97
98
Detection
limit








10
2
5
9
100
20
0.1
5
50
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
id
10
5
5
5
5
5
5
                 Blanks indicate data not available.
                 BDL, below detection Mult.
                 ND, not detected.
                 NM, not Meaningful.
                 *Approximate value.
  Date:   9/25/81               III.3.1.14-10
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Oil Separation
Data source:
Point source
Subcategory:
Plant:  105
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Iron and steel
 Cold forming

3-10, pp. 69, 79-81,  97
Pretreatment/treatment:   Equal./Oil Sep.
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING  PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:   Sedimentation basin with skimmer
Wastewater  flow  rate:  25.7 L/s
Hydraulic detention  time:   Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Chemical dosage:   Unspecified
                                   REMOVAL DATA

     Sampling;  24-hour composite and grab	Analysis:
                                            Data set I  (V.7.3.5)
        Pol Iutant/parameter
                      Concentration        Percent    Detection
                    Influent    Effluent    removal	I imit
     Classical pollutants,  mg/L:
       TSS                           290         300
       Oil and grease               1,900       1,400
       Total phenol                 0.053       0.054
     Blanks indicate data not available.
     ND, not detected.
     NM, not meaningful.
                                            NM
                                            26
                                            NM
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Ch rom i urn
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
Se 1 en i urn
S i 1 ve r
Zinc
1 ,2-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,3-Dichlorobenzene
Carbon tetrachloride
Chloroform
1, l-Dichloroethane
Tet rach 1 o roethy 1 ene
1,1, l-Trichloroethane
Xylene

16
30
140
170
240
15
420
350
26
180
200
1 1
17
33
39
14
82
140
12

290
31
200
240
450
13
600
500
76
250
680
ND
ND
43
67
93
71
190
99
>99
NM
NM
NM
13
NM
58
 Date:   9/25/81
                    III.3.1.14-11
-------
                                                  Data  source  status:
                                                   Not specified
                                                   Bench  scale
                                                   Pilot  scale
                                                   Full scale
                                             x
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Oil Separation
Data source:   Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Electrical and electronic
  components
Subcategory:   Carbon and graphite
Plant:  36173
References:  3-31, pp. VI-30, 33
Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Oil  Sep.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
Unit configuration:  Circular clarifier with a conical bottom
Wastewater flow rate:  18.2 m3/hr
Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Chemical dosage:  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA(a)

Sampling:  Three 24-hour composite	Analysis;   Data set 2 (V.3.7.11)
                                    Concentration
   Pollutant/parameter
   Influent
                                             Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
   limit
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  TSS
  TOC
  BOD
  Oil and grease
  Phenols
        5
        1
        2
       14
    0.022
                                                  6
                                                  2
                                                  2
                                                 11
                                               0.02
   NM
   NM
    0
   21
    9
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Zinc
1 , 2-Benzanthracene
3 , 4-Benzopyrene
11 , 12-Benzof luorathene
Chrysene

23
11
13
11
11

140 NM
<10 >9
<10 23
<10 >9
<10 >9
Blanks indicate data not available.
NM, not meaningful.
(a)Values presented as "less than" the reported concentration are below
   detectable limits.  They are not reported as BDL because the detection
   limits are variable in this industry.
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.14-12
-------
III.3.1.15  Polymeric Adsorption

     Description

Polymeric adsorption, also referred to as resin adsorption or
treatment, is a process that may be used to extract and,  in some
cases, recover dissolved organic solutes from aqueous wastes.
Ion exchange, a resin process used to separate inorganic  ions, is
covered in Section III.3.1.12 of this manual.  Polymeric  adsorp-
tion is similar in nature to activated carbon adsorption (Section
II1.3.1.1), making the two processes competitive in many appli-
cations.  The most significant difference between carbon and
resin adsorption is that resins are always chemically regenerated
(through the use of caustic or organic solvents), while carbons,
because the adsorption forces are stronger, must usually be
thermally regenerated, eliminating the possibility of material
recovery.  On the other hand, resins generally have a lower
adsorption capacity than carbons.  Polymeric adsorption is not
likely to be competitive with carbon for the treatment of high
volume waste streams containing moderate to high concentrations
of mixed wastes with no recovery value.  However, a combination
of the two processes may be attractive.  A schematic of a poly-
meric adsorption system used for the removal and recovery of
phenol from water is shown in Figure 3.1.15-1.

Waste treatment by resin adsorption involves two basic steps:
(1) contacting the liquid waste stream with the resins and allow-
ing the resins to adsorb the solutes from the solution and, (2)
subsequently regenerating the resins by removing the adsorbed
chemicals, often effected by simply washing with the proper
solvent.  Commonly, a typical system for treating low volume
waste streams will consist of two fixed beds of resin.  One bed
will be on stream for adsorption, while the second is being re-
generated.  In cases where the adsorption time is very much
longer than the regeneration time (as might be when solute con-
centrations are very low), one resin bed plus a hold-up storage
tank could suffice.

Solvent regeneration will be required unless the solute-laden
solvent can be used as a feed stream in some industrial process
at the plant, or the cost of the solvent is low enough so that it
may be disposed of after a single use.  Solvent recovery, usually
by distillation (Section III.3.1.6), is most common when organic
solvents are used.  Distillation will allow solute recovery for
reuse if such is desired.

Resin lifetimes may vary considerably depending on the nature of
the feed and regenerant streams.  Regeneration with caustic is
estimated to cause a loss of 0.1 to 1% of the resin per cycle;
replacement of resins at such installations may be necessary
every two to five years.  Regeneration with hot water, steam, or
Date:  9/25/81            III.3.1.15-1
-------
                                 M tj &3 LJ

                                 O 3 « H




£ *j
S&-.
o re
O PU
vO

§
H
3
N
H
J
-------
          When selective adsorption is desired,
          When low leakage rates are required, and
          When carbon regeneration is not practical.

Several current applications of resin adsorption for which some
information is available are discussed below.

A dual resin adsorption system is being used to remove color
associated with metal complexes and other organics from a one
million liter per day (300,000 gpd) waste stream from a dyestuff
production plant.  The system also removes copper and chromium
present in the influent waste stream both as salts and as organic
chelates [3-36].

Two large systems currently operating in Sweden and Japan remove
colored pollutants (derived from lignin) from paper mill bleach
plant effluents.   The Swedish plant, which produces 70 Mg (300
tons) of pulp/day, uses the resin adsorption system and is re-
ported to remove 92 to 96% of the color, 80 to 90% of the chem-
ical oxygen demand (COD), and 40 to 60% of the 5-day biological
oxygen demand (BOD5) from the effluent of the caustic extraction
stage in the bleach plant.  The system consists of three resin
columns, each containing about 20 cubic meters (700 cubic feet)
of resin.  The system in Japan is for a 420 Mg/day (760 ton/day)
pulp plant and consists of four resin columns, each with about 30
cubic meters (1,060 cubic feet) of resin.  In both cases, the
resins are regenerated with a caustic wash followed by reactiva-
tion with an acid stream (e.g., sulfuric acid) [3-36].

Some resin adsorption units in operation are used to remove color
in water supply systems; others are used to decolorize sugar,
glycerol, wines,  milk whey, Pharmaceuticals, and similar products.
One plant in Louisiana,  which removes color from an organic
product stream, is said to have been in operation for eight years
now without replacement of the initial resin charge [3-36].

Another plant in Indiana currently uses a resin system to recover
phenol from a waste stream.  A dual resin system is currently
being installed at a coal liquefaction plant in West Virginia to
remove phenol and high molecular-weight polycyclic hydrocarbons
from a 38 liter/min (10 gpm) waste stream; methanol will be used
as the regenerant for the primary resin adsorbent.  One resin
adsorption system, in operation for five years, is removing fat
from the wastewaters of a meat production plant.

Other applications include the recovery of antibiotics from a
fermentation broth, the removal of organics from bririe, and the
removal of drugs from urine for subsequent analysis.^,,- Adsorbent
resins are also currently being used on a commercial scale for
screening out organic foulants prior to deionization in the
production of extremely high purity water [3-36].
Date:  9/25/81            III.3.1.15-3
-------
     - When selective adsorption is desired,
     - When low leakage rates are required,  and
     - When carbon regeneration is not practical.

Several current applications of resin adsorption for which some
information is available are discussed below.

A dual resin adsorption system is being used to remove color
associated with metal complexes and other organics from a one
million liter per day (300,000 gpd) waste stream from a dyestuff
production plant.  The system also removes copper and chromium
present in the influent waste stream both as salts and as organic
chelates [3-36].

Two large systems currently operating in Sweden and Japan remove
colored pollutants (derived from lignin) from paper mill bleach
plant effluents.  The Swedish plant, which produces 70 Mg (300
tons) of pulp/day, uses the resin adsorption system and is re-
ported to remove 92 to 96% of the color, 80 to 90% of the chem-
ical oxygen demand (COD), and 40 to 60% of the 5-day biological
oxygen demand (BOD5) from the effluent of the caustic extraction
stage in the bleach plant.  The system consists of three resin
columns, each containing about 20 cubic meters (700 cubic feet)
of resin.  The system in Japan is for a 420 Mg/day (760 ton/day)
pulp plant and consists of four resin columns, each with about 30
cubic meters (1060 cubic feet) of resin.  In both cases, the
resins are regenerated with a caustic wash followed by reactiva-
tion with an acid stream (e.g., sulfuric acid) [3-36].

Some resin adsorption units in operation are used to remove color
in water supply systems; others are used to decolorize sugar,
glycerol, wines, milk whey, Pharmaceuticals,  and similar products.
One plant in Louisiana, which removes color from an organic
product stream, is said to have been in operation for eight years
now without replacement of the initial resin charge [3-36].

Another plant in Indiana currently uses a resin system to recover
phenol from a waste stream.  A dual resin system is currently
being installed at a coal liquefaction plant in West Virginia to
remove phenol and high molecular-weight polycyclic hydrocarbons
from a 38 liter/min (10 gpm.) waste stream; methanol will be used
as the regenerant for the primary resin adsorbent.  One resin
adsorption system, in operation for five years, is removing fat
from the wastewaters of a meat production plant.

Other applications include the recovery of antibiotics from a
fermentation broth, the removal of organics from brine, and the
removal of drugs from urine for subsequent analysis.  Adsorbent
resins are also currently being used on a commercial scale for
screening out organic foulants prior to deionization in the
production of extremely high purity water [3-36].
Date:  9/25/81            III.3.1.15-4
-------
     Advantages and Limitations

Advantages cited for the use of polymeric adsorbents include
efficient removal of both polar and nonpolar molecules from
wastewater, ability to tailor-make an adsorbent for a particular
contaminant, and small energy inputs for regeneration when com-
pared to carbon.  The systems are relatively compact and thus
require little space.  High levels of total dissolved solids
(particularly inorganic salts) do not interfere with the action
of resin adsorbents on organic solutes.  There are clear indi-
cations that some organic chemicals are more easily removed from
solutions with high concentrations of dissolved salts than from
salt-free solutions (in some cases of high salt content, the
adsorbent may have to be prerinsed before regeneration).

Among its limitations, resin adsorption generally has lower
adsorption capacity than activated carbon, and it also has a
relatively high cost when the two are compared.  It is necessary
to keep suspended solids in the influent low enough to prevent
clogging of the bed (no higher than 50 ppm and in some cases
below 10 ppm).  Another disadvantage is the susceptibility of the
process to certain poisons such as oxidants or organic foulants
that are not efficiently removed by the regenerant.  Resin ad-
sorption may be used over a wide pH range; some resins have been
able to operate as low as pH 1-2 and as high as pH 11-12.  How-
ever, in many cases, adsorption will be pH dependent, and will
thus require pH control.  Temperature may also vary significantly.
Resins have been used in applications where the influent temper-
ature was as high as 80°C (176°F); adsorption will, however, be
more efficient at lower temperatures.  Conversely, regeneration
will be aided by higher temperatures.

     Reliability

Reliability is still uncertain for this technology.

     Chemicals Required

Regenerants that are in use include basic, acidic, and salt
solutions or regenerable nonaqueous solvents.

     Residuals Generated

The used regenerant solution and/or extracted solutes require
disposal if they are not recycled.  For example, when highly
colored wastewaters are treated, the used regenerant solution
(containing 2 to 4% caustic plus the eluted wastes) is not re-
cycled and must be disposed usually by evaporation and incin-
eration.  A second example is the removal of pesticides from
water, with regeneration being effected by an organic solvent.
Date:  9/25/81            III.3.1.15-5
-------
     Design Criteria

The equipment for resin adsorption systems consists of two or
more steel tanks (stainless or rubber-lined) with associated
piping, pumps, and possibly an influent hold-up tank.  Regenera-
tion takes place in the same tanks, and thus the extra equipment
needs for regeneration will consist only of such items as solvent
storage tanks, associated solvent piping and pumps, and solvent
(and perhaps solute) recovery equipment (e.g., a still).  Up to
three stills may be required in some systems.

Materials needed include a regenerant solution (e.g., aqueous
caustic solution or organic solvent), and resin.   In one full-
scale installation for the removal of organic dye wastes from
water, two different resins are employed.   The waste stream is
first contacted with a normal polymeric adsorbent and then with
an anion exchange resin.

The adsorption bed is usually fed downflow at flow rates in the
range of 0.6 to 5 liters/second per cubic meter of resin (0.25 to
2 gpm per cubic foot of resin).  This is equivalent to 2 to 16
bed volumes per hour, and thus contact times are in the range of
3 to 30 minutes.  Surface hydraulic loading rates range from 2 to
22 liters/second per square meter  (1 to 10 gpm per square foot).
Adsorption is stopped when the bed is fully loaded and/or the
concentration in the effluent rises above a certain level.

Features of a few currently available resin adsorbents are given
in Table 3.1.15-1.  Surface areas of resin adsorbents are gene-
rally in the range of 100 to 700 m2/g (490,000 to 3,400,000
ft2/lb); this is below the typical range for activated carbons
[800 to 1,200 m2/g (3,900,000 to 5,900,000 ft2/lb)] and, in
general, indicates lower adsorptive capacities, although the
chemical nature and pore structure of the resin may be more im-
portant factors.  This has been demonstrated in one application
relating to color removal.

Tests should be run on several resins when evaluating a new
application.  Important properties are the degree of hydrophili-
city and polarity, particle shape  (granular versus spherical),
size, porosity, and surface area.

It is frequently possible to "tailor" a resin for  specific appli-
cations because much greater control over the chemical and sur-
face nature can be achieved in resin production than in activated
carbon manufacture.  The cost of developing a totally new resin
would be prohibitive for most applications, but minor modifica-
tions of currently available resins are often feasible.
Date:  9/25/81            III.3.1.15-6
-------
                TABLE 3.1.15-1.
    PROPERTIES  OF  CURRENTLY
    AVAILABLE RESIN ADSORBENTS.
                      TABLE 3.I.15-1. PROPERTIES OF CURRENTLY AVAILABLE RESIN ADSORBENTS


Hamelnl
XAD-1
XAD-2
XAD-ll
XAP-7
XAD-B
now XFS H256(ta)
DOW xrs no2R
Dow XFS 14257
Duo 1 i tc S- 30
Duo lite S-37
Duol ite ES-561
Dun lite A-7D
Duol ite A-7
|a)XAD resins »


Base a

Sty rene-d 1 v 1 ny 1 benzene


Acrylic ester
Sty rene-d i v i ny I benzene




Pheno 1 -forma 1 dehyde( c )



Specific
ravity (we
.02
.02
.02
.05
.09
.
-
-
1.11
1.12
1.12
-
1.12
anufactured by Rohn and Haas Company
Void
vo 1 ume .
t) *
37
12
51
55
52
HO
35
HO
35
35 - 10
35 - HO
.
35 - 10
Particle
size
nesh
20 - 50
20 - 50
20 - 50
20 - 50
20 - 50
+10
20 - 50
20 - 50
16 - 50
16 - 50
18 - 50
•
16 - 50
Bulk
density,
Ku/cu. n
_
610 - 700
625
655
690
130
-
-
IIBO
640
610 - 720
_
6MO
; Dow XF resins manufactured by Dow Chem
;he« leal Conoa nv .
Surface
area.
sa n/Q
100
300
780
150
110
100
100
100
128
-
-
21
-
cat U.S.A.;
Avc rage
po ro size,
Anostroms
200
90
50
90
235
110
200
110
_
-
-
-
-

        (b)ftesiri designed Tor use in vapor phase adsorption applications.

        (c)Funciional groups such as phenolic hydroxyl groups, secondary and
          tertiary amines are prsent on the basic phenol-formaIdohydo structure;
          physical form of these resins is granular as opposed to a bead form
          for the other brands.
       Performance


No performance data  are  presently  available  on  polymeric  adsorp-
tion.

       References

3-15,  3-18,  3-36.
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.15-7
-------
III.3.1.16  Reverse Osmosis

     Description

Reverse osmosis is a pressure-driven membrane process that separ-
ates a wastewater stream into a purified "permeate" stream and a
residual "concentrate" stream by selective permeation of water
through a semipermeable membrane.  This occurs by developing a
pressure gradient large enough to overcome the osmotic pressure
of the ions within the waste stream.  Pressures in the range of 3
to 12 MPa (400 to 1,800 psi) are applied to the more concentrated
wastewater solution, forcing the permeate (i.e., pure water) to
diffuse through the semipermeable membrane and into the more
dilute solution.  This process generates a permeate of relatively
pure water,  which can be recycled or disposed, and a concentrate
stream containing most of the pollutants originally present,
which can be treated further, reprocessed or recycled (e.g.,
evaporation, land filling, total impoundment, or land applica-
tion).  A schematic of the process is shown in Figure 3.1.16-1.

The membrane is the most important aspect of reverse osmosis
systems.  The membranes most widely used are manufactured from a
mixture of cellulose acetate, acetone, polyamide, and magnesium
perchlorate.  Non-cellulose synthetic polymer membranes have also
been developed and are commercially available; however, these are
more often applicable in ultrafiltration systems.  The most
common commercially available reverse osmosis systems include
tubular, spiral-wound, or hollow-fiber; these are detailed in the
following section.

Reverse osmosis systems generally require extensive pretreatment
of the waste stream to prevent rapid fouling or deterioration of
the membrane surface.  Reverse osmosis systems operate at rela-
tively high pressures to overcome the natural osmotic pressures
thus forcing a separation to occur; ultrafiltration (Section
III.3.1.21) operates at much lower pressures as the means of
separation is filtering rather than reversing the osmotic pres-
sure gradient.  Also, ultrafiltration generally retains parti-
culates and materials with a molecular weight greater than 500,
while reverse osmosis membranes generally retain materials with a
molecular weight greater than 100.  An exception is sodium chlo-
ride (molecular weight = 58.5), which is retained by reverse
osmosis, allowing application to desalinization [3-25].

     Representative Types and Modifications

There are three basic configurations used in commercially avail-
able reverse osmosis modules:  tubular, spiral-wound, and hollow-
fiber.  All of these operate on the principle described above,
the major difference being their mechanical and structural design
characteristics.
Date:  9/25/81            III.3.1.16-1
-------
             Pressure
                            Semipermeable
                              membrane
             Concentrated
             Solution
                Dilute
                Solution
     FIGURE 3.1.16-1.   TRANSFER AGAINST OSMOTIC GRADIENT IN
                        REVERSE OSMOSIS  SYSTEM
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.16-2
-------
The tubular membrane module uses a porous tube with a cellulose
acetate membrane-lining.  A common tubular module consists of a
2.5 cm (1 in.) diameter tube wound on a supporting spool and
encased in a plastic shroud.  Feed water is driven into the tube
under pressures varying from 4.1-5.5 MPa (600-800 psi).  The
permeate passes through the walls of the tube and is collected in
a manifold, while the concentrate is drained off at the end of
the tube.  This system is the easiest to clean and replace.
Spiral-wound membranes consist of a porous backing sandwiched
between two cellulose acetate membrane sheets and bonded along
three edges.  The fourth edge of the composite sheet is attached
to a large permeate collector tube.  A spacer screen is then
placed on top of the membrane sandwich and the entire stack is
rolled around the centrally located tubular permeate collector.
The rolled up package is inserted into a pipe and is able to
withstand the high operating pressures employed in this process,
up to 5.5 MPa (800 psi).  When the system is operating, the
pressurized product water permeates the membrane and flows
through the backing material to the central collector tube.  The
concentrate is drained off at the end of the container pipe.

The hollow fiber membrane configuration is made up of a bundle of
polyamide fibers of approximately 0.08 mm (0.003 in.) outside
diameter and 0.043 mm (0.0017 in.) inside diameter.  A commonly
used hollow fiber module contains several hundred thousand of the
fibers placed in a long tube, wrapped around a flow screen, and
rolled into a spiral.  The fibers are bent in a U-shape and their
ends are supported by an epoxy bond.  The hollow fiber unit is
operated under 2.8 MPa (400 psi), the feed water being dispersed
from the center of the module through a porous distributor tube.
Permeate flows through the membrane to the hollow interiors of
the fibers and is collected at their ends.

The hollow fiber and spiral-wound modules have a distinct advan-
tage over the tubular system in that they are able to load a very
large membrane surface area into a relatively small volume.
However,  these two membrane types are much more susceptible to
fouling than the tubular system, which has a larger flow channel.
This characteristic also makes the tubular membrane much easier
to clean and regenerate than either the spiral-wound or hollow
fiber modules.

     Technology Status

Reverse osmosis has been commercially available since the
mid-I9601s.  Originally developed for desalination of seawater,
it is seeing broader acceptance as a wastewater treatment tool,
especially when a waste stream has pollutants with recoverable
value.
Date:  9/25/81            III.3.1.16-3
-------
     Applications

The process has considerable potential application to many indus-
tries for the recovery and recycle of chemicals.   Metals and
other reusable materials can easily be separated from a waste
stream for reuse, and the permeate (water)  can also be recycled
back to the process with a high degree of efficiency.  The
Photographic Equipment and Supplies Industry uses reverse osmosis
on a widespread basis.  The following industries currently use
reverse osmosis as a recycling technique on a limited basis:

     - Metal Finishing,
     - Battery Manufacturing,
     - Nonferrous Metals Manufacturing, and
     - Pulp and Paper Mills.

In a number of metal finishing plants, the overflow from the
first rinse in a countercurrent setup is directed to a. reverse
osmosis unit, where it is separated into two streams.  The con-
centrated stream, containing dragged out chemicals, is returned
to the bath to replace solution loss resulting from evaporation
and dragout.  The dilute stream (the permeate) is routed to the
last rinse tank to provide water for the rinsing operation.  The
rinse flows from the last tank to the first tank, completing the
cycle.

This closed-loop system may be supplemented by the addition of a
vacuum evaporation unit after the reverse osmosis unit in order
to further reduce the volume of concentrate collected.  The
evaporated vapor can be condensed and returned to the last rinse
tank or sent on for further treatment  [3-23].

     Advantages and Limitations

The major advantage of reverse osmosis for handling process
effluents is its ability to concentrate dilute solutions for
recovery of salts and chemicals at a low power requirement, when
compared to evaporation (Section III.3.1.8) and electrodialysis
(Section III.3.1.7).  No latent heat of vaporization or fusion is
required for effecting separations; the main energy requirement
is for a high pressure pump.  Reverse osmosis requires relatively
little floor space for compact, high capacity units, and the
process exhibits good recovery and rejection rates for a number
of typical process solutions.  Also, reverse osmosis has the
ability to sufficiently purify water for reuse.

The limitations include the need for careful piloting to tailor
the reverse osmosis membrane to the particular waste stream to
enable efficient operation.  This is also important in order to
prevent rapid fouling and shortened life of the membrane.
Date:  9/25/81            III.3.1.16-4
-------
Although reverse osmosis is slightly more effective than chemical
precipitation (Section III.3.1.3) and sedimentation (Section
III.3.1.18) for metals removal,  this technology is very expensive
and appropriate only for low volume waste streams high in dis-
solved solids.  The process also requires sophisticated equipment
and control.

Another limitation is the temperature sensitive nature of the
process.  When using cellulose acetate systems, the preferred
limits are 18 to 29°C (65 to 85°F).  Higher temperatures will
increase the rate of membrane hydrolysis and reduce the system
life, while lower temperatures will result in decreased fluxes
with no damage to the membrane.   Borates and organics with low
molecular weights exhibit poor rejection and certain solutions
(such as strong oxidizing agents and solvents) cannot be treated
by reverse osmosis.

     Reliability

The process reliability is highly dependent upon the pretreatment
used, proper design, and the particular waste stream being treat-
ed.

Pretreatment of the wastewater will prevent rapid fouling or
deterioration of the membrane surface and thus improve both
membrane life and its efficiency.  Fouling of the membrane and
the resulting reduction in permeability or efficiency are due to
the blinding of the membrane by suspended solids as a result of
the age of the membrane, or as a result of deterioration of the
membrane.  The efficiency of the process can also be reduced by
concentration polarization.  As the solution is rejected by the
membrane, it concentrates at the membrane surface causing a much
higher concentration than in the bulk feed solution.  To prevent
this, most modules should not be driven to permeate more than 50%
of the feed.

     Chemicals Required

Sodium tripolyphosphate is used to increase water recovery and
also to prevent fouling by precipitated calcium and magnesium
salts.  Chlorine is used as a biocide when using cellulose-based
membranes to prevent their deterioration.

     Residuals Generated

The process does not generate any solid residue but produces a
concentrated stream that must be treated further or disposed if
not suitable for recycle.
Date:  9/25/81             III.3.1.16-3
-------
     Design Criteria

Virtually any application of reverse osmosis must be carefully
piloted in order to ensure efficient operation.   After the proper
membrane type is chosen,  the process can be designed on the basis
of criteria shown below:
   Criteria                 Units                 Value/Range


   Membrane flux            liter/day/m2             240-410a

                            (gpd/ft2)                 (6-10)a


   Rejection                percent                   70-99a

   Operating pressure       MPa                      2.8-12.4
                            (psi)                   (400-1,800)

   Recovery rate            percent                   50-95
     aValues for 5,000 mg/L sodium chloride (NaCl) solution,
      flux rate 4.1 MPa (600 psi), and temperature 25°C (77°F).


      Depends upon minimum solubility and number of modules
      used; expressed as a percent of the feed flow rate.


The design of reverse osmosis is, however, highly waste specific
and therefore the design values for the parameters may vary from
the range of values shown above.

     Performance

Reverse osmosis removes substantially all soluble heavy metals
and many, but not all, high molecular weight organics.  The
following industries provide performance data in the technology
data sheets:

     - Metal Finishing,
     - Textile Mills,
     - Steam Electric Power Plants,
     - Adhesives and Sealants, and
     - Timber Products Processing.

     References

3-3, 3-5, 3-12, 3-16, 3-17, 3-18, 3-22, 3-23, 3-25, 3-26, 3-29,
3-31, 3-34, 3-36.
Date:  9/25/81            III.3.1.16-6
-------











V)
w
i
V)
0
Ul
cc
UJ
s
cc
g
u.
£

O
o
-1
o
z
X
u
UJ
_J
o
oc
yr
8













s«
>
o
c
0)
u
t
0)

n
i
0)
cc
c
nt ra t i o
ffi
o
c
o
o
c
0)
2
^
t*.
UJ


Ifl
.U
C

O
o
(Q
s

















c
(Q
•o

s


o
0
c
to

c
«
i



o
g
CO



0)
n
u
V)
3
U.




«
1(0
o
(0

o

Ou









lutant

£
SoNcSSSS SS^^coSSSSSSSSosoN'S




ON O\ * *
C\|NO — tf\ O ON 0 1*- PO — 3" CNJ sO ON ON ON 00 O\ —

II 1 1 I 1 1 1 t 1 I 1 1 I 1 i l I I
^ 00 CO — tf"\ v£) lA — MP^-CXlCXJPO —
A

t\J — . . — — f- (0— —CO • .CO —
o \o oo

oo
§0 0
CNJOO O
CO -3" • O Oif\COOOOCJiA(\jr^**— • O
•3- f- O — O — •VONvN GOOroO— 1^
CM 1 1 1 1 —
II 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 l 1 l
1 OtMO 1
— O OV— OWVtM CMQOOQ if»
• O\— COCQCQCQ^T
O











co CM — in— o NO\ovor-eo^NOvo*ooN^NOCN»fN — cy


0
-J 19
O) *> Q>
E •* £ *J
-J a n v
wi at "« n «
4Ji 2. — £ — O **
C >>w  «

4J 0) M 0) CX4J — *> ££(OJC
— -WC — — Q..C *J
— o a> co »> **£
o c *- *» IUJ=N — j=a
a at 9> 3 c *j c >>a
JZ — >» E £
UlA — <0 Q. 6 C — 6 * — 010) U — — i £ *»
 O — O — C ^ (0 £ O >> » — — — C — 3 — — —

5 3
OLrtCyONNOgNONg.ON|CO|




* *
§ ON** CAO\ 3

1 II II 1
t£\ irt h* C?N

OO CQ CO CO CO CO *
o



r- _j 3-
. ON a —
O — cy co COM \o o
_i
l l l l O II II
CO
' . .0 oo a
o o o co coco co












fOfNtlftvOCM— — CM-tf — ifNftl






«

— C

•o o —
•"•—>*
0)0) O t- .C.C
C C 0 C 0 0 **
o o c o E— a
— cc are— c a> o— — —
0) C— Q}3 Q, O t- — S3 —




































O
n
(0
 E
O —
C —
ce
*J *» C >
nks tndica
, below de
not mean!
p rox i ma te
Q-J -a
co oz*
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.16-7
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Reverse  Osmosis
Data'source:  Effluent Guidelines                 Data source status:
Point source:  Metal finishing                     Not specified
Subcategory:  Copper plating                       Bench scale
Plant:  New England Plating Co.  (Worchester, Mass)  Pilot scale
References:  3-96,  pp. 60,65                       Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:   Unspecified/Reverse Osmosis

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
Wastewater flow rate:   Unspecified
Product flow rate:  0.008 m3/min
Flux rate:  Unspecified
Membrane type:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Unspecified
             Retentate  (concentrate)  flow rate:
               Unspecified
             Operating  pressure:   1,240  kPa
             Operating  temperature:   25°C
             Percent  conversion:   84
             Total feed concentrate:   1.5 yg/L
                                 REMOVAL DATA

Sampling:  Average of 17 samples taken over
           a 1,130-hr period for copper,
           average of 9 samples taken in
           the latter part of the 1,130-hr
	period for cyanide	
                   Analysis:   Data  set  2  (V.7.3.13)
                              Concentration
  Pollutant/parameter
Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
  limit
Toxic pollutants, yg/L
Copper
Cyanide
i :
170,000
240,000

28,000
22,000

84
91
Blanks indicate data not available.
 Date:   9/25/81
   III.3.1.16-8
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Reverse  Osmosis
Data source:  Government report
Point source:  Textile mills
Subcategory:  Dyeing and finishing
Plant:  Lafranee Industries
References:  3-102,  pp. 119,126,141
                   Data source status:
                     Not specified
                     Bench scale
                     Pilot scale
                     Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:   Filter (250-y screen)/Reverse  Osmosis
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:   Unspecified
Product flow rate:  Unspecified
Flux rate:  Unspecified
Membrane type: Selas Flotronics
  Zr(IV)-PAA
Unit configuration:  Eight externally coated 19-tube bundles  in a  series
         Retentate  (concentrate) flow rate:
           Unspecified
         Operating pressure.-  2,400-7,020 kPa
         Operating temperature:  20-90°C
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling:  Composite of several daily samples
	taken in 1-week period	
               Analysis:  Data set 3  (V.7.3.32)
      Pollutant/parameter
                                      Concentration
    Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
  limit
Classical pollutants,  mg/L:
  BOD s
  COD

  TOC
      20(a)
     250(b)
     160
      83(c)
      30
    2(a)
   14(b)
   15
  5.6(c)
    5
   90(a)
   94(b)
   91
   93(c)
   83
Toxic pollutants,  yg/L:

  Zinc
    1,400
     940
   30
   20
   98
   98
Blanks indicate data not available.
(a)Only one sample.
(b)Average of five samples.
(c)Average of six samples.
 Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.16-9
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Reverse Osmosis
Data source:   Government report
Point source:  Textfle mills
Subcategory:   Dyeing and finishing
Plant:  Lafranee Industries
References:  3-102, pp. Ill, 124,  139-140
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Reverse Osmosis
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Product flow rate:  Unspecified
Flux rate:  Unspecified
Membrane type:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Unspecified
                    Data source status;
                      Not specified
                      Bench scale
                      Pilot scale
                      Full scale
          Retentate (concentrate) flow rate;
            Unspecified
          Operating pressure:   Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling:  Composite of several daily samples
	taken in 1-week period	
                Analysis;  Data set 3 (V.7.3.32)
                                      Concentration
      Pollutant/parameter
    Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
  limit
Classical pollutants, mg/L:

  BOD 5

  COD



  TOC



Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
         35
         16(a)
        600(b)
        230
        270(c)
        160(d)
        150(e)
         50(c)
         24 (d)
    2.7
      4(a)
     37 (b)
     30
     42(c)
     13(d)
     10(e)
      8(c)
      6(d)
Blanks indicate data not available.
(a)Average of two samples.
(b)Average of 13 samples.
(c)Average of six samples.
(d)Average of five samples.
(e)Average of eleven samples.
(f)Average of nine samples.
    92
    75(a)
    94(b)
    87
    84(c)
    92(d)
    93(e)
    84(c)
    75(d)
Zinc



9,700(f)
5,200
2,500
l,200(d)
37(f)
60
20
28(d)
>99(f)
99
99
98(d)
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.16-10
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Reverse Osmosis
Data source:  Government report
Point source:  Textile mills
Subcategory:  Dyeing and finishing
Plant:  Lafranee Industries
References:  3-102,  pp. 117,126,141
Pretreatment/treatment:  Filter(a)/Reverse  Osmosis
                   Data  source  status:
                     Not specified
                     Bench  scale
                     Pilot  scale
                     Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Product flow rate:   Unspecified
Flux rate:  Unspecified
Membrane type:  Gulf, cellulose
  acetate
Unit configuration:  Spiral-wound
          Retentate  (concentrate) flow rate:
            Unspecified
          Operating  pressure:  2,800 kPa
          Operating  temperature:  15-26 °C
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling:  Composite of several daily samples
	taken in 1-week period	
               Analysis;  Data  set 3  (V.7.3.32)
      Pollutant/parameter
        Concentration       Percent    Detection
    Influent     Effluent    removal      limit
Classical pollutants,  mg/L;
  BOD 5

  COD

  TOC
Toxic pollutants,
  Chromium
  Copper

  Zinc
         10
        100(b)
        160
        460(c)
         35
        300
        120
      l,000(c)
        960
      l,200(c)
  1
 18(b)
 25
 26(c)
  5
  7(d)
100
 40
 71(c)
 40
 22(c)
90
82(b)
84
94(b)
86
94 (d)
67
67
93(c)
96
98(c)
Blanks indicate data not available.
(a)25 y and 1 y cartridge filter when necessary.
(b)Average of four samples.
(c)Average of 13 samples.
(d)Average of 12 samples.
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.16-11
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Reverse Osmosis
Data source:  Government report
Point source:  Textile mills
Subcategory:  Dyeing and finishing
Plant:  Lafranee Industries
References:  3-102, pp. 113,125,140
                  Data  source  status:
                   Not specified
                   Bench  scale
                   Pilot  scale
                   Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  Filter (25-y cartridge filter)/Reverse  Osmosis

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate-.  Unspecified      Retentate (concentrate)  flow rate:
Product flow rate:  Unspecified           Unspecified
Flux rate:  Unspecified                 Operating pressure:   2,100-3,100 kPa
Membrane type: Westinghouse #4-291      Operating temperature:   <32°C
Unit configuration:  Tubular (18 in series)
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling:  Composite of several daily samples
           taken in 1-week period
              Analysis;   Data set 3 (V.7.3.32)
Concentration
Pollutant/parameter
Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
limit
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  BOD 5
  COD
  TOC
      15
     320(a)
     890(b)
     150
     100(a)
     140(b)
1.3
 19(a)
 36 (b)
200
  7(a)
  9(b)
91
94(a)
96 (b)
MM
93(a)
94 (b)
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Zinc


14,000(a)
24,000(bO
6,000
230(a)
430 (b)
820
98(a)
98(b)
86
Blanks indicate data not available.
NM, not meaningful.
(a)Average of three samples.
(b)Average of eight samples.
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1,16-12
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Reverse Osmosis
Data source •.   Government report
Point source:  Textile mills
Subcategory:   Dyeing and finishing
Plant:  Lafranee Industries
References:  3-102,  pp. 115,125,140
Pretreatment/treatment:  Filter(a)/Reverse  Osmosis
                  Data source  status:
                    Not specified
                    Bench scale
                    Pilot scale
                    Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:   Unspecified
Product flow rate:  Unspecified
Flux rate:  Unspecified
Membrane type:  Dupont  #400600
Unit configuration:   Hollow polyamide  filter
        Retentate (concentrate)  flow rate;
          Unspecified
        Operating pressure:   2,400  kPa
        Operating temperature:   11-32°C
                                 REMOVAL DATA

Sampling:  Composite of several daily samples
	taken in 1-week period	Analysis;
                         Data set 3  (V.7.3.32)
      Pollutant/parameter
                                      Concentration
  Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
  limit
Classical pollutants,  mg/L:
  BOD 5
  COD

  TOC
Toxic pollutants,
  Zinc
     15
    110
    250(b)
     47(c>
  3,600
  4,100
    2
   10
   31(b)
    6(c)
  500
  180
   87
   91
   88(b)
   87(c)
   86
   96
Blanks indicate data not available.
(a)25 y and 1 y cartridge and diatomaceous earth filter when needed.
(b)Average of 14 samples.
(c)Average of 12 samples.
 Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.16-13
-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Reverse  Osmosis
 Data source:  Government  report
 Point source:  Textile  mills
 Subcategory:  Dye wastewater
 Plant:  Unspecified
 References:  3-107, pp. 4-7
 Pretreatment/treatment:   None/Reverse Osmosis
                   Data source status:
                     Not specified
                     Bench scale
                     Pilot scale
                     Full scale
 DESIGN OR OPERATING  PARAMETERS
 Wastewater flow  rate:   Unspecified
 Product flow  rate:   Unspecified
 Flux rate:  Unspecified
 Membrane type: Polyamide
 Unit configuration:  Unspecified
         Retentate (concentrate) flow rate;
           Unspecified
         Operating pressure:  Unspecified
                                   REMOVAL DATA
      Sampling;   Unspecified
              Analysis:  Data set 3  (V.7.3.321
           Pollutant/parameter
                                        Concentration      Percent
                                     Influent    Effluent    removal
      Classical  pollutants,  mg/L:
       Total phenol
    0.019
0.02
      NM, not meaningful.
NM
                                   Detection
                                     limit
Toxic pollutants, u,g/L:
Ant imony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Si I ve r
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Dimethyl phthalate
Pheno I
Benzene
Toluene
Acenaphthene
Chloroform
Methyl chloride

190
35
22
540
480
520
220
82
7,200
4
1
55
0.2
2
10
3
19
5

130
15
20
760
46
400
200
68
360
31
0.8
45
0.7
0.4
11
0.8
31
45

31
57
9
NM
90
22
9
17
95
NM
20
18
NM
80
NM
73
NM
NM

10
2
2
4
4
22
36
5
1
0.04
0.02
0.03
0.07
0.2
0.1
0.04
5.0
0.4
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.16-14
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Reverse Osmosis
Data source:  Government  report
Point source:  Textile mills
Subcategory:  Dye wastewater
Plants  Unspecified
References:  3-107, pp. 4-7
Pretreatment/treatment:   None/Reverse Osmosis
                    Data  source status:
                      Not specified
                      Bench scale
                      Pilot scale
                      Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
Wastewater flow rate-.  Unspecified
Product flow rate:  Unspecified
Flux rate:  Unspecified
Membrane type:  Cellulose  acetate
Unit configuration:  Unspecified
          Retentate  (concentrate)  flow rate:
            Unspecified
          Operating  pressure:   Unspecified
                                   REMOVAL DATA
     Samp I Inq:  UnspecIf ied
                Analysis:   Data set I  (V.7.3.32)
          Pollutant/parameter
                                       Concentration
     Influent
Effluent
Percent
removaI
    Classical  pollutants, mg/L:
      Total  phenol
      0.019
 0.018
    BDL, below detection  limit.
    NM, not meaningful.
    *Approximate value.
Detection
  limit
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Si 1 ve r
Zinc
Bi s( 2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Phenol
Benzene
Toluene
Chloroform
Methyl ene chloride
Dimethyl phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Acenapthene
Anthracene
Naptha lene

190
35
22
540
480
520
220
82
7,200
4
0.2
2
10
19
5
55
1
3
0.6
0.8

120
97
NM
4
90
27
72
76
98
25
NM
50
NM
79
20
99*
99*
99*
99*
99*

10
2
2
4
4
22
36
5
1
0.04
0.07
0.2
0. 1
5.0
0.4
0.03
0.02
0.04
0.01
0.007
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.16-15
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Reverse  Osmosis
Data source:  Government  report                    Data source status:
Point source:  Textile mills                         Not specified          	
Subcategory:  Scour wastewater                       Bench scale            	
Plant:  Unspecified                                  Pilot scale            	x_
References:  3-107, pp. 4-7                          Full scale             	
Pretreatment/treatment:   None/Reverse Osmosis

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow  rate:  Unspecified      Retentate (concentrate) flow  rate:
Product flow rate:  Unspecified            Unspecified
Flux rate:  Unspecified                  Operating pressure:  Unspecified
Membrane type: Cellulose  acetate
Unit configuration:  Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL DATA

    Sampling;  Unspecified	Analysis:  Data  set  I (V.7.3.321

                                       Concentrat ion      Percent    Detection
    	Pol lutant/parameter	Influent    Effluent    removal	I i m i t

    Classical pollutants, mg/L:
      Total  phenol                   0.006      0.016         NM           I
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Ant imony
Arsen ic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
Si Iver
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Tol uene
Chloroform
Methyl ene chloride
Tr ichl oroethy lene
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Acenapthene
Anthracene
Fl uoranthene
Pyrene

100
19
15
640
90
-------
TREATMENT  TECHNOLOGY:  Reverse Osmosis
Data  source:   Government report
Point source:   Textile mills
Subcategory:   Scour wastewater
Plant:   Unspecified
References:   3-107, pp. 4-7
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Reverse Osmosis
                     Data source status:
                       Not specified
                       Bench scale
                       Pilot scale
                       Full scale
DESIGN  OR  OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:   Unspecified      Retentate  (concentrate)  flow rate;
Product flow rate:   Unspecified           Unspecified
Flux  rate:  Unspecified                 Operating pressure:   Unspecified
Membrane type:  Dual-layer hydrous Zr(IV) oxide-polyacrylate
  dynamic  membrane
Unit  configuration:  Unspecified
                                   REMOVAL DATA
     Samp I Ing:   UnspecIf i ed
                Analysis:  Data  set  I (V.7.3.32)
                                       Concentration
          Pol Iutant/parameter
     Influent
Effluent
Percent
removaI
Detection
  limit
     Classical pollutants,  mg/L:
       Total phenol                   0.004
                75
Toxic pollutants, uxj/L:
Antimony
Arsen ic
Cadmium
Chromium
Lead
Nickel
S i 1 ve r
Zinc
Toluene
Methyl ene chloride
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Acenapthene
Phenanthrene
Chloroform

170
35
16
760
400
200
62
460
0.8
4
9
3
7
2
34

150
5
20
800
410
210
78
250
0.7
5
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL

12
86
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
46
12
NM
99*
99*
99*
99*
93*

10
2
2
4
22
36
5
1
0. 1
0.4
0.04
0.02
0.04
0.01
5.0
     BDL, below detection limit.
     NM, not meaningful.
     *Approximate value.
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.16-17
-------
TREATMENT  TECHNOLOGY:   Reverse Osmosis
Data source:   Government report
Point  source:   Textile mills
Subcategory:   Dye  wastewater
Plant:  Unspecified
References:  3-107,  pp.  4-7
Pretreatment/treatment:   None/Reverse Osmosis
                   Data  source status:
                     Not specified
                     Bench scale
                     Pilot scale
                     Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING  PARAMETERS

Wastewater  flow  rate:   Unspecified
Product flow  rate:   Unspecified
Flux rate:  Unspecified
Membrane type-. Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Dual-layer hydrous Zr(IV) oxide-polyacrylate
  dynamic membrane
         Retentate  (concentrate)  flow rate:
           Unspecified
         Operating  pressure:   Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL DATA
    Samp Ii no;  Unspec i f i ed
              Analysis:  Data  set  I (V.7.3.32)
          Pollutant/parameter
                                       Concentration
   Influent
Effluent
Percent
removaI
    Classical pollutants, mg/L:
      Total phenol
    0.064
 0.012
    BDL,  below detection  limit.
    NM, not  meaningful.
    "Approximate value.
   81
Detection
  I imit
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
Si Iver
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Dimethyl phthalate
Phenol
Acenaphthene
Anthracene
Methyl ene chloride
Butyl benzyl phthalate

280
220
UO
1,000
3,100
8
700
480
120
5,400
51
6
290
1
7
3
14
7

200
2
20
900
11,000
<4
520
190
70
6,600
2
1
170
0.2
3
0.7
5
BDL

29
99
50
10
NM
>50
26
60
42
NM
96
83
41
80
57
77
64
98*

10
2
2
4
4
1
22
36
5
1
0.04
0.02
0.03
0.07
0.04
0.01
0.4
0.03
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.16-18
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Reverse Osmosis
Data source:  Government report
Point source:  Textile mills
Subcategory:  Scour wastewater
Plant:  Unspecified
References:  3-107, pp. 4-7
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Reverse Osmosis
                                                  Data source status:
                                                    Not specified
                                                    Bench scale
                                                    Pilot scale
                                                    Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Product flow rate:  Unspecified
Flux rate:  Unspecified
Membrane type: Polyamide
Unit configuration:  Unspecified
                                        Retentate  (concentrate)  flow  rate:
                                          Unspecified
                                        Operating  pressure:   Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL DATA
    Samp I(no:  Unspecified
                                              Analysis;   Data set 3  tV.7.3.321
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
Total phenol
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
S 1 1 ve r
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Toluene
Acenaphthene
Pyrene
Chloroform
Methyl ene chloride
Anthracene
Fluoranthene
T r i ch 1 o roe thy 1 ene
Influent

0.006

100
19
15
640
90
<4
380
130
42
520
9
4
0.8
7
1
18
5
2
0.4
0.3
Effluent

0.012

90
<1
15
720
26
72
250
70
26
360
3
1
15
0.8
BDL
18
6
BDL
BDL
BDL
Percent
remova I

NM

10
>95
0
NM
71
NM
34
47
38
31
67
75
NM
99
99*
0
NM
98*
75*
NM
Detection
I imit

1

10
2
2
4
4
1
22
36
5
1
0.04
0.02
0.1
0.04
0.01
5.0
0.4
0.1
0.2
0.5
    BDL,  below detection limit.
    NM, not meaningful.
    "Approximate value.
Date:  9/25/81
                             III.3.1.16-19
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Reverse Osmosis
Data source:
Point source;
Subcategory:
Plant:  1226
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Steam electric
 Cooling tower blowdown

3-86, Appendix E, pp. 15-18
       Data source status:
         Not specified
         Bench scale
         Pilot scale
         Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  Filtration/Reverse Osmosis
                       x
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Product flow rate:  Unspecified
Flux rate:  Unspecified
Membrane type:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Influent  to  process is cooling tower blowdown
                           Retentate  (concentrate) flow rate:
                             Unspecified
                           Operating  pressure:  Unspecified
    Samp Ii ng:  Unspec i f i ed
                     REMOVAL DATA

                    	AnaIvsi s;
         Data  set 2 (V.7.3.31
      Pollutant/parameter
                     Concentration
                  Influent   Effluent
       Percent
       removaI
      Detection
        limit
    Classical pollutants,
      TOC
           mg/L:
                     <20
<20
    Blanks  indicate data not available.
    NM,  not meaningful.
NM
Toxic pollutants, u.g/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
S i 1 ve r
Zinc
Chloroform
Tetrachloroethylene
Hexach 1 o rocyc 1 opentad i ene
Acenaphthene
Acenaphthylene
1,2-Benzanthracene (or)
Chrysene (or) Bis(2-
ethylhexyl Jphtha late
Diethylphtha late
Dimethylphtha late
Di-n-butylphtha late
Beryl I ium
Set en ium
Tha I I i urn
Vanad ium

7
I*
1.8
5
1*7
5
3
0.2
6.0
0.7
27
<1
<2
<1
1.1
<1


3.2
<1
6.1
5.0
<5
<2
<1
27

10
1
2.5
<2
10
1
<3
0.3
3.0
0.6
<2
<1
1.3
<1
<1
<1


1.2
<1
<1
11.3
<5
<2
<1
58

NM
75
NM
>60
79
80
>0
NM
50
11*
>93
NM
35
NM
>9
>9


63
NM
8«*
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
 Date:   9/25/81
                    III.3.1.16-20
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Reverse Osmosis
Data source:
Point source;
Subcategory:
Plant:  1226
References:
              Effluent Guidelines
               Steam electric
              Ash transport water

             3-86, Appendix E, pp. 15-18
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  Ash pond, Filtration/Reverse Osmosis
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Product flow rate:  Unspecified
Flux rate:  Unspecified
Membrane type:  Unspecified
                                        Retentate (concentrate) flow rate;
                                          Unspecified
                                        Operating pressure:  Unspecified
Membrane type:  unspeciriea
Unit configuration:  Influent to process from ash pond
     Sampling;   Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL DATA

                                           Analys i s:
   Data set 2 (V.7.3.31)
Pol 1 utant/parameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
TOC
Toxic pollutants, |ig/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
Se ten ium
Si 1 ve r
Zinc
Bromoform
D i b romoch 1 o romethane
Tetrach loroethy lene
-Benzene hexachloride (or)
Benzene-hexachloride
Hexach 1 orocyc 1 open tad i ene
Acenaphthene
Acenaphtha lene
1 ,2-Benzanthracene (or)
Chrysene (or) Bis(2-
ethy I hexyl )phtha late
Dimethyl phthalate
Be ry I I ium
Tha I I ium
Vanad ium
Concentrat
ion
Influent Effluent

<20

7
9
2.0
6
14
<1
4
5. 5
8
0.5
7
<7
<1
<1

<1
<1
<1
<1


<1
2.3
<0.5
<1
78

<20

BDL
<1
1.3
<2
10
8
<3
5.0
2
<0.2
<2
<1
<1
<1

<1
<1
<1
1.6


2.7
5.5
<0.5
<1
14
Percent Detection
remova 1 limit

NM

NM
>89
35
>67
29
NM
>25
9
75
>60
>71
NM
NM
NM

NM
NM
NM
NM


NM
NM
NM
NM
82
     Blanks indicate data not available.
     BDL, below detection limit.
     NM, not meaningful.
 Date:  9/25/81
                                 III.3.1.16-21
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Reverse Osmosis
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Steam electric
Subcategory:  Ash transport water
Plant:  5409
References:  3-86, Appendix E, pp.
Pretreatment/treatment:  Ash pond,

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
                   Data source status:
                     Not specified
                     Bench scale
                     Pilot scale
    16-19            Full scale
    Filtration/Reverse Osmosis
Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Product flow rate:  Unspecified
Flux rate:  Unspecified
Membrane type:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Influent  to process  is from ash pond
         Retentate (concentrate) flow  rate:
           Unspecified
         Operating pressure:  Unspecified
    Samp 11nq:  Unspeci fIed
  REMOVAL DATA

  	AnaIvsi s:
         Data  set 2 (V.7.3.311
      Po11utant/parameter
  Concentration      Percent   Detection
Influent   Effluent   removal	I i m i t
    Classical pollutants, mg/L:
      TOC
   <20
<20
NM
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Copper
Nickel
Selenium
Si 1 ve r
Tha 1 1 i um
Zinc
Ethyl benzene
1,2-Benzanthracene (or)
Chrysene (or) Bis(2-
ethylhexyl) phthalate
Fluoranthene
Be ry 1 1 i um
Cadmium
Chromium
Lead
Mercury
Vanad ium
Cyanide

5
7U
26
2.5
H2
1
9
11
1


<1
<1
<0.5
<0.5
<2
<3
<0.2
31
13

2.5
<1
9
1.5
6.1
1
1
2
<1


<1
<1
<0.5
<0.5
<2
65
<0.2
21
10

50
>99
65
40
85
0
89
82
>0


NM
NM
NM
NM
NM.
NM
NM
32
23
    Blanks indicate data not available.
    NM, not meaningful.
  Date:   9/25/81
 III.3.1.16-22
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Reverse  Osmosis
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
                                                   Data source status:
Point source:  Steam electric
Subcategory:  Cooling tower blowdown
Plant:  5409
References:  3-86, Appendix E, pp.  16-19
Pretreatment/treatment:  Filtration/Reverse  Osmosis
                                                     Not specified
                                                     Bench scale
                                                     Pilot scale
                                                     Full scale
                                                                             x
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified       Retentate (concentrate) flow rate:
Product flow rate:  Unspecified            Unspecified
Flux rate:  Unspecified                  Operating pressure:   Unspecified
Membrane type:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Influent to  process is cooling tower blowdown
     Sampling;   Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL DATA

                                  	Ana lysis:
                                                      Data set 2  (V.7.3.31)
      Pol Iutant/parameter
                                  Concentrat ion
                                Influent   Effluent
                                                    Percent
                                                    removaI
Detection
  I imit
     Classical  pollutants, mg/L:
      TOC
                                    21
                                            <20
    Blanks indicate data not available.
    NM, not  meaningful
                                                      >5
Toxic pollutants, u,g/L:
Be ry 1 1 i urn
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
S i 1 ve r
Tha 1 1 i urn
Zinc
Chloroform
Ethyl benzene
2-Ch loronaphtha lene
Hexachlorocyc lopentad iene
Acenapntha lene
Acenaphthylene
1 ,2-Benzoanthracene (or)
Chrysene (or) Bis(2-
ethylhexyl )phtha late
Diethylphtha late
Dimethyphtha late
Fluorene
Fluoroanthene
Pyrene
Arsenic
Ant imony
Selenium
Vanad ium

3.4
0.8
37
620
5
70
0.5
4.0
14
8
61
2.4
1.5
<1
<1
1.7
<1


3.4
2.7
10.7
<1
5.5
3.5
<1
<1
<2
11

<0.5
<0.5
<2
51
24
<3
<0.2
3.6
1.1
4
<2
<1
<1
1.4
<1
<1
<1


2
<1
4.7
<1
7.4
<1
<1
<1
<2
16

>85
>38
>95
92
NM
>96
>60
10
92
50
>97
>58
>33
NM
NM
>41
NM


41
>63
56
NM
NM
>71
NM
NM
NM
NM
 Date:   9/25/81
                               III.3.1.16-23
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Reverse Osmosis
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Steam electric
Subcategory:  Ash transport water
Plant: 5604
References:  3-86, Appendix E,  pp.
Pretreatment/treatment:  Ash pond,

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
                  Data  source  status:
                    Not specified
                    Bench  scale
                    Pilot  scale
    14-17            Full scale
    Filtration/Reverse Osmosis
Wastewater flow rate-.  Unspecified
Product flow rate:  Unspecified
Flux rate:  Unspecified
Membrane type:   Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Influent to process is from ash pond
         Retentate  (concentrate)  flow rate:
           Unspecified
         Operating  pressure-.   Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Samo 1 i nq : Unspec i f i ed

Ana I ys i s :
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Toxic pollutants, M9/L:
Ant i mony
Be ry 1 1 i urn
Cadmium
Ch rom i urn
Copper
Cyanide
Nickel
Selenium
Si 1 ve r
Tha II i urn
Zinc
Arsenic
Lead
Mercury
Vanad ium
1,2-Benzanthracene
Diethy Iphtha late
Di-n-Butylphtha late
Benzene
Influent

6
2.5
1
U
80
22
9.5
3
5.5
<1
300
<1
<3
<0.2
27
1
1.9
1.6
20
Effluent

3
5
<1
<1
9
4
<1
<1
2
2
53
<1
<1
<1
5
2.1
<1
<1
1.U
Data set 2 (V.7.3.31)
Percent Detection
remova I limit

50
NM
>0
>75
89
82
>89
>67
6U
NM
82
NM
NM
NM
82
NM
80
38
30
    Blanks  indicate data not available.
    NM,  not meaningful.
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.16-24
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Reverse Osmosis
              Effluent Guidelines
               Steam electric
              Cooling tower blowdown
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  5604
References:  3-86,  Appendix E,  pp.  14-17
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:   Filtration/Reverse Osmosis
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Product flow rate:  Unspecified
Flux rate:  Unspecified
Membrane type:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Influent to process is cooling tower blowdown
                                        Retentate (concentrate) flow rate:
                                          Unspecified
                                        Operating pressures  Unspecified
                                   REMOVAL DATA
Samp 1 i na : Unsoec i f i ed

Analysis:
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Toxic pollutants, u.g/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
Be ry 1 1 i urn
Mercury
Selenium
Tha 1 1 i urn
Vanadium
Cyanide
Acenaphthy lene
3,4-Benzof luoroanthene (or)
1 1 , 1 2-Benzof I uorantnene
D i methy I phtha I a te
Fluorene
Fluoroanthene
Phenanthrene (or)
Anthracene
Pyrene
Toluene
Influent

5
7
<0.5
180
<3
6
3
780
<0.5
<0.2
<2
<1
2k
3
1.3

7.8
<1
1
2.7

<1
1.8
23.5
Effluent

2
U9
2
32
20
<1
H
3
<0.5
<1
<1
<1
22
6
<1

12
2.5
<1
<1

<1
3.9
20
Data set 2 (V.7.3.31)
Percent Detection
remova I limit

60
NM
NM
82
NM
>83
NM
99
NM
NM
NM
NM
8
NM
>62

NM
NM
>0
>63

NM
19
15
     Blanks indicate data not available.
     NM, not meaningful.
 Date:  9/25/81
                                III.3,1.16-25
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Reverse Osmosis
Data source:  Government report                   Data source status:
Point source:  Adhesives and sealants               Not specified         	
Subcategory:  Unspecified                           Bench scale           	
Plant:  Grace Chicago                               Pilot scale           	x_
References:  3-95, p. 75                            Full scale            	
Pretreatment/treatment:  Sed., Ultrafiltration/Reverse Osmosis

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified     Retentate (concentrate) flow rate:   Un-
Product flow rate:  Unspecified          specified
Flux rate:  Unspecified                Operating pressure:  2,700 kPa
Membrane type:  DuPont B-9 polyamide   Feed flow rate:  27.3 m3/d
Unit configuration:  Hollow fiber      Module flux:  10.4 m3/d
                                       Operating temperature:  27-30°C
                                 REMOVAL DATA

Sampling:  Equal volume grab samples collected
	throughout an 8-hr day	Analysis;  Data set 1 (V.7.3.17)

                                  Concentration        Percent    Detection
 Pollutant/parameter	Influent    Effluent    removal	limit

Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  BOD5                         1,300            430       67
  COD                          7,000            740       89
  TS                           4,100            150       96
Blanks indicate data not available.
Date:   9/25/81              III.3.1.16-26
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Reverse  Osmosis
Data source:   Effluent Guidelines                 Data source status:
Point source:  Timber products                      Not specified
Subcategory:   Unspecified                          Bench scale
Plant:  Unspecified                                Pilot scale
References:  3-65,  p. E-4                          Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  Ultrafiltration/Reverse Osmosis

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified     Retentate (concentrate) flow rate:
Product flow  rate:   Unspecfied            Unspecified
Flux rate: Unspecified                Operating pressure:  Unspecified
Membrane type:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Unspecified
                                   REMOVAL DATA

        Sampling;   Unspecified	Analysis;  Data set 3 (V.7.3.33)

                                         Concentration        Percent
        Pollutant/parameter	Influent(a) Effluent    removal

        Classical  pollutants,  mg/L:
          Oil and  grease                  55          17           69


        (a)Pentachlorophenol wastewater.
 Date:   9/25/81              III.3.1.16-27
-------
III.3.1.17  Screening

     Description

Screening is a preliminary process used to remove coarse and/or
gross solids from untreated wastewater before subsequent treat-
ment.  When necessary, screening is usually the first operation
used in wastewater treatment in order to remove material that can
potentially damage plant equipment and clog pumps or sewers.

     Representative Types and Modifications

Screens are generally classified as either coarse or fine, de-
pending upon the size of the openings.

     (1)  Coarse Screens (Bar Screens).  Coarse screens are
          designed to remove large objects from the waste stream
          and are classified as having openings of 6 mm (Jj inch)
          or greater.  The openings are commonly circular or
          rectangular but can be in any shape.  The screens can
          be cleaned by hand or by mechanical means.

     (2)  Fine Screens.  Fine screens have openings that are less
          than 6 mm (Jg inch).  They are designed to remove small,
          noncolloidal solids such as flocculated solids and
          short fibers.  There are two major types of fine screens
          termed wedge wire screens and rotating horizontal shaft
          screens.

          Wedge Wire Screens - A wedge wire screen is a device
          onto which wastewater is directed across an inclined
          stationary screen or a drum screen of uniform sized
          openings.  Solids are trapped on the screen surface
          while the wastewater flows through the openings.  The
          solids are moved either by gravity (stationary) or by
          mechanical means (rotating drum) to a collecting area
          for discharge.  Stationary  screens introduce the
          wastewater as a thin film flowing downward with a
          minimum of turbulence across the wedge wire screens,
          which are generally in three sections of progressively
          flatter slope.  The drum screen employs the same type
          of wedge wire wound around its periphery.  Wastewater
          is introduced as a thin film near the top of the drum
          and flows through the hollow drum and out the bottom.
          The solids retained by the peripheral screen follow the
          drum rotation until removed by a doctor blade located
          at about a 120° angle from the introduction point.
          Wedge wire spacing can be varied to best suit the
          application.  Inclined screens can be housed in stain-
          less steel or fiberglass.  Wedge wires may be curved or
          straight.  The screen face may be a single multi-angle
          unit, three separate multi-angle pieces, or a single
          curved unit.

Date:  9/25/81            III.3.1.17-1
-------
          Rotary screens can have a single rotation speed drive
          or a variable speed drive.

          Rotating Horizontal Shaft Screens - A rotating hori-
          zontal shaft screen is an intermittently or continously
          rotating drum covered with a plastic or stainless steel
          screen of uniform sized openings, installed and par-
          tially submerged in a chamber.   The chamber is designed
          to permit the entry of wastewater to the interior of
          the drum and collection of filtered (or screened)
          wastewater from the exterior side of the drum.  With
          each revolution, the solids are flushed by sprays from
          the exposed screen surface into a collecting trough.
          Coarse screens generally have openings of 6 mm (Jj inch)
          or more.  Screens with openings of 20 to 70 microns are
          called microscreens or microstrainers.  Drum diameters
          are 1 to 2 meters (3 to 5 feet) with lengths of 1 to 4
          meters (4 to 12 feet).

     Technology Status

Both coarse and fine screens have been in use in industrial waste
treatment.  For example, wedge wire screens have been used in
industry since 1965.  Rotating horizontal shaft screens are in
widespread use for pretreatment of industrial wastewaters.

     Applications

Screening is widely used in the following industries:

     - Auto and Other Laundries,
     - Leather Tanning and Finishing,
     - Pulp and Paper Mills, and
     - Textile Mills.

Screening is also used on a limited basis in the Rubber Process-
ing industry.

Rotating horizontal shaft screens with openings of 150 microns to
10 millimeters are used for removal of coarse wastewater solids
from the waste stream after bar screen treatment.  Screen open-
ings of 20 to 70 microns are used for polishing activated sludge
effluent.

Laundries (in the Auto and Other Laundries industrial category)
use screening as a means of preventing obstruction of pipes and
drains, thus ensuring constant hydraulic capacity.  Fine screen-
ing is used in the Leather Tanning and Finishing industry to
remove hair particles, wool, fleshings, hide tannings, and other
large-scale particulates  [3-11].  Many municipalities require
screening before indirect discharge of industrial wastewaters to
publicly owned treatment works  (POTWs).


Date:  9/25/81            III.3.1.17-2
-------
     Advantages and Limitations

Screening is a simple process  to  operate and maintain, with
generally simple mechanical  equipment.   The main limitation is
that the screens require  regular  cleaning and prompt residuals
disposal to prevent odors.   The performance of rotating hori-
zontal shaft screens depends upon the effectiveness of pretreat-
ment (bar screens).  Blinding  by  grease can be a problem in
pretreatment applications.   Reducing the speed of rotation of the
drum and less frequent  flushing of the screen have resulted in
increased removal efficiency,  but decreased capacity.

     Reliability

Screening is a very reliable process when properly designed and
maintained.

     Residuals Generated

Solids trapped on the screen surface require disposal,  A side-
stream of solids accumulates from backwashing rotating horizontal
shaft screens.

     Chemicals Required

No chemicals are required in this process.

     Design Criteria

Typical design criteria for  fine  screening applications include:

     Wedge Wire Screen  -  Flow  of  190-140,000 m3/day (0.05-36 mgd)
     [3-51]:

    Parameter          Stationary  Screen           Rotating Screen

 Screen openings   0.2-1.5 mm (0.01-0.06 in)   0.2-1.5 mm (0.01-0.06 in)
 Head required     l-2m (4-7 ft)             0.8-1.4 m (2.5-4.5 ft)
 Space required    0.9-70  m2 (10-750 ft2)      0.9-9 m2 (10-100 ft2)
 Motor size                                400-2200 watts (0.5-3 hp)


     Rotating Horizontal  Shaft Screen [3-51]:

Screen submergence:  70-80%
Loading rate:  70-360 L/min/m2 (2-10 gal/min/ft2) of submerged
               area, depending on pretreatment and mesh size.
Screen openings:  150 microns-10  mm (150 microns-0.4 in) for
                  pretreatment, 20-70 microns for tertiary
                  treatment
Drum rotation:  0-7 revolutions/min
Screen materials:  Stainless steel or plastic cloth.


Date:  9/25/81             III.3.1.17-3
-------
Washwater:  2-5% of flow being treated.

     Performance

The performance of the fine screen device varies considerably
depending on influent solids type, concentration and loading
patterns, mesh size, hydraulic head, and degree of biological
conditioning of solids.  No performance data are available for
screening.

     References

3-1, 3-11, 3-18, 3-22, 3-28, 3-51.
Date:  9/25/81             III.3.1.17-4
-------
III.3.1.18  Sedimentation

     Description

Sedimentation is a physical process that removes suspended solids
from a liquid matrix by gravity.  The fundamental elements of
most sedimentation processes are:


        A basin or container of sufficient size to maintain the
        liquid in a relatively quiescent state for a specified
        period of time.

        A means of directing the liquid to be treated into the
        basin or container in a manner that is conducive to
        settling.

        A means of removing the settled particles from the liquid
        or the liquid from the settled particles, as may be
        required.

Sedimentation is often preceded by chemical precipitation
(Section III.3.1.3), which converts dissolved solids to suspended
form and/or by coagulation and flocculation (Section III.3.1.5)
of colloidal particles into larger, faster settling particles.
With chemical pretreatment or without (plain sedimentation),  the
wastewater is fed into a tank or lagoon where it loses velocity
and the suspended solids are allowed to settle out.

Sedimentation is used to separate suspended solids, chemically
precipitated solids, and other settleable solids from wastewater
and/or it is used in conjunction with other unit processes to
separate solids generated in other waste treatment processes,
e.g., removal of biomass from biological treatment.  The settling
basins can also be used for other purposes such as grease and oil
separation (Section III.3.1.14) and flow equalization (Section
III.3.1.11).

     Representative Types and Modifications

There are many variations of the sedimentation process.  The
major representative types are discussed below:

     (1)  Settling Ponds.  Settling ponds can vary from less than
          one acre in size to several hundred acres.  The waste-
          water is merely decanted as the particles accumulate on
          the bottom of the pond and eventually fill it.  The
          accumulated sludge is periodically emptied by mechani-
          cal shovels, dragline or siphons.
Date:  9/25/81            III.3.1.18-1
-------
     (2)   Sedimentation Basins.   The basins  or  tanks  in which
          sedimentation is  carried  out  (also frequently termed
          clairifiers)  may  be  circular  or  rectangular in  design
          and generally employ sludge collection  equipment.  The
          sedimentation basins are  also classified  as horizontal
          flow or vertical-flow according  to the  predominant
          direction of  the  flow path from  inlet to  outlet.
          Vertical-flow applications in the  U.S.  have generally
          been limited  to settling  compartments in  flocculation-
          clarifiers and solids contact units.

          Rectangular basins - Flow through  rectangular basins or
          tanks enters  at one  end,  passes  a  baffle  arrangement,
          and traverses the length  of the  tank  to effluent  weirs.
          Rectangular tanks generally tend to be  used for removal
          of truly settleable  particles from a  liquid.  The
          settled solids are mechanically  transported along the
          bottom of the tank by scraper mechanism and pumped as  a
          sludge underflow.  The sludge removal equipment usually
          consists of crosspieces or flights attached to  endless
          conveyor chains or suspended  by  a  bridge  type mechanism
          that travels  up and  down  the  tank  on  rails  supported on
          the sidewalls.

          Circular basins - The most common  type  of circular
          basin or clarifier is the center-feed in  which  the
          wastewater to be  treated  enters  the clarifier through
          the feedwell  located at or near  the liquid  surface in
          the center. The clarifier has four distinct sections:
          the inlet zone, the  quiescent settling  zone, the  outlet
          zone, and the sludge zone.  The  inlet zone  allows a
          smooth transition from the high  velocities  of the inlet
          pipe to the low uniform velocity needed in  the  settling
          zone.  Careful control of the velocity  change is  neces-
          sary to avoid turbulence, short-circuiting, and carry
          over.  The quiescent settling zone must be  large  enough
          to reduce the net upward  water velocity to  below  the
          settling rate of  the solids.   The  outlet  zone provides
          a transition  from the low velocity settling zone  to the
          relatively high overflow  velocities.  The sludge  zone
          must effectively  settle,  compact,  and collect the
          solids and allow  removal  of the  sludge  without  dis-
          turbing the settling zone above.  The bottom of the
          clarifier is  usually sloped five to eight degrees to
          the center of the unit where  sludge is  collected  in a
          hopper for removal.   Mechanically  driven  sludge rakes
          rotate continuously  and scrape the sludge down  the
          sloped bottom to  the sludge hopper. The clarifier
          effluent or overflow leaves the  clarifier over  a  weir
          mounted on the rim of the tank.  Equipment  associated
          with the clarifier tank and  sludge rake drive  assembly
          may include surface  skimmers  and scum pits  to  collect
Date:  9/25/81            III.3.1.18-2
-------
          foam and/or oil that may collect on the surface of the
          clarifier, scum pumps, and sludge pumps. Circular
          clarifiers are usually used in applications that in-
          volve precipitation and flocculation in addition to
          sedimentation.  Very often all three processes take
          place within the same piece of equipment,  since many
          clarifiers are equipped with separate zones for chem-
          ical mixing, flocculation, and settling. Certain clari-
          fiers are equipped with a low lift turbine that mixes a
          portion of the previously settled solids with the
          incoming feed to improve the settling efficiency.

          The peripheral feed or rim feed circular clarifiers are
          designed to utilize the entire volume of the clarifier
          basin for sedimentation. Wastewater is introduced into
          the clarifier around the periphery of the tank causing
          a radial flow pattern.  The clarified liquid is skimmed
          off over weirs located in the center of the tank.
          Clarifiers or settling basins can be designed to in-
          clude inclined plates, slanted tubes, and lamella
          settlers placed in the clarifier tank or basin to
          decrease the vertical settling distance and reduce
          turbulence, and thus increase the capacity of the
          clarifier or basin.

     Technology Status

Sedimentation is employed extensively in industrial waste treat-
ment.  The process has been in general industrial use for many
years and is currently the most commonly used technique for the
removal of settleable material from wastewater.

     Applications

Practically every industry that discharges a process wastewater
stream contaminated with suspended and/or settleable solids
employs some form of coagulation,  flocculation, and sedimentation.
Plain sedimentation (without chemical addition) is a widely used
treatment technology for wastewater from the following industries:

     - Auto and Other Laundries,
     - Coal Mining,
     - Iron and Steel Manufacturing,
     - Aluminum Forming,
     - Battery Manufacturing,
     - Foundries,
     - Porcelain Enameling,
     - Ore Mining and Dressing,
     - Textile Mills,
     - Coil Coating,
     - Electrical and Electronic Components,
     - Photographic Equipment and Supplies,


Date:  9/25/81            III.3.1.18-3
-------
     - Explosives Manufacturing,
     - Gum and Wood Chemicals,
     - Pharmaceutical Manufacturing,
     - Pulp and Paper Mills,
     - Rubber Processing,
     - Paint and Ink Formulation,
     - Inorganic Chemicals Manufacturing,
     - Steam Electric Power Plants,
     - Timber Products Processing,  and
     - Nonferrous Metals Manufacturing.

The following industries use sedimentation on a limited basis:

     - Organic Chemicals Manufacturing,
     - Petroleum Refining,
     - Soap and Detergent Manufacturing,  and
     - Leather Tanning and Finishing.

Settling lagoons are generally used by industries that generate
large wastewater volumes and have an adequate area of available
land.  Steel industries use settling ponds to treat wastewater
from all subcategories.  Often these lagoons are a main component
in central treatment systems and are used to settle out solids
from several process streams.  Settling ponds are used by the
Coal Mining industry to remove sediments from runoff from surface
mining.  The Steam Electric industry uses settling ponds to treat
bottom ash and fly ash sluice waters.   Clarifiers are the most
commonly used settling device because of their size advantage and
because they can be used where insufficient land exists for
construction of a pond.  Clarifiers,  in conjunction with chemical
addition, are of particular use in industries associated with
metal production, metal finishing,  metal working, and any other
industries with high concentrations of metal ions in their waste-
water.

     Advantages and Limitations

The major advantage of solids removal by settling is the sim-
plicity of the process itself.   The major limitation of simple
settling (without chemical addition) is the long retention time
necessary to achieve complete settling,  especially if the spe-
cific gravity of the suspended matter is close to that of water.
In addition, some materials are not removed by simple sedimenta-
tion alone (i.e., dissolved solids),  and chemicals must be added
to achieve removal.

The major advantage of Clarifiers is that they require less space
than settling ponds.  In addition,  with Clarifiers, closer con-
trol of operating parameters such as retention time and sludge
removal can be maintained, while problems such as runoff from
precipitation and short circuiting can be avoided.  The cost of
Date:  9/25/81            III.3.1.18-4
-------
installing and maintaining a clarifier,  however,  is substantially
greater than the cost associated with a settling pond.

     Reliability

Sedimentation can be a highly reliable technology for removing
suspended solids.  Sufficient retention time and regular sludge
removal are important factors affecting the reliability of all
systems.  The proper control of pH, chemical addition and floccu-
lation are additional factors that affect settling efficiencies.

     Chemicals Required

No chemicals are required in this process, although settling aids
such as polymers, lime, or alum may be used.

     Residuals Generated

Inorganic and/or organic sludge is generated.  The quantity of
sludge per unit volume of wastewater treated depends on the
characteristics of the wastewater treated, the type of equipment,
and chemical conditioning agents added during pretreatment.

     Design Criteria

Sedimentation tank performance is related to the surface hydrau-
lic loading (the overflow rate).  This is the inflow (or over-
flow) divided by the surface area of the basin and is commonly
expressed in units of volume per day per unit area (L/day/sq. m.
or gpd/sq. ft.).  Typical hydraulic rates for numerous wastewater
treatment cases are shown in Table 3.1.18-1.

The surface loading rates for sedimentation following chemical
treatment vary considerably from one application to another.
This wide variation emphasizes the importance of testing and
pilot work in designing sedimentation facilities. In addition to
the hydraulic loading rate, other design criteria include:  solid
loading rate, depth, detention time, weir loading rate, and
length/width ratio for rectangular basins.

     Performance

A properly operating sedimentation system can efficiently remove
suspended solids and precipitated materials from wastewater.  The
performance of the process depends on a variety of factors,
including the density and particle size of the solids, the effec-
tive charge on the suspended particles, and the types of chemicals
used in pretreatment.  The performance of simple settling is a
function of the surface loading, upflow rate, or retention time,
and particle size and density.  In addition to removal of organic
and inorganic settleable solids, the sedimentation process pre-
ceded by chemical precipitation (Section III.3.1.3) and/or by


Date:  9/25/81            III.3.1.18-5
-------
     TABLE  3.1.18-1.   TYPICAL  HYDRAULIC LOADING  [3-37, 3-38]
                                       Typical Overflow Rates
      Type of treatment
        Average
    Peak
      Primary settling  followed by
       secondary treatment
      Primary settling with waste
       activated sludge return

      Settling following trickling
       fiItration

      Settling following air acti-
       vated sludge (excluding ex-
       tended aeration)

      Settling following extended
       aeration

      Settling following chemical
       treatment
         Alum

         I ron

         Lime
       L/day/sq.  m.
      (gpd/sq. ft.)

     33,000 - 49,000
       (800 -  1,200)

     24,000 - 33,000
       (600 - 800)

     16,000 - 24,000
       (400 - 600)
     16,000 - 30,000
       (400 - 800)

      8,000 - 16,000
       (200 - 400)
   L/day/sq. m.
  (gpd/sq. ft.)

81,000 -  120,000
(2,000 -  3,000)

49,000 -  61,000
(I,200 -  I,500)

41,000 -  49,000
(1,000 -  1,200)
41,000 - 49,000
(1,000 - 1,200)

   33,000
    (800)
                       20,000 - 24,000
                         (500 - 600)
                       29,000 - 33,000
                         (700 - 800)
                       57,000 - 65,000
                       (I,400 - I,600)
coagulation and flocculation (Section III.3.1.5) will  remove
colloidal and dissolved  solids, some of which could be toxic
pollutants.  Performance data for  such removal are included in
the  appropriate technology descriptions.  Subsequent data sheets
provide performance data on the following industries and/or waste
streams using plain sedimentation,  i.e. without any chemical
pretreatment.

      - Textiles,
      - Leather  Tanning and Finishing,
      - Inorganic Chemicals Manufacturing,
      - Iron and Steel Manufacturing,
      - Metal Finishing,
      - Coil Coating,
      - Aluminum Forming,
      - Steam Electric power Plants,
      - Adhesives and Sealants,
      - Foundries,
      - Ore Mining and Dressing,
      - Coal Mining, and
      - Paint and Ink Formulation.

      References

3-3, 3-5,  3-6,  3-7, 3-8, 3-9,  3-10, 3-11,  3-12, 3-13,  3-17,  3-22,
3-27, 3-34,  3-35, 3-36,  3-37,  3-38.
 Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.18-6
-------























z
o
—
h-

H
Z
LJ
y
»
O
LJ

CC
0
U.
EC


=>
to

s»
O
o
o
X
o
LJ

_J
o
at
o
o






















s*


>
o
^
V
o
t>-
CD
—~
CO
>
o
E
CD
ce
c
o

.p
CO
1_
JP
C
0
o
c
o
o
4J
c
CD
3
*-
(4-
LJ









co
[ %
c
o
a
CO
CO
a

























c
CO

•o
0!
^£



CD
o
c
CO
a:



c
co

•o
CD
£







CD
O
C
CO
CC




CD
CO
c
CO


_
3
^



CD
CO
O
10
a

a.
















4J
c
n
3
O
a.
coco — ONd-Ovo — covocOONOOCOONONOZcovOCMcomvOf^coiTivoZZZ
CO 00 ONI1- — lf\ f- VO VO 1— .* IfN VO .* CO CO ON CO Z ONd" — VO — CO CO ZZZ
A




ONONON ON ON ON r^
ON ON ON ON VO ON O 00 ON VO r**- ON CM ITS co ON ON CO iT\ ON vo d" f^ O d"
VO A A A ON ON |-~ ON ON ON ON ON ON .* r- A A it VO A ON ON A CO ON

1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

CMI^OCM OcoCMOOOI^flOOOOvONh- OOOOOOd- —
CM CM— lf\ JT co Ovd1 —
A

OOOCMOCVJONONl^ONf 	 d-vO— coONdON— CMCMr 	 CM d- CM CO VO to — O
OCMCM 	 O -OOlfN 'CM— • -IfMO — OO •— • • •* — -O
^ • ^•••co»«co~" ••o»cvjco »r^o
« o ooo oo oo o o
— CO
V


o
ooo o
OOO CM— CM O
r- -coo oo in— CM ooo o — CM o
-lA -JtCMd-CMCMVft • • •ONCOCOOONCMOVO.3-VO • • «
VOCM CMON— COlfNcod'CMOOCMVOcoCM— V ONJt — lf\Of 	 lf\ CM vfl

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

r~CM 	 ir> CM cvi ON CM — i^cMONvor^ioooovoa — CMCM— vo CM
CVJ V V CMO • -OOOO •OOlTl Z CM co .ZOOO • • O
•OOO ' • • -OOO • VO -OOO ON O
o • oooo • -o o • •
o oo oo o






vOCMOOr-CMCOCMiAvOoO — cocovOJ-vO<»> J- J-(OrocO — miTiif (^ CM —
CMitCM CMCM —












j'
•^
O)
E

<0
+J
c in
CO 3
*> t- CD — T3
3 O CO 10 CO CD
— JC— CO *> >
— ao a) o — CD
o c'- +j e o *>
a o 0) en 03 E 3 to E co
££ CDEME E O-3EC (03 C
— a a-0 -O3CD3 3<0 0) CD E — 3CD C 	 E O CO
co — c— cc— E 	 -O-OSCOE — •o+J o-o**3.p>»
OlT» — — COt.— CO-OS CC 	 0) 3 "D JO — CO C— COO
— • — coco O E O) CO — C COO «-COC— CO X CO O — -o(->-O
CflQQ«OCJJP4J— 33CC<-OC4^EZ— CB— WO C — JO 1 	 Q«-4JJP —
cflOOtOOOO — — — eoeocot.-— — Ei£3>>cocoOcoOOO — O*>*> — JC
«K
U
OI^OvcoCOvOKOOOfOcot^OCMOO
\f\ co ON CO r^ ON 00 VO ON IfN ON CO ON iTv CO
A A




ON ON 00 ON ON ON O ON r— ON VQCOON
VO ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON CO ON CO ON
OOAAAAAAAAAAONAAA

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

OOlTNOOOOOOOOOOOO
l>- CM


oifNcoooiTiooomoinoino
a- LJ 	 CMVOCMJ- -CMV — V d-
JtV VV OV V —
V
CO


o
o o o
o — o oo o o
O LJ O OO O O* •>
OOcoOO -OvfNOO O OOO
«CO .CVIOOVO - -J- -CM — OO
— CMcoVCMcovOd-VOCOCMcOV 	

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

CM-J^ON— JJO-JO-J-JCM — t -J
OLJ .aozozoav CMQ
CQONOCQCO CO COCO OQ
•
—






VO 	 OOOlT\cO — CMf 	 OCMiTi
— CM 	 CM coco— tOCM — CMCM — co









^ ^ *^ ^ W CNJ C\l ~~ ^ f5


J
10
(_
CD
-1 £l
01 <*•
3. ~-

^ ^
10 CO
+> 4*
C O
co -P
4J
3 -E
- >> , 3 3
O O — 4J — 3 — 1- TJ ! 	 1 	
O.ECCO 	 E9>— 3CDCCD —
— CS-cocDWJCOXcDCD— CD — JC —
X«-------























z
o
—
h—
rf
K
z
LU
s:

Q
Ld
CO
ce
o
T3
> CO
CC 3
< C
^ +J
0 C
CO O
o
i~

o
z
X
0
LiJ
h-
_J
o
CC
Z
O
0






















i^

^
o
c
0)
o
**-
QJ

—
03
^
o
E
CO
c
co
^
CD
Z




CD
O
C
CO
ce



c
o
—
p
CD
s_
c
CD
O
C
o
u

.p
c
CD
3
«-
jj
c
CO
—
T3
CO
£







CD
O
C
CO
cc











U)
.p
C
•—
O
a
CC
CC
C




CO
co
u
(A

-
u.




CD
CO
0
u>
c

a.














P
C
R

3
_
~
O
0.
CO S co ON ON ON ON CO ON ON mNO •£ Z £ m CM CM Z ON ON co 2 ON co ON ON OONNOOOP^ONONNOSP^O — £t O tfN. fO
eoz cooNONONONONONONifNNOzzz .* co r— z ON ON f~ z ON ON ON ON ONCor— I--ONON— zoo d'cONocor-
AAAAA AA AA AA




ONON ON ON C\J ONON ONONON ON ONON
O ONON ON NOONcO ON ONON ONONON ON J" .3" ONONVO
CO AA A lT\ A CO AAA AAAA h- :* A A ON

1 II 1 ill III 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1

O ONOO co co^h- O * NO ifO— ON O CO t~- — ON
ONON ro CONO— coco vOJ'^t — co — CM —
A A CO A
* *

— Q 	 d-ZOCMZZ 	 O — Q — Q . 	 QQZQ— -Q — >Z — • Ift — CM CM 1-
OQ 00 COCQOQON COCOOQOCQlA CM





OO OOO
OO OOO
O— 1 O —1 Jt — —1 O — OlT\
r-QNOJco 00 .3T— QVO « - COON — coOQ ONCOCMCOO— co O ONON •> - »
— DQco^-ON •=(• CMNOCM CDONCM— lA — IT\ 	 CO — CO — CM it CM —CM (^- — CO — CO CM

1 1 1 1 1 1 III 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II 1 1 1 1 1 1

-JQ-IQa O CNJ-J-I Q-IO-I QO-IOQQ O O O Q -1 Q a CM O lA-l-IQCM
ozozz — — QQ zaza zzo — zz — zzzoz z -a- ooz
CQCD COGQOQCOCO CO CQCQ









JTJtONONI 	 CMCM 	 CM lA CO — CM & d" NO co ift \O — CO CM — ro in if\ -3" iTMTi — (O CO — CM — co co ON NO NO









	 ___— — ___^^™ .^^ _



CD
CO CO
— C
CO CO
•P CD CD >>
£ *> C — J= CD
Q.COCD— O— CDCO CDCOCOCOP C
— P £ CO CC T3 C C C 0) CD 03
"- CO CO CD CO 	 CD U) CO CDCOCD — COCOCDCOOCDC£
— £— CDP— OO — £.— CO C CO £ C£ S-.C £ — C S- -O CO *>
>>PCOPCO>>CCOaOi- CD C P 0! P O P P >> ro 0 	 CD
X.C.C CO— C 0 CD C O W O O CO C— C — CO COjC£— CDS->>O
CD ap— TO CD — .c j: co <- CD i co CD ococo>>co Ji E e P P.C-O o.c s-
£ £CO££OQ.Q.— £ Ol-O S- C COC«-S-«- OO OCDCOO 	 -PO
	 O.S. P a C O — O Q. — O 1 CO .C CD CD I-CDOCDO CO CD COE EDO— !-£CD —
c. N — jc a-ox: O£ CD «- o E i- co c co >> co P >>— ~— CD ceo ps-Ei-ooi— *-o
43 c >> a o a— PJEO —i*> N co.c.ccc ad- — «t- £ ass- cs.o'-.a 	 «>£>O<-OEOC t-<-CCDCOCDC££O-~ >,£ t-o 	 t-o— i o— c-Qceoaaeoco ~^-^~^ coeocD£:ccocooo 	 s 	 o i
~— I£-P4J — QQPcoOvO — QCD— COfflcoco'- — OOOO«0'-'--PcoCO'-! 	 QQh->>>jco —
>> C P tt) — £ 1 1 — PC -.ClN>,3ICC.CNNNNN>>OO.CCCD.aOO.CI 1 !££!- -
WPI CDECOJI'3'ZCCDJ'OVOCi: — CM«BCOPCCCCC'-33Q.CO'-' 	 O 	 CNJP-P*> —
— 3 	 II « - 1 tt) .C - 1 «CDPO«OOCCDCOCDCOCCI£ 	 COJT>>COJC£— •>»«CDOJCD-.
CQCDOQazCMCMCMCMO-O-OJ a J- CQLUI 	 «-------
z
o
2
LJ
W

CC
O
U."-
  •D
> 0)
CC 3
< C


i'i
V) O


s-

3
O

X
o
UI
o
CC
 I
                   OS
                   O\
                   A
          CVI
          CVJOQOOco
          — CO CO CO CO
           o
           o
           o
                    o
                    z
            V


            (D
c
co
           £      3
           P      in
           o>      o o
           oo   uj-o c
           I-XOO C O
           OCOXObJ <-
           — i co i  i o
           £ CO  I -  COC
           or:  co^-f o.
           — a


o —



CO C
P O
1CO —
•a P
                            .33
     o o> a> ov co
       p p c >
     CO 
     ._   P«, P
     re > o> a) 
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Sedimentation
Data  source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Textile mills
Subcategory:  Wool scouring
Plant:   W
References:  3-89, pp. 50-53
Pretreatment/treatment:  None(a)/Sed.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit  configuration:  Unspecified
Wastewater flow  rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weir  loading rate:  Unspecified
                     Data source  status:
                        Not specified
                        Bench scale
                        Pilot scale
                        Full scale
                                    REMOVAL DATA
               Sample:  2U-hr composite
                                            Analysis:  Data sat I IV.7.3.321
                                                  Percent  Detection
Pollutant/parameter Influential
Classical pollutants, l«g/L:
A 1 urn i num
Barium
Boron
Calcium
Coba 1 t
1 ron
Magnesium
Manganese
Molybdenum
Sodium
Phosphorus
SHI con
Strontium
Ammonia
Titanium
Vanadium
Pheno 1
Nitrate
Toxic pollutants, M9/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Be ry 1 1 i urn
Cadmium
Ch rom i urn
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl (phthalate
Anthracene
Fluoranthene
Benzol a )pyrene
Pyrene
Benzol k)f luoranthene
Toluene
Ethyl benzene
Methylene chloride

8.1
0.29
0.49
31
O.IT
5
7
0.02
<0.2
54
0.2
4.8
0.17
3.3
0.2
2.7
0.02
5.3

540
38
<2
130
<80
320
200
3,500
2,000
500
1.500
42
1.5
1. 1
1.2
0.8
0.8
1.4
BOL
BOL
Effluent

4.7
0.12
0.64
31
<0.04
3.4
6.6
0.07
<0.2
56
0.21
3.2
0.16
3
0.11
0.12
0.05
1. 1

<200
39
<2
<40
<80
no
240
<400
<700
77
32
6
NM
NM
NM
NM
33
6
9
45
96
NM
NM

<63
NM
NM
>69
NH
66
NM
>89
>65
>80
87
45
73
64
99«
75
99»
NM
NM
NM
limit































0.04
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.02
0. 1
0.2
O.4
               Blanks indicate data not available.
               BDL, below detection Unit.
               NH, not meaningful.
               •Approximate value.
               (a) Influent is taken from final treatment effluent and Is then run through
                 pi lot process.
Date:    9/25/81
III.3.1.18-10
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Sedimentation
Data source:
Point source
Subcategory:
Plant:  10
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Leather tanning and finishing
 Hair pulp

3-74, p.  67
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:   None/Sed.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Two circular clarifiers  in  series
Wastewater flow rate:  3,030 m3/d
Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:   18.8 m3/d/m2
Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
Sampling;  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
                                 Analysis;  Data  set 3  (V.7.3.6)
Concentration
Pollutant/parameter
Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
limit
Classical pollutants,  mg/L:
  BOD5                          2,100        1,200
  TSS                           3,100          940
  Oil and grease                  490           57

Toxic pollutants,  yg/L:
  Chromium                     51,000       24,000
                                            43
                                            70
                                            88
                                             53
                    10
Blanks indicate data not available.
 Date:   9/25/81
                 III.3.1.18-11
-------
                                                  Data  source  status:
                                                   Not specified
                                                   Bench  scale
                                                   Pilot  scale
                                                   Full scale
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Sedimentation
Data source: Effluent Guidelines
Point source: Inorganic chemicals
Subcategory: Titanium dioxide (chloride
              process) manufacture
Plant: 172
References: 3-85,  pp.270-271
Pretreatment/treatment: None/Sed.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
Unit configuration: Two retention basins in series,  neutralization  to
   basin effluent
Wastewater flow rate: 35.8 m3/Mg
Hydraulic detention time: Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate: Unspecified
Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
pH:  7.6-7.9
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling:  3 day, 24-hr composite,
	72-hr composite and grab
                                         Analysis:   Data set  1  and 2  (V.7.3.15)
      Pollutant/parameter
                                       Concentration
                                   Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detec-
 tion
limit
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  TSS

Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
  Chromium
  Zinc
                                      220
                                      620
                                      270
 6.6
  17
  84
   97
   97
   69
Blanks indicate data not available.
Date:   9/25/81
                              III.3.18-12
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Sedimentation
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  251
References:
 Effluent.Guidelines
  Inorganic chemicals
 Hydrofluoric acid

3-85, pp. 210-211
Pretreatment/treatment:   None/Sed.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Gypsum pond
Wastewater flow rate:  82.3 m3/Mg
Hydraulic detention time :  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:   Unspecified
Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
                                 REMOVAL  DATA

Sampling;  Three 24-hr composite samples	 Analysis;  Data  set 2  (V.7.3.4)
  Pollutant/parameter
                      Concentration       Percent    Detection
                  Influent    Effluent     removal      limit
Classical pollutants,  mg/L:
  TSS                          19,000        9.7
  Fluoride                       0.66       0.32
                                            >99
                                             52
Blanks indicate data not available.
 Date:   9/25/81
                  III.3.1.18-13
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Sedimentation
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  E
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Iron and steel
 Cokemaking: Beehive

3-6, pp.  67-100
       Data source  status:
         Not specified
         Bench scale
         Pilot scale
         Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:   None/Sed.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Two settling ponds  in parallel
Wastewater flow rate:  0.022 m3/s
Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:   Unspecified
Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling;  Unspecified
                                  Analysis;   Data set  2  (V.7.3.5)
                                  Concentration
    Pollutant/parameter
                  Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
  limit
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  TSS                             160          36
  Oil and grease                  0.8         0.2
  Total phenol                  0.016       0.014
  Ammonia                        0.33        0.20
  Sulfide                        0.02       <0.02
  Thiocyanate                     3.0         3.0

Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
  Beryllium                       <20         <20
  Cyanides                          5           4
  Mercury                         4.4           2
                                             78
                                             75
                                             13
                                             39
                                             m
                                             NM
                                             NM
                                             20
                                             55
Blanks indicate data not available.
NM, not meaningful.
Date:   9/25/81
                 III.3.1.18-14
-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Sedimentation
 Data source:
 Point source:
 Subcategory:
 Plant:  1-2
 References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Iron and steel
 Hot forming-section

3-8, pp. 149,164,201
     Data source status:
       Not specified
       Bench scale
       Pilot scale
       Full scale
 Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Sed.
 DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

 Unit configuration:  46,200 m3 terminal settling lagoon
 Wastewater flow rate:   350 L/s
 Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
 Hydraulic loading  rate:  Unspecified
 Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
 Sampling;   Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
                                  Analysis;  Data set 2  (V.7.3.5)
     Pollutant/parameter
                                   Concentration
                   Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
 Classical pollutants, mg/L:
   TSS
   Oil and grease
                      190
                      120
    39
    14
   79
   88
Date:   9/25/81
                III.3.1.18-15
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Sedimentation
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Iron and steel
Subcategory:  Hot forming-section
Plant:  0
References:  3-8, pp.  146,163,187
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Sed.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Clarifier
Wastewater flow rate:   36.6 L/s
Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                   Data source status:
                     Not specified
                     Bench scale
                     Pilot scale
                     Full scale
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling:  Unspecified
                Analysis;  Data set 2  (V.7.3.5)
                                  Concentration
    Pollutant/parameter
 Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
  limit
Classical pollutants,  mg/L:
  TSS
  Oil and grease

Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
  Chromium
  Copper
  Lead
  Nickel
  Zinc
     15
    4.9
    57
  12.3
     80
     30
    430
     30
    40
    30
   440
    20
   MM
   NM
   MM
   50
    0
   NM
   33
Blanks indicate data not available.
NM, not meaningful.
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.18-16
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Sedimentation
Data source:
Point source
Subcategory:
Plant:  R
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Iron and steel
 Hot forming-section

3-8, pp. 147,163,192
Pretreatment/treatment:   Sed./Sed.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Settling lagoon
Wastewater flow rate:  90 L/s
Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:   Unspecified
Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
       Data source status:
         Not specified
         Bench scale
         Pilot scale
         Full scale
                                                                           x
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling;  Unspecified
                                  Analysis;  Data set 2  (V.7.3.5)
                                  Concentration
    Pollutant/parameter
                  Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
  limit
Classical pollutants,  mg/L:
  TSS
  Oil and grease

Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
  Chromium
  Copper
  Lead
  Nickel
  Zinc
                      32
                     3.8
                      30
                      60
                      20
    45
   5.3
    10
    30
    40
    20
   NM
   NM
   NM
   NM
   NM
   33
    0
Blanks indicate data not available.
NM, not meaningful.
 Date:   9/25/81
                  III.3.1.18-17
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Sedimentation
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines                 Data  source status:
Point source:  Iron and steel                      Not specified
Subcategory:  Cold forming                         Bench  scale
Plant:  XX-2                                       Pilot  scale
References:  3-10, pp. 68,78,93                    Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Sed.,  Oil  Sep.  (skimmer)

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  72,800 m2 lagoon divided into  two  segments, oil is
  skimmed from the top of the lagoon
Wastewater flow rate:  3,680 L/s
Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA

Sampling;  Unspecified	Analysis;   Data  set  2  (V.7.3.5)

                                  Concentration        Percent    Detection
    Pollutant/parameter	Influent    Effluent    removal	limit	

Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  TSS                             260          30         88
  Oil and grease                  620           7         99

Blanks indicate data not available.
Date:   9/25/81              III.3.1.18-18
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Sedimentation
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines                 Data source  status:
Point source:  Iron and steel                       Not specified
Subcategory:  Steelmaking: Basic oxygen furnace     Bench scale
Plant:  034                                         Pilot scale
References:  3-7, pp. 72-73                         Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  Equal./Sed.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Clarifier
Wastewater flow rate:  15.8 L/s
Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA

Sampling;  24-hour composite and grab	Analysis;   Data set  1  (V.7.3.5)

                                  Concentration        Percent   Detection
    Pollutant/parameter	Influent    Effluent    removal	limit	

Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  TSS                             380          47          88

Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
  Copper                           80         100          NM
  Lead                          1,500         820          45
  Nickel                          550         690          NM
  Zinc                            610         280          54

Blanks indicate data not available.
NM, not meaningful.
Date:,  9/25/81              III.3.1.18-19
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Sedimentation
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  071
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Iron and steel
 Continuous casting

3-7, pp.  429,  437-438,  442
       Data source status:
         Not specified
         Bench scale
         Pilot scale
         Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:   None/Sed.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Two lagoons in parallel
Wastewater flow rate:  3.8 L/s
Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:   Unspecified
Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA

Sampling;  24-hour composite and grab	Analysis;  Data  set  1  (V.7.3.5)
                                  Concentration
    Pollutant/parameter
                  Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
  limit
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  TSS
  Oil and grease
                     6.3
                      10
     8
     6
   MM
   40
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Selenium
Zinc

1,000
87
100
220
200

1,000
70
100
5
200

0
20
0
98
0
Blanks indicate data not available.
NM, not meaningful.
 Date:  9/25/81
                  III.3.1.18-20
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Sedimentation
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines                 Data source status:
Point source:  Iron and steel                       Not specified
Subcategory:  Steelmaking: Basic oxygen furnace     Bench scale
Plant:  Furnace 033                                 Pilot scale
References:  3-7, pp. 120,133,134,160               Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  Equal./Sed.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Clarifier
Wastewater flow rate:  82.6 L/s
Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA

Sampling;  24-hour composite and grab	Analysis;   Data set 1 (V.7.3.5)

                                  Concentration        Percent    Detection
    Pollutant/parameter	Influent    Effluent    removal	limit	

Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  TSS                           7,800          52         99
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Arsenic
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
* Selenium
Thallium
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
Chloroform

75
3,000
920
14,000
0.1
710
37
130
49,000
18
13

17
30,000
69
940
0.1
2,000
31
80
320
32
22

77
NM
93
93
0
NM
16
38
99
NM
NM
Blanks indicate data not available.
NM, not meaningful.
Date:   9/25/81              III.3.1.18-21
-------
            TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Sedimentation
            Data  source:  EGD Combined Data Base
                                                             Data source status:
            Point  source:  Metal finishing
            Subcategory:  Unspecified
            Plant-.   11477
            References:  3-113
            Pretreatment/treatment:  Oil Sep.
             Neutral., Skimming, Coag. Floe.

            DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
                     Not  specified
                     Bench  scale
                     Pilot  scale
                     Full scale
   (emulsion breaking)/Chem.  Red.  (Cr),
  ,  Chlorination,  Sed.  (clarifier)
           Unit configuration:  Continuous operation (24 hr/day),  clarifier
           Wastewater  flow rate:  172,000 m3/day
           Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
           Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
           Weir loading  rate:  Unspecified
Sampling: 21-hr composite,
flow proportion

Classical pollutant, mg/L:
Ba r i urn
Boron
Hagnes turn
Phenols, total
TSS
Aluminum
1 ron
Tin
Oi 1 and grease
Titanium
TOC
COO
Sod i urn
Ca 1 c i urn
Coba 1 t
Vanadium
Yttrium
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Cadm i urn
Ch rom i UHI
Copper
Load
Nickel
Zinc
Cyanide, total
Phenol
Carbon tetrachloride
1,1, l-Trichloroethane
Chlorofona
B!s(2-ethylhexyl )phthalate
Butyl benzylphthalate
Oi-n-butyl phthalate
Trichioroethyiene
Si Ivor
Antimony
Arsenic
Beryll turn
To 1 uene
Tetrachloroethylene
Pyrenc
Fluorene
Mercury
Molybdenum
Seleniuia
Tha 1 1 i UK
Benzene
2,1.6-Trtchlorophenol
Parachloronetacresol
1 ,2-Trans-dichloroethylene
2,1-Dichlorophenol
F luoranthene
Methylene chloride
Oichlorobronomthane
Ch lorod i bromone thane
Isophorono
N-n i t ro sod i phany 1 am i ne
Dimethyl phthalate
1 .2-Benzanthracene
Benzo(a )pyrene
Chrysene
Acenaphthylene
REMOVAL
Conceni
Influent

0.02
0.50
37
0.01
220
1.0
0.60
0.01
51
0.006*
18
86
39
89
0.002*
0.002*
0.002*

2.0*
2,000
10
BDL
BDL
70
BOL
15
1.0
NO
6.0
BDL
BDL
BDL
20
20*
100*
10*
1.0*
10*
BDL
10*
37
0.50
10*
10*
100*
2.0
NO
ND
NO
12
110
1.0

ND
2.0
BDL
BDL

10

DATA
Analysis:
t ration
Effluent

0.03
0.10
13
0.18
12
0.09*
0.20
0.03
7.0
0.006*
17
28
39
16
O.OO2*
0.002*
0.002*

2.0*
10
10
BOL
BDL
50*
29
10

2.0
28
BDL
BDL
BDL
33
20*
100*
10*
1.0*
BDL
BDL
ND
BDL
0.70
7.0
10*
100*
16
2.0
10
5.0
10
ND
1, 100
2.0
1.0*
11
BOL
10*
10*
10
1.0
Data set
Percent
restova 1

NM
80
65
NM
91
98*
67
25
87
NM
61
67
0
18
NM
NM
NM

NM
98
0
NM
NM
28*
NM
33

NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NH
NM
NM
NM
75*
NM
>99*
86*
NM
30*
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
>99
NM
NM

NM
NM
' NM

0

1 IV.7.3.I3I
Detection
I Imlt



O.I
0.005
5.0
0.01
0.005

5.0









2.0
3.0
1.0
30
6.0
1.0
5.0
10
1.0
O.I
1.0
10
10
10
O.I
0. 1/1.0
0.1/100
0.1/10
1.0
5.0
5.0
10
10
O.I

0. 1/200
0.1/10
1.0
1.0/10
1.0/10
1.0
1.0/10
1.0
1.0
1 .0
1 .0
10
1.0/10
10
10
10
10
10
                     Blanks indicate data not available.
                     BDL, below detection Unit.
                     NO. not detected.
                     NH, not Meaningful.
                     •Approximate value.
Date:    9/25/81
III.3.1.18-22
-------
TREATMENT  TECHNOLOGY:  Sedimentation
Data  source:   EGD Combined Data Base
Point source:   Metal finishing
Subcategory.-   Common metals;  oils;  solvents
Plant:   33692
References:   3-113
                    Data  source status:
                      Not specified
                      Bench  scale
                      Pilot  scale
                      Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  Screen,  Oil Sep. (clarifier),
  Oil Sep.  (flotation)/Sed.  (tank)

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Continuous  operation (9 hr/day)
Wastewater  flow rate:  2,610,000  m3/day
Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                    REMOVAL DATA
                Sampling:  2M-hr composite,
                       flow proportion
                                            Analysis:  Data set I IV.7.3.131
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutant, mg/L:
pH, ninimum
Tin
Ti tanium
TSS
1 ron
BOD
Oi 1 and grease
Phenols, total
Arnmon 1 a
TOC
Toxic pollutants, M9/L:
A 1 urn i num
Ba r i urn
Boron
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Molybdenum
Sodium
Ca 1 c i urn
Coba 1 t
Vanadium
Yttrium
Cadmium
Chromi urn
Copper
Lead
Nickel
zinc
Cyanide, total
1,1, l-Trichloroe thane
Chloroform
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Dl-n-butyl phthalate
Oi ethyl phthalate
Si Iver
Antimony
Arsenic
Be ry 1 1 i urn
Se 1 en i urn
Tha 1 1 i urn
Methylene chloride
Anthracene
f luorene
Pnenantnrene
Pyrene
Toluene
Blanks indicate data not aval
Influent

5.6
0.05
0.008
100
2.l|
2
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Sedimentation
Data source:   EGD Combined Data Base
Point source:   Coil coating
Subcategory:   Galvanized
Plant:  33056a
References:   3-113
Pretreatment/treatment:  Chem. Red.  (Cr)/Sed.
                  Data  source status;
                    Not specified
                    Bench scale
                    Pilot Scale
                    Full scale
DESIGN OR  OPERATING PARAMETERS


Unit configuration:  Settling tank-continuous operation (24 hr/day)
Wastewater flow rate:  174,000 m3/day
Hydraulic  detention time:  3.9 hr
Hydraulic  loading rate:  733 L/hr/m2
Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                    REMOVAL DATA

     Sampling:  Effluent:  grab; influent:  unspecified
     	composite, time proportion (2 hrl   Analysis:  Data  set 2 (V.7.3.9)
       Pollutant/parameter
   Concentration       Percent     Detection
 Influent   Effluent    removal	I imit
     Classical pollutants, mg/L:
       pH, minimum                    6.3        7.5
       pH, maximum                    9.8        7.5
       Fluorides                      7.4        9.0
       Phosphorus                      14         12
       TSS                            170         20
       I ron                            1*1*        1.8
       OiI and grease                  54         21
       Phenols, total                0.005*     0.008
       Aluminum                       1.8       0.68
       Manganese                      0.38      0.091
     Blanks  indicate data not available.
     BDL,  below detection limit.
     ND,  not detected.
     NM,  not meaningful.
     "Approximate value.
                         NM
                         14
                         88
                         96
                         61
                         NM
                         62
                         76
  0.1
0.003
  5.0
0.005
  5.0
0.005
 0.04
0.005
Toxic pollutants, u,g/L:
Cadmium
Ch rom i urn
Copper
Lead
Zinc
Cyanide, total
1,1, 1-Trichloroethane
Anthracene
Bis(2-ethylhexyl )phtna late
Phenanthrene
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Di ethyl phthalate
Trichloroethylene
1, 1-Dichloroethylene
1,2-Trans-dichloroethylene

19
1,300
14
260
2,000
40
3,100
ND
BDL
ND
ND
60
3,800
24
34

42
100
ND
ND
91
90
2,500
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
ND
3,000
40
19

NM
92
>99
>99
95
NM
19
NM
NM
NM
NM
>99
21
NM
44

2.0
3.0
1.0
30
1.0
5.0
0.1
10
10
10
10
10
0.1
1.0
1.0
   Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.18-24
-------
           TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Sedimentation
           Data source:  EGD Combined Data Base              Data source status:
           Point source:  Coil coating                        Not specified
           Subcategory:  steel                                Bench scale
           Plant:   33056b                                     Pilot scale
           References:  3-113                                 Full scale
           Pretreatment/treatment:  Chera. Red. (Cr)/Sed.

           DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

           Unit configuration:  8 continuous sed. tanks (24 hr/day)
           Wastewater flow rate:  174,000 m3/day
           Hydraulic detention time:  3.9 hr
           Hydraulic loading rate:  733 L/hr/ra2
           Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                   BDL, below detection Unit.
                   ND, not detected.
                   NM, not meaningful.
                   "Approximate value.
REMOVAL DATA
Sample: Effluent: grab; influent: 8-hr composite.
flow orooortion (2 hr)

Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
pH, minimum
pH. maximum
F luo rides
Phosphorus
TSS
1 ron
Manganese
Tin
Oil and grease
Phenols, total
A 1 urn i num
Magnesium
Mo 1 ybdenum
Sod i urn
Ca 1 c i urn
Coba 1 t
Toxic pollutants, Mg/L:
Cadmium
Chromium
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Cyanide, total
1, 1, 1-Trichloroe thane
Chloroform
Bis(2-ethylhexyl )pti thai ate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Diethyl phthalate
Trichloroethylene
Antimony
Benzene
1 , 1-Dichloroethane
1, 1-Dlchloroethylene
1,2-Trans-dichloroethylene
Ethyl benzene
Methylene chloride
Ch 1 o rod i b romome thane
Isophorone
Dimethyl phthalate
Phenanthrene
Te t rach 1 o roe thy 1 ene
Toluene

Concentrat
Influent

8.0
9.9
9.8
8.7
31
2.0
0.05
0.02
20
0.005
2.0
13
0.05
190
28
0.50

8.0
500
200
ND
2,000
70
2,1400
2.0
25
BDL
BDL
2,700
ND
1.0*
2.0
530
16
2.0
3.0
1.0*
170
BDL
BDL
1.0
29
Analysis
ion
Effluent

7.5
7.5
10
10
6.0
1.0
0.07
0.009
18
0.005"
2.0
11
0.07
600
30
0.20

NO
500
ND
70
3,000
90
290
2.0
15
BOL
ND
190
150
1.0*
2.0
70
10
ND
10
1.0*
110
BOL
BDL
2.0
5.0
: Oa^a
Percent
remova 1



NM
NH
82
50
NM
55
10
NM
0
NH
NM
NM
NM
60

>99
0
>99
NM
NM
NM
88
0
10
NH
NH
93
NM
NH
0
87
38
>99
NM
NM
35
NH
NM
50
83
set 2 (V.7.3.91
Detection
limit



0.1
0.003
5.0
0.005


5.0
0.005
0.01






2.0
3.0
30
6.0
1.0
5.0
0.1
1.0
10
10
10
0.1
0.1/100
1.0
0.1
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
10
10
10
1.0
5.0
Blanks indicate data not available.
Date:    9/25/81                 III.3.1.18-25
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Sedimentation
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  E
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Aluminum forming
 Unspecified

3-27, pp. 89,  304-313
Data source  status
  Not specified
  Bench  scale
  Pilot  scale
  Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  Chem. Red.  (Cr), Oil Sep./Sed.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Settling pond
Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                      REMOVAL DATA
                  Samp I
                         Ttirco 21-hour or
one 72-hour composite

Classical pollutants, oig/L:
Suspended sol ids
COD
TOC
Phono 1
pH, pll units
Oi f and grease
toxic pollutants, M9/L:
Arson ic
Cadm i urn
Chromium
Coppo r
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Zinc
Aconapthone
Benzene
2 , 1 , 6- T r i ch 1 oropheno 1
Ch loroform
2-Chlorophenol
Ethyl benzene
Mothylene chloride
Nnptha lene
Phenol
Bi s| 2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Oi-n-butyl phthalate
Dicthyl phthalate
Anthracene
Fluorene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
Te t rach 1 o roe thy 1 ene
Tol uene
1,1 '-DDE
a Ipha-endosu 1 fan
alpha-BIIC
beta -BMC
PCB-12H2, 1251, 1221
PCB-1232. 12'lS, 1260, 1016
Concentre
Influent

120
310
170
0.008
6.1
210

BDL
BDL
60
200
BDL
BDL
1
BDL
200
83
BOL
<8
31
NO
ND
220
ND
BDL
23
BDL
BDL
19
10
20
10
ND
BDL
10
BOL
BDL
ND
BDL
6.1
5.3
Analysis
tion
Effluent

21
93
29
0.009
7.2
27

BDL
BOL
BDL
<10
BDL
BDL
0.7
BDL
BOL
NO
BOL
BDL
9
BDL
BDL
B8
BDL
BDL
BDL
ND
10
ND
10
12
10
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BOL
BDL
: Data
Percent
remova 1

80
73
83
NM
NM
87

NM
NM
96*
>60
NM
NM
30
NH
68
>99
NM
NM
71
NM
NM
60
NM
NM
79*
NM
NM
>99
0
10
0
NM
NM
50*
NM
NM
NM
NM
59
53
set 2 IV, 7. 3. 71
Detection
1 imi t








10
2
5
9
100
20
0.1
5
50
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
5
5
5
5
5
5
Blanks indicate data not available.
                  DiiiiiKit i(iu iitiic ua t
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Sedimentation
              Effluent Guidelines
               Steam electric
              Unspecified
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory-.
Plant:  4222
References:  3-86,  pp.  238-241
Pretreatment/treatment:   Unspecified/Sed.
      Data source status:
        Not specified
        Bench scale
        Pilot scale
        Full scale
                                                                           x
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Ash pond
Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic detention time :  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
Sampling;  Grab samples
                                 REMOVAL DATA
                                            Analysis;  Data set 1 (V.7.3.31)
  Pollutant/parameter
                                 Concentration      Percent   Detection
                              InfluentEffluent   removal     limit
Classical pollutant, mg/L:
  Phenol
                                <100
260
NM
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Thallium
Zinc
Cyanide
Silver

48
120
100
10
200
300
240
0.62
250
<5
29
400
<20
<5

29
160
20
<5
11
6
<5
0.21
8
32
<5
10
<20
<5

40
NM
80
>50
94
98
>98
66
97
NM
>83
98
NM
NM
Blanks indicate data not available.
NM, not meaningful.
Date:   9/25/81
                                III.3.1.18-27
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Sedimentation
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines                 Data source status:
Point source:  Steam electric                       Not specified
Subcategory:  Unspecified                          Bench scale
Plant:  See below                                  Pilot scale
References:  3-86,  p.  171                          Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Sed.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Combined ash ponds
Wastewater flow rate:   See below
Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weir loading rate:   Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA

Sampling;  Composite and grab	Analysis;  Data set 3  (V.7.3.31)
                                  	TSS	

             Wastewater flow,      Concentration, mg/L      Percent
   Plant	m3/d	Influent	Effluent	removal	

   5143           25,000           64,000        13           >99
   7298           72,000            6,700        19           >99
   0431           98,000           13,000        22           >99
   4504           68,000           15,000          7           >99
   7018           55,000           21,000        18           >99
   3228            6,800           27,000          6           >99
 Date:   9/25/81             III.3.1.18-28
-------
                                                  Data source status:
                                                    Not specified
                                                    Bench scale
                                                    Pilot scale
                                                    Full scale
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Sedimentation
Data source:  Government report
Point source:  Adhesives and sealants
Subcategory:  Unspecified
Plant:  San Leandro
References:  3-95,  p.  66
Pretreatment/treatment:   Equal./Sed.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
Unit configuration:  Four-section settling/flotation tank.   The first and
  third sections are settling areas and the second and fourth sections act
  as flotation tanks.
Wastewater flow rate:  0.76 m3/min
Hydraulic detention time:  2 hrs
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling;  Unspecified
                                             Analysis;   Data  set  2  (V.7.3.17)
                                  Concentration
  Pollutant/parameter
                               Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
  limit
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  BOD5                          8,700        6,700       33
  COD                          27,000       25,000        7
  TSS                          11,000        2,300       79
  Oil and grease(a)             2,200          520       76
  Total phenol(a)                 150           84       44

Toxic pollutants, mg/L:
  Cyanide(a)                    1,900        4,500       NM
  Zinc                         99,000       49,000       51
Blanks indicate data not available.
NM, not meaningful.
(a)Positive interference in assay suspected.
Date:   9/25/81
                                III.3.1.18-29
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Sedimentation
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Foundry Industry
Subcategory:  Ferrous foundry dust  collection
Plant:  AAA-2A
References:  3-83,  pp. VI-96,  VII-17,31,57
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Sed.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Settling lagoon
Wastewater flow rate:  107 L/s
Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weir loading rate:   Unspecified
                   Data  source status:
                     Not specified
                     Bench  scale
                     Pilot  scale
                     Full scale
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling;  Unspecified
                Analysis;   Data  set  2  (V.7.3.12)
Pollutant/parameter
      Concentration      Percent    Detection
   Influent   Effluent   removal      limit
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  TSS
  Oil and grease
  Total phenol
  Sulfide
  Ammonia
  Iron
  Manganese
     4,200
        15
       1.1
       0.6
       2.1
        76
        32
 4.6
  12
0.04
  ND
0.57
  29
0.39
Blanks indicate data not available.
BDL, below detection limit.
ND, not detected.
NM, not meaningful.
>99
 20
 96
>99
 73
 62
 99
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Cyanide
Mercury

37
ND

19
BDL

49
NM

10
10
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.18-30
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Sedimentation
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Foundry Industry
Subcategory:  Ferrous foundry sand washing
Plant:  AAA-2A
References:  3-83, pp. VI-130,  VII-17,37,57
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Sed.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Two settling lagoons
Wastewater flow rate:  107 L/s
Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                   Data source status:
                     Not specified
                     Bench scale
                     Pilot scale
                     Full scale
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling;  Unspecified
               Analysis;  Data set 2 (V.7.3.12)
Pollutant/parameter
     Concentration      Percent   Detection
  Influent   Effluent   removal     limit
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  TSS
  Oil and grease
  Total phenol
  Ammonia
  Iron
  Manganese
Toxic pollutants,
  Cyanide
  Mercury
   5,900
       8
    0.59
     3.7
      60
     1.6
      26
     BDL
 6.6
 7.8
0.02
0.99
0.23
0.02
  14
 BDL
>99
  3'
 96
 63
 99
 99
 46
 NM
10
10
Blanks indicate data not available.
BDL, below detection limit.
NM, not meaningful.
 Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.18-31
-------
                                                 Data source status:
                                                   Not specified
                                                   Bench  scale
                                                   Pilot  scale
                                                   Full scale
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Sedimentation
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Foundry Industry
Subcategory:  Ferrous foundry dust collection
Plant:  HHH-2B
References:  3-83,  pp. VI-96, VII-20,31,67
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Sed.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
Unit configuration:   Settling lagoon;  100% recycle, no discharge
Wastewater flow rate:  14.9 L/s
Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling;  Unspecified
                                              Analysis;  Data  set 2  (V.7.3.12)
Pollutant/parameter
                                    Concentration      Percent    Detection
                                 Influent   Effluent    removal      limit
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  TSS
  Oil and grease
  Phenols
  Manganese
  Iron

Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
  Copper
  Zinc
                                    ,500
                                      14
                                      ND
                                     1.6
                                     110
                                     130
                                   1,900
   64
  2.7
 0.15
  2.1
  4.5
   21
1,800
96
81
NM
NM
96
84
 5
10
10
Blanks indicate data not available.
ND, not detected.
NM, not meaningful.
Date:  9/25/81
                              III.3.1.18-32
-------
                                                  Data source  status,
                                                    Not specified
                                                    Bench scale
                                                    Pilot scale
                                                    Full scale
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Sedimentation
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Foundry Industry
Subcategory:  Ferrous foundry melting furnace
  scrubbers
Plant: .HHH-2B
References:  3-83,  pp. VI-105, VII-20,33,67
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Sed.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
Unit configuration:  Settling lagoon;  100% recycle,  no discharge
Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic detention time:   Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate: Unspecified
Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling;  Unspecified
                                              Analysis;  Data  set 2  (V.7.3.12)
        Analysis;  Unspecified
Pollutant/parameter
                                    Concentration       Percent   Detection
                                 InfluentEffluent    removal      limit
Classical pollutants,  mg/L:
  TSS
  Iron
  Manganese
  Fluoride
                                   4,200
                                     510
                                      34
                                     8.9
 40
4.8
2.5
3.5
99
95
93
61
Toxic pollutants, jig/I
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Zinc
j :
4,400
29,000
BDL
87 , 000

90
1,400
BDL
4,400

98
95
NM
95

10
10
10
10
Blanks indicate data not available.
BDL, below detection limit.
NM, not meaningful.
Date:   9/25/81
                              III.3.1.18-33
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Sedimentation
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Foundry Industry
Subcategory:  Steel foundries-casting quench
  and mold cooling operations
Plant:  417A
References:  3-83, pp. V-41,  VI-115-122,  VII-36,71
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Sed.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Sedimentation  tank
Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weir loading rate-.  Unspecified
                   Data source status;
                     Not specified
                     Bench scale
                     Pilot scale
                     Full scale
Sampling;  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
               Analysis;  Data set 2  (V.7.3.12)
Pollutant/parameter
     Concentration      Percent   Detection
   Influent   Effluent   removal     limit
Classical pollutants,  mg/L:
  TSS
  Oil and grease
  Fluoride
  Iron
        90
        ND
      0.66
        07
  62
   9
0.20
 6.7
31
MM
70
NM
Toxic pollutants, jjg/L:
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate

20
BDL
ND
ND
ND
ND

50
BDL
60
BDL
140
27

NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM

10
10
10
10
10
10
Blanks indicate data not available.
BDL, below detection limit.
ND, not detected.
NM, not meaningful.
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.18-34
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Sedimentation
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines                  Data source status:
Point source:  Foundry Industry                     Not specified
Subcategory:  Steel foundries,  sand washing and     Bench scale
  reclaiming                                         Pilot scale
Plant:  694K                                         Full scale
References:  3-83, pp. V-43, VI-123-130
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Sed.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Four  settling  lagoons
Wastewater flow rate:  19.9 L/s
Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL DATA

    Sampling;  Unspecified	Analysis;  Data  set 2 (V.7.3.12)

                                     Concentration     Percent  Detection
    Pol lutant/parameter	Influent  Effluent   removal	limit	
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
2,U-Dinitrotoluene/2,6-
Dinitrotoluene
Acenaphthene
Naphtha lene
Phenol
Bis(2-ethylhexyl )phtha late
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Diethyl phthalate
Dimethyl phthalate
Ethyl benzene
Fluoranthene
Methylene chloride
Benzo(a)anthracene
Acenanphtha lene
Phenanthrene
Pyrene
Arsenic
Cadmium
Ch rom i urn


50
30
NO
500
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
ND
BDL
BDL
10
BDL
BDL
BDL
20
ND
200


10
53
23
670
73
BDL
28
16
U7
BDL
20
BDL
13
15
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Sedimentation
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines                 Data source  status:
Point source:  Foundry Industry                     Not specified         	
Subcategory:  Copper  and copper alloys foundries,   Bench scale            	
  mold cooling and  casting quench                   Pilot scale            	
Plant:  6809                                         Full scale              x
References:  3-83,  pp. V-16,  VI-73-80, VII-29,48
Pretreatment/treatment:   None/Sed.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Lagoon
Wastewater flow  rate:  180 L/s
Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:   Unspecified
Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL DATA

    Samp 11 nq:   Unspec i f i ed	Analysis;  Data  set 2 (V.7.3.12)
                                     Concentration      Percent  Detection
    Pol iutant/parameter	Influent   Effluent   removal	limit	

    Classical  pollutants, mg/L:
      TSS                              52        20       70
      Oil and  grease                    30        6.2       76
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Cadmium
Copper
Me rcu ry
Nickel
Zinc
Dimethyl phthalate
Tetrachloroethylene
1,1, l-Trichloroethane
T r i ch 1 o roe thy 1 ene
Carbon tetrachloride
Chloroform
Methyl ene chloride
Bis(2-ethylbenzyl ) phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Diethyl phthalate
Chrysene
Acenaphtha lene
Cyanide

100
350
BDL
ND
2,000
15
80
37
50
1 1
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL

1*0
1 10
BDL
60
1,400
93
93
14
56
ND
230
30
170
19
IU
19
19
BDL

60
69
NM
NM
30
NM
NM
NM
NM
>99
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM

10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
    Blanks indicate data not available.
    BCL, below detection limit.
    ND,  not detected.
    NM,  not meaningful.
   Date:   9/25/81             III.3.1.18-36
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Sedimentation
Data source:   Effluent Guidelines                  Data source status:
Point source:   Foundry Industry                      Not specified
Subcategory:   Ferrous foundry  dust collection       Bench scale
Plant:  7929                                          Pilot scale
References:   3-83, pp. V-23, VI-89-97,  VII-21,32    Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Sed.

DESIGN OR  OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Settling  basin
Wastewater flow rate:  23.3 L/s
Hydraulic  detention time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic  loading rate:  Unspecified
Weir loading  rate:  Unspecified
                                     REMOVAL DATA
              Sanpllno: Unspecified	Analysis: Data set 2 IV.7.3.121
Concentration
Pol lutant/oaraneter
Classical pollutants, ng/L:
TSS
01 1 and grease
Total phenol
Ammonia
Iron
Manganese
Sulfide
Toxic pollutants, M9/L:
Coppe r
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
Bis (2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Dl-n-butyl phthalate
Dlethyl phthalate
Dimethyl phthalate
2,M-D!chlorophenol
Pentach 1 oropheno 1
Phenol
Anth racene/phena n th rene
Benzol a )py rone
3 , 4-Benzof 1 uoranthene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Mercury
Zinc
Chrysene
1 soph rone
Methyl chloride
Chloroform
Influent

880
3
9. 1
ND
7.U
.2
3

30
47
37
10
ND
100
200
BDL
2,200
2,200
53
20,000
14 10
30
36
20
98
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
Effluent

600
15
0.76
53
13
.35
1.6

140
14
200
10
81
BDL
34
22
55
48
24
33
32
BDL
BDL
33
21
BDL
360
IS
28
39
14
Percent
remova 1

32
NM
92
NM
NM
NM
47

NM
70
NM
NM
NM
95«
83
NM
98
98
55
>99
92
83»
86«
NM
79
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
Detection
1 imlt









10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
to
10
10
10
10
              Blanks Indicate data not available.
              BDL, below detection Unit.
              ND, not detected.
              NM, not meaningful.
              •Approximate value.
   Date:   9/25/81              III.3.1.18-37
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Sedimentation
Data source:  Effluent  Guidelines
Point source:  Foundry  Industry
Subcategory:  Ferrous foundry dust collection
Plant:  291C
References:  3-83, pp.  V-22,  VI-89-96, VII-70
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Sed.
                 Data source status:
                   Not specified
                   Bench scale
                   Pilot scale
                   Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Two settling tanks; 100% recycle,  no discharge
Wastewater  flow  rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weir loading  rate:   Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL DATA
    Sampling;  Unspecified
            Analysis;  Data set 2 (V.7.3.12)
    Pollutant/parameter
  Concentration      Percent   Detection
Influent   Effluent   removal	I imit
    Classical pollutants, mg/L:
      TSS
      OiI  and grease
      Ammonia
      I ron
      Manganese
      Sulfide
   410
     3
     3
    21
   .68
     I
 41
2.7
 17
3.4
1.4
0.2
    Blanks Indicate data not available.
    BDL, below detection limit.
    NM, not meaningful.
90
10
NM
84
NM
80
Toxic pollutants, Mg/L:
Cyanide
Lead
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Anthracene/phenanthrene
Acenaphthene
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
Chloroform
Fluoroanthene
Methyl chloride
4,6-Dinitro-o-cresol
Pentach 1 o ropheno 1
Pheno 1
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Dimethyl phthalate
Chrysene
Acenaphtha lene
Fluorene
Pyrene
Tet rach 1 o roethy 1 ene
Copper

BDL
30
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
95

74
10
BDL
51
10
BDL
18
BDL
BDL
BDL
12
BDL
BDL
44
13
10
BDL
19
BDL
20

NM
67
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
79

10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
  Date:   9/25/81
 III.3.1.18-38
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Sedimentation
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Ore mining and dressing
Subcategory:  Iron ore mine
Plant:  1105
References:  3-66, pp. V-31,32
Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Sed.
                   Data source status:
                     Not specified
                     Bench scale
                     Pilot scale
                     Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Settling pond
Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA

Sampling;  24-hr composite and grab	Analysis;   Data set  1  (V.7.3.23)
Concentration
Pollutant/parameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
COD
TOC
TSS
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Arsenic
Asbestos (total),
fibers/L
Asbestos (chrysotile) ,
fibers/L
Copper
Zinc
Influent

10
25
5

<2

1.6 X 101

3.8 X 106
90
20
Effluent

6
19
4

5

4.2 x 107

3.8 x 106
120
30
Percent
removal

40
24
20

NM

MM

0
NM
NM
Detection
limit

2
1
1

2

2.2 x 105

2.2 x 105
10
5
NM, not meaningful.
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.18-39
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Sedimentation
Data source: Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Ore mining and dressing
Subcategory:  Iron ore mine/mill
Plant:  1108
References:  3-66, pp. V-33,34
Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Sed.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Tailing pond
Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                 Data  source  status
                   Not specified
                   Bench  scale
                   Pilot  scale
                   Full scale
                                 REMOVAL  DATA
Sampling;  24-hr composite and grab
              Analysis;   Data  set  1  (V.7.3.23)
                                  Concentration
  Pollutant/parameter
Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
  limit
Classical pollutants,  mg/L:
  COD                                 96           4      96         2
  TOC                                 22           11      50         1
  TSS                            110,000           <1     >99         1
  Total phenol                    <0.004        0.006      NM     0.002
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Asbestos, fibers/L
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Zinc
2.2 x 1011
500
130
80
2,700
20
20
500
4.3 x 107
10
100
<20
<20
<5
<10
30
99
98
23
>75
>99
>75
>50
94
2.2 x 105
20
10
50
20
2
10
5
NM, not meaningful.
 Date:   9/25/81
 III.3.1.18-40
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Sedimentation
Data source:  Effluent  Guidelines
Point source:  Ore mining and dressing
Subcategory:  Copper  mine/mill/smelter
Plant:  2117
References:  3-66, pp.  V-52-61
Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/S£d.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:   Tailing pond
Wastewater flow  rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                   Data source status:
                     Not specified
                     Bench scale
                     Pilot scale
                     Full scale
                                    REMOVAL DATA

         Sampling!  Average of two gu-hr composite samples
                                   Concentration
                                                 Analysis:  Data set I  IV.7.3.231
                                                   Percent
                                                          Detection
Pol latent/parameter
Classical pollutants, ng/L:
COD
TOC
TSS
Total phenol
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Arsenic
Asbestos (total). flbers/L
Asbestos (chrysotl le).
fibers/L
Beryl I ium
Cadmium
Ch rom 1 urn
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
Se 1 en 1 urn
Si Iver
Zinc
Influent

4,900
30
210,000
5.1

75
I.9EII

5.5EIO
25
120
1,900
59,000
200
2,000
2,000
320
200
1 1)0,000
Effluent

15
5
2
0.26

2
1.6E6

U.UE5
5
5
US
20
<20
HO
20
7
<20
DO
remova 1

99
83
99
95

97
99

99
80
96
98
99
>90
98
99
98
>90
99
1 Imit

2
1
1
0.002

2
2.2E5

2.2E5
5
2
20
10
20
50
20
2
10
5
 Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.18-41
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Sedimentation
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:   Ore  mining and dressing
Subcategory:  Copper mine/mill
Plant:  2120
References:  3-66,  pp. V-50,51
Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Sed.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Tailing pond
Wastewater  flow rate: Unspecified
Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weir loading rate:   Unspecified
                  Data source status:
                     Not specified
                     Bench scale
                     Pilot scale
                     Full scale
                                     REMOVAL DATA
Semolina: 2U-hr composite and orab
Pollutant/parameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
COD
TOC
TSS
Total phenol
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Asbestos (total). fibers/L
Asbestos (chrysoti le).
fibers/L
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) ph thai ate (a)
Di-n-butyl phthalate (a)
Methyl chloride (b)
Tet rach 1 oroethy 1 ene
Concentrat
Influent

3,900
8
310,000
83
>99
>99

>99
>99
>98
>99
>99
>50
>98
>97
96
>99
35
NM
81
76
Detection
limit

2
1
1
0.002

200
2
2.2E5

2.2E5
2
20
10
50
0.5
20
2
10
5
0.2
0.1
0.08
1. 1
          NM, not meaningful.
          (a) possibly due to tubing used in sampling apparatus.
          (b) Possibly due to laboratory contamination.
  Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.18-42
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Sedimentation
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines                  Data  source status:
Point source:  Ore mining and dressing              Not specified
Subcategory:  Copper mine/mill/smelter/refinery     Bench scale
Plant:  2122                                          Pilot scale
References:  3-66, pp.  V-35-38                       Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Sed.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Tailing pond
Wastewater flow rate:   Unspecified
Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                     REMOVAL DATA

          Sampling: Average of two 21-hr composite samples	Analysis:  Data set I  IV.7.3.231
Pol lutant /parameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
COO
TOC
TSS
Total phenol
Toxic pollutants, M9/L:
Arsenic
Asbestos, fibers/L
Beryl 1 iun
Ch rom 1 urn
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
Se 1 en 1 um
SI Ivor
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (a)
Di-n-butyl phthalate (a)
Methylene chloride (b)
Concentratl
Influent

530
9.5
310,000
6.23

1,100
8.7EI2
30
9,800
100,000
200
1,800
3,800
22O
100
3,400
IU
24
300
on
Effluent

5
7
11
0.017

1
2.2E9
9
20
95
<20
30
<20
12
20
35
12
36
1.5
Percent
remova 1

99
26
99
93

99
99
70
99
99
>90
98
>99
91
81
99
11
NH
>9S
Detection
1 Imlt

2
1
1
0.002

2
2.2E5
5
20
10
29
50
20
2
10
5
0.2
0.1
0.08
          NM, not Meaningful.
          (a) Possibly due to plastic tubing used during sampling.
          (b) Possibly due to laboratory contamination.
Date:   9/25/81               III.3.1.18-43
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Sedimentation
Data source:
Point source
Subcategory:
Plant:  3101
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Ore mining and dressing
 Lead/zinc/mine/mill

3-66, pp. V-122,123
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Sed.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Tailing pond
Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic detention time:   Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
    Sampling:  24-hr composite and grab
                          REMOVAL DATA

                          	Analysis;  Data set 2 (V.7.3.23)
                                     Concentration
      Pol lutant/paranneter
                    Influent
                                             Effluent
                                            Pe rcent
                                            removaI
    Classical pollutants, mg/L:
      COD                            1,200          44       96
      TOC                               46          19       59
      TSS                           150,000           5       99
      Total  phenol                    0.072       0.027       62
                Detection
                  limit
                                                          2
                                                          I
                                                          I
                                                      0.002
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Arsenic
Asbestos (total fibers),
fibers/L
Asbestos (chrysot i le),
f ibers/L
Beryl 1 ium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Se 1 en i urn
Si Iver
Zinc

77

2.4EIO

3.2E9
190
2,800
800
63,000
97,000
540
140
230
560,000

<5

I.9E7

2.7E6
93

99

99
>95
>99
97
>99
99
>9I
>93
>96
99

2

2.2E5

2.2E5
5
2
20
10
50
20
2
10
5
Date:   9/25/81
                 III.3.1.18-44
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Sedimentation
Data source:
Point source
Subcategory:
Plant:  3103
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Ore mining and dressing
 Lead/zinc/mine/mill

3-66, pp. V-127,128
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:   Unspecified/Sed.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Tailing pond
Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate.-   Unspecified
Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                      REMOVAL DATA
Sampling: 18-hr composite and
grab
Ana lysis:
Concentration
Pol lutant/parameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
COD
TOC
TSS
Total phenol
Toxic pollutants, u.g/L:
Arsenic
Asbestos (total fibers).
f ibers/L
Asbestos ( ch rysot i 1 e ) ,
f ibers/L
Beryl 1 ium
Cadmium
Ch rom i urn
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
S i 1 ve r
Zinc
Influent

2, 100
22
120,000
99

99

99
>86
>97
>95
99
25
99
96
>93
98
2 (V.7.3.23)
Detection
limit

2
1
1
0.002

2

2.2E5

2.2E5
5
2
20
10
20
50
20
10
5
    NM, not meaningful.
  Date:   9/25/81
                   III.3.1.18-45
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Sedimentation
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines                 Data  source status:
Point source:  Ore mining and dressing             Not specified
Subcategory:  Lead/zinc/mine/mill/smelter/refinery  Bench  scale
Plant:  3107                                       Pilot  scale
References:  3-66, pp. VI-80-82                    Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  Sed., Chem.  Ppt.  (lime). Aeration, Coag.Floc.
     Sed.(clarifier),  Filter/Sed.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Polishing pond
Wastewater flow rate:   Unspecified
Hydraulic detention time:  11 hr
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
pH:  7.8
                                 REMOVAL DATA

Sampling;  5 days	Analysis;   Data  set  4  (V.7.3.23)

                                  Concentration       Percent    Detection
  Pollutant/parameter	Influent    Effluent   removal	limit	

Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  TSS                               16         3          81

Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
  Cadmium                          120        65          46
  Copper                            31        20          35
  Lead                             130        80          38
  Zinc                           2,900       790          73


Blanks indicate data not available.
 Date:   9/25/81             III.3.1.18-46
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Sedimentation
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategorys
Plant:  3110
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Ore mining and dressing
 Lead/zinc/mine/mill


3-66, pp. V-62,63
    Data source status:
      Not specified
      Bench scale
      Pilot scale
      Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:   Unspecified/Sed.
DESIGN OR OPERATING  PARAMETERS


Unit configuration:   Tailing pond
Wastewater flow  rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic detention  time:   Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weir loading  rate:   Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
    Sampling:  24-hr composite and grab
                                     Analysis:  Data  set  I (V.7.3.231
      Pol Iutant/parameter
                                      Concentration
                       Influent
Effluent
Percent
removaI
Detection
  I imit
    Classical pollutants,  mg/L:
     COD
     TOC
     TSS
     Total phenol
                            200
                              3
                        230,000
                          0.004
       6
       7
       3
    0.006
    NM, not meaningful.
    (a) Possibly due to tubing used in sampling apparatus.
    (b) Possibly due to laboratory contamination.
   97
   NM
  >99
   NM
 0.002
Toxic pollutants, u.g/L:
Arsen ic
Asbestos, fibers/L
Cadmi urn
Chromium
Copper •
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selen ium
S i 1 ve r
Zinc
Bi s(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate (a)
Methylene chloride (b)

1, 100
8.9EI 1
190
200
25,000
20,000
0.5
270
20
250
310,000
4.8
45

<2
3.4E8
<5
99
99
>97
>95
99
>99
NM
>93
>75
>96
99
17
88

2
2.2E5
2
20
10
50
0.5
20
2
10
5
0.2
0.08
 Date:   9/25/81
                  III.3.1.18-47
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Sedimentation
              Effluent Guidelines
               Ore mining and dressing
              Lead/zinc/mine/mill
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  3121
References: 3-66, pp. V-66,67
Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Sed.
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Tailing pond
Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
   Sampling:  2U-hr composite and grab
                                      REMOVAL DATA

                                                Analysis;  Data set I  (V.7.3.231
Pol lutant/parameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
COD
TOC
TSS
Total phenol
Toxic pollutants, u,g/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Asbestos (total), fibers/L
Asbestos (chrysot i le).
fibers/L
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
S i 1 ve r
Zinc
Concent
Influent (a )

970
17
12,000
0.02

100
30,000
I.8EI 1

2.2EIO
670
550
2,500
150,000
19
360
200
240,000
ration
Effluent

50
15
14
0.03

<50
<2
I.6E9

<3.3E5
<5
50
>99
99

>99
>99
>98
85
99
>97
92
>95
99
Detection
limit

2
1
1
0.002

200
2
2.2E5

2.2E5
2
20
10
50
0.5
20
10
5
   NM, not meaningful.
   (a) Influent  represents combined  mine/mill water wastes to tailing pond.
 Date:   9/25/81
                               III.3.1.18-48
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Sedimentation
              Effluent Guidelines
               Ore mining and dressing
              Silver mine/mill
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  4401
References:  3-66,  pp.  V-71,72
Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecifi

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
Unit configuration:  Multiple-stage settling ponds
Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                    Data  source  status
                      Not specified
                      Bench  scale
                      Pilot  scale
                      Full scale
                                 REMOVAL DATA

Sampling;  24-hr composite and grab	Analysis;  Data  set 1  (V.7.3.23)
                                       Concentration
    Pollutant/parameter
      Influent
                                               Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
  limit
Classical pollutants,  mg/L:
  COD
  TOC
  TSS
            19
            16
            23
                                                      4
                                                      1
                                                      3
   80
   94
   87
       2
       1
       1
Toxic pollutants, yg/Ls
Arsenic
Asbestos (total), fibers/L
Asbestos (chrysotile) , fibers/L
Copper
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate(a)

20
3.8 x 107
1.1 x 107
160
40
20
50
0.1

10
5.7 x 107
1.1 x 10s
100
40
30
30
0.02

50
NM
90
38
0
NM
40
80

2
2.2 x 10s
2.2 x 10s
10
20
10
5
0.2
NM, not meaningful.
(a)Possibly from tubing for sampling apparatus.
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.18-49
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Sedimentation
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Ore mining and dressing
Subcategory:  Aluminum ore (bauxite)  mine
Plants  5102
References: 3-66, pp.  V-75,76
Pretreatment/treatment:  Neutral./Sed.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Unspecified
Wastewater flow rate:   Unspecified
Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                    Data source status:
                      Not specified
                      Bench scale
                      Pilot scale
                      Full scale
                                 REMOVAL DATA

Sampling 24-hr composite and grab	Analysis;   Data  set  1  (V.7.3.23)
                                  Concentration
  Pollutant/parameter
 Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
  limit
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  TOC
  TSS

Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
  Chromium
  Copper
  Mercury
        2
      2.8
       30
       60
       37
       4
       6
      25
      50
      84
   NM
   MM
   17
   17
   NM
  1
  1
 20
 10
0.5
NM, not meaningful.
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.18-50
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Sedimentation
Data source:  Effuent Guidelines
Point source:  Ore mining and dressing
Subcategory:  Feroalloy (molybdenum) mine/mill
Plant:  6101
References:  3-66, pp. V-77,78
Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Sed.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Tailing pond
Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                    Data source status:
                      Not specified
                      Bench scale
                      Pilot scale
                      Full scale
                                REMOVAL DATA

 Sampling;  2U-hr composite  sample and grab
                Analysis:  Data set  I (V.7.3.23)
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
COD
TOC
TSS
Total phenol
Toxic pollutants, Mg/L:
Antimony
Asbestos, fibers/L
Beryl 1 lum
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Se 1 en i urn
Si I ve r
Zinc
Di-n-butyl phthalate (a)
Influent

1,200
19
U80,000
0.02

10
3.8EII
130
13
8,300
10,000
11,000
3,500
to
50
13,000
15
Effluent

20
7
68
0.01

5
3.3EIO
<20
<5
20
<20
<20
<20
<5
<10
<20
15
Percent
remova I

98
63
99
50

50
91
>85
>62
99
>99
>99
>99
>87
>80
>99
0
Detection
1 imit

2
1
1
0.002

200
2.2E5
5
2
20
10
50
20
2
10
5
O.U
 (a) Possibly due to tubing used in sampling apparatus.
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.18-51
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY!   Sedimentation
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  9905
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Ore mining and  dressing
 Titanium mine/mill


3-66, pp. V-92,93
      Data source  status:
        Not specified
        Bench  scale
        Pilot  scale
        Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:   Unspecified/Sed.
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Settling pond
Wastewater  flow rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weir loading  rate:  Unspecified
  Sampling:  2U-hr composite and orab
                         REMOVAL DATA

                        	Analysis:  Data set  I (V.7.3.23)
     Pol latent/parameter
                                     Concentration
                    Influent
Ef f Iuent
Percent
removaI
Detection
  I imit
  Classical pollutants, mg/L:
    COD
    TOC
    TSS
    Total phenol

  Toxic pollutants,  u,g/L:
    Antimony
    Asbestos (total),  fibers/L
    Asbestos (chrysotile),
      fibers/L
    Chromium
    Copper
    Lead
    Nickel
    SeI en I urn
    Zinc
                          47
                           3
                       58,000
                         0.01
                         200
                         . IE9
                        I. IE9
                          740
                          880
                          50
                          630
                          15
                        3,500
       4
       5
      <1
    0.01
      100
     .5E8

     .3E6
      100
      40
      10
      <5
      20
   91
   NM
  >99
    0
   50
   98

   99
  >99
   89
   20
   91
  >67
   99
    I
0.002
  200
2.2E5

2.2E5
   20
   10
   50
   20
    2
    5
  NM,  not meaningful.
 Date:   9/25/81
                 III.3.1.18-52
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Sedimentation
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Ore  mining and dressing
Subcategory:  See below
Plant:  See below
References:  3-66,  pp. VI-39,41,46,47
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Sed.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
Unit configuration:   Settling ponds or  tailing ponds
Wastewater  flow  rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic detention  time:  See below
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weir loading  rate:  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
                  Data  source status
                    Not specified
                    Bench scale
                    Pilot scale
                    Full scale
See below
Sau 1 I no : JJf|» ft*


Asbestos ceawnt
processing
Asbestos lining
Mercury
nine/ill II
Uranlm
nine/Milt
uranlua
nine/mil
Uranlua
nine/Bill
dried



-(a)
(In Bale Verte,
Newfoundland)

9202

9H05

-(a)

-99 1.5x10(11)

m 2.2x10(6)

11X10(12)

11X10(12)



5.7X10(7)

7.5X10(7)

1x10(11)

5X10(11)

Percent



>99

NH

98

aa
      Blanks Indicate data not available.
      NH, not Meaningful.
      (a)Hydr«ullc detention tie* Is 21 hr.
      (b)1 hr of sedimentation.
Dates   9/25/81
III.3.1.18-53
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Sedimentation
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Ore mining and  dressing
Subcategory: Placer mining
Plant:  See below
References:  3-66, p. VI-165
                 Data source status;
                   Not specified
                   Bench scale
                   Pilot scale
                   Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  None  (unless  otherwise specified)/Sed.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Multiple-stage  or single-stage settling pond system
Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic detention time:   Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                    REMOVAL DATA
Samol Ina

Plant
4ii4
4126
4127
4132
4133(8)
4135
4l36(a)
4139
: 1 day


TSS
Concentration. mq/L
Influent Effluent
24,000
14,800
39,900
1,540
2,260
2,690
64, 100
9,000
99
99
86
32
92
84
>99
97



Arsenic
Concentration. IIQ/L
Influent Effluent

1,300
5,000
50
1,500
40
3,900
1,200

250
1,200
50
60
22
<2
12
Analysis:

Percent
remova 1

81
76
0
96
45
>99
99
Data set

3 (V.7.3.23)
Hercurv
Concentration. uq/l_
Influent Effluent

2
14

0.2
20
10
4

0.2
0.5

0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2

Percent
remova 1

90
96

0
>99
>98
>95
     Blanks indicate data not available.
     (a) Pretreatment of influent Is screening.
  Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.18-54
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Sedimentation
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:   Coal mining
Subcategory:  Coal preparation plants
  and associated areas
Plant:  NC-3
References:  3-71, pp. IV-41 and Treated
  wastewater analysis
Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Sed.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Slurry pond

Wastewater flow rate:  9,470 m /d
Hydraulic detention time :  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                    Data source status:
                      Not specified
                      Bench scale
                      Pilot scale
                      Full scale
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling;  24-hr composite and grab
                 Analysis;   Data set 1 (V.7.3.2)
Concentration, mg/L
Pollutant/parameter
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Copper
Selenium
Zinc
Antimony
Arsenic
Beryllium
Cadium
Chromium
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Silver
Thallium
Influent

270
50
1,000
<100
<10
<20
<200
<240
<600
<0.5
<500
<25
<100
Effluent

<4
<5
49
<50
<2
<2
<20
100
<60
<0.5
<50
<25
<100
Percent
removal

>98
>90
95
NM
NM
NM
NM
58
NM
0
NM
0
0
Detection
limit














Blanks indicate data not available.
NM, not meaningful.
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.18-55
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Sedimentation
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Coal mining
Subcategory:  Coal preparation plants
  and associated areas
Plant:  NC-8
                 Data source status:
                   Not specified
                   Bench scale
                   Pilot scale
                   Full scale
References:  3-71, pp. IV-34 and Treated wastewater analysis
Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Sed.
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Slurry pond

Wastewater flow rate:  47,100 m /d
Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                   REMOVAL DATA

     Sampling:  Average of three 24-hr composite
               and grab samples
              Analysis:  Data  set 2 (V.7.3.2)
Concent rat ion
Po 1 1 utant/oa rameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
COD
TOC
TSS
TVS
Phenol
pH, pH units
Cadmium
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Ant imony
Arsenic
Beryl 1 ium
Ch rom i urn
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Se 1 en ium
Tha 1 1 ium
Zinc
Benzene
Si Iver
Influent

36,000
1,500
34,000
18,000
<20
7.3
<20

<2
250
57
530
1,300
970
1,200
<5
<6
5,300
15
<5
Effluent

19
97
8.9
160
<20
7.4
<2

<6
6
<1
13
<6
<20
<5
<6
<5
<60
<10
<5
Percent Detection
remova I limit

>99
94
>99
>99
NM

NM

NM
98
>98
98
>99
>98
>99
NM
NM
>99
>33
NM
     Blanks indicate data not available.
     NM, not meaningful.
   Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.18-56
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Sedimentation
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Coal mining
Subcategory:  Coal preparation plants  and
  associated areas
Plant:  NC-22
References:  3-71, pp. IV-44, 47-48  and Treated
  wastewater analysis
Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Sed.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Slurry pond
                              3
Wastewater flow rate:  1,040 m /d
Hydraulic detention time :  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                 Data source status:
                   Not specified
                   Bench scale

                   Pilot scale
                   Full scale
                                           x
Same Una: 24-hr composite
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
COD
TOG
TSS
TVS
SS
pH, pH units
Toxic pollutants, M9/1:
Arsenic
Chromium
Coppe r
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Se 1 en 1 urn
Thallium
N-n 1 1 rosod 1 pheny 1 am 1 ne
2-Chlorophenol
2, 4-Dlmethyl phenol
2-Nitrophenol
4,6-Dlnl tro-o-cresol
Nitrobenzene
To 1 uene
Acenaphthylene
Anthracene/phenanthrene
Benzol a (pyre ne
Benzo(b)f luoranthene.
Benzo( k)f luoranthene
Benzol ghl )perylene
F luoranthene
Fluorene
Naphthalene
Pyrene
Hethylene chloride
1, 1, l-Trichloroethane
1 sopho rone
Antimony
Beryl 1 ium
Cadmium
Silver
Zinc
REMOVAL
samoles
Concj
Influent

49,000
8,400
14,000
18,000
200
6.6

180
230
230
470
2.5
300
34
15
44
86
22
19
190
21
12
12
130
15

12
12
16
47
99
>99
>99
99
NM


>97
81
97
89
>60
97
91
>66
>99
>99
>99
>99
>99
>99
17
>99
>92
>99

>99
>99
>99
>99
>99
>99
77
>57
>99
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
2 (V.7.3.2)
Detection
limit









































                Blanks Indicate data not available.
                ND, not detected.
                NM, not meaningful.
 Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.18-57
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Sedimentation
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Coal mining
Subcategory:  Alkaline mines
Plant:  PN-11
References:  3-71, pp. IV-35 and
             Treated wastewater analysis
Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Sed.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Settling pond

Wastewater flow rate:  15.2 m /d
Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                    Data source status:
                      Not specified
                      Bench scale
                      Pilot scale

                      Full scale
REMOVAL DATA
SafflDlinq: 24-hr composite and
arab
Ana I vs i s :
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
COD
TSS
TS
TVS
VSS
TOC
Pheno 1
PH
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Mercury
Selenium
Zinc
Beryl 1 ium
Cadmium
Ch rom i urn
Copper
Lead
Nickel
S i 1 ve r
Tha 1 1 i urn
Influent

9.7
16
260
10
2.6
<1
<0.02
7.8

2
3
2.2
U
160
<2
<20
<2U
79
72
8
NM
54
0



0
0
NM
25
12
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
     Blanks  indicate data not available.
     NM,  not meaningful.
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.18-58
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Sedimentation
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  V-8
References:
  wastewater analysis
Pretreatment/treatment:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Coal mining
 Alkaline mines

3-71,  pp. IV-35 and Treated
     Data source status:
       Not specified
       Bench scale
       Pilot scale
       Full scale
            Unspecified/Sed.
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Settling pond
Wastewater flow rate:  10.9 m /d
Hydraulic detention time:   Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:   Unspecified
Heir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA

Sampling;  24-hr composite and grab	Analysis;  Data set 2  (V.7.3.2)
                                    Concentration
    Pollutant/parameter
                   Influent
Effluent
Percent   Detection
removal     limit
Classical pollutants,  mg/L:
  COD
  TOC
  TSS
  TVS
                       80
                       54
                       45
                      170
   39
   22
   29
  120
   51
   59
   35
   29
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Selenium
Silver
Thallium
Phenol

6
ND
2
<5
<5
<0.01

15
5
<2
<5
<5
<0.01

MM
MM
>0
NM
MM
NM
Blanks indicate data not available.
ND, not detected.
NM, not meaningful.
Date:  9/25/81
                 III.3.1.18-59
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Sedimentation
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  V-8
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Coal mining
 Alkaline mines

3-71,  pp. IV-34 and Treated
     Data source status:
       Not specified
       Bench scale
       Pilot scale
       Full scale
  wastewater analysis
Pretreatment/treatment:
            Unspecified/Sed.
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Settling pond
Wastewater flow rate:  205 m /d
Hydraulic detention time:   Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL  DATA

Sampling:  Average of three 24-hr composite
	and grab samples	
                                  Analysis;   Data  set 2  (V.7.3.2)
                                    Concentration
    Pollutant/parameter
                   Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
  limit
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  COD                              91
  TOC                              57
  TSS                             100
  TVS                             240
  Phenol                        <0.01
  pH, pH units                    7.6
Blanks indicate data not available.
NM, not meaningful.
                                   76
                                   48
                                   28
                                  360
                                <0.01
                                  8.1
                16
                16
                72
                NM
                NM
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Selenium
Silver
Thallium

6
4
<2
<5
<5

11
<2
<2
<5
<5

NM
>50
NM
NM
NM
Date:   9/25/81
                    III.3.1.18-60
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Sedimentation
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines                 Data source status:
Point source:  Coal mining                          Not specified
Subcategory:  Alkaline mines                        Bench scale
Plant:  V-9                                         Pilot scale
References:  3-71, pp. IV 35,36 and Treated         Full scale
  wastewater analysis
Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Sed.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Settling ponds:  Pond A - dugout, Pond B - pollack

Wastewater flow rate:  Pond A - 152 m3/d, Pond B - 2,690 m3/d
Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
Sampling: 2if-l>r composite and arab

Pollutant/
oaranieter
Classical
pollutants. M/L:
COO
TOC
TSS
TVS
Pheno 1
pH, pH units
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Se 1 en i un
SI Iver
Thall turn

REMOVAL DATA
Pond A
Concentration, ma/l
Influent Effluent


IU
7.2
110
120
ata set 2 IV. 7. 3. 2)
Id B
Percent Detection
removal Unit


16
II
NM
17
NM


NM
NM
NM
     Blanks indicate data not available.
     NH, not Meaningful.
  Date:   9/25/81             III.3.1.18-61
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Sedimentation
               Effluent Guidelines
                Ink  manufacturing
               Water and/or caustic wash
Data  source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:   22
References:  3-19,  pp. VII-2, Appendix H
Pretreatment/treatment:  Neutral./Oil Sep.
   (skimmer), Sed.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit  configuration:  Oil skimming provided,  batch
   operation
Wastewater flow  rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weir  loading rate:   Unspecified
Data  source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
                                     REMOVAL DATA
Sanolina: Conoosite and drab
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
8005
COD
TOC
TSS
01 1 and grease
Tota 1 pheno 1
Total to lids
TDS
TVS
VSS
Ca 1 c 1 UK
Magnesium
Sod 1 un
A 1 un i nu"
Bariu*
Coba 1 t
Iron
Manganese
Molybdenum
Tin
T I tan 1 urn
Toxic pollutants, M9/L:
Ant irony
Beryl 1 turn
Cadmium
ChroHlun
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
Silver
Thai nun
Zinc
Benzene
Ethyl benzene
To I uene
Naphthalene
Ch 1 o rod i b romM thane
Methylene chloride
Tet rach 1 o roe thy 1 ene
Isophorone
Pentachlorophenol
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
Ol-n-butyl phthalate

Concent
Influent

2, I00(a)
32,000(b)
i|, 000
1,600
2,400
330
23,000
21,000
6,300
1,000
71
13
3,700
20
20
0.9
io
0.1
0.7
<0.05
3

99
9<4
93
88
93
NM
0

NM
NM
78
>99
>99
70
>99
NM
NM
NM
>10
56
611
69
>HI
>99
36
>99
NM
>99
NM
NM
                 Blanks Indicate data not available.
                 ND, not detected.
                 NM, not Maningful.
                 (a(Reference reported conflicting data.
                  was also reported as 21,000 ag/L.
                 (b(Reference reported conflicting data.
                  was alto reported at 3,200 «g/L.
                                          The Influent concentration

                                          The Influent concentration
 Date:   9/25/81
                                  III.3.1.18-62
-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Sedimentation
 Data source:
 Point source:
 Subcategory:
 Plant:  76-A
 References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Paint manufacturing
 Unspecified

3-20, pp. V-24-25
        Data source status:
          Not specified
          Bench scale
          Pilot scale
          Full scale
 Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Sed.

 DESIGN OR  OPERATING PARAMETERS

 Unit configuration:  Unspecified
 Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
 Hydraulic  detention time:  Unspecified
 Hydraulic  loading rate:  Unspecified
 Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                    REMOVAL DATA
     Sampling;   Composite and grab
                                  Analysis:  Data set I  (V.7.3.25)
         Pollutant/parameter
                                      Concentration
                    Influent
Effluent
Percent
removaI
Detect ion
  limit
     Classical  pollutants, mg/L:
       BOD(5)
       COD
       TSS
       Oi I  and  grease
       Total phenol
       COD, dissolved
       TS
       Settleable  sol ids
       TDS
       TVS
       VSS
       VDS
       AIuminum
       Ba r i urn
       Boron
       CobaIt
       I  ron
       Manganese
       Molybdenum
       Tin
       Titanium

     Toxic pollutants, u.g/L:
       Cadmium
       Chromium
       Copper
       Lead
       Mercury
       Nickel
       Zinc
                     1,300
                     3,000
                     1,600
                       300
                       2.5
                     1,800
                     4,000
                       180
                     2,400
                     2, 100
                       900
                     I, 100
                        12
                       1.7
                      0.31
                      0.38
                       2.9
                      0.06
                       0. I
                       0.5
                        16
                        10
                    13,000
                       150
                    14,000
                       0.9
                       250
                    18,000
   980
 3,500
   550
   220
   3.5
 1,500
 3,000
   140
 2,400
 1,600
   240
 1,400
    18
   0.9
   0.4
   0.4
   2.4
  0.02
   0. I
   0.5
    33
    10
10,000
    70
 6,800
   0.5
   400
 6,000
    25
    NM
    66
    27
    NM
    17
    25
    22
     0
    24
    73
    NM
    NM
    47
    NM
    NM
    17
    67
     0
     0
    NM
    0
    23
    53
    51
    44
    NM
    67
     Blanks indicate data not available.
     NM, not meaningful.
Date:   9/25/81
                 III.3.1.18-63
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Sedimentation
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  76-J
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Paint manufacturing
 Unspecified

3-20, pp. V-24-25
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Sed.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Unspecified
Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
                                  REMOVAL DATA
Sampling; Composite and grab

Ana lysis:
Concentrat ion(a )
Pol lutant/parameter
Classical pollutants, rng/L:
BOD(5)
COD
TSS
Oil and grease
Total phenol
COD, dissolved
TS
Settleable sol ids
TDS
TVS
VSS
VDS
Aluminum
Ba r i urn
Bismuth
Coba 1 1
1 ron
Manganese
Molybdenum
Tin
Titanium
Toxic pollutants, M9/l_:
Antimony
Cadmium
Ch rom i urn
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Zinc
Influent

3,500
28,000
16,000
2,400
1. 1
4,200
36,000
14
18,000
21,000
4,800
8,300
400
2.2
1.4
3.5
4.5
0. 1
0. 1
0.38
540

500
860
140
300
420
1.2
250
740,000
Effluent

1, 100
3,300
1,400
160
0. 1
2,000
3,200
1 1
2,300
2,000
580
680
45
0.07
1
1
5.2
0.2
O.I
0.5
380

70
200
10
100
60
0.7
10
100,000
Data set 1 (V.7.3.25)
Percent Detection
remova 1 limit

69
88
91
93
91
52
91
21
87
90
88
92
86
97
29
71
NM
NM
0
NM
30

86
77
93
67
86
42
96
86
    Blanks  indicate data not available.
    NM,  not meaningful.
    (a)Average of three samples.
 Date:   9/25/81
                  III.3.1.18-64
-------
III.3.1.19  Stripping

     Description

Stripping, in general,  refers to the removal of relatively
volatile components from a wastewater by the passage of air,
steam, or other gas through the liquid.   Ammonia is readily
removed from wastewater by stripping and is thus the most common
application of the process.  In most cases, air stripping will
achieve effective removal of ammonia.  However, steam is used as
the stripping medium for increased efficiency, ammonia recovery,
or applications in cold weather.  Steam stripping may also be
used to remove phenols and trace organics from wastewaters.

     Representative Types and Modifications

Stripping processes differ according to the stripping medium
chosen for the treatment system.  Air and steam are the most
common media, with inert gases also used.  Air and steam
stripping are described below:

      (1)  Air Stripping.  Air stripping is essentially a gas
          transfer process in which a liquid containing dissolved
          gases is brought into contact with air and an exchange
          of gases takes place between the air and the solution.
          The major application of the air stripping process is
          removal of ammonia from wastewater.  The process can
          also be used to remove other gases or volatile compo-
          nents from dilute aqueous streams.  In general, the
          application of air stripping depends on the environ-
          mental impact of the resulting air emissions.  If
          sufficiently low concentrations are involved, the
          gaseous compounds can be emitted directly to the air.
          Otherwise, air pollution control devices may be nec-
          essary.

          Air stripping of ammonia consists of: (a) raising the
          pH of the water to values in the range of 10.8 to 11.5,
          (b) formulation and reformation of water droplets in a
          stripping tower, and  (c) providing air-water contact
          and droplet agitation by circulation of large quanti-
          ties of air through the tower.  Ammonium ions (NH,"1") in
          wastewater exist in equilibrium with ammonia (NH3)  gas,
          and at high pH values (10.5 - 11.5) essentially all of
          the ammonium is converted to ammonia gas, which can be
          removed by stripping.  The wastewater, pretreated to
          raise the pH, is passed through a stripping tower.   The
          stripping tower consists of a vertical shell filled
          with packing material to increase the surface area for
          gas-liquid contact, and fans to draw air through the
          tower.  The towers are of two basic types; counter-
Date:  9/25/81            III.3.1.19-1
-------
          current towers  and cross-flow  towers.   In  counter-
          current towers,  the entire  airflow  enters  at  the bottom
          of the tower, while the  water  enters the top  of the
          tower and falls to the bottom.   In  crossflow  towers,
          the air is pulled through the  sides of  the tower along
          its entire height,  while water flow proceeds  down the
          tower.  The removal of ammonia by air stripping is
          affected by temperature.  As the water  temperature
          decreases,  the  solubility of ammonia in water increases
          and it becomes  more difficult  to remove ammonia by
          stripping.

     (2)   Steam Stripping.   Steam  stripping is essentially a
          fractional distillation  of  volatile components from  a
          wastewater stream.   The  volatile component may be a  gas
          or an organic compound that is soluble  in  the waste-
          water stream.   More recently,  this  unit operation has
          been applied to the removal of water immiscible com-
          pounds (chlorinated hydrocarbons),  which must be re-
          duced to trace  levels because  of their  toxicity  [3-36].

          Steam stripping is usually  conducted as a  continuous
          operation in a  packed tower or conventional fractiona-
          ting distillation column (bubble cap or sieve tray)
          with more than  one stage of vapor/liquid contact.  The
          preheated wastewater from the  heat  exchanger  enters
          near the top of the distillation column and then flows
          by gravity countercurrent to the steam  and organic
          vapors (or gas) rising up from the  bottom  of  the column.
          As the wastewater passes down  through the  column, it
          contacts the vapors rising  from the bottom of the
          column.  This contact progressively lessens the concen-
          trations of volatile organic compounds  or  gases in the
          wastewater as it approaches the bottom  of  the column.
          At the bottom of the column, the wastewater is heated
          by the incoming steam to reduce the concentration of
          volatile component(s) to their final concentration.
          Much of the heat in the  wastewater  discharged from the
          bottom of the column can then  be recovered by preheat-
          ing the feed to the column.

          Reflux (condensing a portion of the vapors from the  top
          of the column and returning it to the column) may be
          practiced if it is desired  to  alter the composition  of
          the vapor stream that is derived from the  stripping
          column (e.g., increase the  concentration of the  strip-
          ped material).   There also  may be advantages to  intro-
          ducing the feed to a tray below the top tray when
          reflux is used.  Introducing the feed at a lower tray
          (while still using the  same number  of trays in the
          stripper) will  have the  effect of either reducing  steam
          requirements,  as a result of the need for  less reflux,
Date:  9/25/81            III.3.1.19-2
-------
          or yielding a vapor stream richer in volatile compo-
          nent.   The combination of using reflux and introducing
          the feed at a lower tray will increase the concentra-
          tion of the volatile organic component beyond that
          obtainable by reflux alone.   Figure 3.1.19-1 shows
          a schematic of a typical steam stripping system.

          When steam stripping is used for ammonia removal,  the
          stripped ammonia is collected overhead and sent to a
          spray absorber where it is reacted with dilute sulfuric
          acid to produce ammonium sulfate, which is recovered as
          a crystalline powder in a process that involves crystal-
          lization,  centrifugation, and drying operations  [3-37].

          Steam stripping offers better ammonia removal (99% or
          better) than air stripping for the high ammonia concen-
          trations found in some wastewaters.  Extremely high
          initial ammonia concentrations allow recovery of signif-
          icant quantities of reagent ammonia by steam stripping,
          which partially offsets the costs of this technology.

     Technology Status

Although stripping does not have wide application in industrial
waste treatment, the basic techniques have been applied in indus-
trial processes and in wastewater treatment applications and are
well understood.

     Applications

Stripping is generally not a widely practiced industrial waste
treatment technology.  It is widely applied in Iron and Steel
Manufacturing, Nonferrous Metals (columbium and tantalum pro-
duction subcategory), and Petroleum Refining industries.  Organic
and Inorganic Chemicals Manufacturing, Pharmaceutical, Electrical
and Electronic Components, Pulp and Paper Mills, and Rubber
Processing industries use stripping as a treatment technology on
a limited basis.

Steam stripping is mainly used for recovery and/or recycle of
product from industrial wastewaters.  Three common applications
of product recovery by steam stripping are:  ammonia recovery
from coke oven gas scrubber water for sale as ammonia or ammonium
sulfate, sulfur recovery from refinery sour water, and phenol
recovery from water solution in the production of phenol.  Some
of the newer applications include removal of phenols, mercaptans,
and chlorinated hydrocarbons from wastewater [3-36].

     Advantages and Limitations

The major drawback of air stripping is its low efficiency in cold
weather and the possibility of freezing within the tower.  Also,


Date:  9/25/81            III.3.1.19-3
-------
                                   CONDENSER
TREATED WASTEWATER
           FEED
                               tt
                               O  K
                                  Ul
                               z  5
                               X  O
                               3  H
                               o
                               o
                                O
                                III
                                             :ONDENSATE
                                            \^   TANK
                                                       CONCENTRATED

                                                         VAPORS
                                                        OILS
                                        WATER
                                         STEAM
      FIGURE  III.  3.1.19.1.
                             SCHEMATIC  OF A TYPICAL STEAM
                             STRIPPING  PROCESS
Date:  9/25/81
                           III.3.1.19-4
-------
use of lime to raise the pH may cause scaling problems in the
towers and affect the efficiency of the process.

Steam stripping is more efficient than air stripping for ammonia
removal and is thus more widely used.  As a limitation, new
applications involving multiple volatile components generally
require laboratory or bench scale' investigations.  Also, if
volatile components react with each other, as in refinery sour
water containing hydrogen sulfide (H2S) and ammonia, the vapor
pressure exerted by each component must be experimentally de-
veloped since vapor/liquid equilibrium data do not exist for
specific combinations of water soluble components.

     Reliability

Reliability has been a problem in air stripping for installations
where cold weather operation is required.  Freezing and scaling
of calcium carbonate have also been problems.  The reliability of
steam stripping is dependent on the specific wastewater appli-
cation.  In refinery operations, this process has been proven
highly dependable.

     Chemicals Required

Lime or caustic soda may be needed to raise the pH of the waste-
water.  For wastewaters containing high concentrations of cal-
cium, an inhibiting polymer may be added to ease the scaling
problem.  The effluent from the stripper may need pH readjustment
to neutrality by acid addition or recarbonation to obtain an
effluent that can be discharged.

     Residuals Generated

Stripped volatiles are usually processed further for recovery or
incineration.  Stripping generally generates no discharge except
the treated wastewater.

     Design Criteria

The major factors affecting design of a stripping process are
hydraulic loading, tower or column configuration, pH, temper-
ature, and air or steam flow.  Typical range and design values
for some of the design criteria are tabulated on the following
page.
Date:  9/25/81            III.3.1.19-5
-------
Air stripping criteria

Wastewater loading

Stripping air flow rate

Packing depth

pH of wastewater

Air pressure drop

Packing material
Packing spacing,
 horizontal and vertical
         Units

    liter/min/m2
    (gpm/ft2)
    m3/liter
    (ft3/gal)
    m
    (ft)
    pH units

    mm of water/m
    (in of water/ft)

    approximate mm
    (approximate in)
  Value/range

 41 -  81
 (1 -  2)
 2,200 - 3,700
 (300  - 500)
 6-8
 (20 - 25)
 10 -  11 or
 higher
 1.25  - 1.58
(0.015 - 0.019)
 plastic or wood
 51
 (2)
Steam stripping criteria
Column height

Column diameter

Steam requirement

Typical wastewater flow

Units
m
(ft)
m
(ft)
kg/liter
(Ib/gal)
liter/min
(gpm)
Value/range
6-18
(20 - 60)
0.9 - 1.8
(3 - 6)
0.07 - 0.24
(0.6 - 2)
760
(200)
     Performance

To obtain reasonable ammonia removal efficiencies (or rates) by
stripping, either the temperature or the pH of the wastewater
must be increased.  Efficiency is not only a function of temper-
ature and pH, but also the number of vapor/liquid contact stages
and steam or air input.

Subsequent data sheets provide performance data on the following
industries:

     - Inorganic Chemicals Manufacturing, and
     - Organic Chemicals Manufacturing.

     References

3-2, 3-18, 3-21, 3-24, 3-25, 3-26, 3-29, 3-36, 3-37.
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.19-6
-------

























0
z
—
0.
Q_
—
a:
1-
co

y
^
UJ
K-
W

CC
o
u.
OC
•z.

3
CO
0
o
J
0
z
i
o
UJ
l__

J
o
a:
h™
z
o
o






























^t

•
>
o
c
CO
0
tt-
(g_
CO

—
CO
>
o
E
CO
a:
c
o
—
JJ
CO
s_
4J
c
CO
0
c
o
0

4J
c
CO
^
—
Cv
c^.
UJ
c
CO
—
•a
a>
s:





CO
cy
c
CO
cc



C
CO
••«
•a
CO
E








CO
D
C
01
X










U)
4->
c

o
o

CO
CO
O






CO
CO
o
CO
— _
3
U.





CO
co
o
in

o

.H
a.




















4J
c
CO

3
— .
_
o
a.
^. _
voir\







o

CM

1

^



OO
oo d-







o
o
CO

ON

1

in
—





















— CM






• •
_J
-v.
O)
E

•^
ID
4J
c
CO
4J
3
—
•V.
o
a.

—
CO
o
•«
WOO
«OO
COOH

0
^h-ON-ONONONONON.^
f— ONONCOONON ONONCM
A A A A






ON ON ON ON ON ON O
ON ON ON r^ ON ON ON ON
AAACOAA AA

1 1 1 1 1 1 II

ON O ON -3" ON !*~ COON
-^ f** if\ ON oo C7N ON
A

QOOOOQOQQO
zoooozozzo
\f\ ^3 O tf^ ^^ ^3
«\ «V »1 "X *l «*
CMOO— CNJ d-

CO —

O O
OlANO OO
OLJ bJ OO
•v^1 ro iTv -.00 O
m • -uj co ^ o Q
NO ^ — co r*- NO c\i z

i i i i i i ii

OONOOOO QO
z -oooz zz
lAOO —
•4 «\
lAO
— ON

















lP»NOlfMf>UT\CO — IT\C\I —





•co
C CO
CO C
— CO
>> -C CO
J= -P CO CO C
_l 4-> (P C C 0)
^. CO O CO <0 CO £
01 cooa>s-cjc:.c w
±. CS-'OOCO-P-PCOCO
(OO 	 COCOCE
« J=— S-JZ XO 0 CO O
le *>jz o ox: «- s — t.
•P CO O— CO *> O O >>O
C O — £ S- CO 	 £3

•PEOI (U i- O O C0>CM co — c\j££
Ol l£ •><- -vxOU
0 — CNJCNJ+J— 4J 	
— £ ., . 
•o co
c-a
.—
4J
(A O
JC C
c
(0 i
— Q
CQZ
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.19-7
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Stripping - Air


Data source: Effluent  Guidelines                 Data source status:
Point source: Inorganic chemicals                  Not specified
Subcategory: Hydrogen  cyanide                       Bench scale           	
Plant: 782                                         Pilot scale           ^H
References: 3-85,  pp.  426,  430-431                  Full scale            	x_
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Stripping (air)

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  1,140 m3/day       Column diameter: Unspecified
Air flow rate: Unspecified              Plate/packing characteristics: Un-
Column temperature: Unspecified           specified
Column pressure: Unspecified            Plate/packing spacing:  Unspecified
Column height: Unspecified              Number of plates (if applicable):  Un-
Unit configuration: Ammonia stripper      specified
                                        Product  flow rate:  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA

Sampling:  3 day, 24-hr composite
	and grab	Analysis:   Data  set  2  (V.7.3.15)

                                                                       Detec-
                                       Concentration         Percent      tion
_ Pollutant/parameter _ Influent _ Effluent _ removal     limit

Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  TSS                                   76         160          NM
  NH3-N                                410          41          90
Toxic pollutants,
  Cyanide                          170,000      51,000           60
Blanks indicate data not available.
NM, not meaningful.
Date:   9/25/81              III.3.1.19-8
-------
      l< « « M U
      3 a     m
      o vt j: **
      M   U O      III
c  <-> ~-<

    &o  3
    Q.-H


£  ££T3
V)  *J  O «J



>  i-sS

8  iS-S.1
               "•«*  (A  O
                       r-  *H «t
                        I  >< O -H
                       «n tt v 




                                                i





                                                II

                                                                   O •- «- f ~ *- ~ f «- «-•-

                                                s«
                                                ii
                                                I*
                                                r
                                                                             5OOO     OOOOOOOCCOOOOOOCO§
                                                                             9OOC     OOOoOOOOOO*fl*OCJOOi^^O(
                                                                                       ooooocoococoooococ
                                                                                       OOOOOOOCOOOOOC-OCCC
                                                                                       *o*O'Ovo*orvj«w- —lAfgcvj.S'Jirii/Mr
                                                                                    o o o o o o o o o «r-o t^ o o o o o o •-o
                                                                                    mO*-WN«)O*r»*O'O»O«iA<*J^-'-CVJC4'-C*v
                                                                                    goooooooooooooooooooo
                                                                                                  {\JlAfnO«O

                                                                                             SO   1*1
                                                                                             lA   9*
                                                                                             o   o
                                                                                                                   :f
Date:    9/25/81
                                                  III.3.1.19-9
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Stripping - Steam

Data source:  Government report
Point source:  Organic  chemicals
Subcategory:  Unspecified
Plant:  Unspecified
References:  3-88,  pp.  127,129
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Stripping

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow  rate:   See below,
  5.47 L/day design
Steam flow rate:   See below
Column temperature:  104°C
Column pressure:   Unspecified
Column height:   3.67 m
Unit configuration:  Unspecified
                    Data source  status:
                      Not specified
                      Bench scale
                      Pilot scale
                      Full scale
          Column diameter:   5.1  cm
          Plate/packing characteristics:  Pall
            rings made from  polypropylene
          Plate/packing spacing:  Unspecified
          Number of plates  (if applicable):  Un-
            specified
          Product flow rate:  See below
                                    REMOVAL DATA
TOC

f fgtf wastewater faed. ML/ain
243(b)
276
255
245
235

Stean feed. •L/nin

54
50
51
65

Overhead. aL/tlp
9.4
7.8
13.5
5.3
11.4

Bottoas. aL/Mln
272
388
321
290
340
Cor
Feed
99
150
160
16
24
icent ra 1 1 on
Overhead
130
61
120
84
88
•Q/L
Bottons
76
140
140
15
16
Percent
reanva 1 ( a )
14(b)
NM
NM
NM
4
  Blanks indicate data not available.
  NM, not Manlngful.
  (a) Percent removal calculated on a voluMtrlc b»sli.
  (b) Reflux ratio la 1.6:1 (reflux: overhead).
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.19-10
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Stripping -  Steam

Data source:  Government  report
Point source:  Organic chemicals
Subcategory:  Unspecified
Plant:  Unspecified
References:  3-88, pp. 127,129
Pretreatment/treatment:   None/Stripping

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Feed:  360 L/day
  actual, 5,470 L/day design;
  overhead:  18 L/day; bottoms:
  435 L/day
Steam flow rate:  73 L/day
Feed temperature:  Overhead:  104°C;
  bottoms:   104°C
Column pressure:  Unspecified
Column height:  3.67 m
Reflux ratio:  51:94.9
Unit configuration:  Unspecified
                  Data source status:
                    Not specified
                    Bench scale
                    Pilot scale
                    Full scale
        Column diameter:  5.1 cm
        Plate/packing characteristics:   Pall
          rings made from polypropylene
        Plate/packing spacing:  Unspecified
        Number of plates (if applicable):
          Unspecified
        Distillate percent of fuel:   5.1
                                   REMOVAL DATA
Sanollna: Composite and arab
Pol lutant /parameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
TOC
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Chloroform
1,2-Dichloroethane
1 , 2-T rans-d i ch I o roe thy I one
Methylene chloride
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
1,1,2-Trichloroethane


Feed

610

1140,000
1,600,000
1,600,000
800,000
15,000
14,000

Concentration
Overhead

14,800

810,000
4,800,000
460,000
2,800,000
440,000
76,000
Analysis:

Bottoms

590

NO
43,000
15,000
180,000
78,000
NO
Data set 1
Percent
remova I ( a )

NM

>99
97
99
73
NM
>99
(V.7.3.24)
Detection
I imit









         Blanks indicate data not available.
         NO, not detected.
         NM, not meaningful.
         (a) Percent removal calculated on a volumetric basis.
 Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.19-11
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Stripping -  Steam

Data source:  Government  report
Point source:  Organic chemicals
Subcategory:  Unspecified
Plant:  Unspecified
References:  3-88, pp. 127,129
Pretreatment/treatment:   None/Stripping

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Feed:  360 L/day
  actual, 5,470 L/day design;
  overhead:  19 L/day; bottoms:
  396 L/day
Steam flow rate:  57 L/day
Column temperature:  104° C
Column pressure-.  Unspecified
Column height:  3.67 m
Unit configuration:  Unspecified
                 Data source  status:
                   Not specified
                   Bench scale
                   Pilot scale
                   Full scale
       Column diameter:   5.1  cm
       Plate/packing characteristics:   Pall
         rings made from  polypropylene
       Plate/packing spacing:  Unspecified
       Number of plates  (if applicable):
         Unspecified
       Reflux ratio:  0.9:1
       Distillate percent of  fuel:   2.5
                                  REMOVAL DATA
Sanollna: Composite and arab


Analysis:
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
TOC
Toxic pollutants, Mg/L:
Chloroform
1 ,2-Dlchloroethane
1,2-Trans-dichloroethylene
Methylene chloride
1, 1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
Tetrachloroethylene
1,1, 1-Trichloroethane
1, 1,2-Trichloroethane
Trichloroethylene
Feed

640

140,000
1,600,000
1,600,000
800,000
15,000
15,000
51,000
14,000

Overhead

9,800

1,100,000
5,500,000
680,000
5,200,000
24,000
9,600
170,000
66,000
640,000
Bottoms

240

65,000
440,000
NO
130,000
100
NO
42,000
NO
HO
Data set 1 (V.7.3.24)
Percent Detection
removal (a) limit

58

49
70
>99
82
99
>99
9
>99
>99
        Blanks indicate data not available.
        ND, not detected.
        (a) Percent removal calculated on a volumetric basis.
  Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.19-12
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Stripping - Steam

Data source:  Government  report
Point source:  Organic  chemicals
Subcategory:  Unspecified
Plant:  Unspecified
References:  3-88, pp.  127,129
Pretreatment/treatment:   None/Stripping

DESIGN OR OPERATING  PARAMETERS

Wastewater  flow  rate:   Feed: 360 L/day
  actual, 5,470  L/day  design;
  overhead:  10  L/day;  bottoms:
  404 L/day
Steam flow  rate:   76 L/day
Column temperature:  Overhead:  102°C;
  bottoms:   103°C
Column pressure:   Unspecified
Column height:   3.67 m
Unit configuration:  Unspecified
                  Data source status:
                    Not specified
                    Bench scale
                    Pilot scale
                    Full scale
        Column diameter:  5.1 cm
        Plate/packing characteristics:   Pall
          rings made from polypropylene
        Plate/packing spacing:  Unspecified
        Number of plates (if applicable):
          Unspecified
        Distillate percent of feed:   2.8
                                   REMOVAL DATA
Same Una; Composite and arab
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
TOC
Toxic pollutants, (ig/L:
Chloroform
1 ,2-Dich lo roe thane
1,2-Trans-dlchloroethylene
Methylene chloride
1, 1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
Te t rach 1 o roethy 1 ene
1,1, 2-Trich to roe thane
Trichloroethylene


Concentration
Feed

670

11)0,000
1,600,000
1,600,000
800,000
15,000
15,000
14,000
16,000(b)
Overhead

10,000

880,000
14,100,000
270,000
3,300,000
120,000
50,000
34,000
570,000
Analysis:

Bottoms

290

NO
65,000
1,300,000
90,000
50,000
NO
NO
ND
Data set 1
Percent
remova I ( a )

51

>99
95
9
87
NH
>99
>99
>99
(V. 7. 3. 2141
Detection
limit











         Blanks indicate data not available.
         NM, not meaningful.
         ND, not detected.
         (a) Percent removal calculated on a volumetric basis.
         (b) Based on mass balance.
 Date:   9/25/81
III.3,1.19-13
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Stripping - Steam

Data  source:  Government report
Point source:  Organic  chemicals
Subcategory:  Unspecified
Plant:   Unspecified
References:  3-88, pp.  127,129
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Stripping
                   Data source  status:
                     Not specified
                     Bench  scale
                     Pilot  scale
                     Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING  PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:   Feed: 360 L/day
   actual, 5,470 L/day  design;
   overhead:  8 L/day;  bottoms:
   504 L/day
Steam flow rate:   64.8 L/day
Column temperature:  Overhead:
   103° C; bottoms:  104°C
Column pressure:   Unspecified
Column height:  3.67 m
Unit configuration:  Unspecified
        Column diameter:   5.1 cm
        Plate/packing characteristics:   Pall
           rings made from polypropylene
        Plate/packing spacing:  Unspecified
        Number of plates  (if applicable):
           Unspecified
        Distillate percent of feed:   2.3
                                      REMOVAL DATA
         San
            ling;	Composite and grab
                                                    Analysis;  Data set 1 fV.7.3.24)
           Pol I utant/parameter
      Concentration  	   percent    Detection
 feed    Overhead   Bottoms   reamvaHal	I I silt
         Classical pollutants, mg/L:
           TOO
                                      645
           10.1(00
                                                       256
                                                              44
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Chloroform
1,2-Dlchloroethane
1.2-Trans-dichloroethylene
Methylene chloride
1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
Tetrachloroethylene
1, 1,2-Trlchloroethane
Trlchloroetnylene
110,000 1,200,000 ND
1,600,000 4, 400, 000 42,000
1.600.000 350,000 370,000
800,000 3,500,000 110.000
15,000 15,000 33.000
15.000 240.000(b) 6.800
14,000 25.000 200
62,000(b) 640.000 34.000
>99
96
75
ttl
>99
37
98
24(b)
         Blanks Indicate data not available.
         NO, not detected.
         NM, not meaningful.
         (a) Percent removal calculated on a voluawtrlc basis.
         (b) Based on Mass balance calculation.
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.19-14
-------
TREATMENT  TECHNOLOGY:  Stripping - Steam
Data source:   Government  report
Point  source:  Organic chemicals
Subcategory:   Unspecified
Plant:   Unspecified
References:   3-88, pp. 127,129
Pretreatment/treatment:   None/Stripping
                   Data  source status:
                     Not specified
                     Bench scale
                     Pilot scale
                     Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
Wastewater  flow rate:  Feed:  360 L/day
  actual, 5,470 L/day design;
  overhead:   6.2 L/day; bottoms:
  440 L/day
Steam flow  rate:  50.8 mL/min
Column  temperature:  104°C
Column  pressure:  Unspecified
Column  height:  3.67 m
Unit configuration:  Unspecified
         Column diameter:   5.1 cm
         Plate/packing  characteristics:   Pall
           rings made from polypropylene
         Plate/packing  spacing:  Unspecified
         Number of plates  (if applicable):
           Unspecified
         Reflux ratio:   1.4:1
         Distillate percent of fuel:   2.3
                                     REMOVAL DATA
          Sampling;  Composite and grab
                                                   Analysis: Data set 1 IV.7.3.211
            Pol lutant/parameter
                                         oncentration	   Percent    Detection
                                   Feed    Overhead   Bottoms    removal la I	I Imlt
                                        Concentration
          Classical pollutants, ng/L:
           TOC
                                     780
                                             1,500
                                                      210
                                                             63
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Chloroform
) ,2-0 ichlo roe thane
1,2-Trans-dlchloroethylene
Methylene chloride
1 , 1 ,2,2-Tetrachlo roe thane
1, 1,2-Tr Ichlo roe thane

110,000
1,600,000
1,600,000
800,000
15,000
11,000

400,000
3,700,000
1,300,000
1,200,000
8,700
12,000

NO
39,000
16,000
300,000
NO
ND

>99
97
99
51
>99
>99
          Blanks indicate data not available.
          ND, not detected.
          (a) Percent removal calculated on a volumetric basis.
 Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.19-15
-------
III.3.1.20  Solvent Extraction

     Description

Solvent extraction, also referred to as liquid-liquid extraction,
is the separation of the constituents of a liquid solution by
contact with another immiscible liquid for which the impurities
have a high affinity.  The separation can be based either on
physical differences that affect differential solubility between
solvents or on a definite chemical reaction.

The solvent extraction process is shown schematically in
Figure 3.1.20-1.  The diagram shows a single solvent extraction
unit operating on an aqueous stream; in practice this unit might
consist of (1) a single-stage mixing and settling unit, (2)
several mixers and settlers (single-stage unit) in series, or  (3)
a multi-stage unit operating by countercurrent flows in one
device (e.g., a column or differential centrifuge).
                       SOLVENTond SOLUTE
       WASTEWATER
              TREATED WATER


      FIGURE 3.1.20-1.   SCHEMATIC  OF  EXTRACTION PROCESS
As the flow diagram indicates, reuse of the extracting solvent
(following solute removal) and recovery of that portion of the
extracting solvent that dissolves in the extracted phase are
usually necessary aspects of the solvent extraction process.
Solvent reuse is necessary for economic reasons as the cost of
the solvent is generally too high to consider disposal after use.
Only in a very few cases may solvent reuse be eliminated.  These
cases arise where an industrial chemical feed stream can be used
as the solvent and then sent on for normal processing, or where
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.20-1
-------
water is the solvent.  Solvent recovery from extracted water may
be eliminated in cases where the concentration in the water to be
discharged is not harmful, and where the solvent loss does not
represent a high cost.

The end result of solvent extraction is to separate the original
solution into two streams: a treated stream (the raffinate), and
a recovered solute stream (which may contain small amounts of
water and solvent).   Solvent extraction may thus be considered a
recovery process since the solute chemicals are generally re-
covered for reuse, resale, or further treatment and disposal.  A
process for extracting a solute from solution will typically
include three basic steps:  (1) the actual extraction, (2) sol-
vent recovery from the raffinate (treated stream), and (3) solute
removal from the extracting solvent.  The process may be operated
continuously.

The first step, extraction, brings two liquid phases (feed and
solvent) into intimate contact to allow transfer of solute from
feed to solvent.  An extractor unit can be a mixer-settler device
in which feed and solvent are mixed by agitation, allowed to
settle and separate into two aqueous streams; or it can be a
column in which two liquids are brought into contact by counter-
current flow caused by density difference.  The process yields
two streams, the cleaned stream or raffinate and the extract or
solute-laden solvent stream.  Both streams will contain extrac-
tion solvent and may require further processing to remove and/or
to recover the solvent and solute.  The treated stream or raf-
finate may require a solvent removal process if the solvent
losses would add significantly to the cost of the process, or
cause a problem with the discharge of the raffinate.  Solvent
removal may be accomplished by stripping, distillation, or adsorp-
tion.  The extract or solute laden stream may be processed to
recover solvent and remove solute.  The solute removal and solvent
recovery can be via a second solvent extraction step, distilla-
tion (Section III.3.1.6), or some other process.  For example, a
second extraction, with caustic, is sometimes used to extract
phenol from light oil, which is used as the primary solvent in
dephenolizing coke plant wastewaters [3-6].  Distillation will
usually be more common, except where problems with azeotropes are
present.  In certain cases, it may be possible to use the solute-
laden solvent as a feed stream in an industrial process, thus
eliminating solute recovery.  This is apparently the case at some
refineries where crude or light oil can be used as a solvent (for
phenol removal from water) and later processed with the solute in
it.  This application is particularly attractive since it elimi-
nates one costly step.

Solvent extraction should be regarded as a process for treating
concentrated, selected, and segregated wastewater streams pri-
marily where material recovery is possible to offset process
costs.  Solvent extraction, when carried out on the more concen-


Date:  9/25/81            III.3.1.20-2
-------
trated waste streams,  will seldom produce a treated effluent (the
raffinate) that can be directly discharged to surface waters;
some form of final polishing will usually be needed.   Solvent
extraction cannot compete economically with biological oxidation
or adsorption in the treatment of large quantities of very dilute
wastes, and it will have trouble competing with steam stripping
in the recovery of volatile solutes present in moderate to low
concentrations.

     Technology Status

Solvent extraction is a proven method for the recovery of organ-
ics from liquid solutions and may be the process of choice in
some cases.

     Representative Types and Modifications

There are two major categories of equipment for liquid extrac-
tion: single-stage and multi-stage equipment.

In single-stage equipment, the fluids are mixed, extraction
occurs, and the insoluble liquids are settled and separated.  A
cascade of such stages may then be arranged.  A single-stage unit
must provide facilities for mixing the insoluble liquids and for
settling and decanting the resulting emulsion or dispersion.  In
batch operation, mixing together with settling and decanting may
take place in the same or in separate vessels.  In continuous
operation, different vessels are required.

In multi-stage equipment, the equivalent of many stages may be
incorporated into a single device or apparatus.  Countercurrent
flow is produced by virtue of the difference in densities of the
liquids, and with few exceptions, the equipment takes the form of
a vertical tower which may or may not contain internal devices to
influence the flow pattern.  Other forms include centrifuges,
rotating discs,  and rotating buckets.  Depending upon the nature
of the internal structure, the equipment may be of the stagewise
or continuous-contact type.

Commonly used solvents include crude oil, light oil,  benzene,  and
toluene.  Less common but more selective solvents include chloro-
form, ethylacetate, isopropyl ether, tricresyl phosphate, methyl
isobutyl ketone, methylene chloride, and butyl acetate.  When
crude oil or light oil is used, phenol is destroyed in downstream
operations.  Alternatively, extraction with light oil may be
followed by phenol recovery via extraction of the oil with caus-
tic.  In this case, phenol is recovered as sodium phenolate.

     Applications

Solvent extraction is presently applied in two main areas:  (1)
the recovery of phenol from aqueous wastes, and (2) the recovery


Date:  9/25/81            III.3.1.20-3
-------
of halogenated hydrocarbon solvents from organic solutions con-
taining other water-soluble components.   Solvent extraction is
currently being used in the following industries,  the major
application is the extraction of phenolic materials from waste-
water.

     - Iron and Steel Manufacturing,
     - Organic Chemicals Manufacturing,  and
     - Petroleum Refining.

The cokemaking subcategory of the Iron and Steel industry uti-
lizes solvent extraction to dephenolize one waste stream.  In the
process,  the benzene light oil,  or other suitable solvent, ex-
tracts phenolic compounds from the wastewater.   The phenolized
solvent is then separated and extracted with caustic.  Sodium
phenolates separate out, and the dephenolized solvent is reused
in the recovery system  [3-6].

Other applications of solvent extraction are briefly described
below [3-36]:

        Extraction of thiazole-based chemicals from rubber pro-
        cessing effluent with benzene.

        Extraction of salicylic and other hydroxy-aromatic acids
        from wastewaters using methyl isobutyl ketone as the
        solvent.

        Deoiling of quench waters from petroleum operations via
        solvent extraction has been developed by Gulf Oil Corpora-
        tion.  Quench water containing about 6,000 mg/L of .dis-
        solved and emulsified oil is extracted with a light
        aromatic oil solvent, and the extract is recycled for
        refinery processing.  Additional treatment of the water
        (e.g., via coalescence) is necessary for water reuse.  It
        is not known if this process is in current use.

        Recovery of acetic acid from industrial wastewater is
        proposed to handle wastewaters that may contain acetic
        acid levels of  0.5% to over 5%.  The extractant is a
        solution of trioctylphosphine oxide in a carrier solvent.
        This process is currently in the developmental stage, but
        has been demonstrated to be practical.

        Solvent recovery via solvent extraction is carried out in
        at least one hazardous waste management facility in
        Lowell, Massachusetts.

     Advantages and Limitations

The main advantage of solvent extraction is its use as a recycle
technique.  Valuable solvents can be recovered for reuse in the


Date:  9/25/81            III.3.1.20-4
-------
process stream of an industry.  There are relatively few insur-
mountable technical problems with solvent extraction.  The most
difficult problem is usually finding a solvent that best meets a
long list of desired qualities including low cost, high extrac-
tion efficiency, low solubility in the raffinate, easy separation
from the solute, adequate density difference with raffinate, no
tendency for emulsion formation, nonreactive, and nonhazardous.
No one solvent will meet all the desired criteria and, thus,
compromise is necessary.  There is a wide range of extraction
equipment available today, and space requirements are not a
problem.

Process cost is always a determining factor with solvent extrac-
tion, and has thus far limited actual application to situations
where a valuable product is recovered in sufficient quantity to
offset extraction costs.  These costs will be relatively small
when a single-stage extraction unit can be used (e.g., simple
mixer-settler) and where solvent and solute recovery can be
carried out efficiently.  In certain cases, the process may yield
a profit when credit for recovered material is taken.  Any ex-
traction requiring more than the equivalent of about ten theo-
retical stages may require custom-designed equipment and will be
quite expensive.

Even if solvent recovery operations are utilized, the wastewater
that remains after the solvents have been separated will still
contain small amounts of these materials.  Only one treatment
technology has been demonstrated to be effective in complete
solvent removal:  steam stripping (Section III.3.8.19).  In
addition, solvent extraction systems seldom produce a raffinate
that is suitable for direct discharge to surface waters and thus,
a polishing treatment is generally required (e.g., biological
treatment).

     Reliability

Solvent extraction is highly reliable for proven applications, if
properly operated.

     Chemicals Required

Chemical solvents that are used include benzene (benzol), tolu-
ene, chloroform, ethylacetate, isopropyl ether, tricresyl phos-
phate, methyl isobutyl ketone, methylene chloride, and butyl
acetate.

     Residuals Generated
             %
Solvent extraction generates no solid wastes.  When mixed organic
liquids are treated principally for the recovery of just one
component, (e.g., the more valuable halogenated hydrocarbons),
economics may make the purification of the other components (as


Date:  9/25/81            III.3.1.20-5
-------
required for resale or reuse) impractical resulting in a waste
for disposal.

     Design Criteria

Design is specific to the solute being recovered and the waste
stream characteristics.  The major design parameters are the
choice of solvent, distribution coefficient, and wastewater flow
rate.

     Performance

Extraction reduces phenol concentrations from levels of several
percent down to levels of a few parts per million.  Removal
efficiencies of 90 to 98% are possible in most applications, and
with special equipment (e.g, centrifugal and rotating disc con-
tactors) removal efficiencies of about 99% have been achieved.
Subsequent data sheets provide performance data on the following
industries.

     - Petroleum Refining, and
     - Organic Chemicals Manufacturing.

     References

3-2, 3-6, 3-36.
Date:  9/25/81             III.3.1.20-6
-------


















o

f->
u
^
o£
H
X
UJ

t-
z
UJ
>
J
8

o
u.
J.
a:
z
(A
^
§
O
Z
u
111
I-

_J
o
0£
1-
z
0
o





















(X


>
o
o
c
CK
CO

—•
CO
>
i
CO
£C
C
o
^J

+1
c
CO
u
c
o
0

4i
c
co
3
»
C)M
*.
UJ






in
41
c
o
a
CO
co
a




























c
co

•o
1




CO
o
c

*


c
CO
•Q
W
I








0!
O
C
CO
K




a>

co
_
^
u.


»
co
U
U)

^
0

•«
a.














c
co
3
•H
_•
O
a.
OOO
ID 00






CM •f
r^ ON

i i

rooo


OO
00
—


O
o
o
^^5
cor*


i i

^ u%
lf\CO
















m CM






•j
^^
i1
.
(0
•p
c
CO —
4» CO
3 -P
— O
O
a .
co
— c
co —
U «-
~ O
«9O —
to O JC
caOO

O
^ — " CvTco
A —













CMCOif\VO — CM — fO^ — — — —





CO
C
CO
•• *J CO
-1 4) C
V. O O CO
O) CO C <-£
a c co o 
co a— o
JC OJ= 0
 t- o £
•P o a  CD o QOCMCVI
CD C >3 <- P II..
O— CDCOCf— >>CB^CV1CNJ — —
— XC ^COPOPUU . . . .
X X ft- OCQUJ^(A^3C^~*^*~
O

Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.20-7
-------
                                                 Data source status:
                                                   Not specified
                                                   Bench scale
                                                   Pilot scale
                                                   Full scale
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Solvent  Extraction
Data source:   Government report
Point source:  Petroleum refining
Subcategory:   Lube oil refining
Plant:  Unspecified
References:  3-108, pp.  98-102, 159-165,  456
Pretreatment/treatment:   None/Solvent  Extraction

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
Unit configuration:   Spray column contactor  and  stripping column
Column specifications:   0.0254 m diameter  x  0.914 m glass pipe
Type of solvent:  Isobutylene
Solvent flow rate:  0.008 m3/hr
Wastewater flow rate:  0.003 ma/hr
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling;  Grab
                                              Analysis;   Data  set  6  (V.7.3.26)
Concentration
Pollutant/parameter
Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
limit
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
  Phenol
  Benzene
  Acetone
  MEK
  o-Cresol
                               23,000,000
                                  170,000
                                   37,000
                                  230,000
                                2,000,000
9,600,000
   35,000
   22,000
   55,000
  330,000
58
79
40
76
84
Blanks indicate data not available.
 Date:   9/25/81
                              III.3.1.20-8
-------
                                                  Data source  status:
                                                    Not specified
                                                    Bench scale
                                                    Pilot scale
                                                    Full scale
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Solvent Extraction
Data source:  Government report
Point source:  Petroleum refining
Subcategory:  Lube oil refining
Plant:  Unspecified
References:  3-108, pp.  102-109,  212-216,  494
Pretreatment/treatment:   None/Solvent  Extraction

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
Unit configuration:  Rotating disk contactor and stripping column
Column specifications:  0.0762 m diameter x 1.22 m glass  pipe
Type of solvent:  48.7 wt. % n-butyl acetate,  51.3 wt.  %  isobutylene
Solvent flow rate:  0.004 m3/hr
Wastewater flow rate:  0.015 m3/hr
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling;  Grab
                                              Analysis;  Data set 6  (V.7.3.26)
Concentration
Pollutant/parameter
Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
limit
Toxic pollutants,
  Phenol
  Benzene
  Acetone
  MEK
  o-Cresol
                               17,000,000
                                   37,000
                                   25,000
                                  110,000
                                2,700,000
1,900,000
    9,200
   12,000
   55,000
  120,000
89
75
52
50
96
Blanks indicate data not available.
 Date:   9/25/81
                                III.3.1.20-9
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Solvent Extraction
Data source:  Government report                  Data source status:
Point source:  Petroleum refining                  Not specified
Subcategory:  Lube oil refining                    Bench scale
Plant:                                             Pilot scale
References:  3-108, pp.  98-102, 159-165,  455        Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:   None/Solvent  Extraction

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Spray column contactor and stripping column
Column specifications:  0.0254 m diameter x 0.914 m glass pipe
Type of solvent:  Isobutylene
Solvent flow rate:  0.014 m3/hr
Wastewater flow rate:  0.003 m3/hr
                                 REMOVAL DATA

Sampling;  Grab	Analysis;   Data  set 6  (V.7.3.26)
Concentration
Pollutant/parameter
Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
limit
Toxic pollutants, v9/Ls
  Phenol                       23,000,000  4,600,000      80
  Benzene                         170,000      7,000      96
  Acetone                          37,000     16,000      57
  MEK                             230,000     12,000      95
  o-Cresol                      2,000,000     50,000      98

Blanks indicate data not available.
Date:   9/25/81                 III.3.1.20-10
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Solvent Extraction
Data source:  Government report
Point source:  Petroleum refining
Subcategory-.  Lube oil refining
Plant:  Unspecified
References:  3-108, pp. 98-109, 159-165,  198-212,
  453, 491-493
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Solvent Extraction

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
                 Data  source  status:
                   Not specified
                   Bench scale
                   Pilot scale
                   Full scale
Unit configuration:  Rotating disk contactor  and stripping column
Column specifications:  0.0762 m diameter  x 1.22 m glass pipe
Type of solvent:  Isobutylene (unless  otherwise  specified)
Solvent flow rate:  See below
Wastewater flow rate:  0.012 m3/hr
Sanml ina: Grab
Solvent flow
cu. m/hr
0.0021
0.0021
0.0014
0.0043
0.099

REMOVAL
DATA
Ana l.vsi
Concentration
Pol lutant mq/L
Phenol
MEK
o-Cresol
Pheno 1
MEK
o-Cresol
Pheno 1
MEK
o-Cresol
Pheno 1
MEK
o-Cresol
Phenol
o-Cresol
Influent
310(a)
5,600
24
230{a)
2,800
18
8,800(b)
12,000
890
8,800(b)
12,000
990
17,000(c)
1,200
Effluent
230
3,600
2.3
190
1,900
2.8
100
5,900
6.5
77
2,500
4.3
10,000
4,000
s: Data set 6 (V.7.3.26)
Percent Detection
remova I limit
26
36
90
17
32
84
99
51
99
99
79
99
41
NM
    Blanks  indicate data not available.
    NM,  not meaningful.
    (a)Pretreatment of  influent:  N-butyl acetate extraction.
    (b)Solvent used:  N-butyl  acetate.
    (c)Wastewater flow  rate:  0.031 m cu.m/hr
  Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.20-11
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Solvent Extraction
Data source:  Government report                    Data source status:
Point source:  Organic chemicals                     Not specified         	
Subcategory:  Ethylene oxychlorination process       Bench scale           	
Plant:  Unspecified                                  Pilot scale           	x_
References:  3-88, pp. 102-117, 218                  Full scale            	
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Solvent Extraction

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Multi-stage
Column specifications: Extractor:  0.10  m diameter x 3.0 m; stripper:  0.05 m
  diameter x 2.25 m
Type of solvent:  C10-C12  paraffin
Solvent flow rate:  0.205  L/min
Wastewater flow  rate:  0.76-3.76  L/min
                                   REMOVAL DATA
Sampling: One-day composites
Ana lysis
Concentration
Pol lutant/parameter
Toxic pollutants, M9/L:
1,2,-Dichloroethane




1, 1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane




1,1,2-Trichloroethane




Classical pollutants, mg/L:
Total chlorine




Influent

920,000
190,000
210,000(a)
l»60,000(b)
1,100,000(c)
22,000
200,000
85,000(c)
51,000(d)
91,000(a)
110,000
360,000
150,000(8)
110,000(6)
110,000(8)

1,600
910
550
1,800
1,800
Effluent

350,000
20,000
36,000(8)
51,000(b)
27,000(c)
6,000
2,000
11,000(c)
1,000(d)
1,000
16,000
30,000
22,000(a)
5,UOO(e)
8,700(8).

510
81
85(a)
110(a)
84(c)
: Data set
Percent
remova 1

62
89
83
89
98
73
99
87
98
99
85
92
85
95
92

68
91
85
91
95
1 (V.7.3.2U)
H(2)0 to
solvent ratio

18,3:1
13.7:1
9.1:1
5.5:1
3.7:1
18.3:1
13.7:1
9.1:1
5.5:1
3.7:1
18.3:1
13.7:1
9.1:1
5.5:1
3.7:1

18.3:1
13.7:1
9.1:1
5.5:1
3,7:1
     (a)  Average of three one-day composites.
     (b)  Average of four one-day composites.
     (c)  Average of two one-day composites.
     id)  Average of six one-day composites.
     (e)  Average of five one-day composites.
 Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.20-12
-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Solvent  Extraction
 Data source:   Government report                  Data source status:
 Point source:   Organic  chemicals                    Not specified         	
 Subcategory:   Styrene production process            Bench scale           	
 Plant:  Unspecified                                Pilot scale           	x_
 References:  3-108,  pp.  102-109, 241-243,  501       Full scale            	
 Pretreatment/treatment:   Unspecified/Solvent Extraction

 DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

 Unit configuration:  Rotating disc  contactor and stripping column
 Column specifications:   0.076 m diameter by 1.22 m glass pipe
 Type of solvent:   Isobutylene
 Solvent flow  rate:   0.451 m/hr
 Wastewater flow rate:   2.49  m/hr
                                 REMOVAL DATA

 Sampling;   Unspecified _ Analysis-.  Data set 2 (V.7.3.24)

                                  Concentration      Percent   Detection
   Pollutant/parameter _ Influent   Effluent   removal _ limit _
 Toxic pollutants,
   Benzene                      290,000     10,000      97
   Ethylbenzene                 120,000      4,000      97
   Styrene                       15,000     <1,000     >93
 Blanks indicate data not available.
Date:   9/25/81               III.3.1.20-13
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Solvent Extraction
Data source:  Government report
Point source:  Organic chemicals
Subcategory:  Ethylene quench
Plant:  Unspecified
References:  3-108, pp. 102-109,  223-227,  495
                    Data  source  status;
                     Not specified
                     Bench scale
                     Pilot scale
                     Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:   Unspecified/Solvent Extraction

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Rotating disc  contactor and  stripping column
Column specifications:  0.076 m diameter  by 1.22  m glass pipe
Type of solvent:  Isobutylene
Solvent flow rate:  0.652 m/hr
Wastewater flow rate:  3.84 m/hr
                                REMOVAL DATA
Sampling;  Unspecified
                Analysis;   Data set 2  (V.7.3.24)
  Pollutant/parameter
   Concentration      Percent   Detection
Influent   Effluent   removal     limit
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  COD                            1,900      1,200
                         37
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Phenol
Benzene
Toluene
Xylene

67,000
71,000
40,000
40,000

63,000
2,900
2,300
<1,000

6
96
94
>98
Blanks indicate data not available.
 Date:  9/25/81
  III.3.1.20-14
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Solvent  Extraction
Data source:  Government report
Point source:   Organic chemicals
Subcategory:  Ethylene quench
Plant:  Unspecified
References:  3-108,  pp.  102-109,  223-227, 496
                    Data source  status:
                      Not specified
                      Bench scale
                      Pilot scale
                      Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:   Unspecified/Solvent Extraction

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Rotating disc  contactor and stripping column
Column specifications:  0.076 m diameter by 1.22 m glass pipe
Type of solvent:   Isobutane
Solvent flow rate:  0.668 m/hr
Wastewater flow rate:  3.81  m/hr
                                REMOVAL  DATA
Sampling;  Unspecified
                Analysis:   Data  set  2  (V.7.3.24)
  Pollutant/parameter
   Concentration      Percent  Detection
Influent   Effluent   removal     limit
Classical pollutants,  mg/L:
  COD
   1,900
700
63
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Phenol
Benzene
Toluene
Xylene

68,000
81,000
44,000
34,000

66,000
2,400
1,600
<1,000

3
97
96
>97
Blanks indicate data not available.
 Date:  9/25/81
  111.3.1.20^15
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Solvent  Extraction
Data source:  Government report                  Data source status:
Point source:  Organic chemicals                    Not specified
Subcategory:  Cresylic acid recovery                Bench scale
Plant:  Unspecified                                Pilot scale
References:  3-108, pp.  98-102, 159-165, 465        Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:   Unspecified/Solvent Extraction

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit configuration:  Spray column contactor and  stripping column
Column specifications:  0.025 m diameter by 0.91 m glass pipe
Type of solvent:  Isobutylene
Solvent flow rate:  18.5 m/hr
Wastewater flow rate:  6.14 m/hr
                                REMOVAL DATA

Sampling;  Unspecified	Analysis;  Data set 2  (V.7.3.24)

                                 Concentration      Percent   Detection
  Pollutant/parameter	Influent    Effluent   removal	limit	

Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  COD                            4,000       1,100      72
Toxic pollutants,
  Phenol                       580,000    160,000       72
  o-Cresol                     310,000     31,000       90
  m, p-Cresol                  290,000     25,000       91
  Xylene                       230,000     10,000       96
Blanks indicate data not available.
 Date:   9/25/81              III.3.1.20-16
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Solvent Extraction
Data source:   Government report
Point source:   Organic chemicals
Subcategory:   Ethylene oxychlorination process
Plant:  Unspecified
References:  3-88,  pp. 102-117
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Solvent Extraction

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
                    Data source  status:
                      Not specified
                      Bench scale
                      Pilot scale
                      Full scale
Unit configuration:  Multi-stage
Column specifications:   Extractor:   0.10 m diameter  X 3.0 m;
                        Stripper:   0.05 m diameter X 2.25 m
Type of solvent:  C10-C12 paraffin
Solvent flow rate:  0.27 L/min
Wastewater flow rate:  1.23-5.32 L/min
                                REMOVAL DATA
Sampling;  One-day composites
                Analysis;   Data set  1  (V.7.3.24)
  Pollutant/parameter
   Concentration      Percent
Influent   Effluent   removal
                     H20 to
                  solvent ratio
Classical pollutants,  mg/L:
  TOC
   58
   73
   59
   76
   54

  120
37
48
38
39
75

86
36.
34
36
49
NM

30a
   5:1
 6.5:1
   8:1
  10:1
16.5:1

  20:1
Total chlorine 150
180
160
300
270
690
3.2
3.0
1.8
6.6
16
180
98
98
99
98
94
74
5:1
6.5:1
8:1
10:1
16.5:1
20:1
(a) Average of two 1-day composites.
NM, not meaningful.
 Date:   9/25/81
   III.3.1.20-17
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Solvent Extraction
Data  source:  Government report
Point source:  Unspecified
Subcategory:  Hydrofiner or phenolic resin plant
Plant:  Unspecified
References:  3-108, pp.  102-109, 233-241,  499-501
                    Data  source status:
                      Not specified
                      Bench scale
                      Pilot scale
                      Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:   Unspecified/Solvent Extraction

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Unit  configuration:   Rotating disc contactor and stripping column
Column specifications:   Extractor:   0.0762 m diameter x 1.22 m glass  pipe
                          Stripper:  Unspecified
Type  of solvent:  See below
Solvent flow rate:  See  below
Wastewater flow rate: See below
                                      REMOVAL DATA
Si M> Una:

Unspecified

Solvent
•m/hr
0.0023
0.0028
0.002$
0.0011
ft m/hr
0.082
0.100
0.089
0.039

COO
Haste Concentration. an/L Percent
•m/hr
0.019
0.0094
0.0091
0.0082
rtm/hr Influent Effluent removal
0.52
0.33 17,000 18,000 KM
0.32
0.29
Analysis: Unspecified
Phenol

Influent
400,000
400,000
48,000,000
48,000,000

'on, Hq/L. Percent
Effluent i
99
>99
99
87
       NN, not •e*nlngful.

       (OSolvent used:  Mthyl Itobutyl ketone.

       (b)Solvent used:  49.5 wt % "ethyl Iiobutyl ketone, 50.5 wt X itobutylene.
       (c)Solvent used:  48.2% n-butyl acetate, 51.•% Kobutylene.

       (d)Solvent used:  N-butyl acetate.
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.20-18
-------
 TREATMENT  TECHNOLOGY:  Solvent Extraction
 Data source:   Government  report                   Data source status:
 Point source:   Unspecified                          Not specified
 Subcategory:   Oxychlorination                       Bench scale
 Plant:   Unspecified                                Pilot scale
 References:  3-108, pp. 102-109                     Full scale
 Pretreatment/treatment:   Neutral./Solvent Extraction

 DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

 Unit configuration:  Rotating disc contactor and stripping column
 Column specifications:  Extractor:  0.0762 m diameter x 1.22 m glass pipe
                        Stripper:  Unspecified
 Type of  solvent:   2-ethyhexanol
 Solvent  flow rate:  0.0021 m3/hr
 Wastewater flow rate:  0.016 m3/hr
                                 REMOVAL DATA

 Sampling:   Unspecified	Analysis:  Data set 6 (V.7.3.26)

                             Concentration        Percent    Detection
   Pollutant/parameter	Influent    Effluent    removal	limit	

 Toxic pollutants,  yg/L:
   1,2-Dichloroethane       1,500,000   <20,000        >99


 Blanks indicate  data not  available.
Date:   9/25/81               III.3.1.20-19
-------
III.3.1.21  Ultrafiltration

     Description

Ultrafiltration is a physical unit process used to segregate
dissolved or suspended solids from a liquid stream on the basis
of molecular size.  High-molecular-weight solutes or colloids are
separated from a suspension or solution through the use of semi-
permeable polymeric membranes.  The process has been successfully
applied to both homogeneous solutions and colloidal suspensions,
which are difficult to separate practically by other techniques.
To date, commercial applications have been entirely focused on
aqueous media.

The membrane of an ultrafilter forms a molecular screen that
separates molecular particles based on their differences in size,
shape, and chemical structure.  A hydrostatic pressure, ranging
from 34 to 690 kPa (5 to 100 psi), is applied to the upstream
side of a tubular membrane unit, which acts as a filter, passing
small particles, such as salts, while blocking (rejecting) larger
emulsified and suspended matter.  The pores of Ultrafiltration
membranes are much smaller than the retained particles thereby
preventing the particles from clogging the membrane.  If the pore
size of the membrane is properly selected to suit the wastewater
being treated, particles near the minimum removal size will not
clog the membrane.  In contrast to ordinary filtration, the
concentrated retained particles are continuously washed off the
membrane filter rather than held by the filter.

     Representative Types and Modifications

Ultrafiltration membranes are asymmetrical structures, possessing
an extremely thin selective layer (0.1 to 1.0 microns thick)
supported on a thicker spongy substructure.  Controlled variation
of fabrication methods can produce membranes with desirable
retentive characteristics for a number of separation applica-
tions.  It has become possible to tailor membranes with a wide
range of selective properties.  For example, tight membranes can
retain organic solutes with molecular weights of 500 to 1,000
while allowing passage of most inorganic salts.  Conversely,
loose membranes can discriminate between solutes with molecular
weights of 1,000,000 and 250,000 [3-36].

Membranes can be made from various synthetic or natural polymeric
materials.  These range from hydrophilic polymers such as cellu-
lose, to highly hydrophobic materials such as fluorinated poly-
mers.  Polyarylsulfones and inorganic materials have been intro-
duced to deal with high temperatures and pH values.  Other forms
and materials are available, including porous zirconia, deposited
on a porous carbon substrate and on a porous ceramic tube.  The
latter two systems, while more expensive than the former, are
also capable of withstanding very high pH values and temperatures.


Date:  9/25/81            III.3.1.21-1
-------
     Ultrafiltration differs from other membrane processes such
as reverse osmosis (Section III.3.1.16) in the size of contam-
inants passed.  Ultrafiltration generally retains particulates
and materials with a molecular weight greater than 500,  while
reverse osmosis membranes generally pass only materials with a
molecular weight below 100.  The membranes used in Ultrafiltra-
tion have pores large enough to eliminate osmotic pressure allow-
ing operation at relatively low pressures when compared to re-
verse osmosis.

     Technology Status

Ultrafiltration has demonstrated unique capabilities in oil/water
separation (Section III.3.1.14).   The process has also been used
for the removal of macromolecules such as proteins/ enzymes,
starches, and other organic polymers.

     Applications

Ultrafiltration can be used for (1) concentration, where the
desired component is rejected by the membrane and taken off as a
fluid concentrate; (2) fractionation, for systems where more than
one solute is to be recovered, and products are taken from both
the rejected concentrate and permeate; and (3) purification,
where the desired product is purified solvent.

Ultrafiltration is presently not a widely used process but has
potential application to wastewater treatment.  Only one industry
currently uses Ultrafiltration on a widespread basis; the electro-
plating subcategory of the Metal Finishing industry uses ultra-
filtration to remove oil or paint contaminated wastes from the
process effluent stream [3-3].  Limited application of ultra-
filtration is reported in the following industries:

     - Aluminum Forming,
     - Iron and Steel Manufacturing,
     - Metal Finishing,
     - Battery Manufacturing,
     - Porcelain Enameling, and
     - Nonferrous Metals Manufacturing.

     Advantages and Limitations

Ultrafiltration is uniquely capable of making certain separations
especially from concentrated streams with little or no pretreat-
ment required.  It is sometimes a viable alternative to chemical
treatment because of its lower equipment installation and operat-
ing costs.  The process is also insensitive to the chemical
nature of the waste stream and needs no chemical addition.

Ultrafiltration is especially advantageous for oil removal. The
process gives high oil removal efficiency independent of the


Date:  9/25/81             III.3.1.21-2
-------
influent oil concentration.   No oily sludge is generated and the
membrane itself provides a positive barrier between oil and
effluent preventing any accidental oil discharge.   The unit is
very compact and utilizes a small amount of floor space.

The limitations include the need for careful pilot studies be-
cause the system design and determination of operating parameters
are critical.  For satisfactory operation, the unit must operate
within a narrow temperature range of about 18 to 30°C (64 to
86°F).  Membrane life is decreased with higher temperatures, but
flux increases at elevated temperatures.  Therefore, surface area
requirements are a function of temperature and become a tradeoff
between initial costs and replacement costs for the membrane
[3-33].

The membranes cannot handle certain solutions such as strong
oxidizing agents, solvents,  and other organic compounds that can
cause dissolution of the membrane.  Also some compounds are
poorly rejected.  Slightly soluble components can foul the mem-
brane although the high velocity of the wastewater normally
creates enough turbulence to minimize the problem.  Pretreatment
may be necessary for removal of large solids particles that can
pierce the membrane.

     Reliability

Ultrafiltration is continually being refined.  The individual
process reliability will depend on the specific application and
the pretreatment used.

     Chemicals Required

No chemicals are required in this process.

     Residuals Generated

Because Ultrafiltration involves no chemical conversion, residues
from the process are typically a concentrate of the undesirable
or hazardous components.  The process generally serves to provide
a greatly reduced volume of hazardous waste, but does not inher-
ently provide any elimination of waste.  Noteworthy exceptions
are those cases where a pollutant can be recovered as a valuable
byproduct.  Otherwise, organic concentrates require further
processing for ultimate disposal, such as additional concentra-
tion and incineration.  In some fractionation applications, the
concentrate and permeate require further processing before end
disposal occurs.

     Design Criteria

Typical design criteria are presented in Table 3.1.21-1.
Date:  9/25/81            III.3.1.21-3
-------
   TABLE 3.1.21-1.   ULTRAFILTRATION DESIGN CRITERIA
                    [3-1,  3-23]
Criteria
Pore size
Flux

Operating pressure

Pressure drop

Units
mm
L/day/m2
(gpd/ft2)
kPa
(psig)
kPa
(psig)
Value/Range
0.001 -
200 -
(5 -
0 -
(0 -
34 -
(5 -
1.0
41,000
1,000
690
100)
200
30)
A schematic of the process is shown in Figure 3.1.21-1.

After a suitable membrane providing maximum attainable removal of
the desired particles has been chosen, the next criterion is the
membrane capacity (flux).  Flux is the volume of water passed
through the membrane area per unit time.   It is desirable to
maximize flux in order to minimize equipment and operating costs.
Membrane flux is normally dependent on operating pressure, temp-
erature, flux velocity, solids concentration (both total dis-
solved solids and total suspended solids), membrane permeability,
membrane thickness,  and fluid viscosity.   Membrane flux is also
affected by the surface tension of the solution being processed.
With a fixed geometry, membrane flux will increase as the fluid
pressure is increased in the system.  This increase in pressure
will require greater capacity and more horsepower.  Less membrane
area is, therefore,  required per unit of effluent to be treated
with higher fluid pressures; membrane replacement and initial
capital costs decrease.  Opposing these cost decreases is the
increase in power cost.

                         Performance

Subsequent data sheets provide performance data from studies on
the following industries and/or waste streams:

                         - Aluminum Forming,
                         - Auto and Other Laundries,
                         - Rubber Manufacturing, and
                         - Timber Products Processing.

                         References

3-1, 3-3, 3-5, 3-12, 3-16, 3-17, 3-23, 3-24, 3-29, 3-31, 3-33,
3-36.
Date:  9/25/81            III.3.1.21-4
-------
               I
PRESSURIZED SOUITION OF (A).IB)
                                                    CONCENTRATED (A)
               *• ••
                              •  •
                        • SJ

                           •
                        •   •
                                      .   .
                                                     • MEMBRANE
                I
                                    SOLUTION OF IB)
            FIGURE  III.3.1.21.1.   SCHEMATIC OF  MEMBRANE
                                     ULTRAFILTRATION PROCESS
Date:   9/25/81
            III.3.1.21-5
-------
                                                 * * *






















z
o
[Z
^
ce
h-
j
~
U.
^
ce
i-

3

CC
o
u.
ce


3
co
O
o
0
z
X
o
u

_J
o
z
8




















*

^,
u

IN
0
^
CO

—
CO
^


co
ce
c
o
p
CO
i.
P
C
o
c
o
o

p
c
CO
3
_
<*-
+.
J








CO
4J
C
o
Q

CO
CO
Q























c
CO
•"•
^
CO
z




CO
O
c
co
ce



c
co
•o
CO
z







CD
O
C
CO
ce






CO
CO
u
M
^
3
U.




CO
CC
o
m
•P
o
ft















*>
d
*

_
£
cor- ON CM
CO CO ON CO
A




ON
CO ON ON CM
COONA ON

1 1 1 1

co o in^
m — r —



oomo
— CM V O
CMP- CM






o
0
oa-o
co *CM VO
O\ CM CM vo

1 1 1 1

CM^ONO
— • — •
CMO —

O
















oQ co r*" *o




j
x^
O>
E

 c s.
O <0 Ol
£.£
Q. O.T3
c
	 CO
CO CO C

O O— s-
H ^ O -^

zor-inzoN^c\jr-ONvoinsoNONZ — ZTSZ^COONO-^SS
zONvovozin— roONONcoONZovONzr-zzzzovr-invozz
A





co o mco co
Ov ON ONco ON

1 1 1 1 1

r- j- j-o in
VO JS- it P-



•JOOO^O^'OO-Jco-^OQO VO 	 1  . « OCM
v CM— — cviin*

iii i i i i

— J 00— 1 — l^O-J
avoo o . — a
co ca co o ca





















CO
co
CO
£
P
.. ^ —
-J O.CD O
~x -PC >CO *> 0. 	 C
•> X£ CO O <- >> CO 0)
in aj P— s- o£ >
c — a.£ — a> a> £ co 3 £
co >>p£cea>oo MCD
P £— £ O CO »CE t- O-Q
3 -p>,a— NfcDt-cooouj-a —
— E CD *> I- C +>— O C — XOQ C co
— OE3 CO >, 13— H- CD CO CO £ CO d- CO £ CO X Q LJ
O — 3 — «- -o I 	 CNJjQ >>— 1 C £• C O-£ O — U 1 CO 1 1C
a. c — e oj — 3a> «— I£OVOCD— co«*>'->»cocoi«- to —
CO E O aCT3 O JC O CPC .N >>3 C£ O£ *-£ coa-£ S-
OU5T3i-Q.CO(Dt-OC«l 0) COd- C£— CO a— P P a-P Q.-D
— l-co£O>>0)CD 	 £ »0)'POOco£ajCO— CO «— C
o
























































CO*
CO

CO
co *>

p i
0 —
c —

CO C
P O
eo— — CO
•0 W • 3 3
CO CO CO Ol CO
•P P P C >
ca CD o~
OT3 CO C CO
— +> CO*J
T3 i Q) fl) W
C 0-0 E E
CO PP X
MX) O O O
J£ C C t-
c « a
co_i « « a.
CQCOZZ*
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.1.21-6
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Ultrafiltration
Data source:   Effluent Guidelines                  Data source status:
Point source:   Aluminum forming                      Not specified          	
Subcategory:   Unspecified                             Bench scale            	
Plant:  B                                              Pilot scale            	
References:   3-27,  pp. 88, 282-288                   Full scale             	x_
Pretreatment/treatment:  Oil.  Sep. (emulsion breaking)/Ultrafiltration

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater  flow rate:  Unspecified           Pressure  drop-.  Unspecified
Product flow  rate:   Unspecified              Operating pressure:  Unspecified
Flux rate:  Unspecified
Membrane type:  Unspecified
Retentate  (concentrate) flow  rate:  Unspecified
                                    REMOVAL DATA

             Sampling:  Three 2U-hour or one
                     72-hour composite	Analysis: Data set 2 (V.7.3.7)
Pol latent/parameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
Oi 1 and grease
Suspended sol Ids
COD
TOC
Pheno 1
pH, pH units
Toxic pollutants, M9/L:
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Zinc
Acenapthene
Benzene
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
Chloroform
Ethyl benzene
Methylene chloride
Napthalene
Pheno 1
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) ph thai ate
Dl-n-butyl ph thai ate
Diethyl phtnalate
Tetrachloroethylene
To 1 uene
14,14-DOE
a 1 pha-endosu I ran
Endrin aldehyde
alpha-BHC
beta-BHC
PCB-12II2, 1251), 1221
PCB-1232, 12148, 1260, 1016
Concent ra
Influent

13
2.6
31
12
0.022
7.9

BOL
ND
NO
NO
BDL
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
140
500
17
30
67
ND
7,900
820
93
110
3,000
17
7
BDL
BDL
12
5
110
360
tlon
Effluent

0.11
0.019
2.i«
1.0
0.016
8.0

BDL
BDL
<68
BDL
BDL
BDL
1
<10
BDL
3
ND
ND
62
36
320
66
9,700
BDL
13
BDL
200
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
Percent
remova I

99
99
92
92
27
NM

NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
99»
99*
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
99*
86
95*
93
71*
6
-------
TREATMENT  TECHNOLOGY!   Ultrafiltration
Data source: Government  report
Point source: Auto  and .other laundries
Subcategory:  See below
Plant:  Unspecified
References: 3-94, pp.32-41
Pretreatment/treatment:  See Below/Ultrafiltration
                    Data source  status:
                       Not  specified
                       Bench scale
                       Pilot scale
                       Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING  PARAMETERS
Wastewater flow rate: Unspecified
Product  flow  rate:   Unspecified
Flux rate: See  below
Membrane type:  Abcor, Inc., type HFD or
  HFM
Retentate (concentrate)  flow  rate: Unspeci-
  fied
               Pressure drop: See below
               Operating pressure:   Unspecified
               Operating temperature:   52°C
               Recycle flow rate:  Total  recycle
                 of permeate and concentrate
               Membrane configuration:  See be-
                 low
                                      REMOVAL DATA
        SanplIna: See below
                                                      Analysis:  Data set 3 IV.7.3.11


subcateuorv
Industrfal laundries(a)
Industrial laundries(b)
Industrial laundrles(c)
Industrial laundries(d)

Flux rate.
cu.m./d/sa.*.
0.69
1.5
1.6
1.8
Ave rage feed
flow rate,
cu.m./nm
0. 17
0.2J
0.31)
0.36
Average

TOC
pressure drop. Concentration. ma/L
kPa
100
it
83
90
Influent
2,500
2,500
35,000
35.000
Effluent
M20
370
9HO
920

Percent
remova 1
84
85
97
97
        Blanks Indicate data not available.

        (a)LIghtly polluted industrial laundry wastewater; membrane configuration: spiral wound, corrugated
          spacer; sampling period:  sampled after 53 and 239 hr of operation.

        (b)Llghtly polluted industrial laundry wastewater; membrane configuration: spiral wound, open mesh;
          sampling period: sampled after 53 and 239 hr of operation.

        (c)Heavlly polluted Industrie I laundry wastewater; pretreatment: oiI separation; membrane
          configuration:  spiral wound, open spacer; sampling period:  sampled after 19.** and 2'(2 hr. •

        (d)Heavily polluted industrial laundry wastewater; pretreatment: oil separation; membrane configuration:
          spiral wound, corrugated spacer; sampling period: sampled after 19.M and 2142 hr.
  Date:    9/25/81
III.3.1.21-8
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Ultrafiltration
Data source: Government report
Point source: Auto and other laundries
Subcategory:  Industrial laundries(a)
Plant:  Unspecified
References-. 3-94, pp.32-41,  90
                    Data source  status:
                      Not specified
                      Bench scale
                      Pilot scale
                      Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:   Unspecified/Ultrafiltration
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate: 0.246-0.284 m3/min
Product flow rate: 0.227-0.265 m3/min
Flux rate:  1.22-1.42 m3/d/m2
Membrane type:  Abcor Inc.,  types HFD/cor-
  rugated spacer and HFM/open spacer
Retentate (concentrate) flow rate:  0.189 m3/min
Membrane configuration:  Spiral wound
Recycle flow rate:  All concentrate recycled
               Pressure  drop:  62-69  kPa
               Operating pressure:   Unspecified
               Water recovery:   92.8%
               Inlet pressure:   310-340  kPa
                                REMOVAL DATA
Sampling;  Unspecified
                 Analysis;   Data  set  3  (V.7.3.1)
   Pollutant/parameter
   Concentration      Percent   Detection
Influent   Effluent   removal     limit
Classical pollutants,  mg/L:
  BOD5                          1,700       550        68
  COD                           5,500       800        85
  TOC                           1,200       200        83
  TSS                             680       2.4       >99
  Oil and grease                  800        10        99
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Cadmium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Zinc
Chromium
Iron
Nickel
Zinc
Iron

30
1,200
2,100
0.5
1,400
<500
6,500
<500
9,000
90,000

<10
<500
<1,000
0.4
<500
<500
<1,000
<500
180
1,800

>67
<58
<52
20
>64
NM
85
NM
98
98
Blanks indicate data not available.
NM, not meaningful.
(a)"Medium polluted" industrial laundry wastewater.
Date:   9/25/81
  III.3.1.21-9
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Ultrafiltration
Data source:   Government report
Point source:  Auto and other laundries
Subcategory:   Industrial laundries(a)
Plant:  Unspecified
References:    3-94, pp.32-41,91
Pretreatment/treatment: Oil Sep./Ultrafiltration
                    Data  source  status:
                      Not specified
                      Bench scale
                      Pilot scale
                      Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate: 0.341-0.360 m3/min
Product flow rate: 0.318-0.333 m3/min
Flux rate:  1.83-2.04 m3/d/m2
Membrane type:  Abcor Inc.,  type HFD/
  open - spacer and HFM.corrugated spacer
Retentate (concentrate) flow rate:  0.02-
  0.03 m3/min
Membrane configuration:  Spiral wound
Recycle flow rate:  All concentrate recycled
               Pressure drop:  Unspecified
               Operating pressures   Unspecified
               Operating temperature:   52°C
               Water recovery:  92.8%
               Inlet pressure:  310-345 kPa
                               REMOVAL DATA
Sampling;  Unspecified
                 Analysis;   Data set 3 (V.7.3.1)
   Pollutant/parameter
   Concentration      Percent   Detection
Influent   Effluent   removal     limit
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  BOD5                         7,900        930        88
  COD                         27,000      2,400        91
  TOC                          6,800        640        91
  TSS                          4,500         <5       >99
  Oil and grease               7,900         38       >99
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Zinc
Iron

150
8,800
11,000
22,000
0.9
740
9,000
90,000

<10
2,900
1,100
<1,000
0.8
<500
180
1,800

>93
67
90
>95
11
>32
98
98
Blanks indicate data not available.
(a)"Heavily polluted" industrial laundry supply.
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.1.21-10
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Ultrafiltration
Data source:  Government report
Point source: Auto and other laundries
Subcategory:  Industrial laundries(a)
Plant:  Unspecified
References: 3-94, pp.  32-41, 89
Pretreatment/treatment: Unspecified/Ultrafiltration
                    Data source status:
                      Not specified
                      Bench scale
                      Pilot scale
                      Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:   Unspecified
Product flow rate:   0.159-0.212 m3/min
Flux rate: 1.22-1.63 m3/d/m2
Membrane type: Abcor Inc.,  types HFD/cor-
  rugated spacer and HFM/open spacer
Retentate (concentrate) flow rate: 0.011-
  0.015 m3/min
Membrane configuration:  Spiral wound
Recycle flow rate:   All concentrate recycled
               Pressure drop-.  41-76  kPa
               Operating pressure: Unspecified
               Operating temperature:  52°C
               Water recovery: 92.8%
               Inlet pressure: 310-345 kPa
               Feed flow rate: 0.17-0.227  m3/min
                                REMOVAL DATA
Sampling; Unspecified
                  Analysis:   Data set 3 (V.7.3.1)
   Pollutant/parameter
   Concentration      Percent   Detection
Influent   Effluent   removal     limit
Classical pollutants,  mg/L:
  BOD5                          2,800       360       87
  COD                           3,800       670       82
  TOC                           1,100       200       82
  TSS                             700        <4      >99
  Oil and grease                  750        28       96
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Cadmium
Copper
Lead
Zinc
Chromium
Iron
Nickel
Mercury

50
1,700
3,900
3,900
<500
17,000
<500
<2

<5
<500
<1,000
200
<500
<1,000
<500
<2

>90
>71
>74
95
NM
>94
NM
NM
Blanks indicate data not available.
NM, not meaningful.
Date:   9/25/81
 III.3.1.21-11
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Ultrafiltration
Data source:   Government report
Point source: Auto and other laundries
Subcategory:  Industrial laundries
Plant: Standard Uniform Rental Service
        (Dorchester,  Mass.)
References:  3-94, p. 70
Pretreatment/treatment:  Filter/Ultrafiltration

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
                    Data  source  status:
                      Not specified
                      Bench scale
                      Pilot scale
                      Full scale
Wastewater flow rate: 0.341-0.360 m /min
Product flow rate: Unspecified
Flux rate:  0.122-1.62 m3/d/m2
Membrane type:  Abcor, Inc.,  type HFM/open
  mesh spacer,  Vexan spacer, corrugated
  spacer
Retentate (concentrate) flow rate: Unspecified
Membrane configuration:  Spiral Wound
               Inlet pressure:   324-345  kPa
               Pressure drop:   Unspecified
               Operating pressure:  Unspecified
               Operating temperature:  57°C
                                REMOVAL DATA
Sampling; Unspecified
                  Analysis;   Data set 3 (V.7.3.1)
   Pollutant/parameter
   Concentration (a)  Percent   Detection
Influent   Effluent   removal     limit
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  BOD 5                         1,000
  COD                          3,000
  TOC                            760
  TSS                            480
  Oil and grease                 600
              190
              350
              120
               <9
 81
 88
 84
>96
>99
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Iron
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Zinc

<200
<500
900
5,900
1,800
1.5
<500
1,700
«
<200
<500
<500
<1,000
<1,000
1
<500
420

m
m
>44
>44
>44
33
NM
75
Blanks indicate data not available.
NM, not meaningful.
(a)Average of concentrations for six different conversion periods;  67-99%.
 Date:   9/25/81
  III.3.1.21-12
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Ultrafiltration
Data source:   Government  report
Point source:  Synthetic  rubber manufacturing
Subcategory:   See below
Plant:   See below
References:   3-48, pp. 63,68,79,122,159
Pretreatment/treatment:   Screen./Ultrafiltration
                                                             Data  source status
                                                                Not specified
                                                                Bench scale
                                                                Pilot scale
                                                                Full scale
DESIGN  OR OPERATING  PARAMETERS
                                                       Pressure  drop:   Unspecified
                                                       Operating pressure:   345 kPa
Wastewater  flow  rate:   Unspecified
Product  flow rate:   Unspecified
Flux rate:   Unspecified
Membrane type:   Abcor  Inc., HFM  (unless otherwise  specified)
Retentate  (concentrate)  flow  rate:  Unspecified
Membrane configuration:   Tubular  (unless  otherwise  specified)
REMOVAL DATA
Samollnq: Unspecified Analysis: Data set 1 (V.7.3.29)
Subcateqorv
Emul si on crumb(a )
Latex(b)
Latexjc)
Solution crumb(d)
Emulsion crumb(a)
Latex(b)
Latexjc)
Solution crumb(e)
Subcateqorv
Emulsion crumb! a)
La tex( b)
Latexjc)
Solution crumb(d)
Temperature,
°C
38
50
50
38
38
50
50
38

Concentrate
Influent
920
99,000
620
Oil

Concentr
Influent
98
100
1,1400
86
Concentr
Influent
190
2M.OOO
COD
>n. mq/L
Effluent
830
780
and qrease
concentration. mq/L
Influent Effluent
Emulsion crumb(a)
Latex( b)
Latexjc)
Solution crumb(e)
12
5
1 1
BODI 5 1
•ation. mq/L
Effluent
12
147
230
30
TSS
•ation. mq/L
Effluent
118
220

Percent
removal
10
99
29
Percent
remova 1
58
61

Percent
remova 1
88
53
84
65
Percent
remova 1
75
99
TOC
Concentration. mq/L
Influent Effluent
330 250
320 66
IllO 120

Percent
remova 1
214
79
IU
                   Blanks indicate data not aval table.
                   (a)Wastewater was adjusted with sulfuric acid to a pH of ii.o before ship-
                      ment in order to maintain sample integrity; membrane configuration:
                      tubular and spiral; feed circulation rate:  tubular model - 6 8 m(3)/hr-
                      spiral model - 22.7 m(3)/hr.                               '
                   (b)Plant:  styrene-butadiene latex manufacturing; feed circulation rate-
                      7.9 to 8.M m(3)/hr.
                   (c)Plant:  styrene-butadiene latex manufacturing; feed circulation rate-
                      7.9 to B.I m|3)/hr; Wastewater is 3.6% latex washwater,  in full scale
                      operation this would represent 70% to 90% of plant effluent; bench
                      seale.
                   (d)Wastewater is from production of solution crumb rubbers, adhesives, and
                      antioxidants.  Approximately 70% of wastewater is attributed to solution
                      crumb rubber manufacture; of this volume, two-thirds comes from the
                      production of polyisoprene rubber.  Feed circulation rate: 6  9 m(3)/hr
                   (e)Slnce the majority of production at the time of sampling was geared to
                      nonextended" rubbers,  the relatively low oil and grease content in
                      the sampled wastewater would be expected.
                   (f)Unless otherwise specified.
  Date:    9/25/81
                                         III.3.1.21-13
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Ultrafiltration
Data source:  Government report                   Data source status:
Point source:  Synthetic rubber manufacturing       Not specified         	
Subcategory:  Unspecified                           Bench scale           	
Plant:  Unspecified                                 Pilot scale           	x_
References:  3-48, p. 159                           Full scale            	
Pretreatment/treatment:  Screen./Ultrafiltration

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified           Pressure drop:  Unspecified
Product flow rate:  Unspecified              Operating pressure:  Unspecified
Flux rate:  Unspecified
Membrane type:  Abcor Inc., HFM (unless otherwise specified)
Retentate (concentrate) flow rate:  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA

 Sampling;  Unspecified	Analysis;  Data set 1 (V.7.3.29)

                             	TOC	
                              Concentration, mg/L      Percent
 Pretreatment of influent     Influent     Effluent     removal
Screening(a)
-U)
Screening(b)
™*
650
650
270
270
380
410
200
180
42
37
26
33
 (a)l%  triton x-100  (a nonionic surfactant) was added.
 (b)Membrane type used is Abcor, Inc., type HFA.
Date:   9/25/81               III.3.1.21-14
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Ultrafiltration
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines                Data source status:
Point source:  Timber products                     Not  specified
Subcategory:  Unspecified                          Bench scale
Plant:  Unspecified                                Pilot scale
References:  3-65,  p. E-3                          Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Ultrafiltration

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  137 m3/day           Pressure drop:  Unspecified
Product flow rate:   Unspecified             Operating pressure:  331 kPa
Flux rate:  4,030 m3/hr/m2                  Water  recovery:  96.2%
Membrane type:  Unspecified
Retentate (concentrate) flow rate:   Unspecified
                                   REMOVAL  DATA

        Sample;  Unspecified	Analysis-.  Data  set 3  (V.7.3.33)

                                         Concentration         Percent

        Pollutant/parameter	Influent(a) Effluent     removal

        Classical pollutants,  mg/L:
          Oil and grease                 2,200        55          98


        (a)Pentachlorophenol wastewater.
Date:   9/25/81              III.3.1.21-15
-------
III.3.2  BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT

III.3.2.1  Activated Sludge

     Description

The activated sludge process is a biological treatment process
primarily used for the removal of organic material from waste-
water.  It is characterized by a suspension of aerobic and facul-
tative microorganisms maintained in a relatively homogeneous
state by mixing or by the turbulence induced by aeration.  These
microorganisms oxidize soluble organics and agglomerate colloidal
and particulate solids in the presence of dissolved molecular
oxygen.  The process can be preceded by sedimentation (Section
III.3.1.18) to remove larger and heavier solid particles if
needed.  The mixture of microorganisms, agglomerated particles,
and wastewaters (referred to as mixed liquor) is aerated in an
ae'ration basin.  The aeration step is followed by sedimentation
to separate biological sludge from treated wastewater.  The major
portion of the microorganisms and solids removed by sedimentation
are recycled to the aeration basins to be recombined with in-
coming wastewater, while the excess, which constitutes the waste
sludge, is sent to sludge disposal facilities.

The activated sludge biomass is made up of bacteria, fungi,
protozoa, rotifers, and other higher forms of life.  The bac-
teria are the most important group of microorganisms as they are
responsible for stabilizations of the organic matter and forma-
tion of the biological floe.  The function of the biomass is to
convert the soluble organic compounds to cellular material.  This
conversion consists of transfer of organic matter (also referred
to as substrate or food) through the cell wall into the cytoplasm,
oxidation of substrate to produce energy, and synthesis of pro-
tein and other cellular components from the substrate.  Some of
the cellular material undergoes auto-oxidation (self-oxidation or
endogenous respiration) in the aeration basin, the remainder
forming net growth or excess sludge.  In addition to the direct
removal of dissolved organics by biosorption, the biomass can
also remove suspended matter and colloidal matter.  The suspended
matter is removed by enmeshment in the biological floe.  The
colloidal material is removed by physiochemical adsorption on the
biological floe.  Volatile compounds may be driven off to a
certain extent in the aeration process.  Metals are also partially
removed, and accumulate in the sludge.

The effectiveness of the activated sludge process is governed by
several design and operation variables.  The key variables are
organic loading, sludge retention time, hydraulic or aeration
detention time, and oxygen requirements.  The organic loading is
described as the food to microorganism (F/M) ratio, the kilograms
of BOD5 applied daily to the system per kilogram of mixed liquor
suspended solids (MLSS).  The MLSS in the aeration tank is deter-


Date:  9/25/81            III.3.2.1-1
-------
mined by the rate and concentration of activated sludge returned
to the tank.  The organic loading (F/M ratio) affects the BOD
removal, oxygen requirements,  biomass production,  and the settle-
ability of the biomass.   The sludge retention time (SRT) or
sludge age is a measure of the average retention time of solids
in the activated sludge system.   Sludge retention time is im-
portant in the operation of an activated sludge system as it must
be maintained at a level which is greater than the maximum gene-
ration time of microorganisms in the system.   If adequate sludge
retention time is not maintained, the bacteria are washed from
the system faster than they can reproduce themselves and the
process fails.  The SRT also effects the degree of treatment and
production of waste sludge.  A high SRT results in carrying a
high quantity of solids in the system and obtaining a higher
degree of treatment and also results in the production of less
waste sludge.  The hydraulic detention time is used to determine
the size of the aeration tank and should be determined by use of
F/M ratio, SRT, and MLSS.

Oxygen requirements are based on the amount required for BOD5
synthesis and the amount required for endogenous respiration.
The design parameters will vary with the type of wastewater to be
treated and are usually determined in a treatability study.  The
oxygen requirement to satisfy BOD synthesis is established by the
characteristics of the wastewater.  The oxygen requirement to
satisfy endogenous respiration is established by the total solids
maintained in the system and their characteristics.

     Representative Types and Modifications

Modifications of the activated sludge process are common, as the
process is extremely versatile and can be adapted for a wide
variety of organically contaminated wastewaters.  The typical
modification may represent a variation in one or more of the key
design parameters, including the food-to-microorganism  (F/M)
loading, aeration location and type, sludge return, and contact
basin configuration.  The modifications in practice have been
identified by the major characteristics that distinguish the
particular configuration.  The characteristic types and modi-
fications are briefly described as follows:

     (1)  Conventional Activated Sludge.  In this process, both
          influent wastewater and recycled sludge enter the
          reactor at the head end of the aeration tank.  Conven-
          tional systems are usually designed for organic loading
          (F/M) of 0.2 to 0.4 kg BOD/day/kg MLSS and aeration
          detention time of 4 to 8 hours.  Aeration can be of the
          diffused or mechanical type and is applied at a con-
          stant rate as the mixed liquor moves through  the tank
          in a plug-flow fashion.  Oxygen demand decreases as the
          mixed liquor travels the tank length.  The mixed liquor
          is settled in a clarifier, and the activated  sludge is


Date:   9/25/81            III.3.2.1-2
-------
          returned at a rate of approximately 25 to 50% of the
          influent flow rate depending upon the concentration of
          sludge removed from the clarifiers.  This return sludge
          usually accounts for 90 to 95% of the sludge removed.
          The remaining 5 to 10% is the waste sludge produced by
          the system.

          (a)  Complete Mix Activated Sludge - This process is a
               modification of the conventional process in which
               the influent wastewater and the recycled sludge
               enter the reactor at several points in the aera-
               tion tank.  The mixed liquor is aerated at a
               constant rate as it passes through the tank.  The
               contents of the reactor are completely mixed and
               the oxygen demand remains uniform throughout.  The
               organic loading (F/M) usually ranges from 0.2 to
               0.6 kg BOD/day/kg MLSS and the aeration period is
               from 3 to 5 hours.  The activated sludge is re-
               turned at a rate of 25 to 100% of the influent
               flow rate, depending upon the concentration of
               sludge removed from the clarifiers.

          (b)  Tapered Aeration - This process is a modification
               of the conventional process in which air is sup-
               plied in the greatest quantity where the oxygen
               demand is greatest.  The aerators are spaced close
               together at the head of the reactor where waste-
               water and return activated sludge come in contact
               and more oxygen is required.  As the mixed liquor
               traverses the aeration tank, the oxygen demand
               decreases and aeration is decreased by spacing the
               aerators further apart.  Since the air supply is
               decreased with the oxygen demand,  a lower overall
               air requirement is a benefit of the tapered-
               aeration process.

          (c)  Step Aeration - This process is also a modifica-
               tion of the conventional activated sludge process.
               In this modification, the wastewater is introduced
               at several points in a compartmentalized reactor
               while the return activated sludge is introduced at
               the head of the reactor.  Each compartment of the
               reactor comprises a separate step,  and the several
               steps are linked together in series.  Aeration can
               be of the diffused or mechanical type and kept at
               a constant rate as the mixed liquor moves through
               the tank in a plug-flow fashion.  The oxygen
               demand is more uniformly spread over the length of
               the reactor than in the conventional activated
               sludge process,  resulting in better utilization of
               the oxygen supply.
Date:  9/25/81            III.3.2.1-3
-------
     (2)   Pure Oxygen Activated Sludge.  The use of pure oxygen
          for activated  sludge treatment has become competitive
          with the use of  air as  a result of the development of
          efficient  oxygen dissolution  systems.  The main bene-
          fits for the process include  reduced power requirements
          for the required oxygen transfer to the wastewater,
          reduced aeration tank volume, and improved biokinetics
          of the activated sludge system.  In the covered process
          the oxygenation  is performed  in a staged, covered
          reactor.   High-purity oxygen  gas (90 to 100%) enters
          the first  stage  of the  system and flows through the
          oxygenation basin concurrently with the wastewater
          being treated.   Gas is  vented only from the  last stage
          after approximately 90% of  the oxygen has been utilized.
          Pressure under the tank covers is slightly above atmo-
          spheric, being held at  50 to  100 mm (2 to 4  inches)
          water column,  which is  sufficient to maintain oxygen
          gas feed control and prevent  backmixing from stage to
          stage.  Effluent mixed  liquor is separated in conven-
          tional gravity clarifiers,  and the thickened sludge is
          recycled to the  first stage for contact with influent
          wastewater.

          Oxygen transfer  and mixing  within each stage are accom-
          plished either with surface aerators or with a  sub-
          merged-turbine rotating-sparge system.  In the  first
          case, mass transfer occurs  at the gas/liquid interface;
          in the latter, oxygen is  sparged into the mixed  liquor
          where mass transfer occurs  from the oxygen bubbles to
          the bulk  liquid.  In both cases, the mass transfer
          process is enhanced by  the  high oxygen partial pressure
          maintained under the tank covers in each  stage.

          Although the process can be operated in any  of  the
          normally used  flow regimes  (i.e., plug-flow, complete
          mix,  step  aeration, and contact stabilization),  the
          plug-flow  mode is  the favored method of oxygen  contact
          employed.

          In the open  reactor system, oxygenation is performed  in
          an open tank  in  which extremely fine porous  diffusers
          are utilized  to  develop small oxygen gas  bubbles and
          increase  the  efficiency of  oxygen transfer to waste-
          water.  The  influent to the system  enters the oxygena-
          tion  tank  and  is mixed  with return  activated sludge.
          The mixed  liquor is continuously and thoroughly mixed
          using a  low-energy mechanical mixing device. Pure
          oxygen  in the  form of micro-size bubbles  is  introduced
          into  the  tank by a rotating diffuser.  As the diffuser
          rotates  at constant  speed in  the mixed  liquor,  hydraulic
          shear wipes  bubbles from  the  medium before they have  an
          opportunity  to coalesce and enlarge.
Date:  9/25/81            III.3.2.1-4
-------
     (3)  High Rate Activated Sludge.   This process modification
          is similar to the conventional or tapered-aeration
          process, except that the aeration period is shorter and
          the food-to-microorganism ratio is higher.  Activated
          sludge is returned at a rate of only 5 to 15% of in-
          fluent flow rate.  The rate of BOD removal for this
          process is higher than that of conventional activated
          sludge processes, but the overall efficiency of BOD
          removal is lower.  Therefore, the process is not suit-
          able where a high-quality effluent is desired.

     (4)  Contact Stabilization.  This process takes advantage of
          the adsorptive properties of activated sludge by oper-
          ating the process in two stages.  The first stage is
          the adsorptive phase, in which most of the colloidal,
          finely suspended, and dissolved organics are adsorbed
          on the activated sludge in a contact tank.  The waste-
          water and return stabilized sludge enter at the head of
          the contact tank, are aerated for a short period of
          time (usually 20 to 60 minutes) and settled in a con-
          ventional clarifier.  The second stage is the oxidation
          phase, in which the adsorbed organics are metabolically
          assimilated providing energy and resulting in the
          production of new cells.  In this stage, the settled
          sludge from the adsorptive stage is usually aerated for
          3 to 6 hours in a stabilization tank.  A portion of the
          sludge is wasted to maintain a constant mixed liquor
          volatile suspended solids (MLVSS) concentration in the
          stabilization tank.  Overall aeration requirements are
          approximately 50% of the conventional or tapered-
          aeration plant.  However, the process is usually not
          effective in treating industrial waste in which the
          organic matter is predominantly soluble.

     (5)  Extended Aeration.   This process involves a long deten-
          tion time and a low organic loading (F/M ratio of 0.05
          to 0.15).  This low F/M ratio results in a high degree
          of oxidation and a minimum of excess sludge.  The
          process is very stable and can accept intermittent
          loads without upset.  In smaller applications, the
          reactor and clarifier are generally a single-fabricated
          unit, and all sludge is returned to the reactor to
          maintain the required low F/M ratio.

          In larger applications, the reactor and clarifier are
          separated and some means of wasting and treating sludge
          is usually necessary.  Reactors can be concrete with
          diffused aeration or a lined earth basin with mechani-
          cal aerators.

     (6)  Oxidation Ditch Activated Sludge.  The oxidation ditch
          activated sludge process is usually an extended-aeration
Date:  9/25/81            III.3.2.1-5
-------
          process but can be a conventional or high-rate process
          in which aeration and mixing are provided by brush
          rotors placed across a race track-shaped basin.   The
          waste enters the ditch at one end,  is aerated by the
          rotors, and circulates at about 0.3 to 0.6 m/s (1 to 2
          fps).  Operation can be intermittent, in which case
          sedimentation takes place in the ditch,  or continuous,
          in which case a separate clarifier for recycling settled
          sludge is provided.

The aeration equipment used for activated sludge processes, using
air as a source of oxygen, can be either a diffused aeration or
mechanical aeration system.  Diffused aeration systems consist
of compressors and a network of diffusers that supply fine or
coarse air bubbles.  Diffusers commonly used in activated sludge
service include porous ceramic domes or ceramic or plastic tubes
connected to a pipe header and lateral system (fine bubble),
tubes covered with synthetic fabric or wound filaments (fine or
coarse bubble), and specially designed spargers with multiple
openings (coarse bubble).  The fine bubble units typically attain
higher oxygen adsorption efficiencies but require a cleaner air
supply to prevent clogging.  With their higher efficiencies they
use significantly less power than coarse bubble units but normally
have higher maintenance costs.

Spiral roll aeration has normally been utilized in long narrow
aeration tanks.  This type of system, which uses diffusers along
one wall of the tank, produces lower oxygen adsorption effi-
ciencies than whole plan aeration.  In the latter type, diffusers
are installed over the whole tank bottom, or headers are in-
stalled perpendicular to the tank wall instead of parallel.

Mechanical aeration methods include surface-type mechanical
entrainment aerators and submerged turbines with compressed air
spargers.  The surface-type aerators entrain atmospheric air by
producing a region of intense turbulence at the surface of the
aeration tank.  They are designed to pump large quantities of
liquid, thus dispersing the entrained air and mixing the basin
contents.  The agitator/sparger system consists of a radial-flow
turbine located below the mid-depth of the basin with compressed
air supplied to the turbine through a sparger.

The submerged turbine aeration system affords a convenient and
relatively economical method for upgrading overloaded activated
sludge plants.  To attain optimum flexibility of oxygen input,
the surface aerator can be combined with the submerged turbine
aerator.  Several manufacturers supply such equipment, with both
aerators mounted on the same vertical shaft.  Such an arrangement
might be advantegeous if space limitations require the use of
deep aeration basins.  In addition, mechanical aerators may be
either the floating or fixed installation type, using either
high-speed, small diameter units or low speed, large diameter


Date:  9/25/81            III.3.2.1-6
-------
units with gear reducers.  When utilizing surface aerators,  both
oxygen transfer and mixing requirements must be considered.   The
greater the separation distance between aerators, the greater
horsepower required to maintain solids in suspension.

     Technology Status

Conventional activated sludge is the most versatile and widely
used biological wastewater treatment process.  Since 1950, the
mechanical aeration method has been utilized more often than
diffused aeration systems for industrial wastewater treatment.

Pure oxygen activated sludge is the newest modification to the
activated sludge process.  It can generally accept higher load-
ings and shock loadings better than air systems.  Package plants
are available for industrial use.

High rate activated sludge was more widely used in the 1950's and
1960's than it is today.  Its lower removal rates do not meet
present requirements for direct discharge.

Contact stabilization has evolved as an out-growth of activated
sludge technology since 1950.  The technology has common use in
package plants and some use for on-site constructed plants.

Extended aeration plants have evolved since the latter part of
the 1940's.  Pre-engineered, package plants have been utilized
mainly for domestic wastewater treatment.

Numerous shallow and deep oxidation ditch systems are in opera-
tion in the U.S., Canada, and Europe and are mainly used for
treatment of domestic wastewater.  The overall process is fully
demonstrated for BOD removal, and generally produces a high
quality effluent.

     Applications

Activated sludge is considered the method of choice in most cases
where an organic biodegradable waste is involved.  It is used on
a wide basis in the following industries:

     - Iron and Steel Manufacturing,
     - Pharmaceutical Manufacturing,
     - Petroleum Refining,
     - Pulp and Paper Mills,
     - Textile Mills,
     - Organic Chemicals Manufacturing, and
     - Rubber Processing.
Date:  9/25/81            III.3.2.1-7
-------
Activated sludge is also used on a limited basis in the following
industries:

     - Leather Tanning and Finishing,
     - Explosives Manufacturing,
     - Gum and Wood Chemicals,  and
     - Paint and Ink Formulation.

     Advantages and Limitations

With respect to the other methods also presented here,  the con-
ventional activated sludge process provides a high quality
effluent.  It has a limited organic loading capacity and can be
upset with extreme variations in hydraulic, organic, or toxic
loadings.  Other disadvantages are high operating costs, opera-
tional complexity, and energy consumption.

Among the advantages of pure oxygen activated sludge are its
applicability where available space is limited,  its acceptance of
fluctuations in organic loading, and it can handle strong waste-
waters that conventional methods cannot.  Effluent quality is
also generally equal to or better than the conventional method.
Limitations include added complexity of both operation and equip-
ment and the necessity for a supply of 90 to 100% pure oxygen.
Excessive pH depression has also been reported in some cases.

High rate activated sludge requires lower aeration volume and
less air than the conventional process.  Its limitations include
high sludge production and a lower quality effluent that gen-
erally will not meet present standards if not used in conjunction
with other treatment processes.

The advantages of contact stabilization are:  slightly lower
total aeration volume, greatest ability to handle shock loads,
and lower detention time for wastewater.  Its limitations include
poor removal of soluble BOD, the more complex nature of the
process, and higher operating and maintenance costs.  Flow equal-
ization may also be necessary for smaller plants.

Extended aeration has the advantages of low net sludge production
and very good BOD removals.  High power costs, operation costs,
and large land requirements are limitations of this system.

Oxidation ditches are essentially extended-aeration processes and
therefore have the same limitations mentioned above.

     Reliability

Activated sludge processes can be operated very reliably.  As
with any complex mechanical system, activated sludge plants
require considerable operator attention.  Reliability is related
to the operators' ability to understand and manipulate  a bio-


Date:  9/25/81            III.3.2.1-8
-------
logical system in addition to the capability of the secondary
clarifiers to perform adequately.  In-plant recycle streams from
sludge handling processes often cause poor settling and "fines"
discharged to the effluent.

     Chemicals Required

In some cases a proper nutrient balance may not be present in the
wastewater.  Proper operation normally requires that BOD5/ nitro-
gen, and phosphorus be present in the ratio 100:5:1.  If actual
analysis indicates a wide variation from these levels, supple-
mental nutrients may have to be added for optimum operation.

     Residuals Generated

Sludge production from the conventional activated sludge process
can be approximated from the following:


           F/M             	Excess VSS	

           0.3               0.3-0.6  kg/kg BOD removed
           0.5               0.4-0.7  kg/kg BOD removed
The actual sludge production will be a function of the type of
wastewater.  High colloidal content in the waste will cause
increased sludge production.

Oxygen activated sludge biomass production is equal to or less
than that for the conventional activated sludge process.  The
high rate activated sludge biomass production is greater than
that for conventional activated sludge.  Contact stabilization
process sludge production is about the same as for the conven-
tional activated sludge systems. The lowest net sludge production
is expected in the extended aeration modification, since the
longer retention time for this process allows the auto-oxidation
reaction to proceed further.

     Design Criteria

The basic parameters of interest in the design of an activated
sludge system include BOD loading rate, oxygen and air require-
ments, sludge production, oxygen transfer rates in wastewater,
nutrient requirements, sludge settleability and return rate.
Because of the variability in industrial wastewater character-
istics, the development of the optimum design parameters for an
activated sludge system usually requires laboratory or pilot
plant investigations.  Batch laboratory studies generally are
useful for the evaluation of treatability.  Continuous flow
Date:  9/25/81            III.3.2.1-9
-------
systems are most useful for the evaluation of design criteria
such as BOD removal rates,  oxygen requirements, sludge produc-
tion, aeration time,  and sedimentation time.

     Performance

Subsequent data sheets provide performance data for the following
industries and/or waste streams:

     - Iron and Steel Manufacturing,
     - Pharmaceutical Manufacturing,
     - Leather Tanning and Finishing,
     - Pulp and Paper Mills,
     - Rubber Processing,
     - Textile Mills,
     - Timber Products Processing,
     - Organic and Inorganic Wastes,
     - Unspecified/Domestic Wastes,
     - Synthetic Resins, and
     - Petrochemical/Paper.

     References

3-5, 3-11, 3-24, 3-28, 3-40, 3-62.
Date:  9/25/81             III.3.2.1-10
-------























UJ
o
3
_ J
CO

Q
UJ
h-
^
>
—
I—
o


CC
o
U.
CC
2
S
^
to

o
o
j
o
z
X
o
U
l_

1
0
CC
1-
z
o
o





























63

.
>-
U
c
CO
o
Ct.
CD

—
CO
>
0
E
CO
CC
C
CO
...
T3
CD
S.




CD
CT
C
CO
OL



c c
o

4-1
CO
s_
c
CD
O
c
o
o

4J
c
CD
3
—.
Ct.
c*_
UJ
CO

•o
9)
£







CD
O
C
CO
CC











(A
P
C
—
O
Q

CO
CO
0







CD
CO
O
to

—
3
U-





03
CO
o
U)

4->
O

._
0.





















4J
C
CO
P
3
—
O
Q-
CM — or — COCMCVJON
ON f*~ NO GO in NO ON .£f ON
A






ON ON ONOO
ONr'-ONinf^-ONONO
A ON A ON ON A A r-

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

co o co ^r JT — NO j-
CM co — —


p*-OinONOOOCOONO
mCM COON -CNJ — CNJCM
•=f OJ COO CO .
O
O



oooo
OOOO 00
ON— COCO — O
-. * •* *ON • O ON
CM -^° — — CNJ O CO in

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

—lino oinr-mo
a J-ZCM — o NO
CO CM -O
o •
o





cooNCMcocor— r*~CM —
t-NONO CMCM











_ _ _








.*
_i
•\
01
E

•K
in
u
c ta
CO 3
+> S- CD
3 o « in
— .c — co
— ao co
o in c i-
a. o CD oi
^^ ^ tfS
— a axi co
o m 	 co —
— -^ CO CO <1-
u)QOtOO4J-P — Z —
WOOCOO O O — ^3
^
U
OOONCMSJ'd'J'CO — OOSNOSOSONONONSCOZNOONONONESONONONOO
["•• if> ONOOZ^NO^O-^OO in ^Z^Z^ZONONONZOOZON ON ON ON Z Z ON ON ON r^-
A A A A A A A






ONONON ON ON ON ON O\ ON
O 00 ON ON 00 ON ON ON ^J* ON ON CM ONONON ON ON ON ON ON
ONON ON ONONAAAONA A ON ONONON A ON A A A

II I I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 III 1 I 1 1 1

coo in OinCMOOcoo co 0 ^fOON ON CM O ON O
coCM — —co COCMON NO ON ON
A

CM— IONO— i— icooNOin— Jo— i— i— 10 — oooooo — ooo^ooooom
OZ — OO — CO CMOJ-OOOI- 	 ZZZO 	 ZZ -OOZZZ —
CO COCO COCQCQCQ — OO -3"C\J — -
« o
m


0 O O
O 0 O
o o o
OO —1 «O«OONO -1- O*OO O Oco
I--NO OOcoOr-cQCM -O — mooo ONO -ONO O O NO •
NO — CM CO — CM — CO — O zt ^t ON CO CO C- NO CM 	 CN1 m Z CM O
CM
II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 III III II 1 II
1
_l _1 _l _J — 1 _J O O O O _J _! _J _l OOO D OJ Q QQ O Q —
OO OOO OOZZ ZZOO O O ZZZ Z Z ZZ Z Z •
CQCQZCQCQCOCQ COCQCQCQ O







CO 00 — CO.* 1— C- f- cOit — CM — d-ONO — OONO 00 CM CM CM 00 CNJ 	 CM — inj-
CMCM CM — CM CO CO CO CO CM CO CNJ CNJ CM CO — CM











_ _ __•__-_





CD
4J
CO 03
— c
(_ (o CD — CD
CDf C E C
r: +j CD — co CD
•P.C -P E— «-
— i co a cocoocoX >>
*x» — 4J 4J — Q. O.
Ol ,—*~^ CO CO Q) CO >i O
3. 	 £— CO-P— C i- — —
>>>> 4JCO-PCOCOCOO.O "O
^ JK X £ *~ CO ^" JC ,C 1 EZ O
at 4-1 a) o.4->— co-uac— CD CD i
4J CD.C r. tacc.-- \oc. c co
C S — — Q.JC -P O.T3 — C a CD CD
CO O >> >> -P^I Of} CD O C i- CM CO

3 0 -P E C>>0. >>O 0 Q.-P.C C 0. — ^CD
— >>— 4)3 E E E CD+J — WCOWO — PCD-^COCD — ' —
— C O £ 1 — E 3 CD >> 3 3 J33— >>OOOi-C^:OCOCC CO
OO— OCM— 3— £-"O ' 	 ' 	 £> >>£ O'-'-O— acO~'CD(BO^:CD
O. E C • 	 	 ECO— 3CDCCD— — I£4J|*>+J — OcoS-OU)l-C-PC
*~CD >sEOfiC"OO^CD>'™O^sC'PCDC*~ — ^ 1 C^N^OCD^CD
cj-pu3(o«t--Di-aco«i'-o 	 COC-PI CDEI cco^)-a34Jcs-3-oa!-
— C ! 	 CD CO £ O >> CO CD — 03 — .C — 3 	 1 1 1 - O C CD £ — C CO >>
X«COCOCQOOOO-ISZWCOt-NCOOOaOZZCNJCM«CQOLi 	 ZO-
o

Date:  9/25/81
III.3.2.1-11
-------




















LU
O
O
^
_J
CO

Q
UJ
J—
^
>

1—
O
<
ce
U-T3
CD
>- 3
cr c
S P
s c
3 O
COO
*—
O
o
_ J
o
z
X
o
LJ
1-

J
O
X.
z
o
o




























5^

•
>
o
o
CD

—
CO
>
o
E
O

C
0

P
CO
5_
4J
C
CD
O
C
o
o

P
c
CD

—
*.
jj










w
4-J
C
—
O
a.

CO
P
CO
0

































C
CO
•—
T3
0


CD
ej
c
CO
cc



c
CO

T3
0
£








0
0
C
CO
cc






0)
CO
o
u>

—
3
U_





0
—
CO
o
in

o
—
—
a.



















4J
C
CO
P
£
—
O
cu
ON2£COONONONSIONON.3'CNCvONCNONVOONS2£tn2IONONONONONCOONONONONONONSONONCO£inON
COZONONONCNZONONCOONONONGNONONONZZI — ZONONONONONONONONONONON ON Z ON ON ON Z ON ON
AAA AA AAAAA A AAAAAAAAA AA AAA A



ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON
ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON
A AAAONAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAA

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

C\J ON ON ON ON in ON NO ON S — CO P— ON in CO ON ON ON P— Is— t"- ON
in ON ON NO in ON m ON NO CO ON P~ CO VO &"- ON f"- ON — ^J"
A A AAA A A

r~- CO in — ICOQOQ— J CO in — Q— IOCOOQ— 1 NO _J in O O — JQ[^O^JQQQLT\OO— IcO—lvOCO
• o -zzzoco -zaz — zzo -a -zzaz zazzzoooo -a • •
o ir\coo CD o CD CQ — CD in co CD • 	 caoca 	
V O





ooo o o
ON OOO O O
— inO CO O — 1 CO _l — -3-ro^O O O O CO •* O
-CO • ON Q • in Q O • Cf ON Q * •% -. • ^t O ON — O * • *C\J
NO OlA— CM ZOCMC03TO COCO CO CD fO — J- — \O — \O CNJ CM CO O —ON

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 III II

O _J Q O O OOONOQO Or- OQ O Q O O £3 Q O Q QOO QO
Z OZZZ ZZ -ZZZ Z • ZZ ZZZZZZZ Z ZZZ ZZ
CD O —








in 	 ON CNJ in — CM — NO — co r- coj- 	 — j- co — in co o co NO \o CNJ — h- — ro.d- — o
— — _c\j__ cvico —












	 — 	 — — — 	 CNJ 	 	 	





0
C 0
0 C
0 — CO
C >> £ 0 CD
0 .CP0CDC — C
<-00PQ)CCCO O 0
.C-OC000O0COCO.C C CD00 N
P— C00OCC0S-C-C.C4J — CD CCCCU0 C
C <- £C5-COCOT3O0P4J00 O — .C— 00CUCC 0 0
eo o P co o a a. 	 0a>ce c oao NNNC &
c — to c.— oo'-j:>sOO0o 0 c o« cccss 0 o
0 .C £PJZi-^-OOXIS-S 	 t- SZ 0 i-0 000 	 N t-
£ o O0oaa— COPOO>>O a. 	 .c o5- o^^inoo c o
a co EO— oo.cs-0 	 .cr — ooo. — o cooopp000 —
^v s- oi-T3S-i-oPOJ:x:p— >>cco .ci 0s-s-s-oocj3C jz
CD PE'-OIOO 0i-OO0Cf- !-a>£0COS- OE NOOO'-'-0O0 O
C E 0 1- £ — W 	 01— O 	 OO O0OCP.C.CO — 1 C 	 pplMS-N —
0t_poox:cjzi:c — s-s-i-s-ozc— o0a a— s-o 0x:^:j: 	 coc £-
OO jc\j co — CMJZJT i COS-COX:QPPCOONO— 0'-ooooo— 000.3-
£E^3O£l 1 1 l£ -i- -^OOCoEOPai 	 PC .J3 N O 1 1 1 1 lXcoi-3 «
PO i — o — CMOJC04J— P 	 P E— aod-zz c 0^-0 c — CNJCOJ-^-NO^: X P — oo


CO 0 O —
OT! 0 C
4-> CO
•o > 0 0
C OT3 E

(DPP
VI £> O O
-X C C
co-j" •> •>
— 00 S
CO CO Z Z
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.2.1-12
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Activated Sludge
Data source:
Point source
Subcategory:
Plant:  B
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Iron and steel
 Coke making

3-6, pp. 74,83,90
Pretreatment/treatment:   Equal./Act. Si.
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
                           x
DESIGN OR OPERATING  PARAMETERS
Wastewater flow  rate:   33.9 L/s
Hydraulic aeration  detention time:  8 hrs
Volumetric loading:  Unspecified
MLSS:  Unspecified
Oxygen supply:   Unspecified
F/M:  Unspecified
Mean cell residence  time:   Unspecified
Sludge recycle ratio:   Unspecified
Process modification:   Single stage
  conventional
                                 Operating temperatures   Un-
                                   specified
                                 Sludge recycle ratio:   Un-
                                   specified
                                 Clarifier configuration: Un-
                                   specified
                                 Depth:  Unspecified
                                 Hydraulic loading rate:  Un-
                                   specified
                                 Solids loading rate:  Unspecified
                                 Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                REMOVAL DATA
  Samp Ii nq:  UnspecIf i ed
                                Analysis;  Data  set 2 (V.7.3.51
      Pollutant/parameter
                    Concentration       Percent    Detection
                 Influent(a) Effluent    removal	limit
  Classical pollutants, mg/L:
    TSS                           57         16
    GiI  and grease                240          5
    Total  phenol                  350      0.06k
    Thiocyanate                   270         13
    Ammonia                      1,700      1,200
    Sulfide                      2,600       0.26

  Toxic pollutants,  fig/L:
    Cyanide                    140,000      38,000
  Blanks  indicate data not available.
  NM,  not meaningful.
  (a)CaIculated from effluent and percent removal.
                                          NM
                                         >98
                                         >99
                                          95
                                          29
                                         >99
                                          73
Date:   9/25/ol
                  III.3.2.1-13
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Sludge
Data source: Effluent Guidelines
Point source: Pharmaceuticals
Subcategory: Formulation products
Plant: 5
References: 3-87, Supplement 2
Pretreatment/treatment:   Unspecified/Act.  Si.
                    Data source status:
                      Not specified
                      Bench scale
                      Pilot scale
                      Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate: 606 m3/day
Hydraulic aeration detention time:  Un-
  specified
Volumetric loading:  Unspecified
MLSS: Unspecified
Oxygen supply: Unspecified
F/M:  Unspecified
Mean cell residence time: Unspecified
Sludge recycle ratio:  Unspecified
Process modification:  Four 1,290 m3
  aeration tanks
           Operating temperature:  Unspecified
           Sludge recycle ratio:   Unspecified
           Clarifier configuration: Unspecified
           Depth:  Unspecified
           Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
                (overflow rate)
           Solids loading rate:  Unspecified
           Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
Sampling:  Composite and grab
                                 REMOVAL DATA
                Analysis;  Data set 1 (V.7.3.21)
  Pollutant/parameter
                                 Concentration
Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
 limit
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  COD                           ND
  TSS                           ND

Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
  Chromium                      30
  Copper                        80
  Zinc                          ND
  Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate   50
  Methylene chloride           800
  Di-n-butyl phthalate          20
  Chloroform                   130
  1,1,1-Trichloroethane         17
  1,2-Dichloroethane            15
              850
              350
               10
               20
              100
               10
              250
               ND
               ND
               ND
               ND
              NM
              NM
              67
              75
              NM
              80
              69
             >99
             >99
             >99
             >99
Blanks indicate data not available.
ND, not detected.
NM, not meaningful.
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.2.1-14
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Sludge
Data source: Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Pharmaceuticals
Subcategory:   Biological and natural extrac-
  tion products, formulation products
Plant:  12257
References:  3-87, Supplement 2, 3-2, p. F-24
Pretreatment/treatment:  Equal./Act. SI.
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate: 1,890 m3/day
Hydraulic aeration detention time: Un-
  specified
Volumetric loading:  Unspecified
MLSS:  Unspecified
Oxygen supply:  Unspecified
F/M:  Unspecified
Mean cell residence time:  Unspecified
Sludge recycle ratio:  200 to 500%
Process modification:  Unspecified
                   Data source status:
                     Not specified
                     Bench scale
                     Pilot scale
                     Full scale
           Operating temperature:  Unspecified
           Clarifier configuration:  Multiple
             settling tanks, 620 m2
           Depth:  Unspecified
           Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
                 (overflow rate)
           Solids loading rate :   Unspecified
           Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL DATA
Samol inq: Composite and grab

Ana 1 ys i
Concentration
Pol lutant/parameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
BOD(5)
TSS
Toxc pollutants, u,g/L:
Arsenic
Chromium
Copper
Cya n i de
Lead
Nickel
Tha 1 1 ium
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
2-Chlorophenol
2-N i trophenol
Phenol
Methylene chloride
1 ,2-Dichloroethane
Influent

3,000
950

70
680
ISO
580
15
630
47
540
24
2UO
31
230
ND
ND
Effluent

120
500

20
190
31
7,700
2U
190
29
160
33
ND
ND
ND
67
290
s: Data set 1 (V.7.3.21 )
Percent Detection
remova 1 limit

96
17

71
72
83
NM
NM
70
38
70
NM
>99
>99
>99
NM
NM
    Blanks  indicate data not available.
    ND,  not detected.
    NM,  not meaningful.
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.2.1-15
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Activated Sludge
Data source.- Effluent Guidelines
Point source: Pharmaceuticals
Subcategory:  Biological and natural
  extraction products, formulation products
Plant:  12420
References:  3-87,  Supplement 2; 3-2,  p.  F-28
Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Act.  Si.
                      Data source status:
                        Not specified
                        Bench scale
                        Pilot scale
                        Full scale
                                                x
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate: 644 m3/day
Hydraulic aeration detention time:
  2.56 days
Volumetric loading:  Unspecified
MLSS:  3,500 mg/L
Oxygen supply:  Unspecified
F/M:  0.3
Mean cell residence time:  6.85 days
Sludge recycle ratio:  Unspecified
Process modification:  Unspecified
            Operating temperature:  Unspecified
            Sludge  recycle  flow  rate:  922 m3/day
            Clarifier configuration:  Unspecified
            Depth:   Unspecified
            Hydraulic loading rate:  21.4 m3/d/m2
              (overflow  rate)
            Solids  loading  rate:  107 kg TSS/d/m2
            Weir loading rate:   Unspecified
            Aerator power requirement:   345  KW
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling;  Composite and grab
                   Analysis;   Data  set  1  (V.7.3.21)
                              Concentration
  Pollutant/parameter
Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
 limit
Toxic pollutants, jig/L:
Benzene
Methylene chloride
Toluene

40
130
140

10
210
ND

75
NM
>99
Blanks indicate data not available.
ND, not detected.
NM, not meaningful.
Date:  9/25/81
   III. 3.2.1-16
-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Sludge
 Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
 Point source:  Leather tanning  and finishing
 Subcategory:  Hair save, nonchrome (primarily
   vegetable) tan, retan-wet  finish
 Plant:  47
 References:  3-11, p. 208
 Pretreatment/treatment:  Coag.  Floe./Act.  Si.
                     Data  source  status;
                       Not specified
                       Bench scale
                       Pilot scale
                       Full scale
 DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
 Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
 Hydraulic aeration detention time:
   Unspecified
 Volumetric loading:  Unspecified
 MLSS:  Unspecified
 Oxygen supply:  Unspecified
 F/M:  Unspecified
 Mean cell residence  time:   Unspecified
 Sludge recycle ratio:  Unspecified
 Process modification:  Extended aeration
           Operating  temperature:   Unspecified
           Sludge  recycle  ratio:   Unspecified
           Clarifier  configuration:  Unspecified
           Depth:  Unspecified
           Hydraulic  loading rate:  Unspecified
              (overflow  rate)
           Solids  loading  rate:  Unspecified
           Weir  loading rate:  Unspecified
                                   REMOVAL DATA
  Samp I ing:  3 days
                     Ana lysis:  Data set 2
    Pollutant/parameter
                                    Concentration
   Influent
Effluent
Percent
removaI
Detection
  I imit
  Classical pollutants, mg/L:
    BOD(5)
    COD
    TSS
    OiI  and grease
    TKN
    1,500
    6,000
    6,UOO
     250
     750
  550
  230
   35
  280
  Blanks  indicate data not available.
  BDL,  below detection limit.
  ND,  not detected.
  NM,  not meaningful.
  97
  91
  96
  86
  63
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Chromium
Copper
Cyan ide
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Pentach lorophenol
Phenol
2, 4, 6-T rich lorophenol
1 , 2-D i ch I o robenzene
1 , U-D i ch I o robenzene
Ethyl benzene
Anthracene/phenanthrene
Naphtha lene

6,UOO
200
100
100
60
U60
ND
2,900
810
1.700
H9
19
U3
7.6
19

170
25
too
50
30
59
26
200
ND
38
ND
ND
BDL
ND
ND

97
88
NM
50
50
87
NM
93
>99
98
>99
>99
88
>99
>99

10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.2.1-17
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Sludge
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Leather tanning and finishing
Subcategory:  Hair save, chrome tan, retan-wet
  finish
Plant:  248
References:  3-11, p. 208
Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Act. Si.
                 Data source status:
                   Not specified
                   Bench scale
                   Pilot scale
                   Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic aeration detention time:  Un-
  specified
Volumetric loading:  Unspecified
MLSS:  Unspecified
Oxygen supply:  Unspecified
F/M:  Unspecified
Mean cell residence time:  Unspecified
Sludge recycle ratio:  Unspecified
Process modification:  Extended aeration
        Operating temperature:  Unspecified
        Sludge recycle ratio.-  Unspecified
        Clarifier configuration:  Unspecified
        Depth:  Unspecified
        Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
          (overflow rate)
        Solids loading rate:  Unspecified
        Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL DATA
 Sampling;  Unspecified
               Analysis:  Data set 2 (V.7.3.61
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
BOD(5)
COD
TSS
Oi 1 and grease
TKN
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Pentach 1 o ropheno 1
Phenol
2,3,6-Trichlorophenol
1 , 2-D i ch 1 o robenzene
1 , 4-D i ch I o robenzene
Anthracene/phenanthrene
Naptha lene
Chloroform
Influent

1,200
2,600
1,100
170
250

31,000
57
20
100
5
230
9,500
480
10,000
220
99
56
49
41
Effluent

920
1,800
560
91
190

20,000
37
40
30
34
140
3,100
440
4,300
69
21
BDL
15
BDL
Percent
remova 1

23
31
49
46
24

35
35
NM
70
NM
39
67
8
57
69
79
91*
69
88
Detect ion
1 i m i t







10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
 Blanks indicate data not available.
 BDL, below detection limit.
 NM, not meaningful.
 *Approximate value.
  Date:   9/25/81
III.3.2.1-18
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Sludge
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  253
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Leather tanning and finishing
 Shearing

3-11, pp. 174,208
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Act.  SI.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  13.1 L/s
Hydraulic aeration detention time:  Un-
  specified
Volumetric loading:  Unspecified
MLSS:  6,000-15,000 mg/L
Oxygen supply:  Unspecified
F/M:  Unspecifed
Mean cell residence time:  Unspecified
Sludge recycle ratio:  Unspecified
Process modification:  Unspecified
Data source status;
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
                             Operating temperature:   Unspecified
                             Sludge recycle ratio:   Unspecified
                             Clarifier configuration:  Unspeci-
                               fied
                             Depth:  Unspecified
                             Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
                               (overflow rate)
                             Solids loading rate:  Unspecified
                             Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Samol inq: 3 days

Ana
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
BOD(5)
COD
TSS
Oil and grease
TKN
Toxic pollutants, ng/L:
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Z i nc
Bi s(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Pentach 1 o ropheno 1
Phenol
Benzene
1 , 4-D i ch I o robenzene
To I uene
Anthracene/phenanthrene
Chloroform
1 , 1 ,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
Influent

1,000
2,400
770
410
49

53,000
120
80
27
500
93
400
91
5
20
9
36
12
18
Effluent

27
490
110
25
27

2,200
7
30
19
68
34
130
ND
ND
ND
ND
6
10
ND
I ys i s :
Percent
remova I

97
80
86
94
45

96
94
62
30
86
63
68
>99
>99
>99
>99
83
17
>99
Data set 2 (V.7.3.6)
Detection
limit







10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
 Blanks  indicate data not available.
 ND,  not detected.
  Date:   9/25/81
                    III.3.2.1-19
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Sludge
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Leather tanning and finishing
Subcategory:  Hair save, chrome tan, retan-wet
  finish
Plant:  320
References:  3-11, p. 208
Pretreatment/treatment:  Screen., Equal./Act. SI.
                 Data  source  status;
                   Not specified
                   Bench  scale
                   Pilot  scale
                   Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  1,500 m3/day
Hydraulic aeration detention time:  12
  hrs
Volumetric loading:
MLSS:  6,000-15,000 mg/L
Oxygen supply:  Unspecified
F/M:  Unspecified
Mean cell residence time:  Unspecified
Sludge recycle ratio:  Unspecified
Process modification:  Extended aeration
         Operating temperature:   Unspecified
         Sludge  recycle  ratio:  Unspecified
         Clarifier  configuration:  Unspecified
         Depth:   Unspecified
         Hydraulic  loading rate:   24-28 m3/
           day/m2 (overflow rate)
         Solids  loading  rate:   3,600 kg/day/
           1,000 m3
         Weir  loading rate: Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling; Unspecified
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
BOD(5)
COD
TSS
Oil and grease
TKN
Toxic pollutants, u.g/L:
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Pentach 1 oropheno 1
Phenol
2,4,6-Trich lorophenol
Ethyl benzene
Toluene
Anthracene/phenanthrene
Naptha lene

Ana
Concentration
Influent

2,000
4,000
2,300
550
290

170,000
220
50
3,100
75
2,100
32
ND
5,500
ND
>100
>100
2.9
ND
Effluent

300
890
130
17
160

1,700
8
to
60
30
170
6
12
1,1*00
12
BDL
BDL
1.4
2.3
lysis: Data
Percent
remova I

86
88
94
97
45

99
96
20
98
60
92
81
NM
75
NM
>99
>99
52
NM
set 2 rv.7.3.6)
Detect ion
1 i m i t







10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
 Blanks indicate data not available.
 BDL, below detection limit.
 ND,  not detected.
 NM,  not meaningful.
 *Approximate value.
 Date:   9/25/81
III. 3.2.1-20
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Sludge
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Leather tanning and finishing
Subcategory:  None
Plant:  Berwick POTW
References:  3-11, p. 208
Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Act. SI.
                                                  Data source status:
                                                    Not specified
                                                    Bench scale
                                                    Pilot scale
                                                    Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic aeration detention time:  Un-
  specified
Volumetric loading:  Unspecified
MLSS:  Unspecified
Oxygen supply:  Unspecified
F/M:  Unspecified
Mean cell residence time:  Unspecified
Sludge recycle ratio:  Unspecified
Process modification:  Unspecified
                                         Operating temperature:  Unspecified
                                         Sludge recycle ratio:  Unspecified
                                         Clarifier configuration:  Unspecified
                                         Depth:  Unspecified
                                         Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
                                           (overflow rate)
                                         Solids loading rate:  Unspecified
                                         Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
 Sampling;   3 days
                                              Analysis;   Data set  2 (V.7.3.6)
Concentration
Pol lutant/oa rameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
BOD(5)
COD
TSS
Oi 1 and grease
TKN
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Pentach 1 o ropheno 1
Phenol
2, 4, 6-Trichlo ropheno 1
Ethyl benzene
Toluene
Anthracene/phenanthrene
Naphtha lene
Chloroform
Influent

930
2,600
1,200
260
130

50,000
350
30
1,500
8
1,700
29
200
8,500
330
>100
>100
6.6
29
11
Effluent

77
430
110
20
70

3,900
28
BDL
90
5
280
4
22
ND
5
BDL
BDL
0.7
ND
10
Percent
remova I

92
84
91
92
46

92
92
83
94
38
84
86
89
>99
98
>95*
>95*
89
>99
9
Detection
1 imit







10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
 Blanks indicate data  not available.
 BDL, below detection  limit.
 NO, not detected.
 *Approxi ma te vaIue.
 Date:   9/25/81
                             III.3.2.1-21
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY!   Activated Sludge
Data  source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Leather tanning and finishing
Subcategory:  See  below
Plant:   See below
References:  3-74,  p.  90
Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Act.  Si.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
                       Data  source status;
                         Not specified
                         Bench scale
                         Pilot scale
                         Full scale
Wastewater flow  rate:  See below
Hydraulic aeration detention time:
  below
Volumetric loading:  See below
MLSS:   Unspecified
Oxygen supply:   Unspecified
F/M:   Unspecified
Mean cell residence time:  Unspecified
Sludge recycle ratio:  Unspecified
Process modification:  Unspecified
              Operating temperature:   Unspecified
         See  Sludge recycle ratio:  Unspecified
              Clarifier configuration:   Unspecified
              Depth:  Unspecified
              Hydraulic loading rate:   Unspecified
                 (overflow  rate)
              Solids loading rate:  Unspecified
              Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                      REMOVAL DATA
Samo 1 1 no : Unspec 1 f 1 ed
Subcateaory
Cattle, save
chrome
Cattle, pulp,
chrome
Cattle, pulp,
combination
tanning
$ubcateoorv
Cattle, save
chrome
Cattle, pulp,
chrome
Cattle, pulp,
comb I na 1 1 on
tann I ng
Plant
Hoench Tanning
Co., (in
Cowanda, NY)(b)
S. B. foot
Tanning Co.,
I In Red Wing,
MN)(c)
Caldwell LBce
Leather,
( In Auburn,
KY)(d)
Plant
Moench Tanning
Co., (In
Cowanda, NY)(b)
S. B. Foot
Tanning Co.,
(In Red Wing,
MN)(c)
Caldwell Lace
Leather,
( In Auburn,
KY)(d)
BOOI5I
Concentration, mo/L Percent
Influent Effluent removalia)
1 , 700 31(0 80
1,1(00 320 76
1,1(00 96 93
COD
Concentration. mo/L Percent
Influent Effluent removal(a)
1,000 180 88
Analysis: Data set 3 (V
TSS
Detection Concentration. mq/L Percent
limit Influent Effluent removal la)
2,100 190 92
3,000 320 89
3,100 220 93
TKN
Detection ConperHratjon, na/|_ Percent
limit Influent Effluent remove Hal
190 322 35
.7.3.6)

Detection
limit


Detection
1 imlt

  Blanks Indicate data not available.
  (a)Percent renovaI for entire plant.
  (b)Wastewater flow:  1,510 cu.nt/d; hydraulic aeration detention time:  12 hr;
   volumetric loading: 3,600 kg BOD(5)/d/1,000 cu.n.
  (c)Wastewater flow:  3,760 cu.m/d; pretreatment Influent: screening, primary
   sedimentation.
  (d)Wastewater flow:  61 cu.n/d; hydraulic aeration detention time: 1.6 d;
   volumetric loading: 908 kg BOD(5)/d/l,000 cu.m.
 Date:    9/25/81
III.3.2.1-22
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Sludge
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Pulp, paper and paperboard
Subcategory:  Waste paperboard
Plant:  Unspecified
References: 3-82, pp. 78-85
Pretreatment/treatment:  Lagoon, Tr. Filter/
  Act. SI.
                                   Data  source  status:
                                     Not specified
                                     Bench  scale
                                     Pilot  scale
                                     Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic aeration detention time:
  Unspecified
Volumetric loading:  Unspecified
MLSS:  Unspecified
Oxygen supply:  Unspecified
F/M:  Unspecified
Mean cell residence time:  Unspecified
Sludge recycle ratio:  Unspecified
Process modificatin:  Unspecified
                         Operating  temperature:   Unspecified
                         Sludge recycle  ratio:   Unspecified
                         Clarifier  configuration:   Unspecified
                         Depth:  Unspecified
                         Hydraulic  loading rate:   Unspecified
                         Solids loading  rate:  Unspecified
                         Weir loading  rate:  Unspecified
                                   REMOVAL DATA
     Samp I ing:
3-day, 2U-hour
composite and  grab
                                              Analysis:  Data  set I  (V.7.3.281
Concent rat ion( a)
Pol lutant/oarameter Influent Effluent
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
COD 620 970
Percent Detection
remova 1 limit
NM
Toxic pollutants, ng/L:
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Butyl benzyl phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Di ethyl phthalate
Pentach 1 o ropheno 1
Pheno 1
2, U, 6-Trichlo ropheno 1
Toluene
Naptha lene
Brornoform
Chloroform
Methylene chloride
T r i ch 1 o rome thy 1 ene
Xylene

17
12
16
49
6
0
>99
     Blanks indicate data not available.
     ND, not detected.
     NM, not meaningful.
     (a) Average values.
Date:   9/25/81
                 III.3.2.1-23
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Sludge
Data source: Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Pulp, paper and paperboard
Subcategory:  Sulfite-papergrade       ,
Plant:  Unspecified
References: 3-82, pp. 34-41
Pretreatment/ treatment:  None/Act.  Si.
                                               Data source status
                                                 Not specified
                                                 Bench scale
                                                 Pilot scale
                                                 Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
Wastewater flow rate: Unspecified
Hydraulic aeration detention  time:  Un-
  specified
Volumetric loading:  Unspecified
MLSS:  Unspecified
Oxygen supply:  Unspecified
F/M:  Unspecified
Mean cell residence  time:  Unspecified
Process modification:  Unspecified
                                      Operating temperature:  Unspecified
                                      Sludge recycle ratio:  Unspecified
                                      Clarifier configuration:  Unspecified
                                      Depth:  Unspecified
                                      Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
                                      Solids loading rate:  Unspecified
                                      Solids loading rate:  Unspecified
                                      Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
Samp I ing:
              3-day, 24-hour
              composite and grab
                                  REMOVAL DATA
                                        Analysis:  Data set 1  (V.7.3.28)
      Pol lutant/oarameter
                                   Concent rat ion(a 1
                            Influent
         Effluent
         Percent
         remova I
Detection
  limit
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  COD
4,800
2,900
                                                       40
Toxic pollutants, u.g/L:
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Pentach 1 oropheno 1
Phenol
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol
Benzene
Toluene
Napthalene
Chloroform
D i ch 1 o rob romomet ha ne
1, 1-Dichloroethane
Methylene chloride
1,1, 1-Trichloroethane
T r i ch I o roethy I ene

13
81
13
16
91
38
4
53
i)
53
15
34
3,200
9
4
460
410
5

10
20
10
17
58
3
ND
2
ND
ND
ND
ND
56
ND
ND
5
3
ND

23
75
23
NM
36
92
>99
96
>99
>99
>99

98
>99
>99
99
99
>99
    Blanks indicate data not available.
    ND, not detected.
    NM, not meaningful.
    (a)Average values.
   Date:.  9/25/81
                           III.3.2.1-24
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Sludge
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Rubber processing
Subcategory:  Unspecified
Plant:  000012
References:  3,-28, p. 121
Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Act,
                  Data source status:
                    Not specified
                    Bench scale
                    Pilot scale
                    Full scale
X
          SI.
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic aeration detention time:
  Unspecified
Volumetric loading:  Unspecified
MLSS:  Unspecified
Oxygen supply:  Unspecified
F/M:  Unspecified
Mean cell residence time:  Un-
  specified
Sludge recycle ratio:  Unspecified
Process modification:  Unspecified
        Operating temperature:  Unspecified
        Sludge recycle ratio:  Unspecified
        Clarifier configuration: Unspecified
        Depth:  Unspecified
        Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
        Solids loading rate:  Unspecified
        Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
    Sampling;  24-hr composite and grab
              Analysis:  Data set I.(V.7.3.29)
Concentration
Pollutant/parameter Influent
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Cadmium
Mercury
Nickel
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate(b)
N-n i t rosod i pheny 1 am i ne
Phenol (c)
Toluene
Carbon tetrachloride
Ch lo reform
Methylene chloride •*.
Tetrachloroethylene
1,1, l-Trichloroethane
1 , l-Dichloroethy lene <
Ni trobenzene
Blanks indicate data not available.
NM, not meaningful.
(a) Values presented are averages of
(b) Analytical methodology for phtha

1
2.5
610
260
5.2
41
250
4.7
27
0. 1
1.4
1.0
1 .7
<30


three
lates
Effluent

< |
1.6
400
220
1.6
19
<0. 1
0. 1
4. 1
0.9
<0. 1
3.3
99
98
85
NM
>93
NM
0
0


samples.
is questionable.
(c) Screening data show reduction over treatment to
f icance.


levels below signi-

 Date:   9/25/81
III.3.2.1-25
-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Activated Sludge
 Data source:
 Point source;
 Subcategory:
 Plant:  A
 References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Textile mills
 Unspecified

3-90, pp. 32-53
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
 Pretreatment/treatment:   Unspecified/Act. Si.
 DESIGN OR OPERATING  PARAMETERS
 Wastewater  flow  rate:   Unspecified
 Hydraulic aeration detention time:
   Unspecified
 Volumetric  loading:  Unspecified
 MLSS:  Unspecified
 Oxygen supply:   Unspecified
 F/M:  Unspecified
 Mean cell residence time:   Unspecified
 Sludge recycle ratio:   Unspecified
 Process modification:   Surface aeration
                                 Operating temperature:  Un-
                                   specified
                                 Sludge recycle ratio:
                                   Unspecified
                                 Clarifier configuration:
                                   Unspecified
                                 Depth:  Unspecified
                                 Hydraulic loading rate:
                                   Unspecified
                                 Solids loading rate:  Unspecified
                                 Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                      REMOVAL DATA
faanllmi: 1 day
Po| (utant/Daraanter
Claiilcal pollutant!, HO./L:
BOD(5)
COO
TSS
Total phenol
Total phosphorus
Toxic pollutants, M9/L:
Ant inony
Arsenic
CadHlui
Chro*iuia
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Se 1 en 1 uai
Silver
Thai Hun
Zinc
Bls(2-etnylhexyl) phthalate
Olethyl phthalate
Dimethyl phthalate
Pentach 1 oropheno 1
Pheno 1
1,2,-Dichlorobenzene
1 , 4-D 1 ch lorobenzene
To 1 uene
1,2,1-Trlchlorobenzene
Naphtha lene
Heptichlor

Concent r
Inf luent

»60
1,700
170
0.092
1.2

BDL
BOL
BDL
190
21
BDL
BDL
99
>99
>99
>99
NM
>99
NM
M9
>99
75
1 IV.7,3.321
Detection
Halt







0.5
5
0.5
0.2
0.2
4
|
0.5
10
5
5
5
25
0.04
0.03
0.03
0.4
0.07
0.05
0.01)
O.I
0.09
0.007

                   Blanks indicate data not available.
                   BOL, below detection licit.
                   NO, not detected.
                   NM, not meaningful.
                   •Approximate value.
Date:   9/25/81
                III.3.2.1-26
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Activated Sludge
              Effluent  Guidelines
               Textile  mills
              Unspecified
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  B
References:  3-90, pp. 32-53
Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Act.  51.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic aeration detention  time:
  Unspecified
Volumetric loading:  Unspecified
MLSS:  Unspecified
Oxygen supply:  Unspecified
F/M:  Unspecified
Mean cell residence time:  Unspecified
Sludge recycle ratio:  Unspecified
Process modification:  Surface  aeration
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
                                              Operating temperature:  Un-
                                                specified
                                              Sludge recycle ratio:
                                                Unspecified
                                              Clarifier configuration:
                                                Unspecified
                                              Depth:  Unspecified
                                              Hydraulic loading rate:
                                                Unspecified
                                              Solids loading rate:  Unspecified
                                              Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
REMOVAL DATA
Samol inq: I dav
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
BOD(5)
COD
TSS
Total phenol
Total phosphorus
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cya n I de
Lead
Me rcu ry
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Thai Hum
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) ph thai ate
Chloroform
Diethyl phthalate
N-nitroso-di-n-propylamine
Toluene
Anthracene/phenanthrene
Naphthalene
Pyrene
T r 1 ch 1 o rof 1 uo rome thane

Concentra
Influent

1, 100
1,300
32
0.042
12

BDL
BDL
0.7
12
74
17
BDL
0.9
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
300
5.7
3
3.3
ND
3.7
0. 1
41
ND
ND
Ana 1 vs i
tion
Effluent

BDL
99
8
0.015
6.5

BDL
BDL
BDL
4
30
BDL
BDL
0.6
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
170
3
ND
ND
2
ND
ND
NO
0.3
2.6
is: Da ta :
Percent
remova 1

>99
92
75
64
46

NM
NM
64»
67
59
88*
NM
33
NM
NM
NM
NM
43
47
NM
>99
NM
>99
>99
>99
NM
NM
set 1 (V.7.3.32)
Detection
limit

5





0.5
5
0.5
0.2
0.2
4
1
0.5
IO
5
5
5
25
0.04

0.3
0.2
0. 1
0.01
0.007
0. 1
2
              Blanks Indicate data not available.
              BDL, below detection limit.
              ND, not detected.
              NM, not meaningful.
              •Approximate value.
Date:   9/25/81
                              III.3.2.1-27
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Sludge
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  C
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Textile mills
 Unspecified

3-90, pp. 32-53
Data source status;
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:   Unspecified/Act.  Si.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow  rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic aeration detention time:
  Unspecified
Volumetric loading:  Unspecified
MLSS:  Unspecified
Oxygen supply:   Unspecified
F/M:  Unspecified
Mean cell residence time:  Unspecified
Sludge recycle ratio:  Unspecified
Process modification:  Surface aeration
                                 Operating temperature:  Un-
                                   specified
                                 Sludge recycle ratio:
                                   Unspecified
                                 Clarifier configuration:
                                   Unspecified
                                 Depth:  Unspecified
                                 Hydraulic loading rate:
                                   Unspecified
                                 Solids loading rate:  Unspecified
                                 Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                    REMOVAL DATA
SanDl 1 nq: 1 day
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants. mg/L:
B00( 5 )
COD
TSS
Totat phenol
.Total phosphorus
Toxic pollutants, M9/L:
Ant ifflony
Arsenic
Be ry 1 1 1 urn
Cadmium
Chromium
Coppe r
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
S 1 1 ve r
Tha 1 1 i urn
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Oiethyl phthalate
Pheno 1
1 ,2-Dichlorobenzene
Ethyl benzene
Toluene
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
Acenaphthene
Anthracene/phenanthrene
Tetrachloroethylene
T r i ch 1 o roe thy 1 ene

Concent ra
Influent

450
800
49
0.074
4.0

7
BDL
BDL
5
35
8
7
120
BDL
150
BDL
BOL
BDL
74
140
4. 1
0.5
1. 1
110
240
NO
NO
ND
26
18
Analysis:
tlon
Effluent

25
400
300
0.088
4.1

4
BDL
BOL
6
31
20
13
120
0.7
140
BDL
BDL
BOL
120
3.0
ND
ND
0.3
2.0
2.6
10
0.5
4.4
ND
ND
: Data set
Percent
renova 1

94
50
NM
NH
NM

43
NM
NH
NM
II
NM
NH
0
NH
7
NM
NM
NM
NH
98
>99
>86
73
98
99
NM
NH
NM
>97
>97
1 IV. 7. 3. 321
Detection
Unit







0.5
5
O.I
0.5
0.2
0.2
4
1
0.5
10
5
5
5
25
0.04
0.03
0.07
0.05
0.2
O.I
0.09
0.04
0.01
0.9
0.5
                 Blanks Indicate data not available.
                 BDL, below detection limit.
                 ND, not detected.
                 NM, not meaningful.
  Date:   9/25/81
                III.3.2.1-28
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Activated Sludge
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  D
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Textile mills
 Unspecified

3-90, pp. 32-53
Data source  status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
x
Pretreatment/treatment:   Unspecified/Act. Si.

DESIGN OR OPERATING  PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow  rate:   Unspecified
Hydraulic aeration detention time:
  Unspecified
Volumetric loading:  Unspecified
MLSS:  Unspecified
Oxygen supply:   Unspecified
F/M:  Unspecified
Mean cell residence  time:  Unspecified
Sludge recycle ratio:   Unspecified
Process modification:   Surface aeration
                                 Operating temperature:   Un-
                                   specified
                                 Sludge recycle ratio:
                                   Unspecified
                                 Clarifier configuration:
                                   Unspecified
                                 Depth:  Unspecified
                                 Hydraulic loading  rate:
                                   Unspecified
                                 Solids loading rate :  Unspecified
                                 Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                    REMOVAL DATA
              Samp Iina:  I  day
                                             Analysis: Data set I IV.7.3.321
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
BOD( 5 )
COD
TSS
Total phenol
Total phosphorus
Toxic pollutants, Mg/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Be ry 1 1 I urn
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Mercury
Lead
Se 1 en i urn
Nickel
SI Iver
Thai 1 ium
Zinc
Ch loroform
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Diethyl phthalate
Pentach 1 o ropheno 1
Ethyl benzene
To 1 uene
Naphthalene
Influent

71
220
16
0.02U
1.6

3
17
BDL
BDL
BDL
31
210
BDL
BDL
BDL
30
1 1
BDL
210
3.3
8.9
16
ND
22
57
2.3
0.3
Effluent

6.6
64
I5U
0. 18
1.0

2
6
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
210
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
210
ND
5
ND
1
ND
ND
1.7
ND
Percent
remova 1

91
71
NM
25
38

33
65
NM
NM
NM
99»
0
NM
NM
NM
67»
55»
NM
0
>99
It
>99
NM
>98
>99
27
>99
Detection
limit







0.5
5
0. 1
0.5
0.2
0.2
It
0.5

5
10
5
5
25

O.OU
0.02
0.03
O.l»
0.2
0. 1
0.007
              Blanks  indicate data not available.
              BDL, below detection limit.
              ND, not detected.
              NM, not meaningful.
              •Approximate value.
  Date:   9/25/81
                 III.3.2.1-29
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Sludge
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  E
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Textile mills
 Unspecified

3-90, pp. 32-53
Data source  status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Act.  SI.
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
Wastewater  flow rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic aeration detention time:
  Unspecified
Volumetric  loading:  Unspecified
MLSS:  Unspecified
Oxygen supply:   Unspecified
F/M:  Unspecified
Mean cell residence time:  Unspecified
Sludge recycle  ratio:  Unspecified
Process modification:  Surface aeration
                                 Operating temperature:   Un-
                                    specified
                                 Sludge recycle ratio:
                                    Unspecified
                                 Clarifier configuration:
                                    Unspecified
                                 Depth:  Unspecified
                                 Hydraulic loading rate:
                                    Unspecified
                                 Solids loading rate:  Unspecified
                                 Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                     REMOVAL DATA
                                             Analysis:  Data set I (V.7.3.321
                    Pol Imam/parameter
                                      Concentration
                                           Effluent
                                     Percent
                                     removaI
                  Blanks indicate data riot available.
                  BOL, below detection limit.
                  NO. not detected.
                  NH, not meaningfnI.
                  *Approxima to value.
     Detection
      ) igii t
Classical pollutants. mg/L:
DOD(5)
COD
TSS
Total phenol
Total phosphorus
toxic pollutants, utj/L :
Ant imoiiy
Arsenic
llcryl 1 nim
Cadmi urn
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
S i 1 ve r
Fha 1 1 i um
Zinc
Bis(2-uthylhexyl ) phthalate
Cyanide
Oiethyl ph thai ate
Dimethyl phthalate
Pcntachloropheno 1
Phono 1
Benzene
Ch lorobenzcne
trans-l,2-d ichloroethy 1 ene
1 ,2-0 ichlorobenzene
1 . *4-D ichlorobenzene
Ethyl benzene
To l ucue
Naphtha lene
Pyrene
Ch loroform
I.I, I-T rich lo roe thane
T r i ch I a roe thy I ene

18
2,700
52
0.069
1.9

8
DDL
BOL
6
1 1
sun
a
BDL
'10
BOL
7
BDL
7.900
5
BDL
NO
NO
30
5.7
5.1
1 .0
1 .8
NO
2
21
61
1
ND
22
17
2.0

BDL
78
19
0.0114
l.ll

0.8
BDL
BDL
1
14
30
BDL
BDL
no
BDL
BDL
BDL
5, 100
18
BDL
0.5
1
NO
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.2
0.2
NO
5.5
ND
0. 1
ND
ND
ND

86»
97
63
80
26

90
NM
NM
83
61
96
91"
NM
0
NM
>29
NM
35
NM
NM
NM
NM
>99
>99
>99
>99
NM
NM
90
>99
91
>99
NM
>99
>99
>99

5





0.5
5
0. 1
0.5
0.2
0.2
1
0.5
10
5
5
5
25
O.O'I
1
0.03
0.03
O.U
0.07
0.02
0.2

0.05
O.OIl
0.2
0. 1
0.007
0.01
5
2
0.5
  Date:   9/25/81
                     III.3.2.1-30
-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Sludge
 Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
 Point source:  Textile mills
 Subcategory:  Unspecified
 Plant:  F
 References:  3-90, pp. 32-53
 Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Act.  Si.
                                                   Data source status:
                                                     Not specified
                                                     Bench scale
                                                     Pilot scale
                                                     Full scale
x
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic aeration detention  time:
  Unspecified
Volumetric loading:  Unspecified
MLSS:  Unspecified
Oxygen supply:  Unspecified
F/M:  Unspecified
Mean cell residence time:  Unspecified
Sludge recycle ratio:  Unspecified
Process modification:  Surface  aeration
                                               Operating temperature:  Un-
                                                 specified
                                               Sludge recycle ratio:
                                                 Unspecified
                                               Clarifier configuration:
                                                 Unspecified
                                               Depth:  Unspecified
                                               Hydraulic loading rate:
                                                 Unspecified
                                               Solids loading rate:  Unspecified
                                               Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                    REMOVAL DATA
Sanol ina: 1 day
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, ng/L:
BOD ( 5 )
COO
TSS
Total phenol
Total phosphorus
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
CadmiuN
Ch ron fun
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Se 1 en i urn
Si Iver
Thai 1 1 u«
Zinc
Bls(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Diethyl phthalate
2, 1-Dimethyl phenol
Pen tach 1 o ropheno 1
Pheno 1
1 ,2-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,1-Dichlorobenzene
Ethyl benzene
Toluene
1 ,2,1-TricMorobenzene
Acenaphthene
Fluorene
1 , 2-0 1 ch 1 o rop ropane
1,1, l-Trlchloroethane
T r i ch 1 o rof 1 uo rome thane
1, l-Dlchloroethane
1 , t-Olchlo rop ropane
cls-l,3-dichlo rop ropene
Trane- 1 , 3-d ichlo rop ropene


Influent

190
580
23
0.71
21

1
BDL
10
6
590
BDL
80
BDL
100
BDL
100
BDL
260
NO
31
ND
2.1
8.2
35
6.5
ND
12
120
12
1 5
1.5
II
15
0.59
1.5
2. 1
ND
Analysis:
ration
Effluent

69
280
11
0.28
9.5

0.3
BDL
10
1
130
BDL
0.6
0.9
60
BDL
80
BDL
570
23
ND
9
NM
ND
ND
ND
2.7
0.85
6.3
ND
ND
ND
ND
1.7
ND
ND
5.6
3.9
Data set
Percent
remove 1

61
52
NM
96
60

70
NM
0
33
78
NM
99
NM
10
NM
20
NM
NM
NM
>99
NM
>99
>99
>99
>99
NM
93
95
>99
>99
>99
>99
96
>99
>99
NM
NM
1 IV. 7. 3. 321
Detection
limit

5





0.5
5
0.5
0.2
0.2
1
1
0.5
10
5
5
5
25
0.01
0.03
0. 1
0.1
0.07
0.05
0.01
0.2
O.I
0.09
0.01
0.02
0.7
2
2




                Blanks indicate data not available.
                BDL, below detection limit.
                NO, not detected.
                NM, not Meaningful.
Date:   9/25/81
                              III.3.2.1-31
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Sludge
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  G
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Textile mills
 Unspecified

3-90, pp. 32-53
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:   Unspecified/Act. 51.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater  flow  rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic aeration detention time:
  Unspecified
Volumetric  loading:  Unspecified
MLSS:  Unspecified
Oxygen supply:   Unspecified
F/M:  Unspecified
Mean cell residence time:  Unspecified
Sludge recycle  ratio:  Unspecified
Process modification:  Surface aeration
                                 Operating temperature:  Un-
                                   specified
                                 Sludge recycle ratio:
                                   Unspecified
                                 Clarifier configuration:
                                   Unspecified
                                 Depth:  Unspecified
                                 Hydraulic loading rate:
                                   Unspecified
                                 Solids loading rate:   Unspecified
                                 Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL DATA
Samollna: 1 day
Ppl lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
BOD(5)
COD
TSS
Total phenol
Total phosphorus
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Be ry 1 1 i urn
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
S i 1 ve r
Se 1 en i urn
Thai 1 ium
Zinc
Bls(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Dlethyl phthalate
Phenol
Hexach 1 o robenzene
To 1 uene
Acenaphthene
Fluorene
Naphtha lene
Chloroform

Concent ra
Influent

200
1,300
n
0.028
6. It

52
BDL
BDL
BOL
t>
63
BDL
6
BDL
28
8.5
BDL
BOL
050
19
ND
0.8
NO
ND
270
5
95
5.2
Analysis:
tlon
Effluent

142
500
6
0.050
6.1

II
BDL
BDL
BDL
3
28
6
BDL
BDL
13
BDL
BDL
BDL
260
10
II
2
0.8
0.8
2.0
NO
ND
ND
Data set
Percent
remova 1

79
62
80
NM
5

79
NM
NM
NM
25
56
NM
92*
NM
54
71*
NM
NM
02
07
NM
NM
NM
NM
99
>99
>99
>99
1 (V. 7. 3. 321
Detection
1 imlt

5





0.5
5
O.I
0.5
0.2
0.2
14
1
0.5
10
5
5
5
25
0.00
0.03
0.07
0.05
O.I
O.OM
0.02
0.007
5
               Blanks indicate data not available.
               BDL, below detection limit.
               ND, not detected.
               NM, not meaningful.
               "Approximate value.
  Date:   9/25/81
                  III.3.2.1-32
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Activated Sludge
Data source:
Point source
Subcategory:
Plant:  H
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Textile mills
 Unspecified

3-90, pp. 32-53
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:   Unspecified/Act. Si.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater  flow  rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic aeration  detention time:
  Unspecified
Volumetric  loading:  Unspecified
MLSS:  Unspecified
Oxygen supply:   Unspecified
F/M:  Unspecified
Mean cell residence time-.  Unspecified
Sludge recycle ratio:  Unspecified
Process modification:  Surface aeration
                                 Operating temperature:  Un-
                                   specified
                                 Sludge recycle ratio:
                                   Unspecified
                                 Clarifier configuration:
                                   Unspecified
                                 Depth:  Unspecified
                                 Hydraulic loading rate:
                                   Unspecified
                                 Solids loading rate:  Unspecified
                                 Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                    REMOVAL DATA
Sampl inq: 1 day
Pol lutant/para meter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
BOD(5)
COD
TSS
Total phenol
Total phosphorus
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Ant imony
Arsenic *
Be ry 1 1 I urn
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Se leni urn
Silver
Thall ium
Zinc
Bis(2-eUiylliexyl ) phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
2-Ni tropheno 1
M-Ni trophenol
Pheno 1
p-Chloro-m-c resol
1 , 2-Dichlorobenzene
Ethyl benzene
To luene
Acenaphthene
Naphtha lene
Tr ichlorof luorome thane

Concentri
Influent

290
320
39
0.0147
0.99

14
BBL
BDL
BDL
14
22
BDL
BDL
BDL
111
BDL
Ml
BDL
3,900
Ml
2
60
65
63
M.5
0.5
5.7
26
27
3
BDL
Ana Ivsis:
it ion
Effluent

11
300
«
0.019
0.20

6
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BOL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BOL
BDL
960
230
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
12
ND
ND
2, 100
Data set
Percent
remova 1

95
6
NM
60
80

NM
NM
NM
NM
98"
>99*
NM
NM
NM
6>4*
NM
914*
NM
75
NM
>99
>99
>99
>99
>99
>99
>99
514
>99
>99
NM
1 (Y,_7,3.32)
Detection
limit

5





0.5
5
0. 1
0.5
0.2
0.2
14
1
0.5
10
5
5
5
25
0.014
0.02
0.14
0.9
0.07
0. 1
0.05
0.2
0. 1
0.0<4
O.OOY
2
                Blanks indicate data not available.
                BDL, below detection limit.
                ND, not detected.
                NM, not meaningful.
                "Approximate value.
Date:   9/25/81
                  III.3.2.1-33
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Sludge
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Textile mills
Subcategory:  Unspecified
Plant:  J
References:  3-90, pp. 32-53
Pretreatment/treatment:   Unspecified/Act.
                   Data source status:
                     Not specified
                     Bench scale
                     Pilot scale
                     Full scale
          SI.
DESIGN OR OPERATING  PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow  rate:   Unspecified
Hydraulic aeration detention time:
  Unspecified
Volumetric loading:  Unspecified
MLSS:  Unspecified
Oxygen supply?   Unspecified
F/M:  Unspecified
Mean cell residence  time:  Unspecified
Sludge recycle ratio:   Unspecified
Process modification:   Surface aeration
              Operating temperature:  Un-
                specified
              Sludge recycle ratio:
                Unspecified
              Clarifier configuration:
                Unspecified
              Depth:  Unspecified
              Hydraulic loading rate:
                Unspecified
              Solids loading rate:  Unspecified
              Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                    REMOVAL DATA
Samel Ina: 1 day
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
BOD(5)
COO
TSS
Total phenol
Total phosphorus
Toxic pollutants. ug/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Be ry 1 1 i urn
Cadmium
Ch ram i urn
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Si Iver
Tha 1 1 i urn
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) ph thai ate
Di-n-butyl ph thai ate
Oiethyl phthalate
Ethyl benzene
Toluene
Naphthalene
Pyrene

Concent ra
Influent

210
810
0.01
0.063
3.3

0.7
BDL
BDL
BDL
18
2,1400
BDL
29
BOL
97
BDL
60
BDL
2, 100
160
23
6.5
NO
36
80
ND
Analysis:
tion
Effluent

25
380
0.023
0.021*
0.6

BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
25
100
BDL
BDL
BOL
90
BDL
BDL
BDL
800
35
3.6
ND
51
8
ND
0. 1
Data set
Percent
remova 1

88
53
NM
62
82

6H»
NM
NM
NM
18
96
NM
98*
NM
7
NM
96*
NM
62
78
81
>99
NM
78
>99
NH
1 (V.7.3.32)
Detection
limit

5





0.5
5
0. 1
0.5
0.2
0.2
0.04
I
0.5
10
5
5
5
25
0.04
0.02
0.03
0.2
0. 1
0.07
0.01
              Blanks indicate data not available.
              BDL, below detection limit.
              ND, not detected.
              NM, not meaningful.
              "Approximate value.
 Date:   9/25/81
III.3.2.1-34
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Sludge
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  JJ
References:
              Effluent Guidelines
               Textile mills
              Unspecified

             3-90, pp. 32-53
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:   Unspecified/Act. SI.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic aeration detention time:
  Unspecified
Volumetric loading:  Unspecified
MLSS:  Unspecified
Oxygen supply:  Unspecified
F/M:  Unspecified
Mean cell residence time:  Unspecified
Sludge recycle ratio:  Unspecified
Process modification:  Surface aeration
                                             Operating temperature:   Un-
                                               specified
                                             Sludge recycle ratio:
                                               Unspecified
                                             Clarifier configuration:
                                               Unspecified
                                             Depth:  Unspecified
                                             Hydraulic loading rate:
                                               Unspecified
                                             Solids loading rate:  Unspecified
                                             Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
Samol inq; I day
REMOVAL
DATA
Ana lysis:
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
COD
Total phenol
Total phosphorus
Toxic pollutants, u.g/L:
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cya n i de
Lead
Nickel
S i 1 ve r
Zinc
Phenol
1 ,2-Dichlorobenzene
Ethyl benzene
1 , 2,4-Trichlorobenzene
Tetrachloroethylene
T r i ch 1 o roe thy 1 ene
Influent

1,500
0. 14
3.5

200
5
160
32
5
84
100
47
130
41
II
14
440
1, 100
190
Effluent

510
0.055
2.3

160
5
80
31
28
65
120
49
320
ND
ND
ND
32
ND
84
Data set
Percent
remova 1

66
61
34

20
0
50
3
NM
23
NM
NM
NM
>99
>99
>99
93
>99
56
1 (V.7.3.32)
Detection
1 imit





5
0.5
0.2
0.2
4
1
10
5
25
0.07
0.05
0.2
0.09
0.9
0.5
    Blanks indicate data not available.
    ND, not detected.
    NM, not meaningful.
Date:   9/25/81
                              III.3.2.1-35
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Sludge
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Textile mills
Subcategory:  Unspecified
Plant:  K
References:  3-90, pp. 32-53
Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Act. Si.
                  Data source  status;
                    Not specified
                    Bench  scale
                    Pilot  scale
                    Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic aeration detention time:
  Unspecified
Volumetric loading:  Unspecified
MLSS:  Unspecified
Oxygen supply:  Unspecified
F/M:  Unspecified
Mean cell residence time:   Unspecified
Sludge recycle ratio:  Unspecified
Process modification:  Surface aeration
             Operating  temperature:   Un-
               specified
             Sludge recycle  ratio:
               Unspecified
             Clarifier  configuration:
               Unspecified
             Depth:  Unspecified
             Hydraulic  loading rate:
               Unspecified
             Solids loading  rate:   Unspecified
             Weir  loading rate:  Unspecified
                                    REMOVAL DATA
Samof ino: 1 rfav
Pol lutant/DAraiHoter
Classical pollutants, an/L:
BOD< 5)
COO
TSS
Total phenol
Total pnosphorus
toxic pollutants. ug/L:
Ant imny
Arsenic
DC ry 1 1 i un
Cadmium
Ch rom i urn
Coppe r
Cyanide
t end
Mercury
Nickol
Selenium
Si Ivor
Tha 1 1 him
Zinc
lit &f 2-ethylhoxyl ) phthalate
Dicthyl phthalate
Poll tacit loruphofiol
2. '1,6-T r ichlorophanol
t thy 1 benzene
Toluene
Naphtha lent?
Ch 1 o ro To rn)
T r i ch 1 o roc thy 1 ene
gamma -8HC

Concentraf
Influent 1

560
1,700
69
0.067
1.9

3
6
BOL
U
19
26
BOL
30
DDL
100
DDL
130
BDL
150
N»
0.2
3.9
0.7
6<4
29
0.03
1.8
ND
0.31
Ana lysis:
t ion
Effluent

BOL
130
21
0.018
0.93

0.6
BOL
BDL
BDL
1
15
BDL
ND
BOL
ND
BDL
ND
BOL
MO
8
NO
NO
NO
0.7
21
0.5
58
1.6
NO
Data set
Percent
renova 1

>99
92
70
73
51

73
58*
NM
91*
79
H?
NM
>99
NM
>99
NM
>99
NM
27
NM
>99
>99
>99
99
17
NM
NM
NM
NM
1 fV.7.3.32)
Detection
1 imit

5





0.5
5
O.I
0.5
0.2
0.2
U
1
0.5
10
5
5
5

O.O'I
0.03
0.1
0.2
0.2
O.I
0.007
5
0.5

                 Blanks indicate data not available.
                 BOL, ho low do loot ion Imit.
                 ND. not detected.
                 NM, not moan ing Tii I.
                 •Approximate value.
 Date:   9/25/81
III.3.2.1-36
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Activated Sludge
Data source:
Point source;
Subcategory:
Plant:  KK
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Textile mills
 Unspecified

3-90, pp. 32-53
Data source  status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:   Unspecified/Act.  SI.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater  flow  rate:   Unspecified
Hydraulic aeration detention time:
  Unspecified
Volumetric  loading:  Unspecified
MLSS:  Unspecified
Oxygen supply:   Unspecified
F/M:  Unspecified
Mean cell residence time:   Unspecified
Sludge recycle ratio:   Unspecified
Process modification:   Surface aeration
                                 Operating  temperature:  Un-
                                   specified
                                 Sludge recycle ratio:
                                   Unspecified
                                 Clarifier  configuration:
                                   Unspecified
                                 Depth:  Unspecified
                                 Hydraulic  loading rate:
                                   Unspecified
                                 Solids loading rate:  Unspecified
                                 Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                    REMOVAL DATA
             Samp I ing:  I day
                                             Analysis:  Data set I  (V.7.3.321
                                    Concentration
                                                   Percent
             Blanks indicate data not available.
             BDL, below detection limit.
             ND, not detected.
             NH, not meaningful.
             "Approximate value.
                                                          Detection
Pol lutant/parameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
COD
Total phosphorus
Total phenol
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Arsenic
Ca dm i urn
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
Si Iver
Zinc
Bl s(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Di ethyl phthalate
Dimethyl phthalate
2-Chlorophenol
Pentach 1 o ropheno 1
2,M,6-Trichlorophenol
Benzene
Chlorobenzene
Ethylbenzene
Toluene
Pyrene
Trichloroethylene
Influent

2,000
6.3
0. 150

120
2
16
86
BDL
U9
77
22
1, 100
9.3
2.5
12
130
20
20
ND
U2
26
28
0.9
52
Effluent

150
6.U
0.052

BDL
1
13
37
BDL
U4
110
111
390
U.I
ND
ND
10
ND
21
6K
26
ND
ND
0.2
ND
remova 1

78
NM
65

98»
NH
19
57
NH
10
NH
NH
65
56
>99
>99
92
>99
NM
NM
38
>99
>99
78
>99
limit





5



4




0.014
0.03
0.03

O.U
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0. 1
0. 1
0.3
Date:   9/25/81
                   III.3.2.1-37
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Activated Sludge
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  L
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Textile mills
 Unspecified

3-90, pp. 32-53
Data source  status:
  Not specified
  Bench  scale
  Pilot  scale
  Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:   Unspecified/Act.  Si.
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
Wastewater  flow rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic aeration detention time:
  Unspecified
Volumetric  loading.-  Unspecified
MLSS:  Unspecified
Oxygen supply:   Unspecified
F/M:  Unspecified
Mean cell residence time:  Unspecified
Sludge recycle  ratio:  Unspecified
Process modification:  Surface  aeration
                                 Operating temperature:  Un-
                                    specified
                                 Sludge  recycle ratio:
                                    Unspecified
                                 Clarifier configuration:
                                    Unspecified
                                 Depth:   Unspecified
                                 Hydraulic loading rate:
                                    Unspecified
                                 Solids  loading rate:  Unspecified
                                 Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                   REMOVAL DATA
             Samp I ing: I  day
                                            Analysis;  Data set I  (V.7.3.321
                Pol Mutant/parameter
                                    Concentration
                                                   Percent
                                  Influent   Effluent   removal
             Blanks indicate data not available.
             BDL, below detection limit.
             ND, not detected.
             NM, not meaningful.
                                                          Detection
                                                            limit
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
BOD(5)
COO
TSS
Total phenol
Total phosphorus
Toxic pollutants, Mg/L:
Antimony
Arsen ic
Be ry 1 1 i urn
Cadmi um
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Set en i um
S i 1 ve r
Tha 1 1 i um
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Dimethyl phthalate
Benzene
1 ,4-Dichlorobenzene
Ethyl benzene
To 1 uene
Acenaphthene

3BO
1, 100
19
0.038
2.2

5
BOL
BDL
BDL
3
300
BDL
36
BDL
51
BDL
BDL
BDL
1,000
3
110
ND
1
2.0
5.2
30

13
230
78
0.026
1.6

3
BDL
BDL
BDL
30
96
170
ND
BDL
35
BDL
BDL
BDL
720
2
ND
0.5
ND
NO
ND
ND

97
79
NM
32
27

1O
NM
NM
NM
NM
68
NM
>99
NM
35
NM
NM
NM
28
33
>99
NM
>99
>90
>99
>99

5





0.5
5
0. 1
0.5
0.2
0.2
U
1
0.5
10
5
5
5
25
0.04
0.03
0.2
0.04
0.2
0.2
0.04
 Date:   9/25/81
                    III.3.2.1-38
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Activated Sludge
Data source:   Effluent Guidelines
Point  source:   Textile mills
Subcategory:   Unspecified
Plant:  LL
References:  3-90,  pp. 32-53
Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Act.  Si.
                    Data source status:
                      Not specified
                      Bench scale
                      Pilot scale
                      Full scale
x
DESIGN OR  OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic  aeration detention time:
  Unspecified
Volumetric loading:  Unspecified
MLSS:  Unspecified
Oxygen supply:   Unspecified
F/M:  Unspecified
Mean cell  residence time:  Unspecified
Sludge recycle  ratio:  Unspecified
Process  modification:  Surface aeration
              Operating temperature:  Un-
                 specified
              Sludge recycle ratio:
                 Unspecified
              Clarifier configuration:
                 Unspecified
              Depth:  Unspecified
              Hydraulic loading rate:
                 Unspecified
              Solids loading rate:  Unspecified
              Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                    REMOVAL DATA
             Samp I ing;  I day
                Pol lutant/oarameter
                                    	Analysis:	Data set I  (V.7.3.321
                                    Concentration      Percent   Detection
                                  Influent
                                             luent
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
COD
Total phenol
Total phosphorus
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Arsenic
Cadmium
Ch rom I urn
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
Si Iver
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Dimethyl phthalate
Pheno 1
1 , 2-Dichlorobenzene
Ethylbenzene
1 ,2,1-Trichlorobenzene
Naptha lene
Chloroform
Tetrachlo roe thy lene

730
0.001
19

100
14
II
38
8
60
130
58
67
ND
ND
16
0.6
M80
320
51
500
1, 100

160
0.0914
29

70
2
20
92
6
48
150
56
68
5.2
0.2
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND

78
NM
NM

30
50
NM
NM
25
20
NM
3
NM
NM
NM
>99
>99
>99
>99
>99
>99
>99





5
0.5
0.2
0.2

1
10
5
25
0.04
0.03
0.07
0.05
0.2
0.09
0.007
5
0.9
             Blanks indicate data not available.
             ND, not detected.
             NM, not meaningful.
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.2.1-39
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Sludge
Data source:   Effluent Guidelines
Point source:   Textile mills
Subcategory:   Unspecified
Plant:  M
References:   3-90,  pp. 32-53
Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Act.  Si.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
                    Data source status:
                      Not specified
                      Bench scale
                      Pilot scale
                      Full scale
x
Wastewater  flow rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic aeration detention time:
  Unspecified
Volumetric  loading:  Unspecified
MLSS:  Unspecified
Oxygen supply:   Unspecified
F/M:  Unspecified
Mean cell residence time.-  Unspecified
Sludge recycle  ratio:  Unspecified
Process modification:  Surface  aeration
              Operating temperature:   Un-
                 specified
              Sludge recycle ratio:
                 Unspecified
              Clarifier configuration:
                 Unspecified
              Depth:  Unspecified
              Hydraulic loading  rate:
                 Unspecified
              Solids loading rate:  Unspecified
              Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                   REMOVAL DATA
             Samp I ing;  I day
                Pol lutant/pararoeter
                                    Concentration
                                            Analysis:  Data set I  IV.7.3.321
                                  Influent
                                          Effluent
                                                   Percent
                                                   removaI
             Blanks indicate data not available.
             BDL, below detection limit.
             NO, not detected.
             NM, not meaningful.
                          Detection
                           I imit
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
BOD(5)
COD
TSS
Total phenol
Total phosphorus
Toxic pollutants, ng/L:
Ant imony
Arsenic
Be ry 1 1 i urn
Cadmium
Ch rom i urn
Copper
Cyan ide
Mercury
Nickel
Lead
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Pentach 1 oropheno 1
Phenol
To 1 uene
1,2,4-Trich lorobenzene
Naphtha lene

830
2,300
210
0.037
3.99

0.8
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
9
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
1,200
300
ND
6.9
12
ND
160
93

BDL
260
21
0.025
3.U6

It
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
5
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
410
ND
58
ND
ND
0.1
1.8
ND

>99
89
90
32
13

NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
141
NM
NM
NM
NM
66
>99
NM
>99
>99
NM
99
>99

5





0.5
5
0. 1
0.5
0.2
0.2
It
0.5
10
1
25
O.OIt
0.02
O.U
0.07
0. 1
0.09
0.007
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.2.1-40
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Sludge
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Textile mills
Subcategory:  Unspecified
Plant:  N
References:  3-90, pp. 32-53
Pretreatment/treatment:   Unspecified/Act. SI.
DESIGN OR OPERATING  PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow  rate:   Unspecified
Hydraulic aeration detention time:
  Unspecified
Volumetric loading:   Unspecified
MLSS:  Unspecified
Oxygen supply:   Unspecified
F/M:  Unspecified
Mean cell residence  time:   Unspecified
Sludge recycle ratio:   Unspecified
Process modification:   Surface aeration
                   Data source status:
                     Not specified
                     Bench scale
                     Pilot scale
                     Full scale
              Operating temperature:  Un-
                specified
              Sludge recycle ratio:
                Unspecified
              Clarifier configuration:
                Unspecified
              Depth:  Unspecified
              Hydraulic loading rate:
                Unspecified
              Solids loading rate:  Unspecified
              Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                   REMOVAL DATA
Samel ing: 1 day

Analysis:
Concentration
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
BOD( 5 )
COO
TSS
Total phenol
Total phosphorus
Toxic pollutants, M9/L:
Antimony
Arsen ic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Tha 1 1 i urn
Zinc
6is(2-ethyihexyl ) ph thai ate
Diethyl phthalate
2,il-Dimethylphenol
Pheno 1
1 ,2-Dichlorobenzene
1 ,M-Dichlorobenzene
Ethyl benzene
Toluene
Naphtha lene
Trichloroethylene
Influent

330
1, 100
68
0. 16
O.U3

0.2
BDL
U6
880
20
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
7,500
10
5.9
ND
1 1
290
220
1,800
I4H
17
21
Effluent

36
290
77
0.068
5.2

2
BDL
BDL
1,800
8
BDL
BDL
BDL
30
BDL
BDL
38,000
17
9.1
8
ND
6.0
1.5
75
17
ND
ND
Data set
Percent
remova 1

89
74
NH
58
NM

NM
NM
99*
NM
60
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
>99
98
99
96
61
>99
>99
1 (V.7.3.32)
Detection
1 imit

5





0.5
5
0.5
0.2
0.2
l|
1
5
10
5
5
25
O.OU
0.03
0. 1
0.07
0.05
0.01
0.2
0. 1
0.007
0.5
            Blanks indicate data not available.
            BDL, below detection limit.
            ND, not detected.
            NM, not meaningful.
            •Approximate value.
 Date:   9/25/81
III.3.2.1-41
-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Sludge
 Data source:   Effluent Guidelines
 Point source:  Textile mills
 Subcategory:   Unspecified
 Plant:  NN
 References:  3-90, pp. 32-53
 Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Act. Si.

 DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
                     Data source status:
                       Not specified
                       Bench scale
                       Pilot scale
                       Full scale
 Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
 Hydraulic aeration detention time:
   Unspecified
 Volumetric loading:  Unspecified
 MLSS:  Unspecified
 Oxygen supply:  Unspecified
 F/M:  Unspecified
 Mean cell residence time:   Unspecified
 Sludge recycle ratio:  Unspecified
 Process modification:  Surface aeration
                Operating temperature:  Un-
                  specified
                Sludge recycle ratio.-
                  Unspecified
                Clarifier configuration:
                  Unspecified
                Depth:  Unspecified
                Hydraulic loading rate.-
                  Unspecified
                Solids loading rate:  Unspecified
                Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                   REMOVAL DATA
Samol ina: 1 day
Pol lutant/parameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
COD
Total phenol
Total phosphorus
Toxic pollutants, Mg/L:
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
S i 1 ve r
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Phenol

Ana 1 ys i
Concentration
Influent

910
0.043
49

BDL
2
23
47
40
33
98
42
84
23
10
Effluent

240
0.014
47

BDL
4
170
46
BDL
25
79
33
130
27
NO
is: Data set
Percent
remova 1

74
67
1

NM
NM
NM
2
95*
24
19
21
NM
NM
>99
1 (V. 7. 3. 321
Detection
1 imit





5
0.5
0.2
0.2
4
1
10
5
25
0.04
0.07
      Blanks indicate data not available.
      BDL, below detection limit.
      NO,  not detected.
      NM,  not meaningful.
      *Approximate value.
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.2.1-42
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Activated Sludge
Data source:
Point source
Subcategory-.
Plant:  00
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Textile mills
 Unspecified

3-90, pp. 32-53
         Data source status:
           Not specified
           Bench scale
           Pilot scale
           Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:   Unspecified/Act.  SI.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic aeration detention time:
  Unspecified
Volumetric loading:  Unspecified
MLSS:  Unspecified
Oxygen supply:  Unspecified
F/M:  Unspecified
Mean cell residence time:   Unspecified
Sludge recycle ratio:  Unspecified
Process modification:  Surface  aeration
                                 Operating temperature:  Un-
                                   specified
                                 Sludge  recycle ratio:
                                   Unspecified
                                 Clarifier configuration:
                                   Unspecified
                                 Depth:   Unspecified
                                 Hydraulic loading rate:
                                   Unspecified
                                 Solids  loading rate:   Unspecified
                                 Weir  loading rate:  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
   Samp I ing;  I  day
                                Analysis:   Data set I  (V.7.3.32)
       PoI Iutant/pa rameter
                                  Concentration
                  Influent
Effluent
                                        Percent
                                        remove I
   Classical pollutants, mg/L:
     COD                         1,900        640
     Total phenol                 0.082      0.026
     Total phosphorus               4.6       0.66
   Blanks  indicate data not available.
   BDL,  below detection limit.
   ND,  not detected.
   NM,  not meaningful.
                                           66
                                           68
                                           86
Detection
  I imi.t
Toxic pollutants, M-9/L:
Arsen ic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
Si 1 ve r
Zinc
Bi s( 2-ethy Ihexy 1 ) phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Phenol
Toluene
Chloroform
Tr ichloroethylene

BDL
4
1 1
39
BDL
U3
1 10
46
120
26
61
23
ND
48
42

BDL
5
12
37
BDL
84
120
50
2,300
3.2
ND
ND
3
10
ND

NM
NM
NM
5
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
88
>99
>99
NM
79
>99

5
0.5
0.2
0.2
4
1
10
5
25
0.04
0.02
0.07
0. 1
5
0.5
 Date:   9/25/81
                   III.3.2.1-43
-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Sludge
 Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
 Point source:  Textile mills
 Subcategory:  Unspecified
 Plant:  P
 References:   3-90, pp. 32-53
 Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Act.  Si.
                    Data source status:
                      Not specified
                      Bench scale
                      Pilot scale
                      Full scale
 DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

 Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
 Hydraulic aeration detention time:
   Unspecified
 Volumetric loading:  Unspecified
 MLSS:   Unspecified
 Oxygen supply:  Unspecified
 F/M:  Unspecified
 Mean cell residence time:  Unspecified
 Sludge recycle ratio:  Unspecified
 Process modification:  Surface aeration
               Operating temperature:  Un-
                 specified
               Sludge recycle ratio:
                 Unspecified
               Clarifier configuration:
                 Unspecified
               Depth:  Unspecified
               Hydraulic loading rate:
                 Unspecified
               Solids loading rate:  Unspecified
               Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                    REMOVAL DATA
SamDl ina: 1 dav
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
BOD(5)
COD
TSS
Total phenol
Total phosphorus
Toxic pollutants, H9/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Be ry 1 1 i urn
Cadmium
Chromium
copper
Cyanide
Lead
Selenium
Mercury
Nickel
S i 1 ve r
Thai luim
Zinc
Bi s(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Diethyl phthalate
Dimethyl phthalate
N-n i t roso-d i -n-propy 1 ami ne
Pheno 1
Chlorobenzerie
Ethyl benzene
To 1 tiene
Naphthalene
Chloroform

Concentre
Influent

680
170
6
0.23
5.7

BOL
BDL
BDL
BDL
3
BDL
190
13
BDL
BDL
100
30
BDL
200
30
9.8
1.7
12
ND
6.6
25
1,200
36
1.9
17
Ana lysis;
itlon
Effluent

28
15
15
0.032
2.2

BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
110
ND
BDL
BDL
10
8
BDL
110
72
ND
ND
ND
19
ND
ND
280
22
ND
6.9
: Data set
Pe rcent
remova 1

96
71
NM
86
61

NM
NM
NM
NM
97*
NM
26
96"
NM
NM
60
73
NM
30
NM
>99
>99
>99
NM
>99
>99
77
39
>99
59
1 (V. 7. 3. 321
Detection
1 inlt

5





0.5
5
O.I
0.5
0.2
0.2

1
5
0.5
10
5
5
25
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.03
0.02
0.07
0.2
0.2
0. 1
0.007
5
                 Blanks indicate data not available.
                 BDL, be tow detection limit.
                 ND, not detected.
                 NM, not meaningful.
                 *Approximate value.
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.2.1-44
-------
TREATMENT  TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Sludge
Data source:
Point source
Subcategory:
Plant:  Q
References:
 Effluent  Guidelines
  Textile  mills
 Knit fabric finishing

3-68, p. VII-58
Pretreatment/treatment:   Sed./Act. SI.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  9,500 m3/day
Hydraulic aeration detention time:  15  hr
Volumetric loading:  Unspecified
MLSS:  Unspecified
Oxygen supply:  Unspecified
F/M:  Unspecified
Mean cell residence time:   Unspecified
Sludge recycle ratio:  Unspecified
Process modification:  Surface aeration
  power requirement:  29.2 W/m3
Data source status:
  Not  specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
                                  Operating temperature:
                                    Unspecified
                                  Sludge  recycle ratio:
                                    Unspecified
                                  Clarifier configuration:
                                    Unspecified
                                  Depth:   Unspecified
                                  Hydraulic loading rate:
                                    Unspecified
                                  Solids  loading rate:  Unspecified
                                  Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                  Aerator power requirement:
                                    22.5  W/m3
                                     REMOVAL DATA

              Sampling: Effluent concentration is an average or two 24-hr composite samples,
                     classical pollutant influent concentration is a 18-hr composite
                     sample, toxic pollutant influent concentration is an average of two
              	24-hr composite samples.	Analysis:  Data set I  (V.7.3.321
                                     Concentration
                                                     Percent
              Blanks indicate data not available.
              ND, not detected.
              NM, not meaningful.
                                                             Detection
Pol lutant/parameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
COD
TSS
Oi 1 and grease
Toxic pollutants, |ig/L:
Antimony
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
Se 1 en i urn
Si Iver
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) ph thai ate
Pheno 1
Ethyl benzene
1 ,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
Naphthalene
Tetrachloroethylene
T r i ch I o roe thy 1 ene
2, 4 , 6-T r i ch 1 o ropheno 1
2-Nitrophenol
Influent

780
IT
320

95
1*1
4M
10
36
36
15
12
56
41
55
100
2,700
45
NO
840
BDL
BDL
Effluent

310
28
300

670
32
100
NO
48
NO
41
13
48
15
NO
ND
NO
NO
17
ND
BDL
BDL
remova 1 limit

60
NM
6

NM
NM
NM
>99
NM
>99
NM
NM
14
63
>99
>99
>99
>99
NM
>99
NM
NM
 Date:   9/25/81
                    III.3,2.1-45
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Activated Sludge
Data source:
Point source:
Subcategory:
Plant:  S
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Textile mills
 Unspecified

3-90, pp. 32-53
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:   Unspecified/Act. 51.

DESIGN OR OPERATING  PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow  rate:   Unspecified
Hydraulic aeration detention time:
  Unspecified
Volumetric loading:  Unspecified
MLSS:  Unspecified
Oxygen supply:   Unspecified
F/M:  Unspecified
Mean cell residence  time:  Unspecified
Sludge recycle ratio:   Unspecified
Process modification:   Surface aeration
                                 Operating temperature:   Un-
                                   'specified
                                 Sludge recycle ratio:
                                   Unspecified
                                 Clarifier configuration:
                                   Unspecified
                                 Depth:  Unspecified
                                 Hydraulic loading  rate:
                                   Unspecified
                                 Solids loading rate:  Unspecified
                                 Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                    REMOVAL DATA
              Samp I ing: I  day
                                             Analysis:  Data set I  (V.7.3.321
Concentration
Pol Imam/parameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
BOD( 5 )
COO
TSS
Total phenol
Total phosphorus
Toxic pollutants, U9/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Be ry 1 1 1 urn
Cadmium
Ch rom i urn
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Me rcu ry
Nickel
Se 1 en i urn
Si Iver
Tha 1 1 iunt
Zinc
Bls(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Chlorobenzene
Ethyl benzene
To 1 uene
1 ,2,14-Trichlorobenzene
Naphtha lene
Chloroform
Tetrachlo roe thy lene
beta-BHC
Influent

220
560
25
0. 1 1
1.6

57
5
BDL
BOL
0.7
1)0
7
BDL
BDL
BOL
BDL
BDL
BDL
120
l>40
14
850
61
190
IUO
71
39
0.35
Effluent

59
1,000
. 580
0.03
5.0

Vi
BDL
BDL
BDL
BOL
60
BDL
BDL
BDL
NO
BDL
BOL
BDL
SU
11
ND
1 10
21
920
260
ND
BDL
ND
Percent
remova 1

73
NM
NM
73
NM

NM
50"
NM
NM
86*
NM
71*
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
30
71
>99
87
66
NM
NM
>99*
99»
>99
Detection
1 tmit

5





0.5
5
0. 1
0.5
0.2
0.2
U
1
0.5
10
5
5
5
25
0.01
0.2
0.2
0. 1
0.09
0.007
5
0.9

              Blanks indicate data not available.
              BDL, below detection limit.
              ND, not detected.
              NM, not meaningful.
              •Approximate value.
   Date:   9/25/81
                     III.3.2.1-46.
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Sludge
Data source:
Point source;
Subcategory.-
Plant:  T
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Textile mills
 Unspecified

3-90, pp. 32-53
        Data source status:
          Not specified
          Bench scale
          Pilot scale
          Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:   Unspecified/Act. SI.
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic aeration detention time:
  Unspecified
Volumetric loading:  Unspecified
MLSS:  Unspecified
Oxygen supply:  Unspecified
F/M:  Unspecified
Mean cell residence time:   Unspecified
Sludge recycle ratio:  Unspecified
Process modification:  Surface aeration
                                 Operating temperature:  Un-
                                   specified
                                 Sludge recycle ratio:
                                   Unspecified
                                 Clarifier configuration:
                                   Unspecified
                                 Depth:  Unspecified
                                 Hydraulic loading rate:
                                   Unspecified
                                 Solids loading rate:  Unspecified
                                 Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL DATA
    Samp I ing;  I  day
                                 Analysis:  Data set I  (V.7.3.32)
        Pollutant/parameter
                                   Concentration
                   I of Iuent
Effluent
Percent
removaI
    Classical pollutants, mg/L:
      BOD(5)                          500        32
      COD                            500       It 10
      TSS                             28        35
      Total phenol                   0.073     0.041
      Total phosphorus                  12        17
    Blanks  indicate data not available.
    BDL,  below detection limit.
    ND,  not detected.
    NM,  not meaningful.
    *Approximate value.
                                            94
                                            17
                                            NM
                                            44
                                            NM
Detection
  limit
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Arsenic
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
S i 1 ve r
Tha 1 1 ium
Zinc
Bi s(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
N-n i t rosod i pheny 1 am i ne
Ethyl benzene
Tol uene
Tet rach 1 o roethy 1 ene

BDL
BDL
120
BDL
25
0.7
50
BDL
BDL
BDL
290
140
1 1
18
300
6.4

BDL
BDL
60
BDL
BDL
BDL
4
BDL
BDL
BDL
80
23
ND
ND
33
2.9

NM
NM
50
NM
98*
64*
92
NM
NM
NM
72
84
>99
>99
89
55

5
0.2
0.2
4
1
0.5
10
5
3
5
25
0.04
0.07
0.2
O.I
0.9
 Date:   9/25/81
                   III.3.2.1-47
-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Activated Sludge
 Data source:
 Point source
 Subcategory:
 Plant:  V
 References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Textile mills
 Unspecified

3-90, pp. 32-53
Data source  status;
  Not specified
  Bench  scale
  Pilot  scale
  Full scale
 Pretreatment/treatment:   Unspecified/Act.  Si.
 DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
 Wastewater flow  rate:   Unspecified
 Hydraulic aeration detention time:
   Unspecified
 Volumetric loading:   Unspecified
 MLSS:  Unspecified
 Oxygen supply:   Unspecified
 F/M:  Unspecified
 Mean cell residence time:  Unspecified
 Sludge recycle ratio:   Unspecified
 Process modification:   Surface aeration
                                  Operating temperature:   Un-
                                    specified
                                  Sludge recycle ratio:
                                    Unspecified
                                  Clarifier configuration:
                                    Unspecified
                                  Depth:  Unspecified
                                  Hydraulic loading  rate:
                                    Unspecified
                                  Solids loading rate:   Unspecified
                                  Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                    REMOVAL DATA
              Samp I ing; I  day
                                             Analysis;  Data set I  (V.7.3.321
                Pol lutant/parameter
                                     Concentration
                                   Influent   Effluent
                                     Percent
                                     removaI
              Blanks indicate data not available.
              BDL, below detection limit.
              ND, not detected.
              NM, not meaningful.
              "Approximate value.
      Detection
        limit
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
BOD(5)
TSS
Total phenol
Total phosphorus
Toxic pollutants, ng/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Be ry II i urn
Cadmi urn
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
Mercury
Se 1 en i urn
Than ium
Z i nc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Dimethyl phthalate
Ethyl benzene
Hexach lorobenzene
Tol uene
1,2,4-Tricnlorobenzene
Acenaphthene

53
51
0.018
0.75

BDL
BOL
BDL
5
it
230
6
BDL
BOL
BDL
BOL
BDL
460
5.3
13
4.9
2.0
8.4
28
8.7

BDL
26
0.016
0.78

It
BDL
BDL
BDL
3
170
18
BOL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
310
9.5
ND
NO
ND
l,<400
ND
ND

91
52
1 1
NM

NM
NM
NM
95*
25
26
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
26
NM
>99
>99
>97
NM
>99
>99

5




0.5
5
0. 1
0.5
0.2
0.2
4
1
10
0.5
5
5
2.5
0.04
0.03
0.2
0.05
0. 1
0.09
0.04
Date:   9/25/81
                  III.3.2.1-48
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Sludge
               Effluent Guidelines
                Textile mills
               Unspecified
Data source:
Point sourcei
Subcategory:
Plant:  U
References:   3-90,  pp. 32-53
Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Act.  Si.
Data source  status:
  Not specified
  Bench  scale
  Pilot  scale
  Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
Wastewater  flow rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic aeration detention time:
  Unspecified
Volumetric  loading:  Unspecified
MLSS:  Unspecified
Oxygen supply:   Unspecified
F/M:  Unspecified
Mean cell residence time:  Unspecified
Sludge recycle  ratio:  Unspecified
Process modification:  Surface  aeration
                                               Operating  temperature:  Un-
                                                 specified
                                               Sludge recycle ratio:
                                                 Unspecified
                                               Clarifier  configuration:
                                                 Unspecified
                                               Depth:  Unspecified
                                               Hydraulic  loading rate:
                                                 Unspecified
                                               Solids loading rate:  Unspecified
                                               Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                   REMOVAL DATA
               Sampling;	I
                                           Ana|ys|«;	Data set I  IV,7.3,32)
                  poIlutant/parameter
                                    Concentration
                                         Effluent
                                                 Percent
                                                 removaI
               Blanks indicate data not aval table.
               BDL, below detection limit.
               ND, not detected.
               NM, not meaningful.
   Detection
    I Irnlt
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
B0015)
COD
TSS
Total phenol
Total phosphorus
Toxic pollutants, |ig/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Si Iver
Thallium
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Dlethyl phthalate
Pen tach ( o ropheno 1
Pheno 1
1 , 2-D i ch 1 o ro benzene
Toluene
Naphthalene
Chloroform
D i ch 1 o rob romome thane
1, l-Oichloroethane
1 ,3-Dichloropropane
1,1, l-Trichloroethane

MOO
1,500
no
0.06
3.5

7
BDL
BDL
27
MO
BDL
BDL
BDL
8
BDL
BDL
BDL
260
IM
6.1
1.6
0.7
2.0
ND
1.5
NO
ND
3.7
<0.5
310

2M
750
92
0.007
3.7

1
BDL
BDL
IM
23
210
BDL
ND
ND
BDL
BDL
BDL
190
IMO
ND
ND
ND
ND
13
22
18
1.5
ND
0.89
ND

9M
50
16
88
NM

86
NM
NM
M8
M2
NM
NM
NM
>99
NM
NM
NM
27
NM
>99
>99
>99
>99
NM
NM
NM
NM
>99
NM
>99

5





0.5
5
0.5
0.2
0.2
M
1
0.5
10
5
5
5
25
O.OM
0.03
O.M
0.07
0.05
0. 1
0.007
0.9
0.9
3
0.5
2
Date:   9/25/81
                                 III.3.2.1-49
-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Sludge
 Data source:
 Point source;
 Subcategory:
 Plant:  W
 References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Textile mills
 Unspecified

3-90, pp. 32-53
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
 Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Act.  SI.
 DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
 Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
 Hydraulic aeration detention  time:
   Unspecified
 Volumetric loading:  Unspecified
 MLSS:  Unspecified
 Oxygen supply:  Unspecified
 F/M:  Unspecified
 Mean cell residence time:   Unspecified
 Sludge recycle ratio:  Unspecified
 Process modification:  Oxidation ditch
                                 Operating temperature:  Un-
                                   specified
                                 Sludge recycle ratio:
                                   Unspecified
                                 Clarifier configuration:
                                   Unspecified
                                 Depth:  Unspecified
                                 Hydraulic loading rate:
                                   Unspecified
                                 Solids loading rate:  Unspecified
                                 Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                   REMOVAL DATA
             Samp I ing:  I day
                                            Analysis:  Data set I (V.7.3.321
Pol lutant/oa name ten
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
BOD(5)
COO
TSS
Tota 1 phenol
Total phosphorus
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Be ry 1 1 i um
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Se 1 en i um
Si Iver
Thai 1 ium
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Pheno 1
Benzene
Ethyl benzene
Hexachlorobenzene
Toluene
Trichloroethylene
Concent ra
Influent

1,900
6, 100
2,300
0.67
5.1

BDL
BOL
BDL
9
12
23
15
18
BOL
51
BOL
65
BDL
190
18
100
19
1. 1
0.5
62
13
tion
Effluent

84
8MO
300
0.23
0.15

BOL
BOL
BOL
13
3
2
20
57
0.5
60
. BDL
95
BDL
90
19
NO
ND
NO
ND
1.7
ND
Percent
remove 1

96
86
87
65
97

NM
NM
NM
NM
75
91
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
53
NM
>99
>99
>99
>99
97
>99
Detection
limit

5





0.5
5
0. 1
0.5
0.2
0.2
it
1
0.5
10
5
5
5
25
0.04
0.07
0.2
0.2
0.05
0. 1
0.5
             Blanks indicate data not available.
             BDL, below detection limit.
             ND, not detected.
             NM, not meaningful.
Date:   9/25/81
                  III.3.2.1-50
-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Sludge
 Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
 Point source:  Textile mills
 Subcategory:  Unspecified
 Plant:  X
 References:  3-90, pp. 32-53
 Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Act.  Si.
                    Data source status;
                      Not specified
                      Bench scale
                      Pilot scale
                      Full scale
x
 DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

 Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
 Hydraulic aeration detention  time:
   Unspecified
 Volumetric loading:  Unspecified
 MLSS:   Unspecified
 Oxygen supply:  Unspecified
 F/M:  Unspecified
 Mean cell residence time:  Unspecified
 Sludge recycle ratio:  Unspecified
 Process modification:  Surface  aeration
               Operating temperature:  Un-
                 specified
               Sludge recycle ratio:
                 Unspecified
               Clarifier configuration:
                 Unspecified
               Depth:  Unspecified
               Hydraulic loading rate:
                 Unspecified
               Solids loading rate-.  Unspecified
               Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                     REMOVAL DATA
Sampl ing: 1 day
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
BOD(5)
COD
TSS
Total phenol
Total phosphorus
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Antimony
Arsen i c
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Selenium
Nickel
Thai 1 mm
S i 1 ve r
Zinc
Bi s(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Diethyl phthalate
Phenol
Ethylbenzene
Hexach 1 o robenzene
Toluene
Acenaphthene
Naphtha lene
Tet rach 1 o roethy 1 ene
1, 1, 1-Tnchlo roe tha ne
T r i ch 1 o ro f 1 uo rome tha ne

Analvsi
Concentration
Influent

240
790
24
0.940
4.6

0.3
BDL
5
24
84
BDL
32
BDL
BDL
110
BDL
17
31
1
ND
3.8
370
ND
64
53
1
410
8.2
ND
Effluent

15
260
18
0.035
5.4

0.9
BDL
7
39
110
100
26
0.9
BDL
72
BDL
33
78
2.3
3.2
ND
NO
0.5
40
ND
NO
40
ND
35
S: Data set 1 IV. 7. 3. 321
Percent
remova 1

94
67
25
96
NM

NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
19
NM
NM
35
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
>99
>99
NM
38
>99
>99
90
>99
NM
Detection
limit

5





0.5
5
0.5
0.2
0.2
4
1
0.5
5
10
5
5
25
0.04
0.3
0.07
0.2
0.5
0. 1
0.04
0.007
0.9
2
2
                 Blanks indicate data not available.
                 BDL, below detection limit.
                 ND, not detected.
                 NM, not meaningful.
                 "Approximate value.
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.2.1-51
-------
TREATMENT  TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Sludge
Data source:   Effluent Guidelines
Point source:   Textile mills
Subcategory:   Unspecified
Plant:  Y-001
References:   3-90, pp. 32-53
Pretreatment/treatment.-  Unspecified/Act.  51.
                   Data  source status:
                     Not specified
                     Bench scale
                     Pilot scale
                     Full scale
DESIGN  OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate.-   Unspecified
Hydraulic aeration detention time:
  Unspecified
Volumetric loading:  Unspecified
MLSS:   Unspecified
Oxygen  supply:  Unspecified
F/M:  Unspecified
Mean  cell residence  time:   Unspecified
Sludge  recycle ratio:   Unspecified
Process modification:   Surface aeration
              Operating temperature:   Un-
                 specified
              Sludge recycle ratio:
                 Unspecified
              Clarifier configuration:
                 Unspecified
              Depth:  Unspecified
              Hydraulic loading  rate:
                 Unspecified
              Solids loading rate:   Unspecified
              Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                    REMOVAL DATA
             Sampling;  I day
                                             Analysis	Data set I IV.7.3.32)
                Pol lutam/parameter
                                    Concentration
                                  Influent   Effluent
                  Percent
                  removaI
             Classical pollutants, mg/L:
              Total phosphorus
    12
            6.8
             Blanks indicate data not available.
             BOL, below detection limit.
             ND, not detected.
             NM, not meaningful.
             "Approximate value.
Detection
  I Imlt
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Cadmium
Arsenic
Antimony
Ch rom i urn
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
Si Iver
Zinc
Bi s(2-ethylhexy 1 ) ph thai ate
Diethyl phthalate
Phenol
p-Ch loro-m-cresol
CMorobenzene
Ethyl benzene
To luene
Acenaphthene
1 ndenof 1 , 2, 3-cd ) py rene
Naphthalene
Chloroform

6
BDL
BDL
650
HI
BDL
160
200
68
130
3
15
19
ND
1.6
1.9
12
13
2
I)
IU

7
BDL
BDL
290
BDL
29
160
160
57
100
130
12
2.9
1.6
ND
ND
15
NO
ND
1.5
ND

NM
NM
NM
55
99"
NM
0
20
16
23
NM
20
85
NM
>99
>99
NM
>99
>99
NM
>99

0.5
5
0.5
0.2
0.2
4
1
10
5
25
0.04
0.03
0.07
0. 1
0.2
0.2
0. 1
0.04
0.02
0.007
5
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.2.1-52
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Sludge
Data source:
Point source
Subcategory:
Plant:  Z
References:
 Effluent Guidelines
  Textile mills
 Unspecified

3-90, pp. 32-53
Data source status:
  Not specified
  Bench scale
  Pilot scale
  Full scale
                          x
Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Act.  51.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic aeration detention  time:
  Unspecified
Volumetric loading:  Unspecified
MLSS:  Unspecified
Oxygen supply:  Unspecified
F/M:  Unspecified
Mean cell residence time:  Unspecified
Sludge recycle ratio:  Unspecified
Process modification:  Surface  aeration
                                Operating temperature:   Un-
                                   specified
                                Sludge  recycle  ratio:
                                   Unspecified
                                Clarifier configuration:
                                   Unspecified
                                Depth:   Unspecified
                                Hydraulic loading rate:
                                   Unspecified
                                Solids  loading  rate:   Unspecified
                                Weir  loading rate :   Unspecified
                                    REMOVAL DATA
Samolina: 1 dav
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, ara/L:
BODI5)
COD
TSS
Total phenol
Total phosphorus
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Ant inony
Arsenic
Beryl 1 iun
Cadmlun
Chro«iiu«
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Zinc
Bi s(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalato
Phono.!
Chlorobenzene
Ethylbenzene
To 1 uene
1 ,2,i|-Trlchlorobenzene
Naphthalene
Tetrachloro«thylene
T r i ch 1 o rof 1 uo route thane


Analvsi
Concentration
Influent

350
810
20
0.56
I.I

II
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
97
BOL
BOL
BDL
1 1
no
zao
314
ND
0.7
5.5
M5
310
12.0
ND
b.
Effluent

BOL
100
13
0.023
0.5

12
BDL
BDL
BDL
BOL
50
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
370
a
ND
3.5
3,000
110
NO
NO
ND
89

s: Data set 1 IV. 7. 3. 32)
Percent
remove 1

99
88
35
96
55

NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
18
NM
NM
NM
55»
NM
99
>99
NM
NM
NM
>99
>99
>92
NM

Detection
limit

5





0.5
5
0.1
0.5
0.2
0.2
14
1
0.5
10
25
O.OM
0.07
0.2
0.2
0. 1
0.09
0.007
0.9
2

Blanks indicate data not available.
                 BOL, below detection linlt.
                 ND, not detected.
                 NH. not meaningful.
                 •Approximate value.
  Date:   9/25/81
                    III.3.2.1-53
-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Activated Sludge
 Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
 Point source:   Textile mills
 Subcategory:  Wool scouring
 Plant:  Unspecified
 References:  3-68, p.  VII-25
 Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Act.  SI.

 DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

 Wastewater flow rate:   Unspecified
 Hydraulic aeration detention  time:  99  hr(a)
 Volumetric loading:  Unspecified
 MLSS:  Unspecified
 Oxygen supply:  Unspecified
 F/M:  Unspecified
 Mean cell residence time:  Unspecified
 Sludge recycle ratio:   Unspecified
 Process modification:   Extended aeration,
   surface aeration
                   Data  source  status;
                     Not specified
                     Bench  scale
                     Pilot  scale
                     Full scale
               Operating temperature:
                 Unspecified
               Sludge  recycle  ratio:
                 Unspecified
               Clarifier configuration:
                 Unspecified
               Depth:   Unspecified
               Hydraulic loading rate:
                 Unspecified

               Solids  loading  rate:  Unspecified
               Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
               Aerator power requirement:
                 32 W/m3
                                  REMOVAL DATA
 Sampling:  Data are average
            values for 1976
                Analysis;   Data set 2 (V.7.3.32)
                                  Concentration
   Pollutant/parameter
 Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
  limit
 Classical pollutants, mg/L:
BOD 5
COD
TSS
1,600
1,600
4,000
130
2,600
1,200
92
84
69
 Blanks indicate data not available.
 (a)Based on average flow and full basin volume.
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.2.1-54
-------
TREATMENT  TECHNOLOGY:   Activated Sludge
Data source:   Effluent  Guidelines
Point source:  Textile  mills
Subcategory:   Stock and yarn finishing
Plant:  Unspecified
References:   3-68, p. VII-25
Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Act. Si.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
Wastewater flow rate:   Unspecified
Hydraulic  aeration detention time:   See
  below
Volumetric loading:  Unspecified
MLSS:  Unspecified
Oxygen supply:  Unspecified
F/M:  Unspecified
Mean.cell  residence  time:   Unspecified
Sludge recycle ratio:   Unspecified
Process modification:   Extended aeration
  surface  aeration
                            Data source  status:
                              Not specified
                              Bench  scale
                              Pilot  scale
                              Full scale
                       Operating temperature:  Unspeci-
                         fied
                       Sludge recycle  ratio:  Unspeci-
                         fied
                       Clarifier configuration:  Unspeci-
                         fied
                       Depth:  Unspecified
                       Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspeci-
                         fied
                       Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                       Aerator power requirement:   See
                         below
                                      REMOVAL DATA
 Sampling; Average of 1976 values
                                                   Analysis: Data set 2 (V.7.3.3Z]
 Hydraulic aeration  Aerator power

  detention time(a)   requirement,

                v/cu.m
                                BOOIS1
                                                      COD
                                                                         _[SS_
Concentration. mq/L  Percent  Concentration. mq/L  Percent  Concentration. mo/L Percent
50
33
ill
16 130 5 96 >I6 21 5t
16 150 6 96 500 120 75 36 27 25
98 1,600 230 86 0,800 1,800 61 110 ZOO KH
 Blanks indicate data not available.

 NM, not me»ningful.

 (a)Qased on average flow and full basin volume.
  Date:   9/25/81
        III.3.2.1-55
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Sludge
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Textile mills
Subcategory:  Stock and yarn finishing
Plant:  Unspecified
References:  3-68, p. VII-61
Pretreatment/treatment:  Screen., Neutral./Act. Si.
                 Data source status:
                   Not specified
                   Bench scale
                   Pilot scale
                   Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  3,500 m3/day
Hydraulic aeration detention time:  120 hr
Volumetric loading:  Unspecified
MLSS:  Unspecified
Oxygen supply:  Unspecified
F/M:  Unspecified
Mean cell residence time:  Unspecified
Sludge recycle ratio:  Unspecified
Process modification:  One 19,900 m3 basin,
  surface aeration (8 aerators)
            Operating temperature:
              Unspecified
            Sludge recycle ratio:
              Unspecified
            Clarifier configuration:
              Unspecified
            Depth:  Unspecified
            Hydraulic loading rate:
              Unspecified

            Solids loading rate:  Unspecified
            Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
            Aerator power requirement:
              22.5 W/m3
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Samfllina: 72-hr composite
Analysis: Data set 1 (V.7.3.32)
Concentration.
Pol 1 utant/oa rameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
COD
TSS
Toxic pollutants, u.g/L:
Arsenic
Bi s(ch loromethyl ) ether
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Dimethyl phthalate
2, k-D i ch 1 o ropheno 1
2, U-D i methy 1 pheno 1
2, /*, 6-Trichlo ropheno 1
p-Chloro-m-cresol
1 , 2-D i ch 1 o robenzene
1 , 2-D i ch 1 o rop ropa ne
Te t ra ch 1 o roethy 1 ene
Tr i ch 1 o roethy 1 ene
Influent

230
25

19
59
25
18
20
190
16
29
56
56
310
10
Effluent

I30(a)
I40(a)

47
>99
>99
>99
>99
>99
>37
>99
>99
>99
>99
NM
    Blanks  indicate data not available.
    ND,  not detected.
    NM,  not meaningful.
    (a)  Average of maximum and minimum values.
  Date:   9/25/81
III.3.2.1-56
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Activated Sludge
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Textile mills
Subcategory:  Knit  fabric finishing (unless
  otherwise specified)
Plant:  Unspecified
References:  3-68,  p.  VII-25
Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Act. SI.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
Wastewater flow  rate:   Unspecified
Hydraulic aeration detention time:  See
  below
Volumetric loading:   Unspecified
MLSS:  Unspecified
Oxygen supply:   Unspecified
F/M:  Unspecified
Mean cell residence time:  Unspecified
Sludge recycle ratio:   Unspecified
Process modification:   Extended aeration
  syrface aeration
                  Data source  status:
                    Not  specified
                    Bench  scale
                    Pilot  scale
                    Full scale
             Operating  temperature:   Unspeci-
               fied
             Sludge recycle  ratio:  Unspeci-
               fied
             Clarifier  configuration:  Unspeci-
               fied
             Depth:  Unspecified
             Hydraulic  loading rate:  Unspeci-
               fied
             Weir loading  rate:   Unspecified
             Aerator power requirement:  See
               below
                                     REMOVAL DATA
  Sampling: Data are average of 1976 values
                                                     Analysis: Data sat Z IV.7.3,321

detention time(a)
hr
I30(b)
117
18
76
82
1 10

requi rement,
W/cu.m
9
8
12
32
15
15

BODI 5 1
Concentration. inq/L
Influent Effluent
210
200
270
1, 100
190
ISO
29
13
45
II
19
•j

Percent
renova 1
86
93
83
99
90
97

COD
Concentration. mg/L
influent
610
750
690

340

Effluent
230
230
350

160


Percent
remova 1
63
70
49

52


1SS
Concentration. Hiq/L
Influent
93
49
26
280
97
IB
Effluent
50
62
55
45
63
18

Percent
renova 1
16
NH
NH
84
35
NH
  Blanks indicate data not available.

  NH, not moaninqful.

  (a) Based on average flow and full basin volume,

  (b) Subca tego ry:  Ca rpe t rin i sh i ng.
 Date:   9/25/81
III.3,2,1-57
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Activated Sludge
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:   Textile mills
                  Data source  status:
                    Not  specified
Subcategory: Woven fabric finishing
Plant: Unspecified
References: 3-68, p. VII-25
Pretreatment/ treatment : Unspecified/Act.
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
Wastewater flow rate: Unspecified
Hydraulic aeration detention time: See
below
Volumetric loading: Unspecified
MLSS: Unspecified
Oxygen supply.- Unspecified
F/M: Unspecified
Mean cell residence time: Unspecified
Sludge recycle ratio: Unspecified
Process modification: Extended aeration,
surface aeration
Bench scale
Pilot scale
Full scale x
SI.
Operating temperature : Unspeci-
fied
Sludge recycle ratio: Unspeci-
fied
Clarifier configuration: Unspeci-
fied
Depth: Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate : Unspeci-
fied
Weir loading rate: Unspecified
Aerator power requirement: See
below
REMOVAL DATA
Sampling: Dai;a are averaae values for each mill for the voar 1976 Analysis: Data set 2IV.7.3.321
Hydraulic aeration Aerator power 800(51
detention time(a) requirement, Concentration. mo/L Percent
hr cu.m Influent Effluent removal
78 16 6UO 105 814
131 II 100 8 98
75 8.1 270 214 91
120 12 180 9 95
80 18 250 5 98
97 119 330 23 93
106 214 180 19 96
2>l 12 130 22 83
COD TSS
Concentration, mq/L. Percent Concentration. ma/L Percent
Influent Effluent removal Influent Effluent removal
1,200 660 U6 170 180 NH
80 8 90
8140 3140 60
1470 160 66 26 18 31
220 US 78
3,000 600 80
"470 310 35 311 38 NM
Blanks indicate data not available.
  NH, not meaningful.

  (a) Based on average flow and full basin volume.
  Date:   9/25/81
III.3.2.1-58
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Activated Sludge
Data source:  Effluent  Guidelines
Point source:  Timber products
Subcategory:  Plywood,  hardwood and wood preserv-
  ing unless otherwise  specified
Plant:  See below
References:  3-80, p. 169;  3-65, pp. 7-103
Pretreatment/treatment:   See Below/Act. Si.
                     Data source status;
                       Not specified
                       Bench scale
                       Pilot scale
                       Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:   Unspecified
Hydraulic aeration detention time:  Un-
  specified
Volumetric loading:  Unspecified
MLSS:  Unspecified
Oxygen supply:  Unspecified
F/M:  Unspecified
Mean cell residence time:   Unspecified
Sludge recycle ratio:   Unspecified
Process modification:   Unspecified
            Operating temperature:  Unspecified
            Sludge  recycle ratio:  Unspecified
            Clarifier configuration:  Unspeci-
              fied
            Depth:  Unspecified
            Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
              (overflow  rate)
            Solids  loading rate:   Unspecified
            Weir  loading rate:   Unspecified
Samol inq:
plant
2U«a,,,b,,,
5
3
4
Unspecified
Pretreatment
of influent
(c) Screening, sedimen-
tation (clarifier),
flow equal ization
Sedimentation (pond)
Sedimentation
(clarifier)
Sedimentation (pond)
REMOVAL DATA

Concentrati
Influent
2,000
3,500
1,800
2,400
BOD15)
tn. mq/L
ff luent
440
180
54
550
Analysis: Data set 3 (V.7.3.33)

Percent
remova 1
78
95
96
77

Concentrati
Influent
520
150
110
60
TSS
tn. mq/L
ff luent
160
390
300
360

Percent
remova 1
70
NM
NH
NM
     NM, not meaningful.
     (a)Process modification: two contact stabilization activated sludge systems operating In parallel.
     (b)Subcategory:  hard board.
     (c)References: Al, pp. 7-103.
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.2.1-59
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Activated Sludge


Data source.-  Effluent Guidelines                Data  source  status:
Point source:  Timber  products processing          Not specified         	
Subcategory:  See below                            Bench  scale             x
Plant:  Unspecified                                Pilot  scale           	
References:  3-65, Appendix D, p. 1                 Full scale           	
Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Act.  Si.

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:   Unspecified           Operating  temperature:
Hydraulic aeration detention time:  See         Unspecified
  below                                      Sludge recycle  ratio:
Volumetric loading:  See below                 Unspecified
MLSS:  See below                             Clarifier  configuration:
Oxygen supply:  Unspecified                    Unspecified
F/M:  See below                              Depth:   Unspecified
Mean cell residence time.-  Unspecified       Hydraulic  loading rate:
Sludge recycle ratio:   Unspecified             Unspecified
Process modification:   Unspecified             (overflow rate)
                                             Solids loading  rate:   Unspecified
                                             Weir loading  rate:  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA

Sampling;  Unspecified	Analysis;   Data set 3  (V.7.3.33)

                                  	Total phenol	
                                  Concentration, yg/LPercent Detection
	Point source category	Influent   Effluent(a)   removal    limit
Coal gas washing process (b)
Coke gasification
plant(c),(d),(e),(f)
Coal-tar distillation plant
1,200

5,000
500
<12

<500
<5
>99

>90
>99
Blanks indicate data not available.
(a)Calculated from influent concentration and percent removal.
(b)F/M ratio:  0.116 kg phenol/kg MLSS/d.
(c)Hydraulic aeration detention time:  2 d.
(d)Volumetric loading:  1,600 kg to 2,400 kg phenol/1,000 m3/d.
(e)MLSS:  2,000 mg/L.
(f)Unit configuration:  continuous flow.
  Date:   9/25/81               III.3.2.1-60
-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Sludge
 Data source:   Effluent Guidelines
 Point source:   Timber products processing
 Subcategory:   Unspecified
 Plant:   Unspecified
 References:  3-65, Appendix D, p. 1
 Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Act. Si.
 DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

 Wastewater flow  rate:  Unspecified
 Hydraulic aeration detention  time:  8-50 hr
 Volumetric loading:  144-1,600 kg
   phenol/100  m3/d
 MLSS:   Unspecified
 Oxygen supply:   Unspecified
 F/M:   Unspecified
 Mean  cell residence time:  Unspecified
 Sludge recycle ratio:  Unspecified
 Process modification:  Unspecified
                     Data source status;
                       Not specified
                       Bench scale
                       Pilot scale
                       Full scale
                Operating temperature:
                  Unspecified
                Clarifier configuration:
                  Unspecified
                Depth:   Unspecified
                Hydraulic loading rate:
                  Unspecified
                Solids  loading rate:  Unspecified
                Weir loading rate: Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
 Sampling;   Unspecified
                 Analysis;   Data set 3 (V.7.3.33)
    Pollutant/parameter
 Concentration,  mg/L       Percent     Detection
Influent     Effluent(a)    removal       limit
 Classical  pollutants:
   Total  phenol
   280
62
78
 Blanks  indicate  data not available.
 (a)Calculated from  influent concentration and percent removal.
Date:   9/25/81
 III.3.2.1-61
-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Sludge
 Data source:   Government  report                   Data source status:
 Point source:   Organic  and  inorganic wastes         Not specified         	
 Subcategory:   Unspecified                          Bench scale           	
 Plant:  Reichhold Chemical,  Inc.                    Pilot scale           	
 References:   3-113, pp. 23,25,28,29,31,32           Full scale            	x_
 Pretreatment/treatment:   Sed.  (clarifier)/Act. 51.

 DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

 Wastewater flow rate:   1,500-6,600 m3/day    Operating temperature:
 Hydraulic aeration detention time:  22-144 hr  Unspecified
 Volumetric loading:  Unspecified             Clarifier configuration:
 MLSS:  2,200-4,900 mg/L                       Unspecified
 Oxygen supply:  14-190  mg/L/hr              Depth:  Unspecified
 F/M:  0.02-0.5                              Hydraulic loading rate:
 Mean cell residence time:  Unspecified         Unspecified
 Sludge recycle ratio:   100:0-46:54           Solids loading rate:  Unspecified
        (recycled: wastes)                   Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
 Process modification:   Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL  DATA

 Sampling;  24-hour composite	Analysis;  Data  set 2  (V.7.3.35)

                                    Concentration        Percent   Detection
    Pollutant/parameter	Influent(a)    Effluent    removal	limit

 Classical pollutants,  mg/L:
BOD 5
COD
TSS
1,900
4,300
130
220
960
110
88
78
15
 Blanks indicate data not available.
 (a)Average of six samples.
Date:   9/25/81               III.3.2.1-62
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated Sludge
Data source:  Government report
Point source:  Unspecified
Subcategory:  Unspecified
Plant:  Reichhold Chemical, Inc.
References:  3-113, pp. 23,25,28,29,31,32
Pretreatment/treatment:  Sed. (clarifier)/Act. SI.
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  See below
Hydraulic aeration detention time:  See below
Volumetric loading:  Unspecified
MLSS:  See below
Oxygen supply:  See below
F/M:  See below
Mean cell residence time:  Unspecified
Sludge recycle ratio:  See below
Process modification:  Unspecified
Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                 Data source status:
                   Not specified
                   Bench scale
                   Pilot scale
                   Full scale
                                            x
               Operating temperature:
                 Unspecified
               Sludge recycle ratio:
                 Unspecified
               Clarifier configuration:
                 Unspecified
               Depth:  Unspecified
               Hydraulic loading rate:
                 Unspecified
               Solids loading rate:  Un-
                 specified
                                  REMOVAL DATA
              Sampling; Average performance data
                                            Analysis:  Data set 2 (V.7.3.351

MLSS,
mq/L
2,220(a) 0
3,020(0) 0
3,920(c) 0
5.610(d) n
M.I 30(0) 0
l4,900(f) o
"
MLSS.


F/M
.13
.22
.5
.21
.08
.23
-
Concent
mq/L Influent
2,220(!i)
3,020(0)
3,920(0)
5.6l40(d)
l|.130(e)
U.900(f)
5.100
7,200
3,200
3, 100
3.400
14,000

Recycle cor
ratio
46:514
100:0
100:0
100:0
100:0

COO
ration. mq/L
Erf luent
1,100
660
1,200
1,300
BOO
680
Oxygen
sumption.
mq/L/hr
14
21
23
3'l
189
214.1

Percent
remova 1
78
91
62
59
76
83
B00( 5 )
Concentrat io
Influent
2,000
3,1100
1,300
1,500
1,300
2,000

Concentrat io
Influent
120
130
130
100
160
160
n. mq/L
:ff luent
360
1140
3140
1400
147
W
TSS
n. mq/L
Effluent
8>4
85
87
97
130
200
Percent
remova 1
82
96
714
73
96
98

Percent
remova 1
30
35
33
3
19
NM
NM, not meaningful .
(a JWastewater
211 hr.
(b)Wastowater
'18 hr.
( c )Wastowa ter
21 hr.
(d)Wastcwater
36 Mr.
(e)Wnstevater
Hl'l-96 hr.
( r )Wastevater
18 hr.
now

now

flow

now

flow

flow
1,500 m(3)/d (0

2.080 m(3)/d (0

6,600 m(3)/d (1

5,030 m(3)/d (1

2.080 m(3)/d (0

1,970 m(3)/d (0
14 MOD); ti

55 MOD);

76 MOD);

33 MOD);

55 MOD);

52 MCD);
ydraul ic aeration

hydraulic aeration

hydraulic aeration

hydraulic aeration

hydraulic aeration

detention

detention

detention

detention

detention

hydraulic aeration detention
time:

time:

time:

time:

time:

time:
   Date:   9/25/81
III.3.2.1-63
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Activated  Sludge
Data source:   Government report
Point source:   Mixed industrial  (mainly
  textile)/domestic wastes
Subcategory:   Unspecified
Plant:  Deep  shaft treatment plant (Paris,
  Ontario)
References:   3-106, pp. 297-301
Pretreatment/treatment:  Screen.,  Comminutor, Neutral./Act.  SI.
                  Data source status:
                    Not specified
                    Bench scale
                    Pilot scale
                    Full scale
DESIGN OR  OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rate:  450 m3/day
Hydraulic  aeration detention  time:   30 min
Volumetric loading:  Unspecified
MLSS:  Unspecified
Oxygen supply.-  Unspecified
F/M:  Unspecified
Mean cell  residence time:  Unspecified
Sludge recycle ratio:  Unspecified
Process  modification:  Deep shaft
  biooxidator air flotation
             Operating temperature:
               Unspecified
             Sludge recycle ratio:
               Unspecified
             Clarifier configuration:  Air
               flotation tank
             Depth:  Unspecified
             Hydraulic loading rate:
               Unspecified
             Solids loading rate:   Unspecified
             Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
Samolinq: Flow days
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:(a)
BOOI5)
COD
TSS
Toxic pollutants, u9/L:(b)
Dimethyl phthalate
Di-n-octy! phthalate
Phono 1
Donzenc
To I uene
1 .2,**- rr ichlorobenzene
Acenaphtheno
Carbon tetracnloride
Chloroform
1 , 1 , 2,2-Tetrachloroethane
Tetrachloroethene
1 , 1 ,2-T rich to roe thane
1 sophorono
Chlordanet c)
Dich torome thane
1.2-Dichloro-l-p ropene
Ch lorobenzene
2,i4-Dint trotolttene
?,6-Dmi tro toluene
Ni t robenzenc
2,14-Oimethylphenol
2-Chlorophonol
2,l|,6-Tr ichlorophenol
Pentachlorophenol »
Anthracene
Chrysene
Penanthacene
Benzo pyrene
Benz i d i ne
OOD(c)
REHOVAL
DATA
Analysis:
Concentration
influent

180
900
310

70
1,000
18
3>IO
30
BDL
ISO
Z.300
22,000
BDL
BDL
1 1
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
Effluent

33
200
60

200
5,000
BOL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
DDL
BDL
BOL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
BDL
100
100
ZOO
BDL
BOL
100
BDL
BDL
500
100
BDL
BDL
ZOO
BDL
Data set 1
Percent
remova 1

82
78
81

NM
NM
NH
NM
NM
NH
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NH
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NH
NH
NH
NH
NM
(V.7.3.35)
Detection
limit



































                 Blanks indicate data not available.
                 BDL, below detection limit.
                 NM, not meaningfuI.
                 (a)Computed from average daily values taken over 30 consecutive days.
                 (b)Grab samples.
                 (c)Oue to banned status of chlordane and DOO's precursor (DOT) in Canada,
                  assignments are doubtful.
  Date:   9/25/81
III.3.2.1-64
-------
TREATMENT  TECHNOLOGY:   Activated Sludge
Data  source:   Effluent Guidelines
Point source:   Synthetic resins (plastics)
Subcategory:   See below
Plant:   Unspecified
References:   3-79,  p.  105
Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Act. Si.
                     Data source status:
                       Not specified
                       Bench scale
                       Pilot scale
                       Full scale
DESIGN OR  OPERATING PARAMETERS
Wastewater  flow rate:   See below
Hydraulic aeration detention time:  See
  below
Volumetric  loading:   See below
MLSS:  Unspecified
Oxygen supply:   Unspecified
F/M:  Unspecified
Mean cell residence  time:  Unspecified
Sludge recycle  ratio:   Unspecified
Process modification:   Unspecified
                Operating temperature:
                  Unspecified
                Sludge recycle ratio:
                  Unspecified
                Clarifier configuration:
                  Unspecified
                Depth:  Unspecified
                Hydraulic loading rate:
                  Unspecified
                Solids loading rate:  Unspecified
                Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                   REMOVAL DATA
  Samp Ii ng;   Unspeci fIed
                   Analysis:  Data set I  (V.7.3.27)
Subcateqorv
Cel lophane(a )
Cel lulosic(b)

BOD(5)
Concentration. mg/L
Influent Effluent
90
1,300
20
37

Percent
remova 1
78
97

COD
Concentration. mq/L
Influent Effluent
230
200

Percent
remova 1
\k
  Blanks indicate data not available.
  (a)Wastewater flow:  26,000 cu.m/d;  hydraulic aeration detention time:   1.5 hr;
    volumetric loading:   1.0 kg BOD(5)/d/cu.m; aerator power  requirement:
    130 W/cu.m.
  (b)Wastewater flow:  12,900 cu.m/d;  hydraulic aeration detention time:   64 hr;
    volumetric loading:  0.48 kg BOD(5)/d/cu.m;  aerator power requirement:
    18.4 W/cu.m.
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.2.1-65
-------
 TREATMENT  TECHNOLOGY:   Activated Sludge
 Data  source:   Government report
 Point source:   Unspecified industrial/
   domestic wastewater (70:30)
 Subcategory:   Unspecified
 Plant:   Unspecified
 References:   3-106,  pp.  260,  262
 Pretreatment/treatment:   Unspecified/Act.  SI.

 DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

 Wastewater flow rate:  4,900  m3/day
 Hydraulic aeration detention  time:   12.7 hr
 Volumetric loading:   Unspecified
 MLSS:  9,250  mg/L
 Oxygen supply:  Unspecified
 F/M:   Unspecified
 Mean  cell residence time:  9.6 d (average)
 Sludge recycle ratio:  Unspecified
 Process modification:  Covered basin pure
   oxygen activated sludge system
 Volatile fraction of MLSS: 75%
                   Data  source  status:
                     Not specified
                     Bench  scale
                     Pilot  scale
                     Full scale
               Operating temperature:
                 Unspecified
               Percent  solids in sludge:   2.2
               Clarifier configuration:
                 Unspecified
               Depth:   Unspecified
               Hydraulic loading rate:
                 Unspecified
               Solids loading rate:  Unspecified
               Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
                                    REMOVAL DATA
Sana Una: Unspecified

Solids retention Co
tine (sludae aae) Infl
5.9
7.8
8.0 1.
8.1
10.0
12.7
17.3
17.3
17.3
23.9
49.7


ncent ri
uentla
930
570
200
650
620
660
120
520
850
630
360

BOD( 5 )
ition. na/L
1 Effluent
160
91
210
120
62
99
42
62
110
57
47


Percent
removal
83
84
83
81
90
85
90
88
87
91
87
Analysis:

Concentration
Influential
2,000
880
2,200
900
920
900
680
760
1.400
1,000
560
Data set 1
COD
mq/l_
Effluent
1,100
420
1,200
550
250
300
290
260
400
too
230
(V.7.3.35)

Percent
renova 1
47
52
47
39
73
67
58
66
72
80
59
         (a)Calculated from effluent and percent removal.
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.2.1-66
-------
III.3.2.2  Lagoons

     Description

A body of wastewater contained in an earthen dike and designed
for biological treatment is termed a lagoon or stabilization
pond.  Another term that is synonymous and often used is
"oxidation pond."  While in the lagoon, the wastewater is bio-
logically treated to reduce the degradable organics and also
reduce suspended solids by sedimentation.  The biological process
taking place in the lagoon can be either aerobic or anaerobic
depending on the type of lagoon.  Because of their low construc-
tion and operating costs, lagoons offer a financial advantage
over other treatment methods and for this reason have become very
popular where sufficient land area is available at reasonable
cost.

     Representative Types and Modifications

There are many different types of lagoons that can be grouped
into four major classes based on the nature of biological ac-
tivity.

     (1)  Aerobic Algae Lagoons.  Aerobic lagoons are shallow
          ponds that contain dissolved oxygen (DO) throughout
          their liquid volume at all times (i.e., there are no
          anaerobic zones).  Aerobic bacterial oxidation and
          algal photosynthesis are the principal biological
          processes.  Aerobic lagoons are best suited to treating
          soluble organics in wastewater relatively free of sus-
          pended solids.  Thus, they are often used to provide
          additional treatment of effluents from anaerobic ponds
          and other partial treatment processes.

          Aerobic lagoons depend on algal photosynthesis, ade-
          quate mixing, good inlet-outlet design, and a minimum
          annual air temperature above about 5°C (41°F), for a
          major portion of the required DO.  Without any one of
          these four conditions, an aerobic pond may develop
          anaerobic conditions or be ineffective or both.  Be-
          cause light penetration decreases rapidly with in-
          creasing depth, aerobic pond depths are restricted to
          0.2 to 0.3 m (0.6 to 1.0 ft) to maintain active algae
          growth from top to bottom.

          Lagoons may be lined with concrete or an impervious
          flexible lining, depending on soil conditions and
          wastewater characteristics.
Date:  9/25/81            III.3.2.2-1
-------
     (2)   Anaerobic  Lagoons.   Anaerobic  lagoons  are  relatively
          deep ponds (up to  6  meters)  with steep sidewalls  in
          which anaerobic conditions are maintained  by keeping
          organic loading so high that complete  deoxygenation is
          prevalent.   Some oxygenation is possible in a shallow
          surface zone.   If  floating materials in the waste form
          an impervious  surface layer, complete  anaerobic con-
          ditions will develop.   Treatment or stabilization
          results from anaerobic digestion of organic wastes by
          acid-forming bacteria that break down  organics.   The
          resultant  acids are  then converted to  carbon dioxide,
          methane, and other end products.   Anaerobic lagoons are
          capable of providing treatment of high strength waste-
          waters and are resistant to shock loads.

          In the typical anaerobic lagoon,  raw wastewater enters
          near the bottom of the pond (often at  the  center) and
          mixes with the active microbial mass in the sludge
          blanket, which can be two meters (six  feet) deep.  The
          discharge  is located near one  of the sides of the pond,
          submerged  below the  liquid surface. Excess sludge is
          washed out with the  effluent and recirculation of waste
          sludge is  not  required.

          Anaerobic  lagoons  are customarily contained within
          earthen dikes.  Depending on soil and  wastewater
          characteristics, lining with various impervious
          materials  such as  rubber, plastic, or  clay may be
          necessary.   Pond geometry may  vary, but surface
          area-to-volume ratios are minimized to enhance heat
          retention.

     (3)   Facultative Lagoons.  Facultative lagoons  are inter-
          mediate depth  ponds  (1 to 2.5  m [3 to  8 feet]) in which
          the wastewater is  stratified into three zones. These
          zones consist  of an  anaerobic  bottom  layer, an aerobic
          surface layer, and an intermediate zone.   Stratifi-
          cation is  a result of solids settling  and  temperature-
          water density  variations.  Oxygen in the  surface  sta-
          bilization zone is provided by reaeration  and photosyn-
          thesis. The photosynthetic activity  at the lagoon
          surface produces oxygen diurnally, increasing the
          dissolved  oxygen content during daylight hours, and
          decreasing it  during the night.  In general, the  aerobic
          surface layer  serves to reduce odors while providing
          treatment  of soluble organic by-products  of the anae-
          robic processes operating at the bottom.   Sludge  at the
          bottom of  facultative lagoons  will undergo anaerobic
          digestion  producing carbon dioxide and methane.
Date:  9/25/81            III.3.2.2-2
-------
          Facultative lagoons are customarily contained within
          earthen dikes.  Depending on soil and wastewater charac-
          teristics, lining the lagoon with various impervious
          materials such as rubber, plastic or clay may be neces-
          sary.

     (4)  Aerated Lagoons.  Aerated lagoons are medium-depth
          basins [2.5 to 5 m (8 to 15 ft)] in which oxygenation
          is accomplished by mechanical or diffused aeration
          units and from induced surface aeration.  Surface
          aerators may be high speed, small diameter or low
          speed, large diameter impeller devices, either fixed-
          mounted on piers or float-mounted on pontoons.  Diffused
          aerators may be plastic pipe with regularly spaced
          holes, static mixers, helical diffusers, or other
          types. Aerated lagoons can be either aerobic or faculta-
          tive.  Aerobic ponds are designed to maintain complete
          mixing.  Thus, all solids are in suspension and separate
          sludge settling and disposal facilities are required to
          separate the solids from the treated wastewater.

     Technology Status

Stabilization ponds or lagoons are one of the most common methods
of organic waste treatment, and the technology has been fully
demonstrated.

     Applications

Lagoons are used in industrial wastewater treatment for stabili-
zation of suspended, dissolved, and colloidal organics either as
a main biological treatment process or as a polishing treatment
process following other biological treatment systems.  Aerobic,
facultative, and aerated lagoons are generally used for indus-
trial wastewater of low and medium organic strength.  High
strength wastewaters are often treated by a series of ponds; the
first one will be virtually all anaerobic, the next facultative,
and the last aerobic.

Lagoons are widely used in the following industries to treat in-
dustrial wastewater:

     - Auto and Other Laundries,
     - Leather Tanning and Finishing,
     - Gum and Wood Chemicals,
     - Pharmaceutical Manufacturing,
     - Inorganic Chemicals Manufacturing,
     - Petroleum Refining,
     - Pulp and Paper Mills,
     - Textile Mills, and
     - Timber Products Processing.
Date:  9/25/81            III.3.2.2-3
-------
Lagoons are also used on a limited basis by the following indus-
tries:
          Organic Chemicals Manufacturing
          Paint and Ink Formulation,  and
          Rubber Processing.

     Advantages and Limitations

The major advantages of treatment lagoons are:  (1) they can
handle considerable variations in organic and hydraulic loading
with little adverse effect on effluent quality, (2) they require
minimum control and thus can be operated by relatively unskilled
operators, and (3) they have low operation and maintenance costs.
The major limitations are: (1) the large land area required,  (2)
localized odor problems that may occur when conditions become
anaerobic (more difficult to prevent if icing occurs), (3) exces-
sive accumulation of algal and bacterial cells in the effluent,
which creates a significant biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) and
suspended solids load in the receiving waters,  and (4) the per-
formance of the process is temperature dependent and effluent
quality will vary.

     Reliability

The lagoon treatment system is simple and requires little opera-
tor expertise.  Overall, the system is highly reliable and is
less vulnerable to upsets than most other biological wastewater
treatment methods.

     Chemicals Required

If the wastewater is nutrient deficient, a source of supplemental
nitrogen or phosphorus may be needed.

     Residuals Generated

Aerobic and facultative lagoons allow solids to settle and accumu-
late on the pond bottom, which may require clean-out and removal
of solids every 5 to 20 years depending on the wastewater charac-
teristics.

     Design Criteria

The lagoons are designed to operate as either a flow-through
system or controlled discharge system.  In the controlled dis-
charge systems, the effluent is discharged intermittently during
periods of high flow in the receiving stream.
Date:  9/25/81            III.3.2.2-4
-------
Design of lagoons is based on surface loading of BOD (kg/ha),
hydraulic detention time, depth, and configuration of the lagoon,
A range of values for typical design criteria is shown in
Table 3.2.2-1.

Aerobic and aerated lagoon systems consist of one or more cells
operated in series.  Facultative lagoons usually consist of at
least three cells in series.

      TABLE 3.2.2-1.  DESIGN CRITERIA FOR LAGOONS [3-114].
                Aerobic    Faculative      Anaerobic     Aerated

Depth, m       0.2-0.3      1-2.5      2.5-5      2.5-5
 (ft)         (0.6 - 1.0)    (3 - 8)        (8 - 15)     (8 - 15)
BOD loading,
kg/ha/day
(Ib/ac/day)

110 -
(100 -

220
200)

22
(20

- 55
- 50)

280 -
(250 -

4,500
4,000)

-
^
     Performance

The performance of lagoons in removing degradable organics
depends upon detention time, temperature, and the nature of
waste.  Aerated lagoons generally provide a high degree of BOD
reduction more consistently than the aerobic and facultative
lagoons.  The general problems with lagoons are excessive algae,
offensive odors from anaerobic ponds if sulfates are present and
the pond is not covered, and seasonal variations of effluent
quality.

Subsequent data sheets provide performance data on the following
industries:

     - Textile Mills,
     - Paint and Ink Formulation,
     - Pharmaceutical Manufacturing,
     - Leather Tanning and Finishing, and
     - Timber Products Processing.

     References

3-1, 3-18, 3-20, 3-24, 3-25, 3-26, 3-30, 3-51, 3-52, 3-54, 3-55,
3-114.
Date:  9/25/81            III.3.2.2-5
-------





















o
Ul
i-

ev
UJ
^
1
Z
O
8
5

cc
O
u.
oc
|

=9

§
_l
O
z
X
o
UJ
h-

_j
O
z
o
o

















S*

•
>
)
0
i
-
0

—
CO
>
3

&
c
co

•o
CD
2



CD
0
C
CO
cc


C C
o
p
n
-
=
CD
J

5
O

p
~
CD
3
£
UJ
CD
TJ
0)
Z







CD
0
C
co
as




CO




CO
4J
C

o
Q

CO
•P
CO
0




CD
O
U)
	
U.





CD
•—
CD
U
v>
4J
O

A













4J
C
CO
*

o
o.
r- oo r*- os oo \o oo
r~ CM j* ON Is- so ON





OsOs Os
ososd- oos
A A OS 00 A

III II

O to ^ in to
CM p*- to


ON°CMOVO-^
SO— CM O —

o


o
O CM
OSOO OO
to »o o •
CMh-SO — O

III II

•3-OCM CM to
— CM— CMO
CM O
O






— Is- 00 	 CM —
















Ij
Ol
E
*
09
4J
C
co
3 U CO
— — co
— O CO
0 C «.
o. CD 01
c
— Q.TJ
CO— C
oin — co
 it — —














CD
CO
 o CD c
•^ 4-> C CD CD "D 0) CO
o> — co CD c c ~ co c£
a. — — £ CD co i- T» co *»
>>CO O O. N N O 	 >o
M CD -P O 1- COCO £ O£ *-
•P ££ — £ o jaja u —wo
c — ao a — o o co eo £co —
CO >> CO £ i- i- C COL. OO£
jj £—0)'- U O O CO CWE <- O
3 E W >>£ O — 	 N CD CD 1- CD O ~
— >> 3 E E E CO W 0-— 1- ££C — *»OC— t-
— CO—E3 CO >> 3 3 1 3 O£ (- 0) O 0 CD 0) CO Q- CD £ 1-
OO 	 3 — t- TJ « 	 « 	 CM ^3 «- O — 1 C 	 J3 C £ C O — O 1
Q.EC 	 £ CD — 3 CD C CD — ^-I*JCOO\O(DOO— . CO*»O'->»co —
— «>>Eoac-ooJ«:eo>— o c — *» c «NI i >, 3 £ ^ o £ t. -
— C<-COCD£O>>cDO— CD — £ 	 1 CD £ •> CD >«WOcoa£COO) »
o





















































B
CD
—
CO
a
«D*>
•P E
o —

a c
*» O

•O W . 3
OTJ*-
CD CO CO O>
•P *» 4) C
eg CD O —
O-D co c
"^ 4* CQ
•o > co co
CO-OE
CO *> *»
«-i .
— QOZ
OQCDZZ
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.2.2-6
-------





















Q
UJ
^_
<(

u
c
0
u
0)

•H
m
5>
o
g
CO
a:
c
CO

•a
V
z:



CD
O
C
CO
cc



c c
o
4J
CO
1.
4J
C
9)
U
C
o
o

4J
c
0)
3

t^.
*•

CO
•0
a>
z







0)
o
c
cc
cc











4-!
C
o
a

a

co
a







*
CO
u
10

-
la.



a>

CO
o
w


c

.V
a.


















4^
C
CO
4-
—
C
a.
f^ iTMTvO O
oo IA r^ i^^






CM cover-
ON NO CO NO

1 1 1 1

NO CO ^ CO
t^lACMPO



OOCOCOd-
~~ r** •
o





0
O >Tt
o — ooo
!•- ->OO •
CNICNlin— O

1 1 1 1 1

f*> O C\J if\**O
iTiNOCMfOO
CM
0






^f PO CA CM CNJ




















1!
Ol
E

in
4J
C
CO
4J

•^ —
— O
o c
a co
— a
eo«—
OlTl —
WO'QCOZ 4J
WOO Wi£ O
.«
o
ON Z ON^ NO ^ ON ON
ON Z ON ^ CO "^ ON ON
A A A A















acoacooNoao
z — z 	 cozz
—







ON
ON
A

i

CM
r^








	 (NJCM 	

















ID
+J
co
CO
4J 0)
£ C
_i a co
01 — 4J
3. — cc

* x o
V) 01-
+> £ O
C — 3
CO XtC —
4-> £. 4*- t-
— 3 3 1 CO O
O — «- — CM .C —
Q.E 0 C •—•!-> .C
Ea-o 00 £ u
a eo — c tn a—
— c. o O co 	 eo t-
XOO-I tONCQZt-
o

























































•
CD

A
CO

•«•
a
co
^
O
c
CO
W •
co —
•D • 3
^7 C^
CO CO Ok
4J *> C
eo O —
O CB C
— 4-> CO
C-D E
4—
4J 4J
WOO
Jt C C
c
a * «
-oz
cozz
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.2.2-7
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Lagoon
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Textile mills
Subcategory:  Felted fabric processing
Plant:  Unspecified
References:  3-68, p. VII-32
Pretreatment/treatment:  Equal., Act.  SI./Lagoon
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Process modification:  Polishing
Wastewater flow rate:  380 m3/d
Hydraulic detention time:   25 days
Hydraulic loading rate: Unspecified
Unit configuration:  One basin, total
  volume 9,500 m3
                  Data  source status:
                    Not specified
                    Bench  scale
                    Pilot  scale
                    Full scale
              Organic  loading rate:
                Unspecified
              Oxygen supply:   Unspecified
              Depth:  Unspecified
              Operating temperature:
                Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling;  24-hr
              Analysis;   Data set  1  (V.7.3.32)
    Pollutant/parameter
Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
   limit
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  COD                             550
  TSS                              91
  Total phenol                   0.05
              260
               22
             0.03
Blanks indicate data not available.
ND, not detected.
MM, not meaningful.
               53
               76
               40
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Chromium
Copper
Selenium
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
Naphthalene

35
ND
32
45
18
56

ND
18
18
100
ND
ND

>99
NM
44
NM
>99
>99
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.2.2-8
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Lagoon
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Textile mills
Subcategory:  Woven fabric finishing
Plant:  Unspecified
References:  3-68, pp. VII-59-60
                  Data source status:
                    Not specified
                    Bench scale
                    Pilot scale
                    Full scale
Pretreatment/treatment:  Equal., Grit Removal, Screen, Flotation
  (DAF) with Chem. Add./Lagoon
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Process modification:  Aerated
Wastewater flow rate:  570 m3/day
Hydraulic detention time:  170 hr
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Two lagoons in series,
  surface aeration
Aerator power requirement:  3.5 W/m3
             Organic loading rate:
               Unspecified
             Oxygen supply:  Unspecified
             Depth:  Unspecified
             Operating temperature:
               Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL DATA

    Sampling;  Two 24-hr composite samples	Analysis:  Data set 1  (V.7.3.32)
Pol lutant/oarameter
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
BOD(5)
COD
TSS
Total phenol
Toxic pollutants, u.g/L:
Copper
Nickel
Tha 1 1 i urn
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
4-Nitrophenol
Pentach 1 oropheno 1
Phenol
Benzene
Ethyl benzene
To luene
Methylene chloride
Influent

<200
720
32
0.03

81
32
14
45
13
34
32
19
160
200
56
Effluent

<67
580
17
0.02

52
32
13
NO
<10
ND
24
<5
ND
ND
<5
Percent
remova I

NM
19
47
33

36
0
7
>99
>23
>99
25
>74
>99
>99
>91
Detection
1 imit

















    Blanks indicate data not available.
    ND, not detected.
    NM, not meaningful.
 Date:   9/25/81
III.3,2.2-9
-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Lagoon
 Data .source:  Effluent Guidelines
 Point source:  Textile mills
 Subcategory:  Stock and yarn finishing
 Plant:  Unspecified
 References:  3-68, p.  VII-31
                    Data source  status:
                      Not specified
                      Bench scale
                      Pilot scale
                      Full scale
 Pretreatment/treatment:  Screen.,  Equal.,  Act.  SI./Lagoon
 DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

 Process modification:  Polishing
 Wastewater flow rate:  2,800 m3/day
 Hydraulic detention time:  20 days
 Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
 Unit configuration:  Two ponds in parallel,
   total volume 57,000 m3
               Organic loading rate:
                 Unspecified
               Oxygen supply:   Unspecified
               Depth:  Unspecified
               Operating temperature:
                 Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL DATA
 Sampling;  24-hr composite sample
                Analysis;   Data set 1 (V.7.3.32)
     Pollutant/parameter
 Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
   limit
 Classical pollutants, mg/L:
   COD                              78        140
   TSS                              37         28
   Total phenol                   0.04       0.05
                            NM
                            24
                            NM
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Lead
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
Trichlorofluorome thane

36
860
40
48

ND
120
11
ND

>99
86
72
>99
 Blanks indicate data not available.
 ND, not detected.
 NM, not meaningful.
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.2.2-10
-------
  TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Lagoon
  Data source:   Effluent Guidelines
  Point source:   Textile mills
  Subcategory.   See below
  Plant:  Unspecified
  References:  3-68, p. VII-22
  Pretreatment/treatment:   Unspecified/Lagoon

  DESIGN OR  OPERATING PARAMETERS

  Process modification:  Aerated
  Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
  Hydraulic  detention time:   See below
  Hydraulic  loading rate:   Unspecified
  Unit configuration:  Unspecified
                      Data source status:
                        Not specified
                        Bench  scale
                        Pilot  scale
                        Full scale
                Organic loading rate:
                   Unspecified
                Oxygen supply:   Unspecified
                Depth:  Unspecified
                Operating temperature:
                   Unspecified
                Aerator power requirement:
                   See below
                                      REMOVAL DATA
Semolina: Unspecified


COO
Concentration. aa/L
Subcateaorv
Knit fabric
f inishing(a)
Stock and yarn
f inishing(b)
Stock and yarn
f inishing(c)
Woven fabric
finishing(d)
Woven fabric
f inishing(e)
Woven fabric
f Inishingff )
Subcateaorv
Knit fabric
f inishing(a)
Stock and yarn
finishing(b)
Stock and yarn
f inishing(c)
Woven fabric
f inishing(d)
Woven fabric
f inlshing(e)
Woven fabric
f inishing(f)
Influent

1.800

560



640

840


Hydraul ic
detention
tine. hr.

18

0.5

75

214

60

86
Effluent

1,200

U30



580

810




Percent
renova 1

33

23



10

3


BOD(5>
Concentration. nra/L
Influent

390

250

110

69

370

1,700
Effluent

190

250

14

69

94

160
An lavs is: Data set
TSS
Concentration. na/L
Influent Effluent





21 12

54 68



560 600

Percent
remove 1

51

0

87

0

74

91
7 (V. 7.3.32|

Percent
renova 1





43

NM



NM













           Blanks indicate data not available.
           NM. not meaningful.
           (a)Aerator power requirement:  30 W/cu.m
           (b)Aerator power requirement:  197 W/cu.m
           c) Aerator power requirement:  5 W/cu.m
           d)Aerator power requirement:  79 W/cu.m
           e)Aerator power requirement:  9 W/cu.m
           f)Aerator power requirement:  154 W/cu.m
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.2.2-11
-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Lagoon
Data source: Effluent Guidelines
Point source: Paint manufacturing
Subcategory: Unspecified
Plant: Unspecified
References: 3-20, p. VII-18
Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Lagoon
                  Data source  status;
                    Not  specified
                    Bench  scale
                    Pilot  scale
                    Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
Process modification: Aerated
Wastewater flow  rate:   Unspecified
Hydraulic detention time:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate: Unspecified
Unit configuration: Unspecified
           Organic  loading rate: Unspecified
           Oxygen supply:   Unspecified
           Depth: Unspecified
           Operating temperature: Unspecified
                                   REMOVAL DATA
    Sampling:  Composite  and grab
              Analysis:   Data set I  (V.7.3.25)
      Pollutant/parameter
                                   Concentration
Influent
Effluent
Percent
removaI
 Detection
	I i m i t	
    Classical  pollutants, mg/L:
      BOD(5)                       23,000         17      >99
      COD                        260,000        680      >99
      TOC                         25,000        200       99
      TSS                           400         42       90
      Total phenol                   I.I      0.003      >99
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Antimony
Arsenic
Be ry 1 1 i urn
Cadmium
Ch rom i urn
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
S i 1 ve r
Tha 1 1 i urn
Zinc
Benzene
Toluene
Chloroform
Methyl ene chloride
Tet rach 1 o roethy 1 ene
1, 1, 1,-Trichloroethylene
Pentach 1 oropheno 1
Pheno 1
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate

170
50
>97
91
94
>80
>99
NM
>50
NM
>80
>99
>95
>99
>99
97
>99
96
>99
>99
NM
>99
     Blanks indicate data not available.
     ND, not detected.
     NM, not meaningful.
 Date:   9/25/81
III.3.2.2-12
-------
 TREATMENT  TECHNOLOGY:   Lagoon
  Data  source:   Effluent Guidelines
  Point source:   Pharmaceuticals
  Subcategory:   Biological and natural extrac-
    tion chemical synthesis products,  formula-
    tion products.
  Plant:   12411
  References:  3-87,  Supplement 2;  3-2,  p.  F-26
  Pretreatment/treatment:  Equal.,  Neutral./Lagoon
                    Data  source  status:
                      Not specified
                      Bench  scale
                      Pilot  scale
                      Full scale
 DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

 Process modification:   Aerated
 Wastewater  flow  rate:   1,330 m3/day
 Hydraulic detention time:   Unspecified
 Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
 Unit configuration:  Aeration tank with
    turbine aerators
          Organic loading  rate:  Unspecified
          Oxygen supply:   Unspecified
          Depth:  Unspecified
          Operating temperature:  Unspecified
                                   REMOVAL DATA
     Sampling!  Composite and grab
                Analysis;  Data set I  (V.7.3.2M
Concentration! a)
Pol lutant/oarameter
Toxic pollutants, ug/L:
Chromium
Copper
Cyanide
Nickel
Zinc
Mercury
Lead
Tha 1 1 i urn
Ant i mony
Arsenic
Se 1 en i urn
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Chloroform
Methylene chloride
Pheno 1
To 1 uene
Influent

16
35
590
20
150
ND
80
ND
68
32
30
38
860
1,100
34
290
Effluent

16
26
52
HO
99
1.6
ND
58
ND
ND
ND
28
1,000
32
ND
ND
Percent Detection
removal 1 imit

0
26
91
NM
34
NM
>99
NM
>99
>99
>99
26
NM
97
>99
>99
     Blanks  indicate data not available.
     ND,  not detected.
     NM,  not meaningful,
     (a)Average of three samples.
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.2.2-13
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Lagoon
Data source:   Effluent Guidelines
Point source:   Pharmaceuticals
Subcategory:   Biological and natural extrac-
  tion products,  chemical synthesis products,
  formulation products
Plant:  12210
References:  3-87,  pp. 20-24; 3-2, p.  F-18
Pretreatment/treatment:  None/Lagoon
                   Data  source status:
                    Not specified
                    Bench  scale
                    Pilot  scale
                    Full scale
                                            x
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Process modification:  Aerated
Wastewater flow rate:   37.9 m3/day
Hydraulic detention time:   Unspeci-
  fied
Unit configuration:  Unspecified
        Organic loading rate:   Unspecified
        Oxygen supply:   Unspecified
        Depth:  Unspecified
        Operating temperature:   Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Sampling;  Composite and grab
               Analysis;   Data  set  1  (V.7.3.21)
                                  Concentration
   Pollutant/parameter
Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
  limit
Toxic pollutants, yg/L:
Copper
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate
Methylene chloride
Benzene
Carbon tetrachloride
Chloroform
Lead
Chromium
Cyanide

60
140
160
63
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
120

110
510
15
130
10
61
130
13
12
ND

NM
NM
57
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
>99
Blanks indicate data not available.
ND, not detected.
NM, not meaningful.
 Date:   9/25/81
  III.3.2.2-14
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Lagoon
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Leather tanning and finishing
Subcategory:  Vegetable tanning process
Plant:  13
References:  3-74,  p.  82
Pretreatment/treatment: Equal./Lagoon
                   Data source status:
                     Not specified
                     Bench scale
                     Pilot scale
                     Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Process modification:   Aerated
Wastewater flow rate:   Unspecified
Hydraulic detention time:   16-35 days
Hydraulic loading rate: Unspecified
Unit configuration: Volume 2,980 m3
           Organic loading rate:   16.2-130  kg
             BOD5/d/l,000 m3
           Oxygen supply:  Unspecified
           Depth:  Unspecified
           Operating temperature:   5°-8°C
           Aerator power requirement:   7.5  KW
Sampling;  Unspecified
                                 REMOVAL DATA
                Analysis;   Data set 3 (V.7.3.6)
  Pollutant/parameter
                                  Concentration
Influent
Effluent
Percent
removal
Detection
  limit
Classical pollutants,  mg/L:
  BOD5                         1,000           86
  COD                          4,500        1,600
  TSS                            540          570
  TKN                             88           22
                          91
                          ,64
                          NM
                          75
Blanks indicate data not available.
NM, not meaningful.
 Date:   9/25/81
  III.3.2.2-15
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Lagoon



Data source:  Effluent Guidelines                 Data source  status:
Point source:  Leather tanning and finishing        Not specified         	
Subcategory:  Hair pulp,  chrome tan,  retan-         Bench scale            	
  wet finish                                         Pilot scale            	
Plant:  184                                          Full scale            	x_
References:  3-11, p. 208
Pretreatment/treatment:   Unspecified/Lagoon


DESIGN OR OPERATING  PARAMETERS

Process modification:  Aerated            Organic loading rate:   Unspecified
Wastewater flow  rate:  Unspecified        Oxygen supply:  Unspecified
Hydraulic detention  time:  Unspecified    Depth:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:   Unspecified      Operating temperature:   Unspecified
Unit configuration:   Unspecified
                                        REMOVAL DATA

  Sampling;  Three days	Analysis:  Data  set 2 (V.7.3.6)

                                  Concentrat ion       Percent    Detection
    Pol lutant/parameter	Influent    Effluent    removal	I imit	

  Classical pollutants, mg/L:
    BOD(5)                        1,900          21       99
    COD                           5,500         220       96
    TSS                           2,900         160       94
    Oil  and grease                  720          17       98
    TKN                             500         100       80
Toxic pollutants, u.g/L:
Ch rom i um
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Phenol
2,U,6-Tr ichlorophenol
1 , 2-D i ch I o robenzene
1 , U-Dich I o robenzene
Ethyl benzene
Toluene
Naphtha lene

160,000
50
60
1,100
60
500
51
U,t»00
880
250
5U
88
<100
2k

1,100
5
150
80
30
U9
2
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
BDL
ND

99
90
NM
93
50
90
96
>99
>99
>99
>99
>99
>95
>99

10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
  Blanks indicate data not available.
  BDL,  below detection limit.
  ND, not  detected.
  NM, not  meaningful.
 Date:   9/25/81               III.3.2.2-16
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Lagoon
Data source:   Effluent  Guidelines
Point source:   Leather  tanning  and finishing
Subcategory:   See below
Plant:  See below
References:  3-74, pp.  84-86
Pretreatment/treatment:  See Below/Lagoon
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Process modification:   Facultative
Wastewater  flow rate:   See below
Hydraulic detention time:  See below
Hydraulic loading rate:   Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Unspecified
                  Data source status:
                      Not  specified
                      Bench scale
                      Pilot scale
                      Full scale
See below
            Organic loading rate:   See below
            Oxygen supply:   Unspecified
            Depth:  Unspecified
            Operating temperature:   Unspecified
                                       REMOVAL DATA
      gaemlllM! Unmeclfled
                                                     Analysis:  Data set 3 IV.7.3.61
BODI5I
Subcatenory
Cattle-sheep save
chrone(a)
Vegetable tanning
process! b)
Vegetable tanning
process(c)
Cattle-sheep save
chroM(a)
Vegetable tanning
process) b)
Vegetable tanning
process(c)
Concentrator
Influent 1
670
1,200
1,100
Concentratlor
Influent I
340
410
i. en/L
[f fluent
53
270
150
1. H/L
If fluent
48
500
100
Percent Detection
removal Halt
92
76
87
TSS
Percent Detection
renova 1 1 1 • 1 t
86
74
Concentratl
Influent
4,700
2,200
?9flc.*fHrit t

110
150
COD
on. an/L
Effluent
2,100
7ZO
TKN
on. ew/L
Effluent
35
100

Percent
reanval
55
68
Percent
reanval
67
33

Detection
llelt

Detection
llelt

      Blanks Indicate data not available.
      (a) Plant:  Pownal Tanning Co., North Povnal, Vermont; pretreatiaent of Influent:
         screening; waatewater flow: 2.27 cu.«/d; full scale.
      (b) Hydraulic detention tlaw:  1-8 d; organic loading:  142 kg BOD(5)/d/l,000 cu.ei;
         pilot scale.
      (c) Organic loading: 32.i|-325 kg BOD(5)/d/1,000 cu.n; full acale.
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.2.2-17
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Lagoon
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Timber products
Subcategory:  Hardboard
Plant:  See below
References:  3-65, pp. 7-10,  7-105
Pretreatment/treatment:   See  Below/Lagoon
                   Data source status:
                     Not specified
                     Bench scale
                     Pilot scale
                     Full scale
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Process modification:  Aerated
Wastewater flow  rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic detention time:   Unspecified
Hydraulic loading  rate:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  See below
             Organic loading  rate:   Unspecified
             Oxygen supply:   Unspecified
             Depth:  Unspecified
             Operating temperature:   Unspeci-
               fied
                                 REMOVAL DATA
Semolina: Unspecified
Plant
22(a)
MtU(b)
Use in
system
Te rt i a ry
Seconda ry

BOD(5)
Concentration. mq/L
Influent Effluent
UUO
690
100
190

Percent
remove I
77
72
Ana lysis:

Data set
TSS
Concentration. mq/L
Influent Effluent
160
150
120
370
3 (V.7.3.33)

Percent
remova I
24
NM
NM, not  meaningful.
(a)Pretreatment of  influent:   screening,  sedimentation (clarifier), flow equalization,
   two contact stabilization  activated sjudge systems operating in parallel.
(b)Pretreatment of  influent:   Sedimentation  (2 ponds); system configuration:  aerated
   lagoon plus settling pond.
Date:   9/25/81
III.3.2.2-18
-------
III.3.2.3  Nitriflcation/Denitrificatlon

     Description

Nitrification/denitrification is a biological process for the
conversion of ammonia to free nitrogen gas.  The process involves
a series of biological reactions,  which can be carried out in
suspended-growth or fixed-film reactors, to complete the con-
version.

In nitrification, ammonia is first oxidized by an autotrophic
bacteria (Nitrosomonas) that converts the ammonia to nitrite.
Another bacteria (Nitrobacter) further oxidizes the nitrite to
nitrate, completing the nitrification process.  Conversion to
nitrate may be the final step in the treatment process,  or de-
nitrification may follow.

Denitrification is performed by facultative anaerobic micro-
organisms that convert nitrites and nitrates, through biological
reduction processes, into free nitrogen gas.  The gas is then
released to the atmosphere.  The complete process can be expres-
sed by the following:


     NH3       •*    N02"      •*    NO3~      ->    N2
     Ammonia        Nitrite        Nitrate        Nitrogen gas

Bacteria that perform denitrification include Pseudomonas, Micro-
coccus, Archromobacter, Bacillus,  and Escherichia.

The growth rate of nitrifiers is significantly lower than that of
heterotrophic bacteria used in the breakdown of carbonaceous or-
ganics.  Thus, in the presence of high carbonaceous organic
concentrations (e.g., BOD), the nitrifiers are unable to compete
successfully with heterotrophs and significant populations cannot
accumulate.  Therefore, single-stage BOD removal and nitrifica-
tion is practicable only when organic loadings are kept suffi-
ciently low.  In effect, this implies maintaining a retention
time long enough for development and maintenance of the nitrify-
ing bacteria.  Alternatively, separate-stage (two-stage) nitrifi-
cation is used in which the wastewater is pretreated to remove
the carbonaceous demand.

     Representative Types and Modifications

Nitrification and denitrification can be carried out in either a
suspended growth or a fixed film reactor.

     (1)  Nitrification in suspended growth reactor.  An activa-
          ted sludge process with a plug flow configuration can
          be used in a single-stage nitrification system.  The
          single-stage system requires a longer solids retention
          time (SRT) to permit build-up of an adequate population


Date:  9/25/81            III.3.2.3-1
-------
          of  nitrifiers,  and  also  requires  additional oxygen for
          oxidation  of  both carbonaceous material  and ammonia.
          The single-stage system  is very sensitive to changes  in
          temperature and flow variations.  In  such situations,  a
          two-stage  system consisting  of organic carbon  oxidation
          followed by nitrification performs better.  The  stabil-
          ity of two-stage systems is  much  greater because con-
          ditions in each stage  can be established to favor the
          specific types  of organisms  derived  in that stage.
          Separate sedimentation and sludge recycling are  used
          with each  stage.

     (2)   Nitrification in fixed film  reactors.  Combined  carbon
          oxidation-nitrification  can  be achieved  in low rate
          trickling  filters.  Trickling filters with synthetic
          media are  more  effective than rock media because of the
          substantially greater  surface area available.  In a
          two-stage  fixed film process, the first  stage  (organic
          carbon oxidation) is carried out  in  a high-rate  trick-
          ling filter followed by  a  second-stage standard  rate
          filter for nitrification.  Rotating  biological contac-
          tors (RBC's)  arranged  in series can  also be used to
          achieve oxidation of both  organic carbon and ammonia.
          Carbonaceous  material  is oxidized in the first stages
          of  RBC and nitrificaton  takes place  in the last  stage.

     (3)   Denitrification in  suspended growth  reactors.  In
          suspended-growth denitrification, the nitrified  waste-
          water is treated in a  mixed  anoxic vessel containing
          the appropriate bacteria.  The nitrified feedwater does
          not contain an  adequate  energy source for maintaining
          the bacterial populations  required for denitrification
          (e.g., carbonaceous material).  Therefore, a supple-
          mental source of carbon  is needed to maintain  the
          denitrifying  biomass.  This  is often provided  by feed-
          ing methanol  to the reactor  along with the feedwater.
          Mixing in  the reaction vessel may be accomplished using
          low-speed  paddles analogous  to standard  flocculation
          equipment. The denitrified  effluent is  aerated  for a
          short period  (5 to  10  minutes) prior to  clarification
          to  strip out  gaseous nitrogen formed in  the previous
          step that  might otherwise  inhibit sludge settling.
          Clarification follows  the  stripping  steps with the
          collected  sludge either  being returned to the  head of
          the denitrification system or disposed as waste  sludge.

     (4)   Denitrification in  fixed growth  reactors.  A fixed film
          reactor designed  similar to  gravity  deep bed filters  or
          pressure  filters  can be  used for  denitrification. The
          media in such filters  can  be either  coarse or  fine with
          either an  upflow  or a  downflow configuration.  The
          media will require  backwashing to prevent clogging.
Date:  9/25/81            III.3.2.3-2
-------
          Provision must be made for adding an oxygen demand
          source such as methanol to the reactor influent in a
          manner similar to that for suspended growth reactors.
          Fixed growth reactors require less contact for denitri-
          fication than that required in the suspended growth
          reactors, and they can accept a higher hydraulic rate
          of application without fear of a washout of organisms.

     Technology Status

Single-stage nitrification systems are fully demonstrated in
treating domestic wastewater.  Separate-stage systems have been
well demonstrated throughout the United States and England in
pilot plant studies and several full-scale designs.  Denitrifi-
cation technology is well developed at full scale but is not in
widespread use.

     Applications

Nitrification/denitrification is not particularly applicable to
industrial wastewater treatment.  The Pulp and Paper Mill Industry
reports potential use of nitrification/denitrification.  No other
industries report its use.

     Advantages and Limitations

Biological nitrification is very sensitive to temperature, re-
sulting in poor performance in colder months.  Heavy metals
(e.g., cadmium, chromium, copper, nickel, lead, and zinc), phe-
nolic compounds, cyanide, and halogenated compounds can also
inhibit nitrification reactions.

Denitrification specifically acts on nitrite and nitrate and will
not affect other forms of nitrogen.

     Reliability

High levels of reliability are achievable under controlled pH,
temperature, loading, and chemical feed.

     Chemicals Required

Nitrification will destroy 7.2 kg of alkalinity per kg of NHa-N
oxidized.  Therefore, alkaline addition is necessary to provide a
residual alkalinity of 30-50 mg/L after complete nitrification.

In denitrification, an energy source is required and is usually
supplied as methanol (CH3OH).
Date:  9/25/81            III.3.2.3-3
-------
     Residuals Generated

Nitrification and denitrification generate sludge,  which is
removed by sedimentation.

     Design Criteria

The nitrification process is governed by the sludge retention
time (SRT) or sludge age.   The sludge age must be greater than
the growth rate of the nitrifying organisms, otherwise the orga-
nisms will be washed out of the reactor and result in incomplete
nitrification. In a suspended growth reactor, the SRT can vary
from 6 to 30 days, depending on reactor temperature, with a MLSS
of 3,000 to 6,000 mg/L. Nitrification in fixed film reactors is
usually achieved at low hydraulic loading rates and warm tempera-
tures and is designed on the basis of both hydraulic and organic
loading rates.  Denitrification systems are designed on the basis
of denitrification rates.   The nitrification and denitrification
rates will vary with the type of wastewater, and pilot plant
studies should be conducted to develop design parameters for
specific wastewaters.

     Performance

Conversions of ammonia (and nitrite) to nitrate on the order of
98% are possible through nitrification.  Properly designed and
operated systems have 1 to 3 mg/L of ammonia in their effluents.
Denitrification systems are capable of reducing 80 to 90% of the
nitrite and nitrate entering the system to gaseous nitrogen.
Overall nitrogen removals of 70 to 90% are achievable.  No per-
formance data sheets are available at the present time.

     References

3-5, 3-11, 3-18, 3-37, 3-49, 3-50, 3-51, 3-52.
Date:  9/25/81            III.3.2.3-4
-------
III.3.2.4  Rotating Biological Contactors

     Description

Rotating biological contactors (RBC's) provide a fixed film
biological treatment method for the removal of carbonaceous and
nitrogenous matter from wastewater.  The most common types con-
sist of a plastic disk or corrugated plastic medium mounted on
horizontal shafts.  The medium slowly rotates in wastewater (with
40 to 50% of its surface immersed) as the wastewater flows past.
During rotation, the medium picks up a thin layer of wastewater,
which flows over its surface absorbing oxygen from the air.  A
biological mass growing on the medium surface adsorbs and coagu-
lates organic pollutants from the wastewater.  The biological
mass biodegrades the organic matter.  Excess microorganisms and
other solids are continously removed from the film on the disk by
shearing forces created by the rotation of the disks in the
wastewater.  This rotation also mixes the wastewater, keeping
sloughed solids in suspension until they are removed by final
clarification.

Rotating biological contactors are similar to trickling filters
(Section III.3.2.5) as both are fixed growth reactors.

     Representative Types and Modifications

Common modifications of RBC's include the following:

     - The use of multiple staging (i.e., several horizontal
       shafts in series operation),
     - The use of mixed disk and corrugated media,
     - Covered units to prevent heat loss and control odors,
     - Various combinations of RBC's with trickling filter and
       activated sludge systems,
     - Air driven systems,
     - The use of aeration or chemical addition,
     - Multi-stage units for nitrification,
     - Immersed units for denitrification, and
     - Variable speeds to meet variable loading.

     Technology Status

Rotating biological contactors have been used in the United
States only since 1969 and are not in widespread use.  However,
their use is growing because of certain advantages (e.g., modular
construction and low hydraulic head loss) that make them adapt-
able to new or existing facilities.
Date:  9/25/81            III.3.2.4-1
-------
     Applications

Rotating biological contactors are suitable for a number of
applications including the following:

        Removal of suspended,  colloidal,  and dissolved organics,
        Polishing of effluents following other biological treat-
        ment systems,
        Pretreatment,
        Nitrification, and
        Denitrification.

The following industries use RBC's on a limited basis for waste-
water treatment:

     - Petroleum Refining,
     - Timber Products Processing,
     - Pharmaceutical Manufacturing,
     - Pulp and Paper Mills,
     - Coal Mining, and
     - Soap and Detergent Manufacturing.

     Advantages and Limitations

Advantages include economics,  simple operation and maintenance,
suitability of the process for step and stage construction, high
process stability and reliability, low process control require-
ments, and low sludge production.  In addition, plants requiring
nitrification and/or denitrification need not have clarifiers
between the processes, since the sloughed solids can pass through
nitrification and denitrification units with negligible effect on
either process.

The main limitations include process vulnerability to climatic
changes and low temperatures if not housed or covered; perfor-
mance may diminish significantly at temperatures below 13°C
(55°F).

     Reliability

RBC's are only moderately reliable in the absence of high organic
loading and temperatures below 13°C (55°F).  The mechanical reli-
ability is generally high, provided the first stage of the system
is designed to hold a large biomass.  The system response to
large increases in organic loadings is slow, so that effluent
quality may fluctuate according to influent fluctuations.
Date:  9/25/81            III.3.2.4-2
-------
     Chemicals Required

A carbon source is required when the process is used for denitri-
fication.  Nitrogen and phosphorus may also be needed for nutrient
deficient wastewaters.

     Residuals Generated

Biomass generated on the RBC surface is sloughed during operation
and is removed in the clarification step generally following the
process.

     Design Criteria

Process design information for rotating biological contactors for
industrial wastewaters is as yet rather limited.  The principal
design criterion is the applied organic loading rate (kg BOD/m2).
RBC's are generally operated at applied organic loading rates
ranging from 0.003 to 0.075 kg BOD/m2/day (0.5 to 15 Ib BOD/1,000
ftz/day).  This wide range in the loading rates points out the
necessity of conducting a pilot plant test for a specific waste-
water to determine the optimum loading rate.  In addition to the
above design criteria, other design considerations include rota-
tional speed of the media and number of stages required to achieve
desired removal efficiencies.  The rotational speed is dependent
on waste strength.  Generally, BOD removal efficiency is upgraded
by the use of multiple stages, which is also the design approach
to achieve nitrification.

     Performance

Pilot scale RBC studies on a broad range of pulp and paper mill
wastewaters have indicated that RBC's could be used to achieve
high levels of BOD removal [3-62].

Subsequent data sheets provide performance data on the following
industries:

     - Soap and Detergent Manufacturing, and
     - Coal mining.

     References

3-40, 3-51, 3-54, 3-55, 3-62.
Date:  9/25/81            III.3.2.4-3
-------















0
h-
O
^
1-

0
o

mlj
5

0
o

o
•»*.
CO

0
t-
o
cc
K
o
u.
a:


V)

1
^J
0
z
o
u
1-
o
ec
0
o


















w
>
o
c
u
d-
d>

—
co
>
O
E
a)
a:
c
o

jj
CO
(.
4J
C
a>
o
c
0
o

4J
c
0)
3
•-•
4-
jj
c
09
•O
0)
z



0)
o
c
CO

a 3
4i 4-0)
3 O t»
— £ co
— Q.0
O ML.
O. O O>
JC
«o~ c
O tA "• CO

CAQOCAZ 4J —
U) O O W iC O —
COOOOI-I-I-O
^
U
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.2.4-4
-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:   Rotating Biological Contactors
 Data source:   Government report
 Point source:   Soap and detergents
 Subcategory:   Liquid detergent
 Plant:   Texize Chemical Co.
 References:   3-111, pp. 30-50
 Pretreatment/treatment:  Equal./RBC

 DESIGN  OR OPERATING PARAMETERS
                        See below
                        0.0146-0.0175
Wastewater flow rate:
Organic loading rate:
  kg BOD5/m2/d
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Contactor surface area:  Unspecified
Rotational velocity:  10 rpm
Unit configuration:  Unspecified
Temperatures  See below
                                                   Data source status:
                                                     Not specified
                                                     Bench scale
                                                     Pilot scale
                                                     Full scale
Clarifier configuration:
  Unspecified
Depth:  Unspecified
Clarifier overflow rate:
  Unspecified
Operating temperature:
  Unspecified
Weir loading rate:  Unspecified
Solids loading rate:  Unspecified
Sludge recycle ratio:
  Unspecified
                                   REMOVAL DATA
             Sampling; Unspecified
                                            Analysis:  Data set 3 (V.7.3.301
Wastewater
flow. L/min
1.9
2.85
3.8
7.6
0.95
Temperature
°C
7-28
16-22
7-23
9-1"»
9-25

Concentratlo
influent
230
100
61
65
Oil
BOD( 5 I
n fflo/L
Effluent
71
18
18
18
and arease
Concentration. mg/L
Influent Effluent
1.9
2.85
3.8
7.6
0.95
7-28
16-22
7-23
9-1U
9-25
26
22
16
33
24
29
17
13
31
19

Percent
renova 1
69
82
72
72
Percent
remova I
NM
NM
19
6
21
                                                           TSS
Wastewater
flow. L/min
1.9
2.85
3.8
7.6
0.95
Concentration. ma/L
Influent
1,1*00
1,200
710
1,300
Effluent
1,000
570
340
930
Phosphorus
Concentration. ma/L

1.9
2.85
3.8
7.6
0.95
Influent
3.6
6.3
3.6
3.2
3.6
Effluent
3.M
5
3.0
3.5
3.2
Percent
remove I
29
5U
52
28
Percent
remova 1
6
21
17
NM
11
Concentration. ma/L
Influent Effluent
75
5"»
97
60
82
68
56
63
61
67
TKN
Concentration. ma/L
Influent
35
1)0
9
22
29
Effluent
15
38
6
15
13
Percent
remova I
9
NM
35
NM
18
Percent
remova 1
57
5
33
32
55
             NM, not meaningful.
Date:  9/25/81
                               III.3.2.4-5
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Rotating Biological Contactors
Data source:  Government report
Point source: Coal mining
Subcategory:    Unspecified
Plant:  Unspecified
References: 3-112, pp. 20, 33, 40-43
Pretreatment/treatment: Unspecified/RBC

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Wastewater flow rates See below
Organic loading rate: Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate.- See below
Contactor surface area: Unspecified
Rotational velocity: Unspecified
Unit configuration: Unspecified
                 Data source status:
                   Not specified
                   Bench scale
                   Pilot scale
                   Full scale
       Clarifier configuration: Unspecified
       Depth: Unspecified
       Clarifier overflow rate: Unspecified
       Operating temperature: Unspecified
       Weir loading rate: Unspecified
       Solids loading rate: Unspecified
       Sludge recycle ratio: Unspecified
                                       UtMOVAl DATA
        Samp I ing; See below
Wa&tevater
now.
CU.
6.
9.
ll,
m/d
3
8
,9
Hydra ul ic
loading rate.
cu.m/d/sa.m
0.31
O.HU
0.22
Theoretical
re tent ion
time, mm
29
20
HO
TSS
Concent rat
Influent
3
14
20
ion. m«/L
Effluent
23
26
68
Percent
remova 1
NM
NM
NM
Crab samples
taken.
weeks
9
10
8
        NM. not moan inqrul .
 Date:   9/25/81
III.3.2.4-6
-------
III.3.2.5  Trickling Filters

     Description

A trickling filter is a biological waste treatment process in
which a fixed microbial population is used to biodegrade the
organic components of a wastewater.  The physical unit consists
of a suitable structure packed with an inert medium (usually rock,
wood, or plastic) on which a biological mass is grown.  The
wastewater is distributed over the upper surface of the medium and
as it flows through the medium covered with biological slime, both
dissolved and suspended organic matter are removed by adsorption.
The adsorbed matter is oxidized by the organisms in the slime
during their metabolic processes.   Air flows through the filter
by convection, thereby providing the oxygen needed to maintain
aerobic conditions.

As the microorganisms grow, the thickness of the slime layer
increases.  Periodically the slime breaks off the medium and is
replaced with new growth.  This phenomenon of losing the slime
layer is called sloughing and is primarily a function of the
organic and hydraulic loadings on the filter.  The effluent from
the filter is usually passed to a clarifier to settle and remove
the agglomerated solids.

Wastewater is applied to the filter by either a fixed-spray
nozzle system or a rotating distribution system.  Fixed-spray
nozzles are used less frequently than rotary distributors because
the latter have greater reliability and ease of maintenance.
These units consist of two or more distributor arms mounted on a
pivot in the center of the filter.  Nozzles in the arms distri-
bute the wastewater as they rotate as a result of the dynamic
action of the incoming waste stream.  Most filter processes also
incorporate recirculation of the treated effluent in order to
provide uniform hydraulic loading as well as to dilute high
strength wastewaters.

     Representative Types and Modifications

Most trickling filters are classified as either low-rate or
high-rate depending on the organic and hydraulic loading.  A
low-rate filter generally has a media bed depth of 1.5 to 3
meters (5 to 10 feet) and does not use recirculation.  High-rate
filter media bed depths can vary from 1 to 9 meters (3 to 30
feet) and require recirculation.  The recirculation of effluent
in high-rate filters is necessary for effective sloughing control.
Otherwise, media clogging and anaerobic conditions could develop
as a consequence of the high organic loading rates employed.

Materials used for trickling filter media include crushed rock,
field stone [usually 2.5 to 13 cm (1 to 5 inch)], limestone, hard
coal, coke, blast furnace slag, wood, and plastics.  Rock and


Date:  9/25/81            III.3.2.5-1
-------
plastic media are the most commonly used.  Media should be sound,
durable, nearly equidimensional,  resistant to freeze and thaw,
and insoluble in the wastewater.   Uniformity in size is necessary
to prevent plugging of the air voids and to ensure adequate
ventilation. Other important considerations include surface area
per unit volume, void space, density,  media configuration (espe-
cially with plastics), availability, and cost.   Also,  hydraulic
and organic loading rates are highly affected by the media used.
For example, synthetic media have the ability to handle higher
hydraulic and organic loadings as a result of the higher specific
surface area and void space of these media compared to stone and
blast furnace slag.

     Technology Status

Low-rate trickling filters using rock media are most common in
older plants and are well developed.  High-rate filters are a
modification of low-rate filters and are also well developed.
Plastic media filters are becoming more prevalent because of the
significant advantages of the plastic media over rock media.
Existing rock filters can be upgraded by elevating the contain-
ment structure and converting to plastic media.

     Applications

Trickling filters are applicable to industrial wastewaters amen-
able to aerobic biological treatment in conjunction with suitable
pre- and post-treatment. The process is effective for the removal
of suspended or colloidal materials but less effective for the
removal of soluble organics.  Trickling filters are currently
used in conjunction with other biological treatment methods or by
themselves to treat wastewaters from several industries.  However,
their use is not as widespread as activated sludge or aerobic and
facultative lagoons.  The following industries employ this process
either as a main biological treatment process or in conjunction
with other biological treatment methods.

     - Gum and Wood Chemicals,
     - Petroleum Refining,
     - Pulp and Paper Mills,
     - Paint and Ink Formulation, and
     - Pharmaceutical Manufacturing.

     Advantages and Limitations

The main advantages of trickling filters are simplicity, low
power and operating costs, and ease of operation and maintenance.
In addition, because of its inherent stability, a trickling
filter is not easily upset by shock loads or sudden variations in
influent volume.
Date:  9/25/81            III.3.2.5-2
-------
Limitations include vulnerability to climatic changes and low
temperatures.   Recirculation may be restricted during cold
weather as a result of cooling effects,  flies and odors are
common problems,  and wastewater containing high concentrations of
soluble organics is less effectively treated.  Also, trickling
filters have limited flexibility and control in comparison with
competing processes.

     Reliability

The equipment and process are quite reliable under conditions of
moderate climate.

     Chemicals Required

Anhydrous ammonia and phosphoric acid or anhydrous ammonia and
ammonium phosphate may be required for wastewaters deficient in
nutrients.

     Residuals Generated

Sludge collected in a clarifier following the trickling filter
requires disposal.

     Design Criteria

Trickling filters can be designed by using several formulas or
models that relate the performance of the system to design para-
meters such as applied BOD loading, hydraulic loading, recir-
culation, and depth of filter.  However, several of these models
are based on data collected from domestic wastewater applications
and are thus not applicable to industrial wastewater.  Among the
models applicable to industrial wastewater, the Thackston and
Eckenfelder' s model seems to apply best [3-63] and is as follows:
      Sa

Where Se = effluent BOD concentration, mg/liter
      Sa = BOD concentration applied to the filter, mg/liter
       e = constant
      Kf = product of the reaction rate constant (Iiter/m2-m3)
           and the specific surface area (m2/m3) of the packing;
           reportedly 0.09 is typical, min"1
      D  = media depth, m
                    ~ j. wcm.-i.ix^ y u1

       m = constant
Q  = hydraulic loading (m3/m2)
Date:  9/25/81            III.3.2.5-3
-------
Due to the variability of industrial wastewaters, the design
parameters are expected to vary and may be evaluated by collec-
tion of pilot-scale performance data at several surface loading
rates and media depths.  A typical range of values for some of
the design parameters are presented in Table 3.2.5-1.

   TABLE 3.2.5-1.  DESIGN CRITERIA FOR TRICKLING FILTERS [3-51]
Criteria
Organic loading
Bed depth
Low- rate
Units rock media
kg BOD/d/1,000 m3
(Ib BOD/d/1,000 ft3)
meters
(feet)
80 to 320
(5 to 20)
1.5 to 3
(5 to 10)
High-rate
rock media
320 to 970
(20 to 60)
1 to 2
(3 to 6)
Plastic
media
160 to 8,100
(10 to 500)
4.5 to 9
(15 to 30)
 Recirculation          -         none       0.5 to 4     0.5 to 5
 ratio
     Performance

Efficiency of trickling filters in the treatment of refinery and
petrochemical wastes ranges from 10 to 20% when used as a rough-
ing filter and 50 to 90% when used for secondary treatment.  A
wide range of effluent quality can be expected depending upon
design and operating conditions.  Data sheets provide performance
data on the following industries:

        Leather Tanning and Finishing,
        Pulp and Paper Mills, and
        Timber Products Processing.

     References

     3-1, 3-2, 3-24, 3-51, 3-53, 3-54, 3-55, 3-63.
Date:  9/25/81             III.3.2.5-4
-------






















CO
cc
bJ
H

—
U.

O
Z
—
_J
X.
o
— •
K
H
OS
O
u.
>.
K
^
Z
a
CO
j.
§
o
z
o
Ul
t-

_J
0
h-
z
o
u




















»*


>
o
c
CO
o
CK
CO

—
CO
>
O
E
CO
Sro>A£££Z££ZZZ
ZZKZOOCMZZZZZZZZZ


















— .* — jf JT M if\ — ~









































CO
CD
co
£
C —
-1 O.CO O
•x. *> c

i 	 CO— £ T3CB
>> — CO <- O —
•P ££ co£ O — >>
c — Q..C a - c.c.
CO >>4JO£CO O 4->
•P C. — C I- O C E CO
3 -P x a o — co i- o> o
— E d) JJ — 1 	 O C t.
— 3 CO 13— £ h-CO VCDO
O"^^^ C\I^^>O~™ I£COO^*~
Q. E fl) — — I.CfOOvO'PC'- X£
Sac-o C-P-PC -fcoofo
acococaicoccod- Q. 	 *»~
— JCO>>» 	 CO.C -CO >>£ CO «-
XUUU-ICQOOa.a.CMZXUZh-
0
H

























































,
CO

^
CO

CO
CO

o


CO

co —
•D 3
CD O)
•P C
ndica
mean)
•P
(19 O
JC C
c
CO «
-z
00 Z
Date:  9/25/81
III.3.2.5-5
-------
 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Trickling Filter
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Leather tanning and finishing
Subcategory:  Unspecified
Plant:  See below
References:  3-74, pp. 79,80
Pretreatment/treatment:  See  Below/Tr.  Filter
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Process modification:  Unspecified
Wastewater flow  rate:  See below
Hydraulic loading  rate:   Unspecified
Recirculation ratio:   See below
Unit configuration:  Unspecified
                  Data  source  status:
                    Not specified
                    Bench  scale
                    Pilot  scale
                    Full scale
           Type of media:   Unspecified
           Organic loading rate:   Unspecified
           Bed depth:   Unspecified
           Operating  temperature.-   Unspecified

$a «p 1 i nq ;
Flint
In India
3


unspecified
P re treatment
of influent
Di lut ion,
sedimmtat ion
(«)
Coagulation.
sedinentat ion


Concent rat i
Influent
860
270
ISO-MOO
REMOVAL DATA
Analysis: Data set 3 (Yt7t?f6)
on. nq/t, Percent Detection Concentration. nra/L Percent Detection
Effluent renoval lini( Influent Effluent removal limit
52 9'l
62 77 110 US 59
30-80 80
       Blanks indicate data not available.
       (a)Wastevater flow: cu.«/d, reelrcutation ratio; 50%.
  Date:   9/25/81
III.3.2.5-6
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Trickling Filter


Data source:  Effluent Guidelines                 Data  source  statuss
Point source:  Pulp, paper and paperboard           Not specified         	
Subcategory:  Wastepaper board                      Bench  scale            	
Plant:  Unspecified                                 Pilot  scale            	
References:  3-82, pp. A-78-85                      Full scale            	x_
Pretreatment/treatment:  Lagoon/Tr. Filters

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Process modification:  Unspecified         Type of media:  Unspecified
Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified         Organic loading rate:  Unspecifed
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified       Bed depth:   Unspecified
Recirculation ratio:  Unspecified          Operating temperature:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Unspecified
                                  REMOVAL DATA

     Samp I I ng;  Unspec I f I ed	Analysis;  Data set 2  (V.7.3.28)
Concent rat ion (a )
Pollutant/parameter Influent Effluent
Classical pollutants, mg/L:
COD
Toxic pollutants, ng/L:
Ch rom i urn
Copper
Cyanide
Lead
Bis(2-ethylhexyl ) phthalate
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Diethyl phthalate
Pentach 1 o ropheno 1
Phenol
2, U, 6-Trichlo ropheno 1
Naptha lene
Chloroform
Methylene chloride
Tr i ch 1 o roe thy 1 ene
Xylene

560

ND
ND
76
ND
35
8
ND
ND
22
ND
31*
ND
ND
ND
ND

620

17
l»2
16
49
6
6
140
3
37
2
55
19
1
1
2
Percent Detection
removal limit

NM

NM
NM
79
NM
83
25
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
     Blanks indicate data not available.
     NO, not detected.
     NM, not meaningful.
     (a)Average values.
Date:   9/25/81              III.3.2.5-7
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Trickling Filter


Data source:  Effluent Guidelines                 Data  source  status:
Point source:  Timber products                     Not specified         	
Subcategory:  Wood preserving                      Bench  scale           	
Plant:  Unspecified                                Pilot  scale              x
References:  3-65, pp. D-8-9                       Full scale           	
Pretreatment/treatment:  Equal., Coag.  Floe.,  Sed.,
  Dilution, Nutrient Addition/Tr. Filter

DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Process modification.-  Unspecified           Type  of  media:  Plastic
Wastewater flow rate:  0.0029 m3/min/m2      Organic  loading rate:  1,060 kg
Hydraulic? loading rate:  0.044 m3/min/m2       BOD/1,000 m3/day; 1,940  kg COD/
Recirculation ratio:  14.3 (to raw waste-      1,000  m3/day,- 19.4 kg phenol/
  water)                                       1,000  m3/day
Unit configuration:  Unspecified             Bed depth: 6.4 m
Recycle rate:  0.041 m3/min/m2               Operating  temperature:  Unspeci-
                                               fied
                                 REMOVAL DATA

Sampling;  Seven months	Analysis;   Data set 3  (V.7.3.33)

                                  Concentration        _     .    «<.«.•
                               	    Percent    Detection
  Pollutant/parameter	Influent (a) Effluent    removal	limit

Classical pollutants, mg/L:
  BOD5                          2,000         140         93
  COD                           3,100         710         77
  Total phenol                     31        <1.0        >97


Blanks indicate data not available.
(a)Creosote wastewater.
 Date:   9/25/81              III.3.2.5-8
-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY:  Trickling Filter
Data source:  Effluent Guidelines
Point source:  Timber products processing
Subcategory:  Unspecified
Plant:  Unspecified
References:  3-65, Appendix D, pp. 7-8
Pretreatment/treatment:  Unspecified/Tr.  Filter
                                 Data source  status:
                                   Not specified
                                   Bench scale
                                   Pilot scale
                                   Full scale
                                          See  below
DESIGN OR OPERATING PARAMETERS

Process modification:  Unspecified
Wastewater flow rate:  Unspecified
Hydraulic loading rate:  Unspecified
Recirculation ratio:  Unspecified
Unit configuration:  Unspecified
                            Type of media:   Unspecified
                            Organic loading rate:
                              Unspecified
                            Bed depth:   Pilot scale  is  30  cm
                            Operating temperature:
                              Unspecified
Sampling;  Unspecified
                REMOVAL DATA

              Analysis;  Data set 3 (V.7.3.33)
              Total phenol concentration,  mg/L
                                         Percent    Detection
Scale         Influent(a)    Effluent    removal      limit
Pilot
Full
400
 25
290-310
   1
23-28
  96
Blanks indicate data not available.
(a)Synthesized wastewater.
Date:   9/25/81
              III.3.2.5-9
-------
111.3.3  DISPOSAL

III.3.3.1  Deep Well Injection

     Description

Deep well injection is a process used for the ultimate disposal
of wastes as an alternative to surface discharge.   The wastes are
disposed of by injecting them into wells at depths of up to
3,600 m (12,000 ft).  The wastes must be placed in a geological
formation which prevents the migration of the wastes to the
surface or to groundwater supplies.  The most suitable site is a
porous zone of relatively low to moderate pressures sealed above
and below by unbroken impermeable strata.  Limestones, sandstones,
and dolomites are among the rock types most frequently used
because of their relatively high porosity.  The formation chosen
must have sufficient volume to contain the waste without an
increase in the hydraulic pressure that would crack the confining
rock layers.

     Representative Types and Modifications

Injection wells can range from 90 to 3,600 m (300 to 12,000 ft)
in depth and operate at 350 to 3,500 kPa (50 to 500 psi) injec-
tion pressure.  Most of the wells in current use are less than
1,200 m deep, dispose of less than 1,500 Lpm/well (400 gpm/well),
and operate at less than 2,000 kPa (300 psi).  The injection
system includes an equalization basin to level fluctuations in
flow, pretreatment equipment, and high-pressure pumps.  Pretreat-
ment requirements are determined by the characteristics of the
wastewater, compatibility of the wastewater and the formation
water, and the characteristics of the receiving stratum.  The
injection well consists of injection tube and casing tube.  The
annular space between the injection tube and the casing is filled
with oil or fresh water under pressure and is used to detect any
leaks from the injection tube or casing.

     Technology Status

Deep well injection is a well-developed technology.

     Applications

Deep well injection is used in the following industries for the
ultimate disposal of toxic wastes:

     - Inorganic Chemicals Manufacturing,
     - Ore Mining and Dressing,
     - Nonferrous Metals Manufacturing,
     - Organic Chemicals Manufacturing, and
     - Petroleum Refining.
Date:  9/25/81            III.3.3.1-1
-------
The Ore Mining and Dressing industry employs deep well injection
in the uranium subcategory for disposal of radioactive wastes.

     Advantages and Limitations

Advantages of deep well injection include the elimination of the
surface discharge of wastes and the process requires little land.

The most significant hindrance to the application of deep well
injection is the potential for ground and surface water contamina-
tion.  Careful control of the process is necessary to prevent any
contamination and it should only be used in certain geograph-
ically acceptable areas.  The process is also limited to waste
streams with suspended solids of less than 20 mg/L to prevent
plugging of the well screen which can cause unstable operation
[3-37].  Pretreatment such as filtration (Section III.3.1.9) can
prevent clogging of the screen and also the disposal aquifer.
Another practical limitation is that waste streams to be injected
should have a pH value between 6.5 and 8.0 to prevent equipment
corrosion.  In general, all streams subject to deep well injec-
tion are treated through equalization, neutralization, and filtra-
tion before disposal.

     Reliability

The reliability of deep well injection is highly dependent on the
geology of the chosen site and the engineering design employed.
If problems begin, these two factors are essentially impossible
to correct.  Careful study of the area prior to well drilling
coupled with a good design will greatly reduce the possibility of
a well failure.

     Chemicals Required

No chemicals are required for deep well injection.

     Residuals Generated

The process generates no solid waste as it is an ultimate disposal
technique.

     Design Criteria

The following factors need to be considered in subsurface disposal
of industrial wastes by deep well injection [3-37]:

     - State laws and legal aspects
     - Geology  (disposal formation)
          porosity
          permeability
          composition
Date:  9/25/81             III.3.3.1-2
-------
     - Waste characteristics
          volume
          injection flow rate
          injection pressure
          corrosiveness
          biological effects
     - Surface equipment needs
     - Wells
          number
          size
          monitoring
     - Economics

     Performance

Disposal of wastes containing dissolved organic matter by in-
jecting them into deep wells has been successful in areas where
geology permits and the waste contains little or no suspended
matter.  The performance of the operation is generally determined
by injection rate, injection pressure, compatibility of waste-
water with the resevoir formation, and off-site migration.

     References

3-21, 3-25, 3-29, 3-37.
Date:  9/25/81            III.3.3.1-3
-------
III.3.3.2  Incineration (Wastewater Disposal)

     Description

Incineration is a commonly used process in industrial waste
treatment for disposal of combustible wastes.  The process in-
volves the oxidation of solid, liquid, or gaseous combustible
wastes primarily to carbon dioxide, water, and ash.  Any con-
tained sulfur, nitrogen, metals, halogens, and impurities of
other elements are converted to various end products.  Liquid
wastes and treatment plant residues considered for disposal by
this process include [3-63]:

     - Wasted biomass from biological treatment systems,
     - Slurry streams and oils from clarification systems,
     - Wastewater high in organic content (>5 to 10%),
     - Hazardous or toxic materials, and
     - Waste solvents and tars.

This section discusses incineration as a liquid waste disposal
method; Section III.4.4 discusses incineration as a sludge dis-
posal method.

Liquid wastes may be classified into two types from a combustion
standpoint:  (1) combustible liquids, and (2) partially combus-
tible liquids.  Noncombustible liquids cannot be treated or dis-
posed of by incineration.  Combustible liquids would contain all
materials having sufficient calorific value to support combustion
in a conventional combustor or burner.  Partially combustible
liquids would include materials that would not support combustion
without the addition of auxiliary fuel and would have a high
percentage of noncombustible constituents such as water.

     Representative Types and Modifications

Incineration can be accomplished using fluidized bed inciner-
ators, multiple hearth incinerators, liquid waste combustors, and
rotary kiln incinerators.  The first two processes are primarily
used for sludge reduction and are discussed in Section III.4.4.
The latter two are described below:

     (1)  Liquid waste combustors.  Liquid waste combustors are
          versatile units which can be used to dispose of vir-
          tually any combustible liquid waste with a viscosity of
          less than 2,200 centistokes (0.02 fps).  Generally,
          liquid waste combustors are classified as either hori-
          zontal or vertical incineration units.  The units are
          refractory lined cylindrical furnaces with an auxiliary
          fuel burner firing at one end or tangential to the
          cylindrical shell.
Date:  9/25/81            111.3.3.2-1
-------
          Before a liquid waste can be combusted,  it must be
          converted to the gaseous state.   This change from a
          liquid to a gas occurs inside the combustion chamber
          and requires heat transfer from  the hot  combustion
          product gases to the injected liquid.   In order to
          effect a rapid vaporization,  it  is desirable to in-
          crease the exposed liquid surface area.   Most commonly,
          the amount of surface exposed to heat is increased by
          finely atomizing the liquid to small droplets of 40y or
          smaller.  The atomization can be achieved mechanically
          and it is usually achieved in the liquid burner direct-
          ly at the point of fuel and air  mixing.   Complete com-
          bustion of the organics in the waste also requires
          adequate combustion air to supply all the oxygen re-
          quired for oxidation of organics.  Partially combus-
          tible waste will also require auxiliary fuel to raise
          the temperature of the waste and the combustion air to
          a point above the ignition temperature of the organic
          material in the waste.  Auxiliary fuel is also required
          to start the incinerator and bring it up to proper
          decomposition temperature.

          The size of the incinerator depends upon the heat
          release in the system and the amount of air to be used
          in combustion.  The temperature  of the incinerator will
          vary depending on the type and amount of waste, with
          temperatures usually ranging from 650°C (1,200°F) to
          1,650°C (3,000°F) [most units operate around 870°C
          (1,600°F)].  Residence times range from 0.5 to 1.0
          second.

     (2)  Rotary kiln incinerators.  Rotary kiln incinerators are
          versatile units which can be used to dispose of solid,
          liquid, and gaseous combustible  wastes.   The rotary
          kiln is a cylindrical, horizontal, refractory-lined
          shell which is mounted on a base.  The rotation of the
          shell causes a good mixing of the wastes with the
          combustion air.  The combustion temperature normally
          ranges from 820 to 1,650°C (1,500 to 3,000°F), and can
          vary according to the characteristics of the waste.
          Residence times vary from seconds to hours, depending
          on the wastes.

          Rotary kiln incinerators when applied to industrial
          applications are generally designed to accept both
          solid and liquid feed.  Liquid wastes are strained and
          blended for optimum burning characteristics, and burned
          in suspension by atomization with steam or air.
Date:  9/25/81            III.3.3.2-2
-------
     Technology Status

Incineration of some form or kind has been used for years as a
disposal and reduction method.   Many incineration devices have
been developed and tested, and the results have shown that they
are applicable to varying degrees for destroying organic sub-
stances.

     Applications

Incineration may be applied to a wide range of wastes such as
petrochemical, chemical, pharmaceutical, pulp and paper, and
pesticidel waste materials.  It can handle the wastes in solid,
liquid, and gaseous form.  Incineration is not well suited to the
disposal of highly toxic substances that cannot be thermally
destroyed because environmental emission of these substances
could endanger the environment and public health.  Direct incin-
eration is applied on a limited basis as a waste treatment tech-
nology in the following industry:

     - Organic Chemicals Manufacturing.

     Advantages and Limitations

As an advantage, incinerators provide a means of ultimate dis-
posal for various wastes and detoxification of some hazardous
wastes.  Little, if any, residuals are generated.  In some cases,
incineration of combustible liquids can be combined with heat re-
covery devices which can turn the waste heat energy from the
incineration system into profit.  Liquid waste combustors and
rotary kiln incinerators also combust noxious gases.

As a limitation, waste streams may require pretreatment before
incineration (e.g., filtration, neutralization, or equalization).
Also, pumping and piping materials must be suitable for the
liquids encountered.  Refractory linings require periodic re-
placement.  Partially combustible wastes require auxiliary fuel
for incineration and will thus have a high operating cost.

     Reliability

Incineration is a reliable process if properly operated and
maintained.

     Chemicals Required

Chemicals are required for air emission control systems.  Fuel as
a supplemental energy source normally is required.
Date:  9/25/81            III.3.3.2-3
-------
     Residuals Generated

A small quantity of ash may be generated which is suitable for
landfilling.  In some cases the ash may contain hazardous mate-
rial and will require special disposal procedures.

     Design Criteria

To achieve efficient destruction of the waste materials by in-
cineration, accurate and reliable information on the composition
and characteristics of the waste must be acquired.   Once the
physical and chemical characteristics of the wastes are identi-
fied, essential criteria required for the incineration process
such as residence time, temperature, and destruction efficiencies
can then be determined.  These criteria are then used to select
the type of incinerator that is best suited for the wastes in
question.

     Performance

In the incineration process, the organic components of wastes
which may contain nitrogen, chloride, hydrogen, or sulfur groups
are wholly or partially converted to gaseous form leaving only
small quantities of noncombustible inorganic materials.  It can
also detoxify many hazardous materials.  If the toxic properties
of the organic materials are due largely to the molecular struc-
ture of the compounds, detoxification can be achieved by destroy-
ing the structure of the organic substances through oxidation by
the application of sufficient heat.

     References

3-60, 3-63, 3-64.
Date:  9/25/81            III.3.3.2-4
-------
III.3.3.3  Land Application

     Description

Land treatment is the direct application of wastewater onto land
with treatment being provided by natural processes (chemical,
physical, and biological) as the effluent moves through a vegeta-
tive cover or the soil. A portion of the wastewater is lost to
the atmosphere through evapotranspiration, part to surface water
by overland flow, and the remainder percolates to the groundwater
system.

Land disposal of industrial wastewaters must be compatible with
land use and take into consideration the potential of environ-
mental pollution, damage to crops, and the human food chain.  To
protect soil fertility and the food chain during land disposal,
it is necessary to determine the capacity of soils to remove
nitrogen, potential toxicity of organic and inorganic contam-
inants to plant life and soil, and the deleterious effects of
dissolved salt and sodium on plants and soil.

     Representative Types and Modifications

The common modifications of this wastewater treatment include
overland flow, slow-rate land treatment (irrigation), high-rate
irrigation, and rapid infiltration (infiltration-percolation).

     (1)  Overland flow.  In overland flow land treatment, waste-
          water is applied over the upper reaches of sloped
          terraces and allowed to flow across the vegetated
          surface to runoff collection ditches.  The wastewater
          is filtered and oxidized by physical, chemical, and
          biological means as it flows in a thin film down the
          relatively impermeable slope.  Plants typically grown
          in overland runoff installations consist of grasses
          grown for hay cropping, such as Kentucky Blue, Bermuda,
          Red Top, and Fescue.

     (2)  Slow rate land treatment.  Slow-rate land treatment
          (irrigation) is the application of wastewater to crops.
          The applied wastewater is treated as it flows through
          the soil matrix, and a portion of the flow percolates
          to the groundwater.  In slow rate systems,  vegetation
          is a critical component for managing water and nutri-
          ents.

     (3)  High-rate irrigation.  High-rate irrigation is primari-
          ly a method of wastewater treatment that has the agri-
          cultural benefit of producing high-yield crops.  Higher
          loading rates are used than with the slow rate treat-
          ment process, and much of the water percolates below
          the root zone.
Date:  9/25/81            111.3. 3.3-1
-------
     (4)   Rapid infiltration.   In rapid infiltration land treat-
          ment, most of the applied wastewater percolates through
          the soil and the treated effluent eventually reaches
          the groundwater.  The wastewater is applied to rapidly
          permeable soils, such as sands and loamy sands,  by
          spreading in basins  or by sprinkling,  and is treated as
          it travels through the soil matrix.  In this treatment
          process, wastewater  is applied at high rates for several
          days to weeks and then is removed during a rest period
          so that the soil can dry and its infiltration and
          treatment capacity is restored.   Vegetation is generally
          not used in this treatment process.

     Technology Status

Land application is a proven method for BOD, suspended solids,
and nutrient removal.

     Applications

Land application is used on a  limited basis for BOD and suspended
solids removal in the following industries:

     - Pulp and Paper Mills,
     - Paint and Ink Formulation,
     - Rubber Processing,
     - Explosives Manufacturing, and
     - Timber Products Processing.

     Advantages and Limitations

This treatment process is advantageous for those industries
producing waste streams having biodegradable, and suspended
solids-laden effluents.  Land  application greatly reduces or
eliminates BOD and suspended solids, results in some nutrient
(nitrogen and phosphorus) removal, may result in some heavy metal
removal,  and can recharge groundwater.  Additionally, industries
producing large quantities of  dilute wastewater could use this
treatment process.  Also, crops harvested from treated lands
generate revenue that can be used to offset operating costs.

A critical limitation against  using land application is that it
requires relatively large land areas and usually requires area
for storage during periods of adverse weather conditions (e.g.,
prolonged cold and excessive rain). Siting may be a problem
because of local topographical, hydrological, and soil character-
istics and because of existing or projected conflicts with area
land use.

Preapplication treatment of wastewater may be necessary for a
variety of reasons, including (1) allowing storage of wastewater
without creating nuisance conditions, (2) obtaining a higher


Date:  9/25/81            III.3.3.3-2
-------
level of wastewater constituent removal,  (3) reducing soil clogg-
ing, (4) reducing possible health risks,  and (5) state require-
ments.  Design modifications may be required to remove oil and
grease to avoid soil sealing, and to remove specific ions to
avoid loss of infiltration capacity or poisoning of plants.  The
pH of the wastewater must be controlled for application on land
because pH outside the range of 6.4 to 8.4 (neutral range) may
render some nutrients unavailable to plants.

     Reliability

Land treatment is reliable provided the application equip-
ment is properly maintained, wastewater application rates do not
exceed the hydraulic capacity of the soil, adequate wastewater
storage is available during periods when land application cannot
be made, and crop cover is properly managed.

     Chemicals Required

Chemicals may be necessary to enhance crop growth (e.g., fertili-
zation) .

     Residuals Generated

No residuals are generated as this technology is an ultimate dis-
posal method, except for the overland flow treatment method which
has a liquid discharge requiring final disposal.

     Design Criteria

Design criteria are presented in Table 3.3.3-1.

     Performance

No performance data are presently available for land application.

     References

3-56, 3-57, 3-58, 3-59.
Date:  9/25/81            III.3.3.3-3
-------
              TABLE  3.3.3-1
   COMPARISON OF  SITE CHARACTERISTICS  FOR  LAND
   TREATMENT  PROCESSES
Characteristics
Application techniques
Annua 1 appl icat ion
rate, m (ft)
Field area required,
hectares (acres) (b)
Typical weekly appli-
cation rate, cm (in)
Minimum preappl icat ion
treatment provided
in United States
Disposi t ion of
applied wastewater
Slow rate
Sprinkler or
surfacefa )
0.6 to 6
(2 to 20)
23 to 230
(56 to 560)
1.3 to 10
(0.5 to It)
Prima ry
sedimentation (e)
Evapotranspi ration
and percolation
Rao id infiltration
Usua I ly surface
6 to 170
(20 to 560)
1 to 23
(2 to 56)
10 to 300
(
-------
III.3.3.4  Recycling

     Description

Recycle involves the reuse of a wastewater in the process to
reduce the volume of wastewater discharged or to obtain zero
discharge.  Treatment of the wastewater prior to reuse is usually
necessary to insure a return stream of sufficient quality for use
in the process.   In some cases, the treatment required is simple
and facilities may already exist on-site (e.g.,  Sedimentation -
Section III.3.1.18).

Recycle is becoming,  and will continue to become, a more frequent
practice in industrial wastewater treatment.  The benefits of
recycle in pollution abatement are manifold and frequently eco-
nomic as well.  By reducing the volume of discharge, recycle not
only reduces the gross pollutant load, but also allows the use of
abatement practices which are uneconomic on the full waste stream.
Further,  by allowing concentrations to increase, the chances for
recovery of waste components to offset treatment cost (or even
achieve profitability) are substantially improved.  In addition,
costs of pretreatment of process water (and in some cases,
reagent use) may be reduced.  Recycle also enables many plants to
achieve zero discharge eliminating the need for ultimate disposal
or surface discharge.

     Representative Types and Modifications

Methods for recycle are highly dependent upon the particular
waste stream intended for reuse.  The variations between tech-
niques depend on the treatment(s) required before recycle can be
employed.

     Technology Status

Recycle systems are well demonstrated in industrial applications.
Full scale recycle systems have been in existence for years.

     Applications

Recycle is currently used in the following industries on a wide-
spread basis:

     - Iron and Steel Manufacturing,
     - Electrical and Electronic Components,
     - Explosives Manufacturing,
     - Nonferrous Metals Manufacturing,
     - Steam Electric Power Plants,
     - Coal Mining,
     - Inorganic Chemicals Manufacturing,
     - Aluminum Forming,
     - Battery Manufacturing,


Date:  9/25/81            III.3.3.4-1
-------
     - Pharmaceutical Manufacturing,
     - Ore Mining and Dressing,
     - Paint and Ink Formulation,
     - Textile Mills, and
     - Timber Products Processing.

As an example of the benefits of recycle,  the coal preparation
subcategory of the Coal Mining industry achieves zero discharge
in numerous plants by recycling.  A survey conducted in coopera-
tion with the National Coal Association in 1980 of its member
companies indicated that approximately 34% of responding facil-
ities currently achieve zero discharge through total recycle
systems [3-34].

     Advantages and Limitations

Recycle systems can achieve significant pollutant load reductions
or zero discharge at relatively low cost.   The systems are easily
controlled by simple instrumentation and relatively little oper-
ator attention is required.

Limitations of recycle include the potential for plugging and
scaling of the process lines and excessive heat build-up in the
recycled water which may require cooling prior to reuse.

     Reliability

The reliability of recycle systems is high, although proper
monitoring and control are required for high return rate systems.

     Chemicals Required

Chemical aids are often used in the recycle loops to inhibit
scaling or corrosion.

     Residuals Generated

Recycling generates no residuals.

     Design Criteria

The most important design parameter is the recycle rate (rate of
return) to the process stream or blowdown rate from closed loop
recycle systems to avoid build up of dissolved solids.

     Performance

No performance data are available for recycling.

     References

3-1, 3-5, 3-25, 3-34.


Date:  9/25/81             III.3.3.4-2
-------
                    III.4  SLUDGE TREATMENT

III.4.1  CONDITIONING

     Description

Conditioning involves the biological, chemical, and/or physical
treatment of a sludge stream to enhance subsequent dewatering
techniques.  In addition, some conditioning processes also disin-
fect sludges, affect odors, alter the sludge physically, provide
limited solids destruction, and improve solids recovery.  Sludge
characteristics that affect thickening or dewatering and which
can be modified by conditioning include particle size and distri-
bution, surface charge,  degree of hydration, and particle inter-
action.

     Representative Types and Modifications

The two most common methods used to condition sludge are thermal
(heat) and chemical conditioning.  Other methods include freezing,
inorganic filtration aids, and elutriation.  Only thermal and
chemical conditioning (which are commonly used) are described
below since the others are not significantly applicable to indus-
trial sludges.

     (1)  Thermal Conditioning (heat treatment).  Thermal con-
          ditioning involves heating sludge to 140 to 210°C (290
          to 410°F) for short periods of time under pressures of
          1 to 3 MPa (150 to 400 psi).  This results in coagula-
          tion of solids, a breakdown in the cell structure of
          biological sludge, and a reduction of the water affin-
          ity of sludge solids.  In addition, the sludge is
          sterilized, generally stabilized, and rendered inoffen-
          sive.

          Several proprietary variations exist for heat treat-
          ment.  In general, sludge is passed through a heat
          exchanger into a reactor vessel, where steam is inject-
          ed directly into the sludge to bring the temperature
          and pressure into the necessary ranges. After approxi-
          mately 30 minutes, the sludge is discharged through a
          heat recovery unit to a thickener-decant tank.  A
          dewatering step such as vacuum filtration or centrifu-
          gation (Section III.4.3) follows.

     (2)  Chemical Conditioning.  The most common sludge condi-
          tioning practice today is the use of ferric chloride
          either alone or in combination with alum.  Other chemi-
          cals used include ferrous sulfate, aluminum chlorohy-
          drate, and organic polymers.  The process is actually a
Date:  9/25/81             III.4.1-1
-------
          coagulation/flocculation process.   In an aqueous solu-
          tion,  metal salts hydrate forming free water-metal ion
          complexes and metal hydroxide precipitates.

     The following mechanisms act to condition the sludge:

             Neutralization of charged particles by the water-
             metal ion complexes,

             Adsorption of the hydroxide on the particles and
             subsequent bridging between particles,  and

             Enmeshment of the particle in the precipitating
             metal hydroxide (the particle may act as a nucleus
             for this precipitation).

     The above mechanisms are pH dependent.   Many sludges have a
     high alkalinity which is undesirable because the required
     dose of metal salt will be very high.  A common method of
     reducing sludge buffering capacity (alkalinity) is to add
     lime, causing the precipitation of calcium carbonate.  This
     results in the proper pH range for optimum performance.

     Technology Status

The technology for sludge conditioning is well developed.  Both
chemical and thermal conditioning units have been in full-scale
operation for years.

     Applications

Sludge conditioning reduces the costs of sludge dewatering and
ultimate disposal, and is used in several industries.

     Advantages and Limitations

Sludge conditioning reduces the costs of sludge dewatering and
ultimate disposal.  Conditioning enhances subsequent dewatering
and allows for a reduction in size of dewatering facilities.
Heat treatment of sludge has the added advantage of producing a
generally innocuous and sterilized sludge suitable for ultimate
disposal by a variety of methods.

The thermal conditioning process has many limitations including
very high capital and operating costs, expensive material costs
(to prevent corrosion and withstand the operating conditions),
and the need for specialized supervision and maintenance because
of the high temperatures and pressures involved.  Heavy metal
concentrations in sludges are not reduced by heat treatment
whereas chemical conditioning may remove some dissolved metals.
Date:  9/25/81             111.4.1-2
-------
Thermal conditioning also produces a supernatant with a very high
BOD content.

     Reliability

Limited operating data on conditioning are available but mechan-
ical and process reliability appear adequate.  Careful operator
attention is required.

     Chemicals Required

Chemicals used in chemical conditioning include ferric chloride
(FeCl3), ferrous sulfate (FeS04),  lime (CaO), alum (A12(S04)3) •
18 H20), and organic polymers.  Corrosion and other chemical aids
may be necessary in heat treatment of sludges.

     Residuals Generated

Thermal conditioning reduces the total sludge volume because some
organics are oxidized.  Chemical conditioning generates additional
sludge because of the addition of chemicals.

     Design Criteria

The choice of what type of conditioning to use for a sludge
should be based on a pilot study because performance is highly
sludge dependent.  In heat treatment, temperatures range from 140
to 210°C (290 to 410°F); pressures from 1 to 3 MPa (150 to 400
psi); detention times from 30 to 90 minutes; and steam consump-
tion is around 70 kg/1,000 liter of sludge  (600 lb/1,000 gal of
sludge).

The dosage and type of chemical conditioning for various types of
sludges should be determined by pilot testing as these vary with
the characteristics of the sludges.

     Performance

Dewatering efficiency can be increased to a solids capture of up
to 95% and a solids content of up to 50% by conditioning.  No
performance data are available on conditioning.

     References

3-51, 3-52, 3-60, 3-61.
Date:  9/25/81             III.4.1-3
-------
III.4.2  DIGESTION, AEROBIC AND ANAEROBIC

     Description

Digestion is a method of sludge stabilization that uses bacteria
to degrade organic matter.  The principal purposes of stabiliza-
tion are to make the treated sludge less odorous and putrescible,
and to reduce the pathogenic organism content.  Digestion also
results in a substantial decrease in the mass of suspended sludge
solids.

Digestion can be performed either aerobically or anaerobically
(with oxygen present or without).  Aerobic digestion is performed
in an open tank. The process involves the direct oxidation of any
biodegradable matter by a biologically active mass of organisms
and by oxidation of microbia.l cellular material.  These two steps
are illustrated by the following reactions:

    organic matter + 02 —bacteria^  cellular matter + CO2 + H2O



    cellular matter + 02	bacteriV  digested sludge + C02 + H20

The second reaction (called endogenous respiration) is normally
the predominant reaction in aerobic digestion.  Endogenous res-
piration is the process whereby microorganisms metabolize their
own protoplasm without replacement.  Stabilization is not com-
plete until there has been an extended period of primarily en-
dogenous respiration (15 to 20 days).

Anaerobic digestion is performed by several groups of anaerobic
and facultative organisms that simultaneously assimilate and
break down organic matter.   It is a two-phase process.  First,
acid-forming organisms convert the organic substrate to volatile
organic acids.  Little change occurs in the total amount of
organic material in the system, although some lowering of pH
results.  Alkaline buffering materials are also produced.  Next,
the volatile organic acids are converted primarily to methane and
carbon dioxide.

This anaerobic process is essentially controlled by the methane-
producing bacteria.  These bacteria grow at a relatively slow rate
and have generation times which range from slightly less than 2
days to about 22 days.  Methane formers are very sensitive to pHy
substrate composition, and temperature.  If the pH drops below
6.0, methane formation ceases, and there is no decrease in organic
content of the sludge.  The methane bacteria are highly active in
the mesophilic and thermophilic ranges.  The mesophilic range is
between 27 and 47°C (80 and 110°F) while the thermophilic range
is between 45 and 65°C (113 and 149°F).  Essentially all di-
gesters in the United States operate within the mesophilic tem-
perature range.


Date:  9/25/81              III.4.2-1
-------
     Representative Types and Modifications

Small-scale aerobic digestion systems often use a one-tank batch
system with a complete mix cycle followed by settling and decant-
ing (to help thicken the sludge).   Larger operations may employ a
separate sedimentation tank to allow continuous flow and facili-
tate decanting and thickening.  Either air or pure oxygen can be
used in these systems.

Anaerobic digestion can be performed in one or two stages.  In
anaerobic digestion, single stage systems provide a single tank
used for digestion and thickening. As decomposition proceeds,
three distinct zones develop: the scum layer at the top of the
digester, the supernatant zone,  and the sludge zones.  The sludge
zones include an actively decomposing upper layer and a relative-
ly stabilized bottom layer where the stabilized sludge accumu-
lates.  Two-stage anaerobic digestion evolved as an attempt to
provide additional gas production as well as a separate settling
and thickening process in the secondary digester.

     Technology Status

Both anaerobic and aerobic digestion are proven methods for the
reduction of organic sludges.

     Applications

Sludge digestion is suitable for stabilization of organic sludges.
It can be used to reduce the volume of sludge, make it less
odorous, and improve its handling characteristics.  Anaerobic
digestion is receiving renewed attention because of the potential
benefits of methane production for use as an energy source.
Digestion is currently used in the following industries:

     - Pharmaceutical Manufacturing,
     - Rubber Processing, and
     - Pulp and Paper Mills.

     Advantages and Limitations

Digestion reduces sludge volumes and produces a less odorous
sludge often easier to dewater.   Aerobic digestion has some
advantages over anaerobic digestion including simplicity of
operation, lower capital cost, fewer effects from interfering
substances (such as heavy metals), and no danger of methane
explosions.  However, anaerobic digestion generally reduces
volatile solids content more than aerobic processes and has the
advantage of producing methane as an energy source. Limitations
of aerobic digestion include less well established design param-
eters and production of a sludge generally unsuitable for de-
watering by vacuum filters.  Frequently, no improvement in de-
waterability occurs.  Although more widely used, anaerobic di-


Date:  9/25/81              III.4.2-2
-------
gesters are sensitive to a variety of physical, chemical, and
biological phenomena (e.g., pH, alkalinity, temperature and
concentrations of toxic substances).  Sludge digester biomass is
relatively intolerant to changing environmental conditions.  The
process requires careful monitoring of pH, gas production, and
volatile acids.

     Reliability

The aerobic process is less sensitive to environmental factors
than anaerobic digestion.  Successful digestion operation depends
on a variety of physical, chemical, and biological phenomena as
mentioned above.

     Chemicals Required

Anaerobic digestion may require the addition of alkalinity to
maintain pH (e.g., lime, ammonia, soda ash, bicarbonate soda, or
lye).

     Residuals Generated

Digestion results in a sludge requiring disposal.

     Design Criteria

Pilot testing is recommended before employing a digestion system
to confirm and/or select the design and operating parameters.
Generally, the design parameters are solids retention time,
loading rate,  oxygen requirements (aerobic only), and temperature
requirements.

     Performance

The primary result of aerobic and anaerobic digestion is the re-
duction of volatile solids.  The performance of anaerobic diges-
tion depends on proper seeding, pH, character of solids, tempera-
ture, and degree of mixing of raw solids with actively digesting
seed material.  The performance of aerobic digestion depends on
detention time, temperature, and character of solids.

     References

3-36, 3-37, 3-60.
Date:  9/25/81              III.4.2-3
-------
III.4.3   DEWATERING

     Description

Dewatering is the removal of water from solids to achieve a
volume reduction greater than that achieved by thickening.
Dewatering of sludge is desirable for one or more of the follow-
ing reasons:

        To prepare sludge for landfilling,

        To reduce sludge volume and mass for lower transportation
        costs, and

        To reduce the moisture content and thereby increase the
        net heating value to make incineration more economical.

Some dewatering processes use natural means (e.g., evaporation,
percolation) for moisture removal, others use mechanical devices
to speed the process.  The method chosen for dewatering is deter-
mined mainly by the type of sludge, space available, subsequent
processes, and economics.

     Representative Types and Modifications

There are many methods for dewatering sludge.   Seven which are
most commonly used are described in this section:  vacuum filtra-
tion, filter press, belt filter, centrifuge, thermal, drying
beds, and lagoons.

(1)  Vacuum Filtration.  A rotary vacuum filter consists of a
cylindrical drum rotating partially submerged in a vat or pan of
conditioned sludge.  During a complete revolution of the drum,
various operating zones (pickup, cake drying,  and cake discharge)
are encountered.  In the pickup zone, vacuum is applied to draw
liquid through the filter covering (media) and to form a cake of
partially dewatered sludge.  As the drum rotates, the cake emer-
ges from the liquid sludge pool, while suction is maintained to
promote further dewatering. A lower level of vacuum is applied in
the cake drying zone.  If the cake tends to adhere to the media,
a scraper blade may be provided to assist in removal in the cake
discharge zone.

The principal types of rotary vacuum filters are the drum type,
coil type, and belt type.  The filters differ primarily in the
type of covering used and the cake discharge mechanism employed.
In the drum type, cloth media are used whereas in the belt type
cloth or stainless steel media are used.  The coil type vacuum
filter uses two layers of stainless steel coils arranged in
corduroy fashion around the drum.  The drum filter also differs
from the belt and coil filters in that the cloth covering does
not leave the drum to be washed.
Date:  9/25/81              III.4.3-1
-------
(2)  Filter Press.   A filter press consists of a series of plates
and frames in which dewatering is achieved by forcing water from
the sludge under high pressure.   The recessed plate press is the
conventional filter press used for dewatering sludge.  This press
consists of a series of vertical recessed plates that are held
rigidly in a frame and pressed together between a fixed and
movable end.  A filter cloth is mounted on either side of each
recessed plate forming a filtration chamber when closed.

The sludge is fed into the press and subjected to about 1.6 MPa
(225 psi) pressure.  Water passes through the filter cloth and
the filtrate drains through ports at the bottom of each chamber.
Solids are retained and form a cake on the surface of the cloth.
Sludge feeding is stopped when the chambers are filled, as indi-
cated when filtrate drainage approaches zero.  At this point, the
plates are separated and the filter cake is removed.  The media
may be washed prior to initiating another cycle.

Common modifications to filter press dewatering include various
weaves and materials for the filter medium, precoating materials
and methods, mechanical plate shifting, washing devices, and
varying pressures.

(3)  Belt Filter Dewatering.  Dewatering by this process is
achieved by compression of the sludge between two belts.  Sludge
is fed onto an endless filter (carrying) belt that is opposed
from above by a press belt.  The upper belt is pressed against
the filter belt by a series of pressure rollers that can be
adjusted horizontally or vertically.  Sludge fed onto the upper
surface of the filter belt is dewatered when pressed between the
belts.  The belt filter press has three processing zones along
the length of the unit: the initial draining zone, which is
analogous to the action of a drying bed; the pressure zone, which
involves application of pressure; and a shear zone in which the
partially dewatered cake is separated from the belt.  Common
modifications to belt filter dewatering include adding a vacuum
box to the free drainage zone and having an extended shearing or
pressure stage.

(4)  Centrifugal Dewatering.  Centrifuges are used to dewater
sludges using centrifugal force to increase the sedimentation
rate of sludge solids.  The solid bowl, the disk, and the basket
are the three most common types of units.

The solid-bowl continuous centrifuge assembly consists of a bowl
and conveyor joined through a planetary gear system, designed to
rotate the bowl and the conveyor at slightly different speeds.
The solid cylindrical bowl forms the dewatering beach over which
the helical conveyor screw pushes the sludge solids to outlet
ports and then to a sludge cake discharge hopper.  The opposite
end of the bowl is fatted with an adjustable outlet weir plate to
regulate the level of the sludge pool in the bowl.  The centrate


Date:  9/25/81              III.4.3-2
-------
flows through outlet ports either by gravity or by a centrate
pump attached to the shaft at the one end of the bowl.   Sludge
slurry enters the unit through a stationary feed pipe extending
into the hollow shaft of the rotating bowl.

In the disk-type centrifuge, the incoming stream is distributed
between a multitude of narrow channels formed by stacked conical
disks.  The centrifugal action causes the solids to concentrate
as they settle outward.  The concentrated material is then dis-
charged continuously through fairly small orifices in the bowl
wall.  The clarification capability and throughput range are
high, but sludge concentration is limited by the necessity of
discharging through orifices 1.2 to 2.5 mm (0.050 to 0.100 in)
diameter.  Therefore, it is generally considered a thickener
rather than a dewatering device.

In the basket-type centrifuge, flow enters the machine at the
bottom and is directed towards the outer wall of the basket.
Cake continually builds up within the basket until the centrate,
which overflows a weir at the top of the unit, begins to increase
in solids.  At that point, feed to the unit is shut off, the
machine decelerates, and a skimmer enters the bowl to remove the
liquid layer remaining in the unit. A knife is then moved into
the bowl to cut out the cake, which falls out of the open bottom
of the machine.  The unit is a batch device with alternate charg-
ing of feed sludge and discharging of dewatered cake.

(5)  Thermal Drying.  Thermal drying is the process of reducing
the moisture in sludge by evaporation to 8 to 10% using hot air,
without combusting the solid materials.  For economic reasons,
the moisture content of the sludge must be reduced as much as
possible through mechanical means prior to heat drying.  The five
available heat treating techniques are flash, rotary, toroidal,
multiple hearth, and atomizing spray.

Flash drying is the instantaneous vaporization of moisuture from
solids by introducing the sludge into a hot gas stream.  The wet
sludge cake is first blended with some previously dried sludge in
a mixer to improve pneumatic conveyance.  Blended sludge and hot
gases from the furnace at about 650 to 760°C (1,200 to 1,400 °F)
are mixed and fed into a cage mill in which the mixture is agita-
ted and the water vapor flashed.  Residence time in the cage mill
is only a matter of seconds.  Dry sludge with 8 to 10% moisture
is separated from the spent drying gases in a cyclone,  with part
of it recycled with incoming wet sludge cake and another part
screened and sent to storage.

A rotary dryer consists of a cylinder that is slightly inclined
from the horizontal and revolves at about five to eight rpm.  The
inside of the dryer is equipped usually with flights or baffles
throughout its length to break up the sludge.  Wet cake is mixed
with previously heat dried sludge in a pug mill.  The system may


Date:  9/25/81              III.4.3-3
-------
include cyclones for sludge and gas separation,  dust collection
scrubbers,  and a gas incineration step.

The toroidal dryer uses the jet mill principle,  which has no
moving parts, and dries and classifies sludge solids simultane-
ously. Dewatered sludge is pumped into a mixer where it is blen-
ded with previously dried sludge.  Blended material is fed into a
doughnut-shaped dryer,  where it comes into contact with heated
air at a temperature of 425°C (800°F).  Particles are dried,
broken up into fine pieces, and carried out of the dryer by the
air stream.

The multiple hearth furnace is adapted for heat drying of sludge
by incorporating fuel burners at the top and bottom hearths, plus
down draft of the gases.  The dewatered sludge cake is mixed in a
pug mill with previously dried sludges before entering the fur-
nace.  At the point of exit from the furnace, the solids tempera-
ture is about 38°C (100°F), and the gas temperature is about
160°C (325°F).

Atomizing drying involves spraying liquid sludge in a vertical
tower through which hot gases pass downward.  Dust carried with
hot gases is removed by a wet scrubber or dry dust collector. A
high-speed centrifugal bowl can also be used to atomize the
liquid sludge into fine particles and to spray them into the top
of the drying chamber where moisture is transferred to the hot
gases.

(6)  Drying Beds.  Drying beds are used to dewater sludge both by
drainage through the sludge mass and by evaporation.  Typically,
a 200 to 300 mm (8 to 12 inch) layer of sludge to be dewatered is
placed on drying beds.   Drying beds consist of a 100 to 230 mm (4
to 9 inch) layer of sand placed over 200 to 450 mm (8 to 18
inches) of graded gravel or stone.  Underdrains collect the
filtrate for return to the treatment facility.

Dewatered sludge is removed from drying beds manually or mechani-
cally after it has drained and dried sufficiently to be spadable.
Mechanical devices can remove sludges of 20 to 30% solids while
cakes of 30 to 40% are usually required for hand removal.  Paved
drying beds with limited drainage systems permit the use of
mechanical equipment for cleaning, thereby reducing operating
costs.

(7)  Lagoons.  Sludge from treatment facilities is often stored
in sludge lagoons where long-term drying occurs through percola-
tion and evaporation, primarily the latter.  The process is
relatively simple, requiring only periodic decanting of superna-
tant back to the head of the treatment facility and occasional
mechanical excavation of dewatered or dried  sludge for transport
Date:  9/25/81              III.4.3-4
-------
to its ultimate disposal site.  The drying time to achieve 30%
solids is generally quite lengthy and may require years.  The
time required is affected by climatic conditions and pre-lagoon
sludge processing.  Multiple cells are required for efficient
operation.

     Technology Status

All of these technologies are well established.  The most
commonly used methods for dewatering industrial sludge are la-
goons and drying beds.  The mechanical methods for dewatering
sludge using vacuum filtration, solid-bowl or disk-type cen-
trifuges, and filter press also are in widespread use.  Ex-
perience with belt filter dewatering, basket-type centrifuges,
and thermal drying is limited in the United States.

     Applications

Vacuum filtration, drying beds, lagoons, centrifugation, and
filter presses are commonly used in industrial operations to
dewater sludge.  These processes are widely applied in the
following industries:

     - Inorganic Chemicals Manufacturing,
     - Battery Manufacturing,
     - Metal Finishing,
     - Coil Coating,
     - Nonferrous Metal Manufacturing, and
     - Pharmaceutical Manufacturing.

Filter press, belt filter, centrifugation, drying beds, vacuum
filtration, and lagoons are used on a limited basis in the
following industries:

     - Electrical and Electronic Components,
     - Porcelain Enameling,
     - Aluminum Forming,
     - Pulp and Paper Mills,
     - Rubber Processing, and
     - Iron and Steel Manufacturing.

     Advantages and Limitations

The advantages and limitations are outlined by type of dewater-
ing.

The advantages of vacuum filters are low maintenance requirements
for continuously operating equipment and the generation of a
filtrate with a low suspended solids concentration.  As a limita-
tion, vacuum filters require relatively high operating skill and
continuous operator attention.  The operation is sensitive to the
type of sludge and conditioning procedures.


Date:  9/25/81              III.4.3-5
-------
Filter press operations have the advantage of high cake solids
concentrations.  However,  the life of the filter cloth is limit-
ed, the process is a batch operation, and it has high capital and
labor costs.

Belt filter dewatering can operate continuously to produce a very
dry cake with low power requirements.  However, the sludge must
be coagulated to avoid penetration of the filter belt, media life
is short, and the process is sensitive to incoming feed charac-
teristics.

Centrifugal dewatering has the advantage that the same machine
can be used for dewatering and thickening.  The process does not
require continuous attention.  Limitations include vibration and
noise problems, high energy requirements, and for most sludges,
this process gives the lowest cake solids concentration (wettest
sludge).

Thermal drying requires a highly skilled operator and the process
is expensive.

Drying beds normally have the lowest capital costs depending on
land availability, a small requirement for operator skill and
attention, and low energy consumption.  However, there may be
odor and insect problems,  oil and grease can clog beds and retard
drainage, and the process is dependent on environmental condi-
tions.

Lagoons are not sensitive to sludge variability, require little
operator skill and attention, are low in energy costs, and,
depending on land availability, have low capital costs.  However,
they have a high potential for odor and insect problems, defini-
tive data on performance and design parameters are lacking, and
the process is relatively land intensive.

     Reliability

All sludge dewatering processes except drying beds and lagoons
are complex mechanical systems.  Their reliability is thus depen-
dent on operator skill and proper maintenance.  Vacuum filtration
requires considerable operating attention and proper chemical
conditioning to prevent filter blinding.  Filter and belt filter
presses have several moving parts and require maintenance to
obtain a high  level of reliability.  Centrifuges are high speed
mechanical devices subject to maintenance problems.

     Chemicals Required

Chemicals may be required for filter press, belt filter, cen-
trifuge, or vacuum filter dewatering as a filter aid.  Ferric
chloride, lime, or polymer are often employed to agglomerate
small particles prior to dewatering.  Thermal drying, drying


Date:  9/25/81               III.4.3-6
-------
beds, or lagoon sludge dewatering processes do not require such
filter aids.  Occasionally lime or other odor control chemicals
may be required in lagoons.

     Residuals Generated

Each of the treatment processes yields thickened or dewatered
sludge suitable for further processing, incineration, soil appli-
cation, landfilling, or for other means of ultimate disposal.
Residue quantity may be increased by the use of filter aid chem-
icals.

     Design Criteria

The applicability of a given method of dewatering to industrial
sludge should be determined on a case-by-case basis, preferably
in pilot tests.  Laboratory and pilot tests can indicate the
amenability of the sludge to a specific dewatering process,
provide appropriate design values for a full-scale system, and
provide expected performance of the process.  Filter press, belt
filter press, and centrifugal dewatering processes are usually
tested by scaled-down laboratory equipment.  The design parame-
ters determined from pilot testing include precoat needs, cycle
time, and sludge conditioning needs for filter press; hydraulic
feed rate and optimum coagulant dosages for belt filter press;
and retention time and acceleration rate for centrifugal dewa-
tering.  The vacuum filtration process design should include both
the Buchner funnel test and filter leaf test.  The Buchner funnel
test can be used to determine optimum coagulant dosages to in-
crease the filtration rate.  The leaf test can be used to deter-
mine the filter loading rate.  Sludge drying in beds or lagoons
is generally based on solids loading and consideration of cli-
matic conditions such as temperature, precipitation, evapotrans-
piration, and wind velocity.

     Performance

The performance of sludge dewatering devices is measured by
sludge solids concentration or cake moisture, and solids re-
covery.  Dewatered sludge solids concentrations of 10 to 30% are
common with organic sludges and values of 60% solids or more may
be attained with some inorganic sludges.  The performance of any
one specific dewatering method depends on sludge type, sludge
characteristics, sludge conditioning, and operating conditions.

     References

3-3, 3-12, 3-16, 3-27, 3-31, 3-37.
Date:  9/25/81              III.4.3-7
-------
III.4.4  INCINERATION

This section is being modified and will be included in subsequent
revisions.
Date:  9/25/81             III.4.4-1
-------
III.4.5  LAND APPLICATION (SLUDGE DISPOSAL)

This section is being modified and will be included in subsequent
revisions.
Date:  9/25/81            III.4.5-1
-------
                           III.5  REFERENCES

3-1.    U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.   Development docu-
        ment for effluent limitations guidelines and standards
        for the auto and other laundries point source category.
        Prepared for Effluent Guidelines Division,  Office of
        Water and Waste Management,  Washington, D.C.; 1980.   157
        pp.

3-2.    U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.   Contractor en-
        gineering report for the development of effluent limita-
        tions guidelines and standards for the pharmaceutical
        manufacturing point source category.  EPA-440/l-80/084-a.
        Prepared for Effluent Guidelines Division,  Office of
        Water and Waste Management,  Washington, D.C.; 1980.
        Variously paginated.

3-3.    U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.   Final development
        document for existing source pretreatment standards for
        the electroplating point source category.  EPA-440/1-
        79/003.  Prepared for Effluent Guidelines Division,
        Office of Water and Hazardous Materials, Washington,
        D.C.; 1979.  526 pp.

3-4.    U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.   Proposed develop-
        ment document for effluent limitations guidelines and
        standards for the inorganic chemicals manufacturing point
        source category.  EPA-440/1-79/007.   Prepared for Effluent
        Guidelines Division, Office of Water and Waste Management,
        Washington, D.C.; 1980.   934 pp.

3-5.    U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.   Proposed develop-
        ment document for effluent limitations guidelines and
        standards for the iron and steel manufacturing point
        source category; general.  EPA-440/l-80/024-b.  Prepared
        for Effluent Guidelines Division, Office of Water and
        Waste Management, Washington, D.C.;  1980.  456 pp.
        Volume I.

3-6.    U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.   Proposed develop-
        ment document for effluent limitations guidelines and
        standards for the iron and steel manufacturing point
        source category; coke making subcategory, sintering
        subcategory, iron making subcategory.   EPA-440/l-80/024-b.
        Prepared for Effluent Guidelines Division,  Office of
        Water and Waste Management,  Washington, D.C.; 1980.
        434 pp.  Volume II.

3-7.    U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.   Proposed develop-
        ment document for effluent limitations guidelines and
        standards for the iron and steel manufacturing point


Date:  9/25/81                III.5-1
-------
        source category;  steel making subcategory,  vacuum degas-
        sing subcategory,  continuous casting subcategory.
        EPA-440/l-80/024-b.   Prepared for Effluent  Guidelines
        Division,  Office of Water and Waste Management,  Washing-
        ton, D.C.; 1980.   488 pp.  Volume III.

3-8.    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.   Proposed develop-
        ment document for effluent limitations  guidelines and
        standards for the iron and steel manufacturing point
        source category;  hot forming subcategory.   EPA-440/1-
        80/024-b.   Prepared for Effluent Guidelines Division,
        Office of Water and Waste Management, Washington,  D.C.;
        1980.  374 pp.   Volume IV.

3-9.    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.   Proposed develop-
        ment document for effluent limitations  guidelines and stan-
        dards for the iron and steel manufacturing  point source
        category;  scale removal subcategory,  acid pickling subcate-
        gory.  EPA-440/l-80/024-b.  Prepared for Effluent Guide-
        lines Division, Office of Water and Waste Management,
        Washington, D.C.;  1980.  512 pp.  Volume V.

3-10.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.   Proposed develop-
        ment document for effluent limita'tions  guidelines and
        standards for the iron and steel manufacturing point
        source category;  cold forming subcategory,  alkaline
        cleaning subcategory, hot coating subcategory.
        EPA-440/l-80/024-b.   Prepared for Effluent  Guidelines
        Division,  Office of Water and Waste Management,  Washington,
        D.C.; 1980.  576 pp.  Volume VI.

3-11.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.   Proposed develop-
        ment document for effluent limitations  guidelines and
        standards for the leather tanning and finishing point
        source category.   EPA-440/1-79/016.  Prepared for Effluent
        Guidelines Division, Office of Water and Waste Management,
        Washington, D.C.;  1979.  381 pp.

3-12.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.   Draft development
        document for effluent limitations guidelines and standards
        for the battery manufacturing point source  category. EPA
        440/1-80/067-a.  Prepared for Effluent Guidelines Divi-
        sion, Office of Water and Waste Management, Washington,
        D.C.; 1980.  823 pp.

3-13.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.   Proposed develop-
        ment document for effluent limitations guidelines and stan-
        dards for the porcelain enameling point source category.
        EPA-440/l-81/072-b.   Prepared for Effluent Guidelines
        Division,  Office of Water and Waste Management, Washington,
        D.C.; 1981.  515 pp.
Date:  9/25/81               III.5-2
-------
3-14.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.   Final development
        document for proposed effluent limitations guidelines,
        new source performance standards and pretreatment stan-
        dards for the explosives manufacturing point source
        category; subcategory E, formulation and packaging of
        blasting agents, dynamite, and pyrotechnics.  Performed
        by Hydro-science for the Effluent Guidelines Division,
        U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,  Washington, D.C.;
        1979.  Variously paginated.

3-15.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.   Technical review
        of the best available technology, best demonstrated
        technology, and pretreatment technology for the gum and
        wood chemicals point source category.   Prepared by Environ-
        mental Science and Engineering, Inc.,  for the Office of
        Water and Hazardous Materials, Washington, D.C.; 1979.
        Variously paginated.

3-16.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.   Proposed develop-
        ment document for effluent limitations guidelines and
        standards for the coil coating point source category.
        EPA-440/1-81/071-b.  Prepared for Effluent Guidelines
        Division, Office of Water and Waste Management, Washing-
        ton, D.C.; 1981.  481 pp.

3-17.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.   Draft development
        document for effluent limitations guidelines and stan-
        dards for the foundries (metal molding and casting) point
        source category.  EPA-440/l-80/070-a.   Prepared for
        Effluent Guidelines Division, Office of Water and Waste
        Management, Washington, D.C.; 1980.  860 pp.

3-18.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.   Proposed develop-
        ment document for effluent limitations guidelines and
        standards for the pulp, paper and paperboard and the
        builders paper and board mills point source categories.
        EPA-440/l-80/025-b.  Prepared for Effluent Guidelines
        Division, Office of Water and Waste Management, Washing-
        ton, D.C.; 1980.  632 pp.

3-19.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.   Draft engineering
        report for development of effluent limitations guidelines
        for the ink manufacturing industry (BATEA, NSPS, Pretreat-
        ment).  Prepared for Effluent Guidelines Division, Office
        of Water and Hazardous Materials, Washington, D.C.; 1979.
        Variously paginated.

3-20.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.   Draft engineering
        report for development of effluent limitations guidelines
        for the paint manufacturing industry (BATEA, NSPA, Pre-
        treatment).  Prepared for Effluent Guidelines Division,
Date:  9/25/81                III.5-3
-------
        Office of Water and Hazardous Materials,  Washington,
        D.C.;  1979.   Variously paginated.

3-21.   U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.   Draft development
        document including the data base for the  review of ef-
        fluent limitations guidelines (BATEA),  new source perfor-
        mance standards, and pretreatment standards for the
        petroleum refining point source category.  Prepared for
        Effluent Guidelines Division, Office of Water and Hazar-
        dous Materials, Washington, D.C.;  1978.   Variously pagi-
        nated.

3-22.   U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.   Proposed develop-
        ment document for effluent limitations  guidelines and
        standards for the timber products processing point source
        category.  EPA-440/l-79/023-b.  Prepared  for Effluent
        Guidelines Division, Office of Water and  Waste Management,
        Washington,  D.C.; 1979.  427 pp.

3-23.   U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.   Draft development
        document for effluent limitations guidelines and stan-
        dards for the metal finishing point source category.
        EPA-440/l-80/091-a.  Prepared for Effluent Guidelines
        Division, Office of Water and Waste Management, Washing-
        ton,  D.C.; 1980.  Variously paginated.

3-24.   U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.   Proposed develop-
        ment document for effluent limitations  guidelines and
        standards for the textile mills point source category.
        EPA-440/1-79/022-b.  Prepared for Effluent Guidelines
        Division, Office of Water and Waste Management, Washing-
        ton,  D.C.; 1979.  678 pp.

3-25.   U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.   Development docu-
        ment for the effluent limitations guidelines for the ore
        mining and dressing point source category.  EPA-440/1-
        78/061-e.  Prepared for Effluent Guidelines Division,
        Office of Water and Hazardous Materials,  Washington,
        D.C.;  1978.   913 pp.

3-26.   U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.   Development docu-
        ment for interim final effluent limitations guidelines
        and new source performance standards for the significant
        organic products segment of the organic chemicals manufac-
        turing point source category.  EPA-440/1-75/045.  Prepared
        for Effluent Guidelines Division, Office of Water and
        Hazardous Materials, Washington, D.C.;  1975.  391 pp.

3-27.   U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.   Draft development
        document for effluent limitations guidelines and standards
Date:  9/25/81               III.5-4
-------
        for the aluminum forming point source category.   EPA-440/1-
        80/073-a.  Prepared for Effluent Guidelines Division,
        Office of Water and Waste Management, Washington, D.C.;
        1980.  604 pp.

3-28.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  Review of the best
        available technology for the rubber processing point
        source category.  Contract No. 68-01-4673.  Performed by
        Envirodyne Engineers,  Inc., for Effluent Guidelines
        Division, Office of Water and Hazardous Materials, Washing-
        ton, D.C.; 1978.  Variously paginated.

3-29.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  Draft development
        document for effluent limitations guidelines standards
        for the nonferrous metals manufacturing point source
        category.  EPA-440/l-79/019-a.  Prepared for Effluent
        Guidelines Division, Office of Water and Waste Management,
        Washington, D.C.; 1979.  622 pp.

3-30.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  Development document
        for effluent limitations guidelines and new source per-
        formance standards, soap and detergent manufacturing
        point source category.  EPA-440/l-74/018-a.  Prepared for
        Effuent Guidelines Division, Office of Water and Waste
        Management, Washington, D.C.; 1974.  202 pp.

3-31.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  Draft development
        document for effluent limitations guidelines and standards
        for the electrical and electronic components point source
        category.  EPA-440/l-80/075-a.  Prepared for Effluent
        Guidelines Division, Office of Water and Waste Management,
        Washington, D.C.; 1980.  Variously paginated.

3-32.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  Draft development
        document for effluent limitations guidelines and standards
        for the photographic equipment and supplies segment of
        the photographic point source category.  EPA-440/1-80/
        077-a.  Prepared for Effluent Guidelines Division, Office
        of Water and Waste Management, Washington, D.C.; 1980.
        Variously paginated.

3-33.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  Draft guidance
        document for effluent limitations guidelines (BATEA),  new
        source performance standards, and pretreatment standards
        for the photographic processing point source category.
        Performed by Versar, Inc.; 1980.  Variously paginated.

3-34.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  Proposed develop-
        ment document for effluent limitations guidelines and
        standards for the coal mining point source category.  EPA
        440/1-81/057-b. Prepared for Effluent Guidelines Division,
        Office of Water and Waste Management; 1981.  429 pp. plus
        appendices.

Date:  9/25/81                III.5-5
-------
3-35.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.   Proposed development
        document for effluent limitations guidelines and standards
        for the steam electric point source category.   EPA
        440/1-80/029-b.  Prepared for Effluent Guidelines Division,
        Office of Water and Waste Management;  1980.   597 pp.

3-36.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.   Physical, chemical,
        and biological treatment techniques for industrial wastes.
        Volume II.  NTIS report No.  PB 275 287; 1977.   Variously
        paginated.

3-37.   Catalytic, Inc.   Draft partial report on evaluation of
        organic chemicals and plastics and synthetics.   Prepared
        for Effluent Guidelines Division, Office of Water and
        Waste Management, Washington, D.C.; 1981.  Variously
        paginated.

3-38.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.   Process design
        manual for suspended solids removal.  EPA-625/l-75/003-a.
        Technology Transfer Division; 1975.

3-39.   Nemerow, Nelson.  Industrial pollution; origins, character-
        istics, and treatment.  Addison-Wesley Publishing Company;
        1978.  733 p.

3-40.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.   Process design
        manual for upgrading existing wastewater treatment plants.
        EPA-625/l-71-004a.  Variously paginated.

3-41.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.   Control and treat-
        ment technology for the metal finishing industry, sulfide
        precipitation.  Summary report.  EPA-625/8-80/003.
        Technology Transfer Division; 1980.

3-42.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.   Economics of
        wastewater treatment alternatives for the electroplating
        industry.  EPA-625/5-79/016.  Technology Transfer Division;
        1979.

3-43.   Water Pollution Control Federation.  Wastewater treatment
        plant design, a manual of practice.  MOP/8.  Water Pollu-
        tion Control Federation; 1977.

3-44.   Eckenfelder, W.W.  Industrial water pollution control.
        New York: McGraw Hill Book Company; 1966.

3-45.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  Development of
        treatment and control technology for refractory petrochem-
        ical wastes.  EPA-600/2-79/080.  Prepared for Office of
        Research and Development, Ada, OK; 1979.  220 pp.
Date:  9/25/81                III.5-6
-------
3-46.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.   Physical,  chemical,
        and biological treatment techniques for industrial wastes.
        Volume I.   NTIS report No.  PB 275 054;  1977.   Variously
        paginated.

3-47.   Illinois Institute for Environmental Quality.   Technology
        and economics of industrial pollution abatement.   Illinois
        Institute for Environmental Quality No. 76/22;  1976.  Var-
        iously paginated.

3-48.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.   Environmental
        pollution control alternatives:  economics of wastewater
        treatment alternatives for the electroplating industry.
        EPA-625/5-79/016.   Technology Transfer Division;  1979.
        72 pp.

3-49.   Nitrification and denitrification facilities.   Technology
        transfer series; 1973.

3-50.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.   Nitrogen control
        process design manual.  (draft)  1975.

3-51.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.   Innovative and al-
        ternative technology assessment manual (draft).  EPA-430/
        9-78/009.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,  Cincin-
        nati, OH,  1978.  252 pp.

3-52.   Metcalf and Eddy.   Wastewater engineering:  collection
        treatment disposal.  New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co.;
        1972.

3-53.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.   Process design
        manual for upgrading existing wastewater treatment plants.
        EPA-625/l-71/004-a.  Technology Transfer Division; 1974.

3-54.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.   Process design
        manual wastewater treatment facilities for several small
        communities.  EPA-625/1-77/009.   Technology Transfer
        Division;  1977.

3-55.   Pollution Engineering Practice Handbook.  Ann Arbor:  Ann
        Arbor Science Publisher, Inc.; 1976.

3-56.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.   Process design
        manual for land treatment of municipal wastewater.
        EPA-625/1-77/008.   Prepared for Office of Water Program
        Operations, Environmental Research Information Center,
        Technology Transfer Division; 1977.

3-57.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.   Upgrading meat
        packing facilities to reduce pollution.  1973.
Date:  9/25/81               III.5-7
-------
3-58.   U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.   Land treatment of
        municipal wastewater effluents,  design factors;  1976.
        Volume II.

3-59.   U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.   Pollution abatement
        in the fruit and vegetable industry.

3-60.   U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.   Process design
        manual sludge treatment and disposal.   EPA-625/1-79/011.
        Prepared for Office of Research and Development; 1979.

3-61.   Sludge dewatering design manual.  Research Report No. 72.
        Ministry of the Environment, Ontario,  Canada.

3-62.   Proceedings of seminars on water pollution abatement
        technology in the pulp and paper industry.  Report
        EPS 3-WP-76-4, Environmental Protection Service, Environ-
        ment Canada, March 1976.

3-63.   Gonway, Richard A., and Richard D. Ross.  Handbook of
        industrial waste disposal.  New York:  Van Nostrand Reinhold
        Company; 1980.

3-64.   Powers, Philip W.  How to dispose of toxic substances and
        industrial wastes.  Park Ridge,  NJ: Noyes Data Corporation;
        1976.

3-65.   U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.   Revised technical
        review of the best available technology, best demonstrated
        technology, and pretreatment technology for the timber
        products processing point source category.  Contract
        68/01/4827.  Prepared for Effluent Guidelines Division,
        Office of Water and Waste Management,  Washington, D.C.;
        1978.  Variously paginated.

3-66.   U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.   Development docu-
        ment for BAT effluent limitations guidelines and new
        source performance standards for ore mining and dressing
        industry.  Contract No. 6332/MI; 1979.

3-67.   U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.   Development document
        for effluent limitations guidelines and new source per-
        formance standards for the tire and synthetic segment of
        the rubber processing point source category.  EPA-440/
        1-74/013-a.  Prepared for Effluent Guidelines Division,
        Office of Water and Waste Management,  Washington, D.C.;
        1974.

3-68.   U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.   Technical study
        report BATEA-NSPS-PSES-PSNS: textile mills point source
        category.  Contracts Nos. 68/01/3289,  68/01/3884.
        Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; 1978.
        Variously paginated.

Date:  9/25/81                III.5-8
-------
3-69.   U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.   Development docu-
        ment for interim final effluent limitations guidelines
        and new source performance standards for the gum and wood
        chemicals manufacturing industry.   EPA-440/1-76.  Prepared
        for Effluent Guidelines Division,  Office of Water and
        Waste Management,  Washington, D.C.;  1976.

3-70.   U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.   Interim final
        supplement for pretreatment to the development document
        for the petroleum refining industry existing point source
        category.  EPA-440/l-76/083-a.  Prepared for Effluent
        Guidelines Division,  Office of Water and Hazardous Mate-
        rials, Washington, D.C.; 1977.  115 pp.

3-71.   U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.   Technical assis-
        tance in the implementation of the BAT review of the coal
        mining industry point source category.  Contracts Nos.
        68/01/3273, 62/01/4762, 68/02/2618.   Prepared for Effluent
        Guidelines Division,  Washington, D.C.; 1979.  Variously
        paginated.

3-72.   U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.   Development docu-
        ment for interim final effluent limitations guidelines
        and proposed new source performance standards for the
        pharmaceutical manufacturing point source category.
        EPA-440/1-75/060.   Prepared for Effluent Guidelines
        Division, Office of Water and Hazardous Materials, Washing-
        ton,  D.C.; 1976.  331 pp.

3-73.   U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.   Development document
        for proposed existing source pretreatment standards for
        the electroplating point source category.   EPA-440/
        1-78/085.  Prepared for Effluent Guidelines Division,
        Office of Water and Hazardous Materials, Washington,
        D.C.; 1978.  532 pp.

3-74.   U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.   Development docu-
        ment for effluent limitations guidelines and new source
        performance standards for the leather tanning and finish-
        ing point source category.  EPA-440/l-74/016-a.  Prepared
        for Effluent Guidelines Division,  Office of Air and Water
        Programs, Washington, D.C.; 1974.

3-75.   U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.   Development docu-
        ment for effluent limitations guidelines for effluent
        limitations guidelines for the pesticide chemicals manu-
        facturing point source category.  EPA-440/l-78/060-e.
        Prepared for Effluent Guidelines Division, Office of
        Water and Hazardous Materials, Washington, D.C.; 1978.
        316 pp.
Date:  9/25/81                III.5-9
-------
3-76.    U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.   Development docu-
        ment for interim final effluent limitations guidelines
        and new source performance standards for the mineral
        mining and processing industry point source category.
        EPA-440/ 1-76/059-a.   Prepared for Effluent Guidelines
        Division,  Office of Water and Hazardous Materials,  Washing-
        ton,  D.C.; 1976.  432 pp.

3-77.    U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.   Development docu-
        ment for interim final effluent limitations guidelines
        and new source performance standards for the primary
        copper smelting subcategory of the copper segment of the
        nonferrous metals manufacturing point source category.
        EPA-440/l-75/032-b.  Prepared for Effluent Guidelines
        Division,  Office of Water and Hazardous Materials,  Washing-
        ton,  D.C.; 1975.  213 pp.

3-78.    U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.   Development document
        for interim final effluent limitations guidelines and
        proposed new source performance standards for the hospital
        point source category.  EPA-440/l-76/060-n.  Prepared for
        Effluent Guidelines Division, Office of Water and Hazar-
        dous Materials, Washington, D.C.; 1976.  131 pp.

3-79.    U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.   Development docu-
        ment for effluent limitations guidelines and new source
        performance standards for the synthetic resins segment of
        the plastics and synthetic materials manufacturing point
        source category.  EPA-440/1-74/010-a.   Prepared for
        Effluent Guidelines Division, Office of Air and Water
        Programs,  Washington, D.C.; 1974.  238 pp.

3-80.    U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.   Development docu-
        ment for effluent limitations guidelines and new source
        performance standards for the plywood, hardboard and wood
        preserving segment of the timber products processing
        point source category.  EPA-440/l-74/023-a.  Prepared for
        Effluent Guidelines Division, Office of Water and Hazar-
        dous Materials, Washington, D.C.; 1974.  Variously pagi-
        nated.

3-81.    U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.   Development docu-
        ment for proposed effluent limitations guidelines and new
        source performance standards for the major organic pro-
        ducts segment of the organic chemicals manufacturing
        point source category.  EPA-440/1-73/009; 1973.  369 pp.

3-82.    U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.   Preliminary data
        base for review of BATEA effluent limitations guidelines,
        NSPS, and pretreatment standards for the pulp, paper and
        paperboard point source category.  Contract No. 68/01/4624.
Date:  9/25/81               III.5-10
-------
        Prepared for Effluent Guidelines Division,  Office of
        Water and Waste Management,  Washington,  D.C.;  1979.
        Variously paginated.

3-83.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.   Contractor's  draft
        report for the foundry industry.  Contract No.  68/01/4379.
        U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,  Washington, D.C.;
        1979.  Variously paginated.

3-84.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.   Technical support
        document for auto and other laundries industry.   Contract
        No. 68/03/2550.  Prepared for Effluent Guidelines Division,
        Washington,  D.C.; 1979.   Variously paginated.

3-85.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.   Draft development
        document for inorganic chemicals manufacturing point
        source category - BATEA,  NSPS, and pretreatment standards.
        Contract No. 68/01/4492.   Prepared for Effluent Guidelines
        Division, Office of Water and Hazardous Materials, Washing-
        ton, D.C.; 1979.  Variously paginated.

3-86.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.   Draft technical
        report for revision of steam electric effluent limita-
        tions guidelines.  Prepared for U.S.  Environmental Protec-
        tion Agency, Washington,  D.C.; 1978.   Variously paginated.

3-87.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.   Draft contractor's
        engineering report for development of effluent limitations
        guidelines for the pharmaceutical manufacturing industry
        (BATEA, NSPS, BCT, BMP,  Pretreatment).  Prepared for
        Effluent Guidelines Division, Washington, D.C.;  1979.
        Variously paginated.

3-88.   Coco, J.H.,  E. Klein, D.  Rowland, J.H. Mayes,  W.A. Myers,
        E. Pratz, C.J. Romero, and F.H. Yocum.  Development  of
        treatment and control technology for refractory petrochem-
        ical wastes (draft report).   Project No. S80073; U.S.
        Environmental Protection Agency, Ada,  OK.  220 pp.

3-89.   Klieve, J.R., and G.D. Rawlings.  Source assessment:
        textile plant wastewater toxics study phase II.   Contract
        No. 68/02/1874; U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency,
        Washington,  D.C.; 1979.   127 pp.

3-90.   Rawlings, G.D.  Source assessment: textile plant waste-
        water toxics study phase I.   EPA-600/2-78/004-h.  U.S.
        Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park,
        NC; 1979.  153 pp.

3-91.   Davis, H.J., F.S. Model,  and J.R. Leal.   FBI reverse
        osmosis membrane for chromium plating rinse water.
Date:  9/25/81                III.5-11
-------
        EPA-600/2-78/040.   U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency,
        Cincinnati,  OH;  1978.   28 pp.

3-92.    Chian,  E.S.K.,  M.N. Aschauer,  and H.H.P.  Fang.   Evaluation
        of new reverse osmosis membranes for the  separation of
        toxic compounds from wastewater.  Contract No.  DADA
        17-73-C-3025.   U.S. Army Medical Research and Develop-
        ment Command,  Washington, D.C.;  1975.  309 pp.

3-93.    Bollyky,  L.J.   Ozone treatment of cyanide-bearing plating
        waste.   EPA-600/2-77/104.  U.S.  Environmental Protection
        Agency, Cincinnati, OH;  1977.   43 pp.

3-94.    Kleper, M.H.,  R.L.  Goldsmith,  and A.2. Gollan.   Demonstra-
        tion of ultrafiltration and carbon adsorption for treatment
        of industrial laundering wastewater.  EPA-660/2-78/177.
        U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH;
        1978.  109 pp.

3-95.    Kleper, M.H.,  R.L.  Goldsmith,  T.V. Tran,  D.H. Steiner, J.
        Pecevich, and M.A.  Sakillaris.  Treatment of wastewaters
        from adhesives and sealants manufacturing by ultrafil-
        tration.   EPA-600/2-78/176.  U.S. Environmental Protection
        Agency, Cincinnati, OH;  1978.

3-96.    McNulty,  K.J.,  R.L. Goldsmith, A. Gollan, S. Hossain, and
        D. Grant.  Reverse osmosis field test: treatment of
        copper cyanide rinse waters.  EPA-600/2-77/107.  U.S.
        Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH; 1977.
        89 pp.

3-97.    Brunotts, V.A.,  R.S. Lynch, and G.R. Van Stone.  Granular
        carbon handles concentrated waste.  Chemical Engineering
        progress 6(8) :81-84;  1973.

3-98.    Anonymous, Putting powdered carbon in wastewater treatment.
        Environmental Science and Technology, Vol. II (9); 1977.

3-99.    De, J,  and B.  Paschal.  The effectiveness of granular
        activated carbon in treatability of municipal and indus-
        trial wastewaters.   In:   Third national conference on
        complete water reuse,  AIChE and EPA Technology Transfer.
        pp. 204-211.

3-100.  De, J,  B. Paschal,  and A. D. Adams.  Treatment of oil
        refinery wastewaters with granular and powdered activated
        carbon.  In:  Thirtieth industrial waste conference,
        Purdue University,  IN; 1975.  pp. 216-232.

3-101.  Argaman Y., and C.  L.  Weddle.   Fate of heavy metals
        physical treatment processes.    In:  AIChE symposium
        series, Vol. 0 (136).


Date:   9/25/81                III.5-12
-------
3-102.   Brandon,  C.A.,  and J.  J.  Porter.   Hyperfiltration for
        renovation of textile finishing plant wastewater.  EPA-600/
        2-76/060.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,  Research
        Triangle Park,  NC; 1976.   147 pp.

3-103.   Petersen, R.  J., and K.  E.  Cobian.  New membranes for
        treating metal finishing effluents by reverse osmosis.
        EPA-600/2-76/197. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
        Cincinnati, OH; 1976.  59 pp.

3-104.   Lang,  W.  C.,  J. H. Crozier, F.P.  Drace, and K.H.  Pearson.
        Industrial wastewater reclamation with a 400,000-
        gallon-per-day vertical tube evaporator.  EPA-600/2-76/260.
        U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Oh;
        1976.  90 pp.

3-105.   Study of effectiveness of activated carbon technology for
        the removal of specific materials from organic chemical
        processes. EPA Contract No. 68-03-2610.  Final report on
        pilot operations at USS chemical,  Nevella.

3-106.   Selected biodegradation techniques for treatment and/or
        ultimate disposal of organic materials.  EPA-600/2-79/006.
        U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH;
        1973.   377 pp.

3-107.   Rawlings, G.  D.  Evaluation of hyperfiltration treated
        textile wastewaters. Contract No.  68-02/1874.  U.S.
        Environmental Protection Agency,  Washington, D.C.  1978.

3-108.   Extraction of chemical pollutants from industrial wastewa-
        ters with volatile solvents.   EPA-600/2-76/220.  U.S.
        Environmental Protection Agency,  Ada, OK; 1976.  510 pp.

3-109.   Treatment and recovery of fluoride industrial wastes.
        No. PB 234 447, Grumman Aerospace Corporation.  Bethpage,
        NY, 1974.

3-110.   Priority pollutant treatability review, industrial sampling
        and assessment. Contract No.  68-03/2579.  U.S. Environmen-
        tal Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH; 1978.  47 pp.

3-111.   Effects of liquid detergent plant effluent on the rotating
        biological contactors. EPA-600/2-78/129.  U.S. Environmen-
        tal Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH;  1978.  58 pp.

3-112.   Olem,  H.   The rotating biological contactor for biochemi-
        cal ferrous iron oxidation in the treatment of coal mine
        drainage.  No.  W77-05337, Penn State University,  PA;
        1975.
Date:  9/25/81                III.5-13
-------
3-113.   Hamilton Standard.   Compilation of lime and settling
        performance data base.   Prepared for Effluent Guidelines
        Division, U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency,  Washing-
        ton,  D.C.; 1980.

3-114.   Ekenfelder, W.W.  Water quality for practicing engineers.
        Barnes and Noble, New York;  1970.

3-115.   Kleper,  M.H.,  Assessment of BATEA synthetic rubber manu-
        facturing.  August,  1978;  182 pp.

3-116.   U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.  Proposed develop-
        ment document for effluent limitations guidelines and
        standards for the petroleum refining point source category.
        Prepared for Effluent Guidelines Division, Office of
        Water and Waste Management,  Washington, D.C.; 1979.  366
        PP-

3-117.   U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.  Status report on
        the treatment and recycle of wastewaters from the car
        wash industry (draft contractor's report).  Contract
        68-01-5767.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washing-
        ton,  D.C., 1979.

3-118.   U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.  Proposed develop-
        ment document for effluent limitations guidelines and
        standards for the inorganic chemicals manufacturing point
        source category.  EPA-440/1-79/007.  Prepared for Effluent
        Guidelines Division, Office of Water and Waste Management,
        Washington, D.C.; 1980.  934 pp.

3-119.   U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.  Development document
        for interim final effluent limitations guidelines and
        proposed new source performance standards for the explo-
        sives manufacturing point source category.  EPA 440/1-76/
        006-j.  Prepared for Effluent Guidelines Division, Office
        of Water and Hazardous Materials, Washington, D.C.; 1976.
        215 pp.

3-120.   U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.  Project recommenda-
        tions for the soap and detergent manufacturing industry
        (SIC 2814) BAT/Toxics Study.  Prepared for Effluent
        Guidelines Division, Washington, D.C.; 1976.  26 pp.

3-121.   U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency.  Environmental
        pollution control alternatives:  economics of wastewater
        treatment alternatives for the electroplating industry.
        Performed by the Industrial Environmental Research Labora-
        tory, Cincinnati, O.H.; 1979.  72 pp.
Date:  9/25/81                III.5-14
-------
  3-122.   Weishaar, Michael F.  1981.   Letter, Michael F.  Weishaar,
           Manager of  Environmental Affairs, Monsanto  Chemicals
           Intermediates Co., to Paul  Fahrenthold, USEPA,  August 5,
           1981.  12 pp.
•ft.U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1982-361-082/303
Date:   9/25/81                III,5-15
-------