-f/EPA
                                 United States
                                 Environmental Protection
                                 Agency
                                 Industrial Environmental Research
                                 Laboratory
                                 Research Triangle Park NC 27711
                                 Research and Development
                                 EPA-600/S2-80-107  May 1981
Project  Summary
                                 Physical/Chemical
                                 Treatment of  Blast  Furnace
                                 Wastewaters  Using  Mobile
                                 Pilot  Units

                                 R. Osantowski, A Gemopolos, J Kane, and G. Rollinger
                                  This project was initiated to provide
                                 an evaluation of the effectiveness of
                                 existing treatment technology for
                                 upgrading steel mill wastewaters to
                                 Best Available Technology (BAT) Eco-
                                 nomically Achievable limits for Blast
                                 Furnace Category scrubber waste-
                                 waters. The wastewater tested was a
                                 blast furnace effluent from an operat-
                                 ing steel mill treatment system that
                                 met 1977 Effluent Guidelines for Best
                                 Practical Control Technology (BPT)
                                 Currently Available. This wastewater
                                 contained residual concentrations of
                                 suspended solids, BOD, oils and
                                 greases, phenols, cyanides, fluorides,
                                 ammonia  compounds, sulfides, and
                                 dissolved  solids. The in-depth pilot
                                 plant study was performed using
                                 mobile facilities designed especially
                                 for treating steel plant wastes.
                                  Treatment processes evaluated
                                 during the study included: alkaline
                                 chlorination, chemical treatment, dual
                                 media filtration, magnetic filtration,
                                 reverse  osmosis, ozonation and acti-
                                 vated carbon.
                                  Based on the performance results of
                                 the pilot program, it was concluded
                                 that the physical/chemical technology
                                 investigated (alkaline chlorination,
                                 ozonation, and reverse osmosis) was
                                 effective in reducing influent blast
                                 furnace scrubber wastewater contam-
                                 inants to below BAT levels. Evaluation
                                and comparison of the treatment train
                                 capital and operating costs determine
                                 that alkaline chlorination was the
                                 least-cost alternative. The study also
                                 concluded that significantly less space
                                 was required for the treatment train
                                 utilizing ozonation than for treatment
                                 trains involving alkaline chlorination
                                 or reverse osmosis.
                                  This Project Summary was devel-
                                 oped by  EPA's Industrial Environ-
                                 mental Research Laboratory. Research
                                 Triangle Park. NC. to announce key
                                 findings of the research project that is
                                 fully documented in a separate report
                                 of the same title (see Project Report
                                 ordering information at back).

                                 Introduction
                                  In 1972, the Federal Water Pollution
                                 Control Act (PL92-500) was enacted by
                                 the U.S. Congress. The Act directed the
                                 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                                 (U.S. EPA) to develop effluent limitation
                                 guidelines for all major industrial groups,
                                 among them the steel industry. EPA
                                 was also mandated to recommend
                                 appropriate levels of treatment and
                                 estimate costs to meet the proposed
                                 limitations. As part of its overall mission,
                                 the EPA's Industrial Environmental
                                 Research Laboratory  of Research Tri-
                                 angle Park, NC, funded this study to
                                determine the feasibility of treating
                                steel plant wastewater to Best Available
                                Technology (BAT) Economically Achiev-
                                able levels. This particular project was

-------
concerned with the treatment of blast
furnace scrubber blowdown wastewater.
  The project objective was achieved
through the performance of a program
consisting of the three phases outlined
below:
  PHASE I -   Bench  Scale Investiga-
             tions of a Blast Furnace
             Scrubber Blowdown
             Wastewater.
  PHASE II -  Design and Fabrication
             of the Mobile Treatment
             Facilities to House the
             Pilot Scale Equipment.
  PHASE III - Operation and Evaluation
             of the Advanced Waste
             Treatment Pilot Plant Sys-
             tems at a Blast Furnace
             Site.

  The purpose of the first phase (bench-
scale work) was to provide information
concerning the treatment methods to be
studied for the Phase II design and the
Phase III pilot plant investigation (opera-
tion and evaluation). Of particular
interest were  such items as the pre-
treatment requirements, magnitude of
operating variables, expected magnitude
of treatment efficiency and effluent
quality, selection of equipment and
media, and pilot plant system design.
  The second phase objective (System
Design and Fabrication) was to provide a
mobile pilot testing system for evaluating
several advanced waste treatment tech-
nologies. The portable treatment system
developed included the technology
needed to remove the residual contami-
nants from the blast furnace BPT waste-
water to the extent that this wastewater
was upgraded to meet BAT requirements
as proposed in 1974.  Schematic repre-
sentations of the mobile testing systems
are shown in Figures 1 and 2. Trailer No.
1 housed the alkaline chlorination,
chemical treatment, magnetic filtration,
and dual media filtration systems. The
ozonator, activated carbon, and reverse
osmosis technologies  were located  in
Trailer No. 2. The mobile system con-
tained a high degree of automation
which greatly assisted the operators
during  the study.  All  of the treatment
technologies were designed to treat a
nominal flow of 18.9 l/min (5 gpm).
  The advanced waste treatment meth-
ods, both singularly and in combination,
investigated on a pilot basis in Phase III,
included the following:
1. FIL + O + CT
2  ACL + CT + AC
3  CT + FIL + RO + O (on ROB)
4. CT + FIL + RO + ACL (on ROB)
                         Chemical Tanks
                                         Magnetic   Dual Media     Air
                                           Filter       Filter    Compressor
  Flocculator
                                                 Trailer
                                                 45'L x8'W x 13'-6"H
   Four Chamber
  Rapid Mix Tank
                    Clarifier
Figure 1.    Steel plant mobile treatment system-trailer No. 1.
              Trailer
             45'L x8'W x 13'-6"H
Sample         Carbon
Refrigerator      Columns
    Ozone
  Generator
                               Clarifier
                                             Reverse Osmosis
                                                 System
       Ozone Contact
           Tanks
Figure 2.    Steel plant mobile treatment system-trailer No. 2.
              Key

 AC:  activated carbon
 ACL:  alkaline chlorination
  CT:  chemical treatment
 FIL:  filtration-dual media or magnetic
   0:  ozonation
 RO:  reverse osmosis
ROB:  reverse osmosis brine
   A schematic illustration of the process
 trains investigated for treatment of the
 blast furnace wastewater is shown in
 Figure 3.
   For each treatment train investigated,
 samples and operational data were ob-
 tained for later use in assessing, evalu-
 ating, appraising, and comparing the
 adequacy  of the individual advanced
 waste treatment methods.

-------
(11 Filtration, Ozonation Clarification

                         NaOH  Air
                                              Poly

Raw






DMF

MF


~*.
-*.


|
03

Acid


C
Y
^
— »

Product

Sludge
   (2) pH Adjustment, Alkaline Chlorination,  Chemical Treatment, Clarification,
       Filtration, Carbon Adsorption

                           Metal
          NaOH      Acid   Salt
              \NaOCI\NaOCI\  Poly
            Alkaline Chlorination
    (3)  Chemical Treatment, Clarification, Filtration, Reverse Osmosis, Alkaline
        Chlormation (on brine). Carbon Adsorption
            Metal
             Salt Poly       ,	,    Acid
                                               NaOH    Acid
                                                   NaOCI I  Poly
                                           Alkaline Ch/orination
    (4J Chemical Treatment, Clarification, Filtration, Reverse Osmosis,
       Ozonation (on brine). Clarification
             Metal
             Salt
                 Poly
                                     Acid
                                                   Air     Poly
                                             NaOH I  Acid  j

                                               i_ToLi_i
Key
  AC: Carbon Adsorption
   C: Clarification
DMF. Dual Media Filtration
                           MF.  Magnetic Filtration
                            O3.  Ozonation
                           RO:  Reverse Osmosis
Figure 3.    Process trains investigated for treatment of the blastfurnace wastewater.
Conclusions
  This report was concerned with the
investigation and evaluation of the
effectiveness of selected physical/
chemical treatment technology on Blast
Furnace category scrubber wastewaters.
Effectiveness was measured using the
criteria: performance, costs and space
requirements. Physical/chemical treat-
ment technology investigated included:
chlorination, ozonation, reverse osmosis,
chemical treatment, clarification, acti-
vated carbon, and filtration. General
conclusions from this pilot scale investi-
gation are listed below:
  1  The results  of the pilot program
     indicated that alkaline chlorination,
     ozonation,  and reverse osmosis
     were effective in reducing influent
     contaminants to below BAT levels
     in  the treatment of blast furnace
     scrubber blowdown.
       a. Pretreatment  requirements.
          1.  For alkaline chlorination
             none
          2.  For reverse osmosis: chem-
             ical clarification and filtra-
             tion
          3.  For ozonation. filtration
       b. Post-treatment requirements
          1   For alkaline chlorination
             chemical clarification and
             possibly activated carbon.
             The activated carbon might
             be  required where free
             chlorine discharge  limita-
             tions are in effect. Other
             methods of chlorine re-
             moval were  not investi-
             gated.
          2.  For reverse osmosis: brine
             treatment by alkaline chlo-
             rination or  ozonation.
             (a)  Following alkaline chlo-
                rination of the reverse
                osmosis brine, the
                wastewater would re-
                quire clarification with
                polymer and dechlon-
                nation by activated
                carbon (where dechlo-
                rination is required
                prior to discharge).
             (b) After reverse osmosis
                brine treatment  by
                ozonation, clarification
               with polymer  is re-
                quired.
  2. Alkaline chlorination was the
     least-cost  alternative  treatment
     train investigated Expected capital
     investment   for a  5,678 mVdav
     (1.5 mgd) train is $1,171,300. Tr
                                                                                       i US GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1981 -757-C

-------
         corresponding operating costs
         including amortization of capital
         are estimated at $2 68/3,785
         liters ($2.68/1,000 gal.).
      3. Ozonation has the lowest system
         area requirement of 676m2(7,100
         ft2). This compared to 938  m2
         (10,100 ft2) for the alkaline  chlo-
         rination treatment train.
      4. The three treatment trains investi-
         gated (alkaline chlormation, ozon-
         ation,  and reverse osmosis)  were
         all able to reduce  the priority
         pollutant to  metals to 10/ug/l
         except for zinc and selenium. BIS-
         (2 ethylhexl) phthalate (BEP) was
         the only organic reported above
         the 10/yg/l verification limit.

    Bibliography
    1. Perry, J. H., Chemical Engineers'
       Handbook, 4th Edition, McGraw-Hill
       Book Company,  New York, 1963.
    2. Singer, P.  C. and Zilli, W. B., "Ozon-
       ation of Ammonia In Wastewater,"
       Water Research, Volume 9, pp. 127-
       134, 1975.
    3. Eisenhauer, H.  R.,  "Increased Rate
       and Efficiency  of Phenolic Waste
       Ozonation," Journal WPCF, Volume
       43, No. 2,  February, 1971.
    4. Selm, R.  P., "Ozone  Oxidation of
       Aqueous Cyanide Waste Solutions
       In Stirred Batch Reactors and Packed
       Towers,"  Advances In Chemistry,
       Series No. 21, American Chemical
       Society.
    5. Permasep Technical  Information
       Manual, Permasep Permeators, Du-
       Pont, July 15, 1974.
           R. Osantowski, A. Geinopolos, J. Kane, and G. Rolliriger are with Rexnord, Inc.,
             Milwaukee, W I 53201.
           Robert V. Hendriks is the EPA Project Officer (see below).
           The complete report, entitled "Physical/Chemical Treatment of Blast Furnace
             Wastewaters Using Mobile Pilot Units,"(Order No. PBS 1-159 386; Cost:$24.50,
             subject to changej will be available only from:
                   National Technical Information Service
                   5285 Port Royal Road
                   Springfield, VA 22161
                   Telephone: 703-487-4650
           The EPA Project Officer can be contacted at:
                   Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
                   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                   Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Center for Environmental Research
Information
Cincinnati OH 45268
Postage and
Fees Paid
Environmental
Protection
Agency
EPA 335
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300
          U  O  !,,MV1K
          M'Ai lu --  *•>  f
          23u  S

-------