WATTS NICKEL AND RINSE WATER RECOVERY
VIA AN ADVANCED REVERSElJSWTOSTS^SYSTEM
by
Curtis Schmidt and Ilknur Erbas-White
Science Applications International Corporation
Santa Ana, CA 92705
Contract No. 68-C8-0062, WA 3-18
Project Officer
Lisa M. Brown
Waste Minimization, Destruction
and Disposal Research Division
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
This study was conducted
in cooperation with
Robert Ludwig
Office of Pollution Prevention and Technology Development
California Environmental Protection Agency
Sacramento, CA 95812-0806
RISK REDUCTION ENGINEERING LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CINCINNATI, OHIO 45268
-------
-------
NOTICE
-------
FOREWORD
Today's rapidly developing and changing technologies and industrial products and practices
frequently carry with them the increased generation of materials that, if improperly dealt with can
threaten both public health and the environment. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is
charged by Congress with protecting the Nation's land, air, and water resources. Under a mandate of
national environmental laws, the Agency strives to formulate and implement actions leading to a
compatible balance between human activities and the ability of natural systems to support and nurture
life. These laws direct the EPA to perform research to define our environmental problems measure the
impacts, and search for solutions.
The Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory Is responsible for planning, implementing and
managing research, development, and demonstration programs to provide an authoritative defensible
engineering basis in support of the policies, programs, and regulations of the EPA with respect to
drinking water, wastewater, pesticides, toxic substances, solid and hazardous wastes Superfund-related
activities and pollution prevention. This publication is one of the products of that research and provides
a vital communication link between the researcher and the user community.
Passage of the Pollution Prevention Act of 1990 marked'a strong change in the U S policies
concerning the generation of hazardous and nonnazardous wastes. This bill implements the national
objective of pollution prevention by establishing a source reduction program at the EPA and by assistinq
States in providing information and technical assistance regarding source reduction. In support of the
emphasis on pollution prevention, the "Waste Reduction Innovative Technology Evaluation (WRITE)
Program' has been designed to identify, evaluate, and/or demonstrate new ideas and technologies that
lead to waste reduction. The WRITE Program emphasizes source reduction and on-site recycling
These methods reduce or eliminate transportation, handling, treatment, and disposal of hazardous
materials in the environment. The technology evaluation project discussed in this report emphasizes the
study and development of methods to reduce waste.
E. Timothy Oppelt, Director
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
iii
-------
'Si
ABSTRACT
An Advanced Reverse Osmosis System (ARCS) manufactured by Water Technologies, Inc. was
installed in the Hewlett-Packard (HP) Printed Circuit Division plant in Sunnyvale, California during an 8
month test program from December 1989 through July 1990. This report uses information from Hewlett-
Packard to assess the effectiveness of the ARCS unit in the recovery of Watts Nickel plating bath
solution and rinse water. In addition, the report estimates the incremental cost savings resulting from
reduced deionized water use, reduced wastewater vdume being pretreated, lower effluent and sludge
disposal quantities, and recovery of plating solution.
A major achievement was that rinse water quality was maintained at a low level of nickel
contamination. The recycling of the rinse water resulted in a dramatic reduction in the use of new
deionized water makeup for this plating process. The AROS unit also successfully produced
concentrated Watts Nickel solution of adequate quality for reuse in the plating bath solution.
The HP cost evaluation showed an estimated net annual savings of approximately $17,000/year
through use of the AROS unit. This compares to a capital expenditure of approximately $75,000
($62,600 for the unit, plus installation and training costs). For Hewlett-Packard, the payback'period was
approximately 4'/6 years and a return on investment of about 23 percent.
The AROS unit at HP was operated at less than 50 percent of its hydraulic capacity. The
economic benefits would have been more favorable if the Watts Nickel plating process had operated for
more hours and treated more printed circuit boards. For example, the plating solution dragout at HP
was estimated to average only about 0.2 to 0.3 gph, whereas the AROS unit is designed to recover 2 to
3 gph of Watts Nickel solution: ten times as much as was actually recovered.
This report was submitted in fulfillment of Contract No. 68-C8-0062 by Science Applications
International Corporation, under the sponsorship of the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. This
report covers a period from February 14, 1990, to September 30, 1992; work was completed as of
September 27, 1992.
Iv
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Notice
ii
Forward
iii
Abstract
iv
List of Tables
vi
List of Figures
vi
Acknowledgements
vii
1. Introduction
1
Project Background
Project Description '.'.'.'.'.'.'.'. 1
2. Description of the AROS Unit Installation 0
' 3
3. Identification of Data Needs
Existing Data
Sampling Program to Obtain Additional Data '.'.'.'.'.'. 7
4. Analysis of Sampling Results
*""**"**••*•••••«•••... y
5. Overall System Performance
6. Economic Analysis of the AROS System
Cost Effectiveness of the AROS System in the
Hewlett-Packard Plant Setting
Cost Effectiveness of the AROS System at Other Sites '.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.', ]g
7. Bibliography
18
Appendix A. Summary of Field Activities
Appendix B. West Coast Analytical Sampling Results 1-
Appendix C. Water Technologies Inc. Continuous Data Summary oo
Appendix D. QAPP 3Z
35
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Number £agg
1 Analyses Done During Additional Sampling and Monitoring ........................ 8
2 Sampling Results of AROS Unit Performance at
Hewlett-Packard During One Day ..................................
3 Continuous Monitoring Results Analysis ............................... 1 1
4 Estimated Annual Incremental Savings From Use of the AROS
Unit as Reported by Hewlett-Packard Corporation. 1990 Costs ......................... 15
5 Details of Deionized Water Production Cost Used in Previous
Table 6-1. Approximate Annual Production of D.I. Water
is 9.1 Million Gal
6 Details of Wastewater Treatment Cost Used in Previous
Table 6-1. Approximate Annual Volume of Water Treated
is 31.25 Million Gal
15
16
LIST OF FIGURES
Number ' Page
1 Schematic Diagram of the Advanced Reverse Osmosis System
(AROS) for the Nickel Plating Operation 4
2 Schematic Diagram of Internal AROS Unit Components
(Courtesy of Water Technologies Inc.) 6
vi
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This report was prepared by Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) under EPA
Contract No. 68-C8-0062, Work Assignment 3-18. Mr. Curtis Schmidt was the project manager
Principal investigator was Ms. Ilknur Erbas-White. Project direction was provided by EPA Project Officer
Lisa M. Brown. Significant input and review was provided by Robert Ludwig. Project Officer Office of
Pollution Prevention. California Environmental Protection Agency. The assistance of Tom Von Kuster
Water Technologies. Inc., Edina. Minnesota, which supplied the equipment tested, is gratefully
acknowledged. Special thanks go to the staff of the Hewlett-Packard Printed Circuit Division In
Sunnyvale. California, including Joe Burquist. Mary Clifford and David Brooks, for the large amount of
information provided and cooperation in obtaining samples for analysis.
vii
-------
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
PROJECT BACKGROUND
This study was performed under the Califomla/U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Waste Reduction Innovative Technology Evaluation (WRITE) Program, and was a cooperative effort
between EPA's Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory (RREL), the Office of Pollution Prevention of the
Calrfornta Environmental Protection Agency, the Hewlett-Packard Co. (HP) Printed Circuit Division
Sunnyvale, California operation, and Water Technologies. Inc.. Edina, Minnesota, which supplied the
Advanced Reverse Osmosis System (AROS) used in the test program. Under the WRITE Program the
cooperative efforts of the EPA and State or local environmental programs are used to identify develoo
demonstrate, and evaluate innovative pollution prevention techniques. Specifically, the WRITE Program
provides engineering and economic evaluations plus information dissemination for methodologiesTtnat
have the potential of reducing the quantity and/or toxicity of waste produced at the source of
generation, or to achieve practicable on-site reuse through recycling.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
An AROS unit manufactured by Water Technologies, Inc. was installed in the HP plant in
Sunnyvale, California to treat and recover Watts Nickel sulfate plating bath solution and rinse water This
report uses information from HP, plus contractor testing, to assess the effectiveness of the AROS unit in
the treatment and recovery of metal plating bath solution and rinse water. In addition the report
estimates the incremental cost savings resulting from reduced deionized water use, reduced wastewater
volume being pretreated, lower effluent and sludge disposal quantities, and recovery of plating solution.
Prior to installation of the AROS unit, the overflow rinse water from the Watts Nickel platina
process (approximately 1.3 million gal/yr) was added to the overall plating wastewater stream generated
by HP operat.ons (approximately 31 million gal/yr). At HP the overall plating wastewater stream is
pretreated pnor to discharge into the City of Sunnyvale sewer system. The pretreatment process
includes chemical precipitation of metals using sodium hydroxide and ferrous sulphate; PH adjustment
using sulfunc acid; and activated carbon adsorption. The chemical sludge generated by metals
precipitation is dewatered and transported to a remote RCRA approved disposal site.
The makeup water to the rinse tank of the Watts nickel plating process is deionized by passaqe
through an ion exchange resin. The ion exchange resin is regenerated using caustic and acid rinses In
addition, a percentage of the old resin is periodically replaced with new resin. The AROS unit recovers
for reuse a high percentage of the deionized water used in the Watts Nickel plating process
(approximately 1.3 million gal/yr) out of HP's total deionized water production of approximately 9 million
The AROS unit was installed in November 1989. After installation and debugging the system
was operated and tested from November 21, 1989 to December 18. 1989. The system was temporarily
taken off line in late December, 1989 to allow HP to test and evaluate the plating bath solution quality
-------
and to create a baseline of comparison for plating bath contents and performance. Results were
considered acceptable and the AROS unit was restarted in January 1990, and the test continued through
July 31. 1990. Counting one month in 1989 and seven months in 1990 the test totaled approximate!v 8
months. '
This report summarizes the performance data provided by HP and also provides the results of a
one day snapshot of the AROS unit operation as measured by chemical analyses of various process;
input and output streams. Section 1 provides background information about the project and Section 2
contains a technical description of the AROS unit. Existing data and the sampling program for the
additional data are discussed in Section 3. Details about the design of the sampling program are
provided in Section 4. The AROS unit performance was considered excellent by HP though some
problems were experienced, as discussed In Section 5. Section 6 presents the economic analysis of the»
AROS system. Section 7 contains bibliographic information. Appendix A summarizes the field activities
Appendix B presents analytical sampling results. Appendix C summarizes the continuous data and
Appendix D is the Quality Assurance Project Plan.
-------
SECTION 2
DESCRIPTION OF THE AROS UNIT INSTALLATION
The HP facility in Sunnyvale, California manufactures printed circuit boards for use in HP
personal computers. As one step in the manufacturing process, Watts Nickel plating is used to plate a
thin layer of conductive material on a non-conductive surface, like epoxy/plastic or ceramic Watts
Nickel is also widely used in other industries for decorative plating operations. During the test program
the HP product line was operated from one to three shifts per day.
Figure 1 is a schematic flow diagram of how the AROS unit was used in the nickel plating
operation at HP. In the upper half of the figure the flow of the production parts (printed circuit boards)
is shown from left to right as follows:
• First, the printed circuit (PC) boards are attached to moving racks. The moving racks
carrying the parts move through the Watts Nickel sulfate solution plating bath of about
1.400 gallons capacity where the nickel plating is electroiytically applied to the PC
boards. When the PC boards are removed from the bath, plating solution adheres to
them. The PC boards are briefly held over the plating bath to allow plating solution to
drip back into the plating bath before moving on. The plating solution that adheres to
the PC boards is called "dragout."
• Second, the PC boards move through the 'dirty" rinse tank which is the first of two rinse
tanks in series. As shown in Figure 1, the clean rinse water enters the second rinse tank
on the right and flows in the opposite direction (right to left) from the movement of the
PC boards. In this way, the PC boards encounter the cleanest rinse water last just
before exiting the second "clean" rinse tank. This method of having the parts and the
rinse water move in opposite directions is called countercurrent rinsing. Each of the
rinse tanks has a capacity of 450 gallons.
The AROS unit accepts as an influent the waste steam of overflow rinse water containing
dissolved metal compounds from the "dirty" rinse tank. As illustrated in Figure 1, the AROS unit then
treats this rinse water to separate out the metal compounds. This separation creates two product
streams. First, a stream of deionized water called the permeate, and second, a liquid stream of
concentrated metal compounds called the concentrate. Both of these product streams are reused in the
production process. The permeate stream is returned to the "clean" water rinse tank. The concentrate
stream of metal compounds is returned to the plating bath. This recycling eliminates the need for
normal wastewater discharge, although, as seen In Figure 1, there is a standby emergency bypass
connection to the existing wastewater pretreatment facility if needed. In addition to providing near zero
discharge capability, the AROS unit also greatly reduces the volume of new deionized makeup water
needed for the rinse tank. It also reduces the quantity of new nickel sulfate solution that must be added
to the plating bath to maintain the required nickel concentration.
Because of the intermittent flow of various streams into and out of the AROS unit it is difficult to
provide a snapshot of the flow volume in various streams. Reported flow volumes for the test period,
-------
uj
UJ
95
>
I
t
3xa!
u. H O
-------
which comprised nearly 5000 hours, are approximately as follows:
• Rinse water cleaned and recycled = 190,000 gal. (38 gph)
• Concentrated Watts Nickel solution recycled = 1.100 gal. (0 2 gph)
• New makeup deionized water used = 31,000 gal. (6.2 gph)
ra™^D rl"9 th® test P6^ tne PC manufacturing line was operating at substantially below maximum
capacrty. The reader should note that the manufacturer reports that the AROS unit has a sustaiSd
capacfty of 180 to 240 gph to dean and recycle rinse wateVand 3 to 4 gph to reTydl con
Watts Nickel sdubon. Obviously, the unit at HP was operating significantly below ££SJ
adversely affected the economic benefits as discussed later in Section 6.
DUItn9 the teSt Peri°dl the PC manufacturina »ne was operating substantially below maximum
" Ca WOU'd ^ ^en °Perati"9 al*>ut 8.500 hoirs annuTand^
haV8'been about 1'275 mi!Iion galloS (150
The,A£?S Unit evaluated bV HP 's manufactured by Water Technologies Inc (WTI) Edina
nf on^l03"8 the Unit their ZDR S*stem: an abbreviation for zero discharge reSy Th
of he AROS unrt ,s a specialized reverse osmosis unit. Reverse osmosis is a physical pr«Sss in
Separated from those dissolv^ ^eriaS pSSfre is
no -
2S^ ? 1 ^" °n.?ne SWe °f 3 membrane banter- Water passes through the membrane but
other matenalsindud.ng dissolved metal ions remain behind, thus becoming mo>e concentrated T fe
o^Tl tTil^T Tde °f ^f^ tWn fflm P1^05 that can P«fom.;*B under a wS Snge of
pH (1 to 13.5) and high pressures (400 to 1100 psi) as needed to reconcentrate a wide range of dilute
rinse waters to produce recyded plating. bath solutions. 9
^.,rfirt 'H f^111?" f the reverse °Sm°sis membrane. the AROS unit contains pumps, valves interim
solut.on holdmg anks, sensors and piping needed to manage the flows into and ou? of the memb^ e
f ' °n^ automatical|y controlled by a computer program that monitors tw qS (us
^ ^— ' "*» 2 " a -hematic d,g?am^f £"
a., ''e2uir?ment for the AROS unit js relatively small. The unit is enclosed in a lidded box
aorar to h9 , ? , ^ by ^^ ™* **Umblng- electrical' and communications connect,
appear to be relatn/ely s.mple and do not require major modifications to existing utilities necilon°
-------
o
Figure 2. Schematic Diagram of Internal AROS Unit Components. (Source: Water Technologies)
-------
SECTION 3
IDENTIFICATION OF DATA NEEDS
EXISTING DATA
M- , -i JT'1"9 ta wa! Provided bV HP ab«ut their sampling and monitoring program for the Watts
Nickel pla&ng process. The program included continuous monitoring (every 15 seconds) of Paramete
JT ^"H 6l COISUCtIvrty and PH at various monitoring points in the sysfem. Streams
make'up line> the emefgency bypass line- the
In addition to the continuous monitoring program, plating bath No. 1 was sampled and analyzed
weekly. Analyses were conducted for nicke!, PH, Nikal PC-3 (Saccharin), boric acid. cKS* ^uS ^
PC 5 h J ™ a° l^T*1 ^T^ ** concentration '* Important to buffer the plating bath. Nikal
PC-3 is an organ* additive that must be maintained at a desirable level; neither too high or too low a
cones nir3t ion.
HP uses ductility testing as a key indication of the plating process performance If the nato
layer * too brittle, then future component failure can occur HP was particEfarly concerned thaUhe
recovered concentrated Watts Nickel solution from the AROS unit might contah3 ^ impuSefthat would
adversely effect ductilrty, but the recovered solution proved satisfactory in this regard The to* b
performed on a coupon removed from samples of printed circuit board products at final inspection and
on a separate coupon plated from the recovered AROS unit concentrate The procedure ^ is
2 followin" 16 Sh66t ^ rem°Ved from the coupon and the s3"1^6 is subJect to the
a. A ball is pushed through the sample sheet at a controlled pressure and rate
b. Pressure at which the metal sheet breaks is measured.
3. The results are compared with base line acceptable standards.
H ,-ISK Th(! ^P'6* plated from the recovered concentrate were all within the acceptable bounds of the
ductHrty test, according to HP. However, to be conservative HP only recycled alx)uthaW the concen rate
recovered from the AROS unit. During the first months of the test period; HP otearded the
concentrate until satisfied that recycling would not harm product quality. aiscaraed tne
SAMPLING PROGRAM TO OBTAIN ADDITIONAL DATA
anah, • ** a™monal s*™^ and monitoring was to spot-check the HP laboratory's
analysis results and continuous monitoring readings with independent laboratory results.
-------
Four streams were identified as target streams for sampling (Figure 1):
• Dirty rinse water stream influent to the AROS unit
• Deionized water (water make-up to the AROS unit)
• Permeate stream (recycled clean rinse water return)
• Concentrate Watts Nickel stream from the AROS unit (returned to the plating bath)
Laboratory analyses done for the samples are shown in Table 1 and indude nickel, sulfate
chlor.de. pH, conductivity. TDS and TOC. Details about sampling activities are provided in Appendix A.
TABLE 1. ANALYSES DONE DURING ADDITIONAL SAMPLING AND MONITORING
PARAMETER
Nickel
Sulfate
Chloride
pH
Conductivity
TDS
TOC
Color
METHOD
ICPMSf
EPA 300.6/ICC
EPA 300.6/IC0
EPA 9040/1 50.1
EPA 120.1
EPA 160.1
EPA 9060
SM 204A
Li___ ••• ... i
. .. >—
DETECTION LIMIT*
0.01
0.1
0.1
.,
0.5
6
0.5
10
All units are ppm except pH. conductivity (umhos/cm) and color (APHA platinum cobalt units)
Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry - ICPMS (similar to EPA 200.8 - a recently acceotpd
method) * v '
EPA 300.6/lon Chromatography method - a similar equivalent method to EPA 300.0
8
-------
SECTION 4
ANALYSIS OF SAMPLING RESULTS
Details of the one day sampling analysis results are shown in Appendix B and summarized in Table 2
The AROS unit achieved good separation of contaminants from the influent dirty rinse water The
composite permeate showed better than a 93% removal of nickel, sulfate, TDS and conductivity
Removal of chloride (76% removal) and TOO (77% removal) were less. The AROS unit normally
achieves removals in the 95 to 97 percent range, as measured by on-line conductivity meters The
sampling done at 3 hour intervals happened to be grab samples (four were taken) that represented
unusually high levels of conductivity (139 umhos/cm) and TDS (165 ppm). Normally, the conductivity of
the permeate rinse water makeup is substantially less than 100 umhos/cm.
For comparison purposes, a continuous monitoring data summary was obtained from WTI for the
period the sampling was conducted. Table 3 summarizes and Appendix C details the reading of
conductivity, flow, etc. for four passes through the AROS unit membrane. Each pass indicated a
different valve switch arrangement within the AROS unit that activated flow to or from internal tanks.
Conductivity values were averaged for each of the four passes and the removal rates were estimated
based on discrete conductivity readings at various times listed in Table 3. A direct comparison of
conductivity readings cannot be made between the data obtained from WTI and the results in Table 2
because of the internal storage of influents and effluents within the AROS unit. A snapshot does not
necessarily reflect the performance over a longer time. In addition, the influent conductivity shown in
Table 3 is the influent conductivity on the high pressure side of the membrane, not the influent
conductivity entering the AROS unit. Similarly, the concentrate conductivity shown in Table 3 is not the
concentrate level in the final product concentrate leaving the AROS unit. The concentrate conductivities
shown in Table 3 'are intermediate values achieved internally within the AROS unit.
The permeate conductivities shown in Table 3, however, are representative of the actual dean rinse
water product, and average less than 80 umhos/cm based on 4 passes (compared to 139 umhos/cm in
Table 2). '
The continuous monitoring removal rates shown in Table 3 were higher than those obtained from
SAIC s one-time sampling event. The continuous monitoring removal rates based on conductivity varied
from 98.3 to 99.4 percent; whereas the snapshot (one time) sampling result indicated a removal rate of
93 percent, based on conductivity. One sample was composited over a period of 16 hours for the
influent, and permeate samples. The concentrate was a composite of two shifts. Initially Hewlett-
Packard's laboratory was going to analyze the duplicate sample for accuracy and precision calculations
Split samples were collected for the Hewlett-Packard laboratory; however, the analysis was never done
As explained in Appendix A, no field blanks, equipment blanks and trip blanks were collected. The
quality control related to each sample depended on the quality control procedures followed by the
laboratory. Recovery rates for all parameters were within the acceptable range (refer to Appendix B)
As previously discussed, the continuous monitoring results reflect internal sensors inside the AROS unit
and do not represent actual removals by the AROS unit, which usually range from about 95 to 97
percent based on conductivity.
-------
n
>
Q
Ut
O
C3
Z
£
E
Q
^J
o
r*
IU
X
h
UI
0
AROS UNITPERFORMAN
u.
o
CO
TABLE 2. SAMPLING RESUI
q
^*T3
CO >
o o
II
Q. CO
CC
o
i §
CO CD
I"3
Q
•u
1 '
^
13
S
1
(D
a
^m
Concentrate0 Permeat<
a^
CD
5.
*C
O
p
CO CO tf
to in cd |
en r^ en I
T-
9 r: - .
o o o 1
en r-
*". T- 1-
O Q O «O
z
U5 S
8 S 52 «
i § § 5
s s §
in t~-
0 0 0 (n
in CM o w
(O T- r-
E E E
a a Q. i
a Q. a i
CO
"n m
*•" MB CD
O ^5 ^™ B*a
z o to a
in q
CO CO
en en
m
to d
j^
Q CO
Z
in en
Is- in
m m
CM CO
m en
CM T-
E
E^f
w)
if
•>
'•s
3
I
m
T-
CO
§
a
Q.
0
•o
e
CO
arithmetic averages are u
CO
2£
to
2
to
m
"S
«
i
o.
•s
i
c
&
CO
1
Z
«
5
3
C
E
o
r
e
a
J£
S
9
"5.
OS
•s
i
in
T—
O
our period with approximi
JC
CO
c
a
i_
Composite sample taken ovei
a
«•
§
&
a
5
j
9
Z
1
Tj
CD
a
CO
2
£
Q.
O
CO
T3
«
E'
concentrate taken at 1 1 a
"S .>.
O o
o =5
Composite sample of two bat
discharges concentrate perio
o
E
d.
(O
•o
M
E
to
0
CM
en
c
CO
s
s
•u
1
i.
3
JC
CO
les taken at approximatel
a
i
JQ
Composite sample of four gra
'O
One-time grab sample.
o
V51
o
3
9=
_C
"c?
1
c
CO
Q,
t
CO
J
*~~*
(9
"3
a
0)
1
CO
§
T3
Sw
"D
CD
Percent removal was calculat
•s
* ^
"5 c
m c
* "
•-—
C C
— o
5 .c
1 1
00 C
> «
2 *
Cu "O
(Q ffl
** ^
i 2
1 S
»M O
C U
-? «
M J
C TS
ax 3
s? °
e «
2 c
c %
CO O
g within the AROS treatm
,the percent removals sh
percent removals.
— 2 TO
O €/ {Q
.§ s s
r ® s
Note that there is a significan
the influent and permeate. Tfi
necessarily representative of ;
d
10
-------
0
O"5
en
t»
XI
2
O
O
CO
CO
>.
<
z
<
to
CO
Ul
CC
0
z
cc.
z
o
to
u
o
z
H-
z
o
(J
•
CO
LU
^
*~ 9
0
T/ Readings
H s
1
S 05
^ 05
"cB ^
O
«.• \> ^ co
*S *~- IO
^
* ifc
*• co rv
^J; «0 to
»-, *o
<\ ^0 O
*- ^ ^
?5 § -
t! 5
co co CM
*•» c3 »-.
c-j £
co xj- CM
to CD *»
S? 2
to
»c^
* ^ ^
1 f 1 5 a
1 §> c *
i: 11 i I
^ ,§ 1 f i
<* o <5 ^ cS!
1?
^
SR %
x""
%
0
1
to
|
x
C:
?
^
CM
^*
CM
CO
cp
05
/•
^
*^
^
.5
ss if 2 Time
Conductivity Readi
(umhos/cm)
J5
^
A_ H
» ^^ ^*i
^ ^ -5. O
2 §
o o
*
S S? >>' 55 r- i' co 05
s 3 § * I 3
$j £
o
10
«-
*
^ c
i ^ > ^ 1
1s 1 is I |s }
*~ CM c
^
o
Q.
jo^'N os^eo OCQ ±
«5^N S01^ S^ i
C
* ^ SN?X; ?> °> c'i
? ? S^? X0^^0
CM f^ ^ CM oj"«^
*^ u*
* J
to **
SCOO) ^VCM <*»»•*-«=
^^•CM c5ix^ S£°°
S3 ^ 8 <^ § - IS
^ f 3
® -a
Jg^O 05QCO ^.0)Wil
$L? *"* ^* ^O ^O 0^ CD ^fr ^ "^
CM "»' S 6j fo ^ '5 o
*•* ^ ^ e en
CM § 8
-------
SECTION 5
OVERALL SYSTEM PERFORMANCE
Overall the HP staff regard the ARCS unit as having shown good performance during the test
period. A major achievement was that rinse water quality was maintained at a low level of nickel
contamination. This is critical to the quality of the Watts Nickel plating process, which in turn is crucial
to the acceptability of the final PC board products. It was reported that no PC boards were rejected
because of Watts Nickel plating deficiencies.
Conductivity is used as an indication of nickel contamination. In the rinse water, approximately
11 umhos of conductivity represent 1 ppm of nickel. Prior to using the AROS system the deionized rinse
water supplied from the ion exchange units maintained a rinse water quality of 4 to 30 umhos
conductivity. The AROS system generally supplied rinse water quality ranging from 25 to 40 umhos
conductivity. The highest reading recorded during the test period was 211 umhos. The recycling of the
rinse water resulted in a 98 percent reduction in the use of new deionized water makeup for this plating
process.
The AROS unit also successfully produced concentrated Watts Nickel solution of adequate
quality to return to the plating bath solution. About half the concentrate produced by the AROS unit
was recycled. As discussed in Section 3, under existing data, HP did not start recycling concentrate
until totally satisfied that the quality was satisfactory for reuse. After extensive testing for the first half of
the trial period. HP did start recycling concentrate to supplement normal additions of fresh Watts Nickel
solution. Fresh Watts Nickel solution is expensive at about $5.00/gallon, so recovery and recycling of
about 500 gallons represented a direct savings of $2,500. Obviously, the savings would have been
greater if the concentrate had been recycled during the entire trial period. It was also calculated that
approximately 3 tons of category F006 sludge wasjnpt generated by the industrial waste water treatment
system that otherwise would have been without recycling. The sludge produced is shipped to Arizona
for treatment and recycling.
The AROS unit demonstrated excellent reliability during most of the test period. For example,
during the period February 28 through June 29, 1990 the system was on-line 3,594 hours and
experienced down-time of only 20 hours. However, mechanical failures experienced in July and August,
1990 caused down-time of over 200 hours during this period. The mechanical problems included failure
of the pressure pump and two high pressure concentrate control valves, plus some minor leakage at
fittings. A failure of the membrane occurred in September 1990, apparently caused by failure of a
temperature sensor that resulted in membrane overheating. As a result, AROS systems are now
equipped with cooling jackets around the pressure vessel to prevent membrane overheating. In
addition, the manufacturer has upgraded the sensors used and the control software.
12
-------
Over a period of several weeks the recycled Wafts Nickel plating solution experienced an
unacceptable bu.ld-up ,n the concentration of organic additive. A small in-line carbon filter was added to
the system to remove these organics prior to recycling the concentrate solution back to the plating bath
" 'S'" difeCtl int° the Pipe'ine Connectin9 the concentrate discharge of^e '
' at
13
-------
SECTION 6
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF THE AROS SYSTEM
COST EFFECTIVENESS OF THE AROS SYSTEM IN THE HEWLETT-PACKARD PLANT SETTING
At HP the savings from use of the AROS unit were directiy related to the incremental reduction
in spending for the following cost items:
« Sewer discharge fees.and fresh water cost, estimated by HP at $0.004/gal. or $4 per 1000
gal.
• Deionized (Dl) water production cost, estimated by HP at $0.0064/gal., or $6.40 per 1000
gal.
• Plating wastewater treatment costs, estimated by HP at $0.0062/gal., or $6.20 per 1000 gal.
These plating wastewater treatment costs include:
Labor
Power
Chemicals
Expendable parts and supplies replacement
Monitoring, e.g. analysis of influent and effluent
- Sludge treatment, handling, manifesting, transport and disposal
• Purchase of new plating chemicals estimated by HP at $5.00/gal. to make up for platina
solution drag-out losses a
.•. *™he ab°Ve listed Cost items are the "^J01" incremental cost savings resulting to HP from use of
the AROS system. As shown in Table 4, HP estimates the annual savings listed above to total
$26.250/year. Tables 5 and 6 provide additional cost details.
This incremental cost savings is balanced against the estimated annual expenditure for
and operating the AROS system, as follows:
• Electrical Power
• R.O. Membrane Replacement $2200
• Labor and Expendable Parts $5000
• Carbon Filters ^ ...
$ 90
Telephone Modem Contact With AROS Mfg. $ 50Q
$9419
14
•
-------
TA8LE 4
lid 1 1 I^VJ
1
2
3
4
uescription
Sewer Discharge Fees and Water Costs
Deionized (Dl) Water Production Cost1
Plating Wastewater Treatment Costs2
Purchase of New Plating Chemicals at an
85 Percent Reduction
Estimated
Savings
($/gai)
0.004
0.0064
0.0062
5.00
Quantity
(gai)
— -
1.275.000
1,275.000
1,275,000
1260 X
0.85
Total
Annual
^S)v/in/"io /^\
OaVings ($)
5,100
8,16)3
7,905
5,355
Dl water production cost is for chemicals, electricity and resin replacement onlv No labor
^
"*
TABLE 5. DETAILS OF DEIONIZED WATER PRODUCTION COST USED IN TABLE 41
tern No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
Description
Electricity
Resin Replacement
Caustic (NaOH)
Hydrochloric Acid
Sulfuric Acid
Labor, Amortization and
Other Costs
Annual Cost ($}
$13,440
$10,000
$27,412
$5,151
$ 2,475
No Difference
Estimated Unit
Cost {$)
6.730/KWH
$2.43/gal.
$0.57/gal.
Approximate Annual Production of D.I. Water is 9.1 Million Gal.
Cost per gallon =
$58,478
9.1 million gal/yr.
= $0.0064/gaJ.
15
-------
TABLE 6. DETAILS OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT COST USED IN TABLE 41
Item No. Description
1 Electricity
2 Sludge Disposal
3 Caustic (NaOH)
4 Sulfuric Acid
5 Ferrous Sulphate
6 Activated Carbon
7 Labor, Amortization and Other Costs
TOTAL
Annual Cost
($)
$46,455
$52,800
$ 49,941
$ 9,000
$19,600
$ 16,900
No Difference
$194,696
Estimated Unit Cost
($)
6.73C/KWH
$275/Ton
$2.43/Gal.
$0.57/Gal.
$0.10/Lb.
—
—
Approximate Annual Volume of Water Treated is 31.25 Million Gal.
Cost per gallon =
$194,696
31.25 million gal/yr
= $0.0062/gal
Subtracting $9,419/Yr. from $26,250/yr., HP estimates that the net annual savings from use of
the AROS unit would be approximately $17,100/yr. Investment is approximately $75,000, which
represents approximately $63,000 for the AROS unit plus another $12,000 for making the installation
permanent and training of operating personnel. Dividing $75,000 by $17,100 results in a payback period
of 4.4 years and a return on investment of 23 percent. As discussed below the economics would have
been more favorable had the AROS unit been utilized to a higher percentage of its capacity.
COST EFFECTIVENESS OF THE AROS SYSTEM AT OTHER SITES
The AROS unit at HP was operated at less than 50 percent of its volumetric flow capacity and
only about 10 percent of its design capacity to recover Watts Nickel solution. The economic benefits
would have been more favorable if the Watts Nickel plating process had operated for more hours and
produced more printed circuit boards. For example, the plating solution dragout at HP was estimated to
average only about 0.2 to 0.3 gph, whereas the AROS unit is designed to recover 2 to 3 gph of Watts
Nickel solution: ten times as much as was actually recovered. Similarly, the AROS unit volumetric
design capacity for influent rinse water is over twice the volume of rinse water processed at HP.
A second economic factor is that at HP the AROS unit treated only a small fraction, e.g. about 3
percent, of the total site wastewater flow. Therefore, in its cost analysis HP made no allowance for
reduced labor cost at its main wastewater pre-treatment plant. It was logical for HP to do this, since a 3
percent reduction in wastewater flow volume would not make a measurable difference in operating and
maintenance labor. However, at another facility where the AROS unit treated a larger percentage of the
total potential wastewater flow a labor reduction credit might have been included in the cost analysis.
16
-------
17
-------
SECTION 7
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Excel Tech, Inc. Hewlett-Packard Application Project to Evaluate a Total Rinse Recycle and
Reclamation System Provided by Water Technologies, Inc., Water Technologies Inc., April 1991.
2. PEI Assoc. Inc. Characterization and Treatment of Wastes from Metal Rnishing Operations.
Order No. PB91-125 732/AS, March 1991.
3. Planning Research Corporation. Waste Audit Study. Printed Circuit Board Manufacturers,
Department of Health Services, June 1987.
4. Water Technologies Inc., Various Items of Promotional Literature.
5. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Reducing Water Pollution Control Costs in the
Electroplating Industry, EPA/625/5-85/016, Office of Research Program Management, Office of
Research and Development. September 1985.
18
-------
APPENDIX A
SUMMARY OF FIELD ACTIVITIES
SAMPLING RATIONALE
c H f 'ft!?8 'n .OUt °f the AROS unit were sanded on October 1 7, 1990 to obtain a one dav
snapshot of the system's operation. The samples were split for independent analysis by the HP Y
laboratory and an outs.de laboratory. The sample results from the two laboratories were to be
Pr°Vided l° HP ^ 'OSt ^ a direC< C0m^is- ^- the
SAMPLING PROCEDURES
A i ;• ^1 HP Staf Cu0nducted the samPlin9- The sample containers were prepared by Western
2SS therVh'Cnf Laborat°fY- labels were fil!ed out and chain of custody maintaTned, ar^Jmples
placed .n the bottles as explained in the QAPP (Appendix D). In addition to SAIC personnel™
representative .from Water Technologies, Incorporated which manufactures the AROS unftand Robert
s^r Department of Toxic Substances Control were also present to observe
Four liquid streams were sampled as shown in Figure A-1 :
1) Influent to the AROS treatment unit, which is the rinse water from "Dirty" rinse tank No. 1
2) Deionized water used as makeup water to the AROS unit
3) 610 Z6d "dean" W3ter) Produced bv tne AROS unit that is returned to 'clean'
the AROS
1< 3; and 4 K6'6 C°l!eCted 3S comP°sftes as described in the following subsections
tn me gf^ ^""P'8- Upon collecti°n. a" samples were stored on ice wfththe
n of the concentrate (stream 4), which would have crystallized if put on ice At the end of the
day samples were poured into the prepared bottles for shipment to the laboratory A split sample of
each (except de,on,zed water) was provided to HP in bottles prepared by them SamplTs from Seams
12, and 3 were shipped to the laboratory in a cooler with blue tee. The conrent
SSff F ^ 3 hard°US material 3nd W3S not "-""am* °" 'ce- The
19
-------
-------
LU
S
UL.O
u.
20
-------
Sampling of the Influent Stream
An I SCO sampler was installed to automatically take samples of the influent to the AROS unit.
Due to the time lapse during treatment of the wastewater entering the unit, the influent to the unit cannot
be calibrated directly with the effluents (permeate and concentrate) from the unit. However, collection of
samples automatically throughout the day gave a good indication of the influent composition. Beginning
at 9:15 a.m., the ISCO was programmed to obtain approximately 165 mL of influent every 30 minutes.
The composite sample was collected from the ISCO sampler at 5:15 p.m. To chill the sample, ice was
packed around the Nalgene collection bottle located within the sampler.
Sampling of the Deionized Water
A one-time grab sample of deionized water was taken from a tap of the deionlzed water
production system at approximately 1:35 p.m. Hewlett Packard did not want a split sample of the
deionized water, as they are already knowledgeable about its composition.
Sampling of the Permeate
Grab samples of permeate were obtained from a tap off the AROS unit, at approximately three
hour time intervals throughout the day, for a total of four grab samples. The first sample was collected
at 9:20 a.m. As each sample was collected, it was placed into an acid-rinsed plastic one gallon bottle.
This composite bottle was kept on ice in a cooler. After the final sample was collected the composite
container was mixed by shaking. The composite sample was then poured into properly labeled bottles
prepared with preservative for the various analyses.
Sampling of the Concentrate
Concentrate is discharged from the AROS unit periodically, not continually. Two grab samples
of concentrate were collected from different batches. The first batch was discharged from the AROS
unit at about 11:00 a.m. It was collected in a five-gallon bucket. The contents of the bucket were
swirled to mix, and a sample was poured into a one-liter glass bottle. This sample was not chilled due
to the likelihood of crystallization of the highly concentrated plating solution. The remainder of the batch
was poured into a 55-gallon drum that HP uses to collect the concentrate. At approximately 4:30 p.m.,
another batch of concentrate was discharged from the unit. A sample from this batch was collected in
the same manner as the first. The contents of both liter bottles were then poured into a compositing
container (one-gallon plastic), and swirled to mix. The bottles prepared by the laboratory were filled with
concentrate and shipped to the laboratory for analysis as described below.
PACKING, PRESERVATION, AND TRANSPORT OF SAMPLES
Ail bottles were taped with duct tape to prevent loosening of the caps in transit. The samples of
influent, deionized water, and permeate were placed into a small cooler, and packs of blue ice were put
in. Remaining gaps were filled with styrofoam "peanuts,' and a small amount of ice was added to the
top. The laboratory confirmed that the samples were still cold when they arrived the next morning.
21
-------
nmv/H JS? f WK3S ^i"1 ^P^y and shipped as a hazardous material. Hewlett-Packard
provKied the informat.on, box, and proper label for this shipment. Taped bottles were placed deep in an
absorbent matenal in the box. The remaining airspace was stuffed wSTcrumpled newsptrSs The box
Tn^ H^ rf^ With the Pf0per Shippin9 "a™ of the ^bstance, 'Co^ive UqK O S ' and
the UN number. UNI 760. The Federal express office accepted the samples after a 4?PPt>s
nnnf!CSrf ^r artldeS" W3S comP)eted- The ^ent determined that since the total quantity
consisted of more than one quart, the shipment would have to go on a cargo rather than a passenXr
plane. The laboratory confirmed receipt of this box by 10 a.m. The following mornfng paSSengeT
22
-------
APPENDIX B
WEST COAST ANALYTICAL
SAMPLING RESULTS
June 25, 1987
To Our Customers:
Ref: Sample Storage Policy
With each report as it is completed we include a Sample Storage
Card. This card is to be returned each time, so that proper
handling of your samples can be maintained.
Our policy as stated on the card will be adhered to in the future
unless we receive back the sample storage card indicating
samples to be returned at customers expense. We do not store
samples after 30 days of job being completed.
Thank you in advance for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
WEST COAST ANALYTICAL SERVICE, INC.1
R.'Northington
Controller
RN/ds
23
-------
October 31, 1990
SAIC
1720 E. Wilshire Ave.
Santa Ana, CA 92705
Attn: . Ilknur Erbus-White
JOB NO. 16864
LABORATORY REPORT
Samples Received; Nine (9) water samples and three (3)
Date Received: 10-18-90
Purchase Order No: R5503467
The samples were analyzed as follows:
Samples Analyzed.
Four (4) samples
One (1) sample
Four (4) samples
Nickel by ICPMS
QC Summary for ICPMS
One (1) sample
Four (4) samples &
two (2) duplicates
Four (4) samples &
two (2) duplicates
Four (4) samples &
two (2) duplicates
Four (4} samples t
two (2) duplicates
Chloride and Sulfate by
EPA 300.6/IC
QC Summary for EPA 300.6/IC
pH by EPA 9040/150.1
Total Dissolved Solids
by EPA 160.1
Conductivity by EPA 120.1
Color by SM 204A
Result^
Table 1
Table 2
Table 3
Table 4
Table 3
Table 6
. Table 7
Table 8
Page 1 of 7
Michael Shelton
Technical Director
. Northington, Ph.D.
President
24
-------
WEST COAST ANALYTICAL SERVICE, INC.
SAIC Job | 16864
Ms. Ilknur Erbas-White October 31, 1990
LABORATORY REPORT
Samples Analyze4 Analysis Resultg
Four (4) samples Total Organic Carbon (TOC)
by EPA 9060 Table 9
One (l) sample QC Summary for EPA 9060 Table 9
Page 2 of 7
25
-------
WEST COAST ANALYTICAL SERVICE, INC.
SAIC ' ' •
Ms. Ilknur Erbas-Whita Sctoberll? 1990
LABORATORY REPORT
TABLE
Parts Per Million
Sample NO, NjLcjs£i
S?nSentrat* S2700
DI Water 0 ,«
Influent 65J'19
Permeate 20 5
Detection Limit o!oi
Dates Analyzed: 10-23-90 & 10-25-90
TABLE 2,
QC Summary for Nickel by ICPM$
m % Recpvery. MSfi % Recovery RPD
20'5 107 87 107 87 0
Spike Level: 100 ppn
Date Analyzed: 10-25-90
Page 3 of 7
26
-------
WEST COAST ANALYTICAL SERVICE, INC.
SAIC
Ms. Ilknur Erbas-Whit«
• Job f 16864
October 31, 1990
LABORATORY REPORT
Sample ID
Concentrate
DI Water
Influent
Permeate
Detection Limit
ND-Not Detected
** values in nig/Kg
Dates Analyzed: 10-19-90
10-22-90*
TABLE ?
Parts Per Million
bv EPA 300.6/IC
Chloride Sulfate
7800**
ND
120
29
0.1
79000**
0.11
1100*
18 •
0.1
Component
Chloride
Sulfate
.29
18
TABLE 4
PC Summary for EPA 300.6/IC
Sample ID; Permeatq
CUE EEC BS MSP %
Detection Limit: 0.1 ppm
29
18
RED
0
0
17
31
17
31
81
65
0
0
Spike Level - 20 ppm
Page 4 of 7
27
-------
WEST COAST ANALYTICAL SERVICE, INC.
SAIC
H3. Ilknur Erbas-wnite OctoberS®" 1990
^«BM»«MMamaMMBOQMB»aMBa*M
LABORATORY REPORT
•M^BHBVEMMMM
TABLE 5.
bv EPA 9040/150,1
gftPPle IP PH (Units)
Concentrate 4. j
Concentrate (DUP) 4.1
DI Water 6 1
DI Water (DUP) 6fi
Influent 6 0
Influent (DUP) 6.0
Permeate 5.7
Permeate (DUP) 5]^
Date Analyzed: 10-25-90
TABLE $
Parts Per Million
bv EPA
Sample IP Total Pis?Piv^
Concentrate 172000
Concentrate DUP 171000
DI Water ND
DI Water DUP ND
Influent 2490
Influent DUP 2560
Permeate 180
Permeate DUP 150
Detection Limit 6
ND-Not Detected
Date Analyzed: 10-19-90
Page 5 of 7
28
-------
WEST COAST ANALYTICAL SERVICE, INC.
SAIC
Ms. Ilknur Erbas-White October 31 1990
LABORATORY REPORT
TABLE
Micromhos Per
(umhos/cm)
Sample IP Conductivity bv EPA 120.1
Concentrate 53700
Concentrate DUP 53800
DI Water 3.7
DI Water DUP 3.8
Influent 1980
Influent DUP • . 1990
Permeate 137
Permeate DUP ' 142
Detection Limit '0.5
Date Analyzed: 10-19-90
TABLE
APHA Plati,nyirc Cobalt
Sample ID Color bv SM 204 ft
Concentrate 9700
Concentrate DUP 9500
DI Water NO
DI Water DUP ND
Influent 140
Influent DUP 140
Permeate ND
Permeate DUP ND
Detection Limit 10
ND-Not Detected
Date Analyzed: 10-19-90
Page 6 of 7
29
-------
WEST COAST ANALYTICAL SERVICE, INC.
SAIC
Ms. Ilknur Erbas-White
Job I 16864
October 31, 1990
LABORATORY REPORT
TABLE 9
Per Million
bv EPA
Sample ID
Total Organic carbon
Concentrate
Concentrate DUP
Influent
Permeate
Permeate DUP °
DI Water -
External Reference Standard
Detection Limit
Date Analyzed: 10-26-90
1610
1640
30.8
6.91
7.10
0.'74
20 (100* Recovery)
0.5
Page 7 of 7
30
-------
Ktmr
£
CHAIN OF CUSTODY
WEST COAST ANALYTICAL SERIVCE. INC.
9340 Alftirm *vt_ _S*nt. Ff^rf •p/C*>90670 ^ ^ ^ HQ
1 6 8 6
PMM Z13/9 / - c ? ^
' liXhtA-fr
' roifc-b'&ic. \
v4«.^/ )
/
_
•
Strapl*
Matrix
^jJfcfV f"
K •
11
pfodjc*-
\m
Ir
=?*, ^ i?|
t«
Uttl-'ofCflBUiMir*
'
.-
•
— ^
^
3
/A-
B.tiMrf,i.^ifc..ft.mM»ii ASfiiMtiirtl> 'Rec«fv*fMM.iMl.:__ Dfitf/Tlme
-1?1cw« Widc*AjM /'•/?/ /o 53
/ o ' d "-"•
Yhttt
ID 1 6 8 6 4
31
-------
APPENDIX C
WATER TECHNOLOGIES INC
CONTINUOUS DATA SUMMARY
32
-------
• File Program*
Hewlett Packard
Watts nickel
Archive Option* System Calib Rinse Membrane
ZDR-513 P*SS • ! PERFORMANCE DATA
(LAST 6 TIMES IN PASS)
Uog
date
time o? day
'Pass time, *in
Rinse tine, *in
Control time, min
Rinse volu»«. 9*1
Control volume, gal
Permeate temperature, deg F
Concentrate temperature
Pump flow rate, gpn
Permeate flow, rate, flpa _
Concentrate flow rate, gpra
System pressure, psi
Membrane pressure drop, psi
Feed tank conductivity, umho
permeate conductivity, umho
Concentrate conductivity
Membrane separation ratio
"Min. permeate conductivity
10-17
13:56
18.72
16.62
16.53
21.9
17.4
74
71
5.02
1.40
0.55
217
12
5984
12.
4776
388.5
12
10-17
15:15
18.16
16.02
18.02
21.4
17.4
75
71
5.05
1.44
0.49
217
12
5608
12
4344
365.5
11
10-17
12:28
9.28
6.92
9.27
•«.4
14.0
73
70
4.54
1.31
0.47
195
5
5368
11
5068
282.5
11
10-17
12: *
3.45
1.45
2.58
0.3
6.0
30
75
3.69
0.38
1.87
118
3
6184
106
7928
74.9
71
10-17
11:41
7.22
1.50
7.20
0.0
14.7
79
71
3.70
0.29
i.eo
74
2
5256
157
1968
12.5
73
ravw^KP^Pvr^^
10-17
u: 4
6.32
st. BO
6.30
0.3!
H2.f ||
71=i
69
3.67
0.38J
:i.ao =
79 .
2
4064 •
.77.
U86U
15.31
32;
£RR(0) OK
Copyright (c) 1990 Water Technologies, Inc.
• File Programs
Hewlett
Watts nicw*l
Archive Options System • Calib Rinse Membrane
ZOR-S13 PASS 82 PERFORMANCE DATA
(LAST 6 TIMES IN PASS)
log
10-.'L7-9(
14:,SO:2(
date
time of day
Pass time, ain
Rinse time, »in
Control tix.e, .-nin
Rinse volume, gal
Control volume, gal
Permeate temperature, deg F
Concentrate tsc-perature
Pump flew rate, gpn
Permeate flew rate, gpra
Concentrate flow rate, gpra
System pressure, psi
Menbrana pressure drop, psi.
Feed tank cc«cuctivity, un»no
Ferireate conductivity , uisho
Concantrsia conductivity
feff-brane *.e.s*ration ratio
Max. cc'-,ce--':rate conductivity
10-17
14:28
3.97
3.90
1.27
8.3
2.1
79
76
4.94
3.15
1.78
564
7
2836
17
9616
S91..0
9616
10-17
14: 5
7.00
7.00
3.70
8.7
5.5
80
75
5.O5
0.75
1.40
137
11
2804
46
3288
180.0
9120
10-17
13:22
9.23
9.23
4.50
11.9
4.2
80
75
5.00
1.00
1.11
175
2
2464
47
7840
167.8
9024
10-17
12:39
11.27
11.10
5.40
13.0
4.9
79
75
4.36
1.20
0.69
197
0
2460
54
7664
142.5
9120
»T .'.jp-v v •^*"irj
10-17
11:56
14.83
11.87
9.17
11.6
5.7
80
76
3.69
0.98
O.40
186
3
2516
47
SS44
182.8
69U
10-17
11:17
12.67
1:1.20
6.43
11. 5
4.8
76
7<
3.67.
i.oe
0.49
197
0
780*
S&
7926
1-«2.S
894*.
£R«i(0) CK
--- Copyright
1990 Water TecM-.olsgies. I
33
-------
• rile Programs
Hewlett Packard
Watt* nickel
Archive Option* Syst«a Calib Rir.se Membrane
ZOR-513 PASS 03 PERFORMANCE DATA
(CA3T « TIMES IN PASS)
Cog
date
time of day
Pass tin*. «in
Rinse time, nin
Control time, nin
Rinse volume, 3*1
Control voluae, gal
Perneat* temperature, deg F
Concentrate temperature
Pump flow rate, gpm
Perweate flow r*t«, gpm
Concentrate flow rate, gpa
System pressure, psi
Membra no pressure drop, psi
Feed tank conductivity, umho
Persieate conductivity, umho
Concentrate conductivity
Membrane separation ratio
Max. concentrate conductivity
10-17
14:10
6.90
6.30
0.00
9.0
0.0
83
81
4.95
2.89
o.ss
729
12
12368
50
20334
410. S
20334
10-17
13:29
6.93
6.43
0.00
8.6
0.0
83
80
5.02
1.49
O.S8
385
5
10664
74
19040
257.0
19040
10-17
12:47
7.40
5.97
o.oo
7.5
0.0
83
80
5.01
1.40
0.60
388
5
9648
79
18848
239.5
18848
10-17
12:11
4.97
4.10
0.30
10.9
0.2
83
81
3.54
3.02
0.64
850
7
11216
54
22688
423.5
22683
10-17
12: 2
6.05
3.80
0.00
3.7
0.0
82
79
3.69
0.91
0.58
244
4
8208
94
15520
165.8
15536
tO- 1 7
A 1 : 26
9.O"1!
1
5.271
O.OO'
5.0i
o.o
I*
811
78
3.69
0.87
0.62
281
4
11600
109
18080
166.5
16080
CRft(O) OK
Copyright (c) 1990 Water Technologies, Inc
• File Programs Archive
Hewlett Packard ZOR-513
Watts
Options System Calib Rinse Membrane
PASS *4 PERFORMANCE DATA
(CAST 6 TIMES IN. PASS)
cog
date
time of rfay
Pass tiir.e, nin
Rinse tiise, win
Control tine, min
Rinse vol-.iae, gal
Control vsluiR*, gal
Permeate temperature, deg F
Concentrate temperature
Pump flow rate, gpm
Permeate flow rate, gpm
Concentrate flow rate, gpm
System pressure, psi
Menbrare cressure drop, psi
Feed tar* conductivity , ur.ho
Permeate conductivity, umho
Concentrate conductivity
Per-fcra-e stearaticn ratio
fax. cc^ce^trate conductivity
1O-17
9:36
4.62
• 1.02
2.88
2.5
1.7
84
82
1.70
O.96
0.62
951
10
20384
149
22443
218.5
32448
10-17
2:22
4.75
3.50
2.92
6.3
1.7
86
84
1.51
1.C2
O.58
1003
8
20384
131
30432
231.8
30432
10-16
22:31
5.05
2.93
2.25
4.8
1.3
87
85
1.50
1.04
0.56
999
9
19963
123
29792
242.3
30112
10-16
16:47
4.95
3.40
2.52
6.1'
1.3
83
81
1.47
1.00
O.S1
998
8
19968
127
30400
239.8
30400
ERR(O) C<
Copyright (c) 199O
34
-------
APPENDIX D
QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN
FOR
THE EVALUATION OF AN ADVANCED REVERSE
OSMOSIS SYSTEM AT THE SUNNYVALE, CALIFORNIA
HEWLETT-PACKARD FACILITY
July 20, 1990
Submitted to:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
Submitted by:
Science Applications International Corporation
635 West Seventh Street, Suite 403
Cincinnati, Ohio 45203
EPA Contract No. 68-C8-0062, Work Assignment No. 1-18
SAIC Project No. 1-832-03-959-00
35
-------
6.6.1
QUAU7Y ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN APPROVAL FORM
for
Contracu/lAG./CooporatJve Aflreemenu/in-houM Project,
RREL QA ID No:
RREL Project Category: _m_ RREL
, m~-1 • nnci
Contractor: Science Applications International Corporation
COMMITMENT TO IMPLEMENT THi ABOVE QA PROJECT
womractor-i Projocvra«kM^g9r(print)
Thomas J. Wagner
contractor OA Mana8er (pnmj :
utner as AppropriateyAnill.tlon- (print)
otn«r at Appropriate/Affiliation* (print)
wuier a* Appropriate/Affiliation- (print)
PLAN:
APPROVAL TO PROCEED IN ACCORDANCE TO THE
ABOVE QA PROJECT PLAN:
RREL Technical Project Mana8er (print
CONCURRENCES:
RHEL (QAPJP AF)
(Sept. 198S)
Data
RREL Section or Branch Chief (print)
Date
36
-------
-------
HP - QAPJP
Section No.: Q
Revision No.: Q
Date: IxbJfL
Pa«e: l-sLl
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION
.EASES
1.0 INTRODUCTION
"""**""*""**"*""" «5
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE OBJECTIVES
«*"•«»•«.......,.,.„„,.... ^
4.0 SITE SELECTION AND SAMPLING PROCEDURES
FOR CRITICAL MEASUREMENTS 7
5.0 ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES AND
CALIBRATION l
6.0 DATA REDUCTION, VALIDATION AND
REPORTING
7.0 INTERNAL QUALITY CONTROL CHECKS 2
8.0 PERFORMANCE SYSTEMS AUDITS !
9.0 CALCULATION OF DATA QUALITY
IMPLJCATORS _ 2
10.0 CORRECTIVE ACTION t
11.0 QA/QC REPORTS TO MANAGEMENT 1 1
£Eyjsjo_N,
0
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7/20/90
7/20/90
7/20/90
7/20/90
7/20/90
7/20/90
7/20/90
7/20/90
7/20/90
7/20/90
7/20/90
37
-------
HP - QAPJP
Section No.:
Revision No.:
Date:
Page:
My 20. 1990
2 of 2
DISTRIBUTION LIST:
Lisa Brown,
Guy Simes,
Robert Ludwig,
Mary Clifford,
Joe Burquist,
Tom von Kuster,
Curtis Schmidt,
Ilknur Erbas-White,
Thomas Wagner,
Joe Arlauskas,
U.S. EPA
U.S. EPA
California DHS
Hewlett-Packard
Hewlett-Packard
wn
SAIC
SAIC
SAIC
SAIC
38
-------
HP - QAPjP
Section No.: i.
Revision No.: 0
July 20.
1 of 3
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The objective of the Waste Reduction Innovative Technology Evaluation (WRITE)
Program is to identify, develop, demonstrate, and evaluate innovative pollution prevention
techniques. The WRITE Program is part of the EPA Risk Reduction Engineering
Laboratory's (RREL) pollution prevention research program and is a cooperative effort
between the U.S. EPA and state and local environmental programs to identify, develop,
demonstrate and evaluate innovative pollution prevention techniques. Specifically, the
Waste Reduction Program provides engineering and economic evaluations plus information
dissemination for methodologies that have the potential of reducing the quantity and/or
toxicity of waste generated at the source, or to achieve practicable on-site reuse through
recycling.
An Advanced Reverse Osmosis System (AROS) manufactured by Water
Technologies, Inc. (WTI), Minnesota was installed in the Hewlett-Packard (HP) plant in
Sunnyvale, California to treat and recover nickel sulfate plating rinse water. The technology
provides zero discharge capability. A test program is ongoing to evaluate the effectiveness
of the AROS in the treatment and recovery of metal plating rinse water and compare its
costs with that of an existing chemical precipitation system.
The AROS unit was installed in November 1989. After initial installation and
debugging, the system was tested from November 21, 1989 to December 18, 1989. The
system was temporarily taken off-line at the end of 1989, to allow HP to test and evaluate
the plating bath quality and to create a baseline of comparison for bath contents and
performance. Results were considered acceptable and the AROS unit was restarted in
January 1990, and has been operated on-line since then.
The operation of the AROS unit is monitored with computers using specialized
software. Samples are collected and analyzed by HP to assess the chemical content of
various streams into and out of the AROS unit This plan describes proposed activities
39
-------
HP • QAPJP
Section No.: J '
Revision No.: Q
Date: July 20. 199Q_
Pa«e: 2 of 3
required to assess the AROS technology and evaluate data. Results of the evaluation will
be presented in a final report and papers will be submitted to related technical journals and
conferences.
The existing wastewater treatment system for plating wastes is designated by HP as
the "Water Purification System" (WPS). A schematic of the processes is shown in Figure
1-1.
The design flow of the WPS is about 120 gallons per minute (gpm). Rinse waters
from various plating operations, including nickel, copper and tin are collected. Sulfuric acid
is added to lower the pH and ferrous sulfate is added to reduce the bivalent copper to
monovalent copper and to form ferrous complexes with the free EDTA that is used as a
complexing agent to solubilize copper. The pH is then raised to 11 in a separate tank with
the addition of sodium hydroxide causing metals to precipitate out as hydroxide salts. The
chemical addition is done in a completely mixed reactor. Settling occurs in three.subsequent
tanks. Chemical sludges are pumped to a recessed plate filter press system for dewatering.
Dewatered sludges are disposed to an off-site RCRA-approved facility at a reported cost of
about $275/ton for transport and disposal. Dewatered sludge generation is about 11.5 tons
per month.
The effluent from the recirculation/settling tanks is pumped to 48 ultrafilters for final
polishing. Solids collected by the filters are recirculated back to the recirculation/settling
tanks. The filtrate is discharged to the city sewer.
A minor side stream from the ultrafiltration system is an hydrochloric acid solution
used to periodically (every 3 months) clean the filter elements. The acid solution can be
used several times for cleaning. Approximately 50 gallons of acid are used every 6 months.
The acid collected from the cleaning process is pumped into an onsite low flow high
concentration neutralization system for batch treatment and disposal. HP has good records
for the performance and costs of the existing water treatment system.
40
-------
ui ^
Il^l
^ i — m 5
E oo > 8
=J «2 o uj «
u. a H-
-------
HP - QAPjP
Section No.: JL_
Revision No.: Q
Date: July 20. 199Q
pa«e: l-of 11
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2.1 Background
The demonstration ARCS unit is currently installed to treat and recycle nickel sulfate
and nickel chloride rinse solutions. A schematic flow diagram of the plating process units
and the ARCS unit is shown in Figure 2-1. The nickel plating line consists of two plating
baths followed by a "dirty" rinse tank and a "clean" rinse tank. Rinse water flows
countercurrent to the flow of the items being plated. The overflow from the "dirty" rinse
tank is the influent to the AROS unit at a flow of about 4 to 5 gpm. The treated effluent
(permeate) produced by the AROS unit becomes the clean water supply to the "clean" rinse
tank. A supply of fresh deionized water provides additional makeup water to replace
evaporative losses.
The AROS unit generates a concentrate at different intervals, depending upon the
conditions of flow, conductivity and pH within the AROS unit. Sensors and controls
required to manage the membranes set the valves on and off to allow or prevent flow to or
from the concentrate stream pipes (Figure 2-2). The concentrate is returned to the plating
bath, as shown in Figure 2-1.
The AROS unit is basically a reverse osmosis (RO) unit with a highly sophisticated
design that allows recovery of rinse water and plating bath solutions. The AROS differs
from other reverse osmosis units by its ability to use tolerant membranes that do not require
pH adjustment to neutral. Membrane materials and system components have been specially
adapted to plating environments and can concentrate dilute rinse solutions to near bath
strength (initial conductivity of the solution) without the need for additional concentration
technology. The unit also contains a continuous monitoring system that monitors the
influent, permeate and concentrate temperatures, flow rates and conductivities every 15
seconds. At the HP facility, the unit has demonstrated the ability to produce concentrate
at a nickel concentration that is about 40 to 50 percent of the original bath strength. Figure
2-2 is an schematic diagram of the AROS unit
42
-------
Section
Revision
Date:
Page;
uj 0
July 20.1990
2 of 11
i~ UJ
UJ
£z
UJ
g
1
Q o.-*
gcE,
S^
^o
u.0
11
:j a.
9.-
Q
UJ
CL
CO
I
cr
ffi
a
Si
u
••"
o
o
UJ
5
o
c w z
£S<
Q CC I-
a.
u.
O
UJ
t-
LU
O
o
o
« o
to «
> r—
13 Q.
B O
-------
Section No.: 2_
Revision No.: 0
Pa«e:
3 of 11
CLEAN RINSE
TANK 2
Specialized Rtwrsi Osmosis
DIRTY RINSE
TANK1
TO PLATING BATH 1
Figure 2-2. Inside of a Topical AROS Unit"
• Courtesy of Water Technologies, Inc.
44
-------
HP - QAPJP
Section NOJ 2_
Revision No.: 0
_
Date: Ju]y 20. 199Q
Pa«e: 4L of 11.
Existing Sampling and Monitoring Program
22.1 Existing WPA Sampling and Monitoring Program
The existing WPS operation performance is monitored by an on-going sampling
program of the effluent. The effluent from the ultrafilters is collected using 50 ml samplers
6 times a day at three-hour intervals during the first two day-shifts. These samples are
composited into one sample which is analyzed for parameters such as nickel, copper, iron
and pH. Sludge disposed to an offsite facility is not analyzed by HP.
Existing AROS Sampling and Monitoring Program
The existing monitoring program for the AROS includes the parameters of flow,
conductivity and pH at various points in the system. Streams monitored include the
deionized water makeup line, the emergency overflow to the WPS line, the concentrate
return line and the permeate return line shown in Figure 2-2. Readings are taken every 15
seconds and are displayed on screen instantaneously at an onsite monitor located at the
facility. Preset values of conductivity and flow control the valves.
In addition to the continuous monitoring described above, the first plating bath is
sampled and analyzed weekly, collecting 1 liter samples. The analyses conducted are nickel,
pH, Nikal PC-3 (saccharin), boric acid, chloride, and ductility of a "plate" from the
concentrate solution. Nickel concentration is measured to estimate how much nickel is
recovered and returned to the plating bath. The quantity of recovered nickel reduces the
amount of new nickel that must be added to the plating bath to maintain the proper
concentration for optimum plating conditions. Boric acid (approximately 50 ppm) is
measured because the amount of boric acid needs to be determined in the plating bath
solution for buffer. Nikal PC-3 containing an aqueous solution of organic salts (the only salt
identified on MSDS is sodium saccharin) is added for plating operations and needs to be
maintained at a desirable level (1.4 ppm). Chloride (approximately 15 ppm) is present in
the plating bath as nickel chloride and needs to be maintained at a certain desirable level.
Ductility tests are run to check for impurities.
45
-------
HP - QAPJP
Section No.: 2
Revision No.: Q .
Date: July 20. 199Q
Page: 5 of 11
Other analyses are conducted to estimate the purity of the return concentrate.
During the reverse osmosis process, chemicals other than nickel are concentrated. These
parameters include VersaCLEAN 400, containing sulfamic acid and resistant breakdown
products. VersaCLEAN 400 is present in the plating bath water as a residue from previous
cleaning operations, and resistant breakdown products result from the high operating
temperatures of the nickel plating bath. Buildup of these compounds present in the
concentrate stream may affect the ductility of the nickel layer plated on the circuit boards.
The ductility is tested to determine the suitability of the return concentrate to maintain the
quality in the nickel plating bath. Impurities have to be kept to a minimum to avoid
brittleness.
There are two kinds of ductility tests. The first one is visual and the other uses a ball
bearing method. For visual ductility tests, a 3-inches by 5-inches brass panel is first plated
using the concentrate solution. The piece is then inspected visually for impurities
(discoloration, spots, dark or light areas, etc.). For ball bearing tests, a piece of stainless
steel panel, 2 inches by 2 inches, is placed in the concentrate solution and plated. The thin
metal is then peeled from the plate and subjected to a laboratory ductility test developed
by HP. The thin metal rectangle is placed in a ductility test apparatus and a ball bearing
is pushed slowly into it. The distance the ball moves before breaking the sheet is measured
and compared to the known distance that provides satisfactory ductility.
During the first month of operation of the AROS unit, concentrate was collected into
55-gallon drums before being returned to the nickel plating bath solution. Chemical and
ductility tests were run to evaluate plating quality of the concentrate to establish the
integrity of the concentrate. Chemical tests included nickel concentration and pH
measurements. Ductility tests were both visual and ball bearing type.
The first 19 tests were run on the plating bath solution to establish the baseline
organic impurities concentrations. Then, the AROS unit was hooked up and subsequent
ductility test results were compared to the baseline results. These tests showed that the
46
-------
HP - QAPJP
Section No.: 2
Revision No.: Q
Date: July 20. 1990
Pa*c: 6 of 11
integrity of the plating bath solution would not be in jeopardy when the concentrate stream
is in-line with the plating operation.
2.3 Purpose and Experimental Design
The purpose of additional sampling and monitoring is to compare the HP laboratory's
analysis results with the ones of an independent laboratory (SAICs) and to obtain a one-day
snap shot of the AROS unit operation at the facility. It is planned to conduct additional
analyses on a daily composite sample collected from each of the following streams (see
Figure 2-1):
• Concentrate stream (returned to the plating bath)
• Permeate stream (recycled rinse water return)
• Influent stream to the AROS unit (the dirty water rinse overflow)
• Deionized water (water makeup to the AROS unit)
Due to the internal storage capacity of the AROS unit, the concentrate and deionized
water (DI) makeup streams are not continuous (Figure 2-2). Only a discrete sample can be
taken from these two streams, whereas, a one-day composite over a period of 16 hours will
be collected from the influent and permeate streams. Dip samples will be taken from the
"dirty" rinse tank 1 and the deionized water, storage tank for the influent stream to the
AROS unit and deionized water samples. Concentrate and permeate samples will be
obtained from ports. Temporary storage of the concentrate during the 16-hour sample may
be necessary due to the non-continuous nature of the concentrate flow.
The collected samples will be split and analyzed by both the HP laboratory and
SAICs laboratory. HP analyses to be run on the samples are listed in Table 2-1. SAICs
laboratory analyses will include parameters listed in Table 2-2. All measurements made by
SAIC, except TOC/Color, are critical measurements. The TOC and/or Color analyses are
proposed as possible methods to monitor the organic impurities. One or both of these
methods will be used. However, it is possible that these general methods may not be able
to distinquish between the buildup of a partiepgdar compound or compounds that affect the
-------
HP - QAPjP
Section No--
Revision No.:
Date:
Page:
July 20. 199Q
7 of 11
quality of the metal plate and higher concentrations of organic compounds in general. In
other words, the buildup of a particular compound or compounds (not identified) would be
a problem; however, no noticeable change in the total organic content is observed, i.e, the
concentration of the offending compound is only a very small fraction of the total organic
or "colored" (UV and visible) compounds.
TABLE 2-i
ANALYSES WHICH WILL BE DONE BY HEWLETT-PACKARD
Parameter
Nickel (1)
pH(2)
Conductivity (2)
Method
AA
•
pH meter
Cond. meter
Detection
Limit
(ppm)
0.5
NA
NA
Stream
Influent to ARCS
Permeate
Concentrate
Influent to ARCS
Permeate
Concentrate
Influent to ARCS
Permeate
(1) The collected composite sample will be split and analyzed
by the Hewlett-Packard Laboratory and SAIC's Laboratory
(2) One-day of monitoring data (every 15 seconds) will be provided
by Hewlett-Packard
NA Not applicable
48
-------
HP - QAPjP
Section No.: 2
Revision No.: Q_
Date:
Page:
-8-of 11
TABLE 2-2
ANALYSES PROPOSED FOR ADDITIONAL SAMPLING AND MONITORING
Pawacier
Nickel
Sulfate
Chloride
PH
Conductivity
TDS
TOC(b)
Color (b)
Method ft)
AA (EPA 249.1)
or (EPA 200.7)
AA (EPA 249.2)
or (EPA 200.7)
Gravimetric (EPA 375.3)
or
Ion chromatography (EPA 300.0)
Titrametric (EPA 325.3)
pH meter (EPA 150.1)
EPA 120.1
EPA 160.1
EPA 415.1
EPA 110.3
Detection
Limit
(ppra)
0.04
0.015
0.001
0.015
— .
—
—
—
— .
—
— _
Stream
Concentrate
Influent to AROS
Permeate
DI water
Concentrate
Influent to AROS
Permeate
DI water
Concentrate
Influent to AROS
Permeate
DI water
Concentrate
Influent to AROS
Permeate
DI water
Concentrate
Influent to AROS
Permeate
DI water
Concentrate
Influent to AROS
Permeate
DI water
Concentrate
Influent to AROS
Permeate
DI water
Concentrate
Influent to AROS
Permeate
DI water
(a) Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes. EPA/600/4-79/020, March 1979
(b) Methods are optional; one of the two methods will be selected.
49
-------
HP - QAPJP
Section No.:
Revision No.: 0
Date: l!lIX_2fiL122Q
Pa«c: 3-of 11
2A Comparative Cost Etiolates for WPS and ARQ§
An economic evaluation will be made of the ARCS system on a side-by-side basis
with the existing WPS system. The capital cost of the AROS is $62,650. The savings from
the AROS unit are directly related to the reduction in spending for:
• Water and sewer charges related to discharges to the city sewer
» DI production
» Batch waste treatment for small quantities of waste -and sludge treatment
» Sludge transport and disposal
• Purchase of new plating chemicals to make up for drag-out losses
» Power costs for the WPS
« Ultrafiltration membrane replacement
cos* for *« WPS (Jt m*y be impossible to quantify the slight
difference, if any, resulting from a 5% volume reduction)
• Liability costs (if applicable)
« Worker health and safety training costs (if applicable)
The AROS unit will be analyzed for costs of:
• Power
• Replacement of the AROS membranes
• Labor
• Part replacement
Savings related to the recirculation of streams in the AROS unit, paybacks, health and safety
benefits, and tradeoffs, will be examined. HP has generally kept good records of costs that
can be analyzed to conduct this evaluation.
50
-------
HP - QAPJP
Section No.: 2 _
Revision Nou jQ __
Datc: Julv 20. 1990
Jfl-of 11
2-5 Organization and Responsibility
A project organization and authority chart is shown in Figure 2-3. The California
DHS and HP are cooperating with the Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory (RREL) on
this evaluation. Mr. Curtis Schmidt is the SAIC Work Assignment Manager and is
responsible for the technical and budgeting aspects of this work assignment Mr. Thomas
Wagner is QA Manager and prepared this QAPJP and is responsible for QA oversight on
this work assignment. Mrs. Ilknur Erbas-White will handle the day-to-day activities of the
project.
2.6 Schedule
The sampling is scheduled for mid to late August or early September, 1990.
51
-------
HP - QAPJP
Section No.:
Revision No.:
Date:
Page:
July 20. 199Q
11 of 11
w
O
2
* s
2 e
< co
A!
W
CO
D
U.S. EPA TECHNICAL
PROJECT MANAGER
L. Brown
J
Q
*£ .£?
2 H
(A ^
0 J
fe OJ
s
Q
o:
d-2
tu ^
a:
to u
O v
^ >5 w
c^<^
< H
CX
•
tu
O
SAIC
WORK ASSIGNMENT MANA
C. Schmidt
g
1
U H -2
^™j ^r £j
co 2 ri
M
0
u.
a, «
-5? ul|
wi 1 w|a
o J 3
f- ""
I
O
I
i
BO
52
-------
HP- QAPJP
Section No,:
Revision No.:
July 20. 199Q
Page: 1 of 2
3.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE OBJECTIVES
3<1 Precision. Accuracy, Completeness, and Method Detection Ljmits
Objectives for accuracy, precision, method detection limits, and completeness for the
critical measurements are listed in Table 3-1. Accuracy (as percent recovery) will be
determined from matrix spike recovery for nickel, sulfate, and chloride, and from laboratory
control samples for pH, conductance and TDS. Precision (as relative percent difference)
will be determined from the results of matrix spike duplicates for nickel, sulfate, and
chloride, and from laboratory duplicate analyses for pH, conductance and TDS. The
completeness will be determined from the number of data meeting the criteria in Table 3-1
divided by the number of samples collected.
3-2 Representativeness and Comparability
Representativeness and Comparability are qualitative parameters. The samples
obtained will be as representative of a typical day's operation as the day's operation is
typical. Regardless of how typical the operation is, the purpose will be accomplished
because a independent comparison of the HP laboratory's analysis will be obtained. The
data obtained in this program will be comparable because all the methods are taken from
a standard EPA reference manual.
3-3 Method Detection Limits
It is anticipated that the deionized water and the permeate sample might have values
below the method detection limits. Since both streams approach a "distilled water" matrix,
listed detection limits should apply. All other streams are also aqueous streams; therefore,
the only adjustments that should be necessary are those caused by dilutions necessary to
remain within the calibration range of the methods.
53
-------
HP- QAPjP
Section No.:
Revision No.:
Date:
Page:
July 20..
of 2
v>
V
JJ4
•3
OS
£
1
1
*
S
O
8
C
S
3
U)
on
"a
a
•
*««
<*
1
H
J.
1
Method
(action Limit
(mg/1)
15
§
1*
-2;
?°
It
• s
' «?
II
,": '".• = •• "' '''>."•>£?•%-
Parameter ' i^
"... . •
§§
°' 0
G 5^.
O j- 5 S 2
^ a > 42 *
1111.1
iflll
1-8 «•? -a
> 'C C .0 J3
*^ o «" ^* o
« ^ - § i
0} QJ V. W S
H^lfS 1
<0 es g S J3
^ a a o - -c
•s 5 s § s ^
"> *2 "> «P "3 u
S--I1I i
ifilf \
Pill 1
« g g g —• lt-
Sli§8 s |
O c *-> '-S S £
«*i s; . c a. si.
References are to "Methods
Determined from MS/MSD i
laboratory control samples
Determined as relative perce
others determined from du
the range of duplicate anal;
Based on SO ml sample and 1
- Not applicable
3§ S §2
54
-------
HP - QAPJP
Section No.:
Revision No.:
Date:
i-2LJ
The sampling points were shown in Figure 2-2. Each influent stream (dirty water
rinse overflow and DI makeup) and each effluent stream (concentrate returned to the
plating bath and permeate added to the final rinse bath) of the AROS unit will be sampled.
The one-day composite sample schedule is given in Table 4-1. HP personnel will
colJect the samples and SAIC will observe the collection and handling of the samples.
Table 4-2 lists each parameter to be determined, the required preservation method
the maximum holding, the nominal analytical volume, the minimum volume required for
analysis including QC, and the sample size to be obtained in the field. The sample
container size is roughly twice the minimum required volume.
A separate 1 liter bottle will be used for each of the four streams to preclude any
cross contamination. The aliquots for the composite samples will be stored in 5-galIon
plastic containers with lids until all portions are obtained. These 5-gallon containers will
be mixed by swirling anddispensed into triplicate bottles of 500, 180 and 2000 ml each and
preserved according to Table 4-2. One set will be given to HP, one will be shipped to the
laboratory for analysis, and one will be shipped to the laboratory and held in reserve.
The DI water permeate and concentrate samples (aliquots) will be obtained from
taps in these lines. These taps will be opened momentarily and flushed into a waste
container prior to obtaining each aliquot The influent samples (aliquots) will be obtained
by dippmg a 1 liter container into the dirty rinse tank near the outfall to the AROS influent
line.
Sample bottles win either be purchased from I-CHEM (precleaned) or cleaned by
the procedure for metals in SW-846, 3rd. Ed., Chapter 3.
55
-------
HP - QAPjP
Section No.: 1
Revision No.: JJ.
Date:
Page:
July 20.
TABLE 4-1. Proposed Sampling Schedule
Location
Sampling Procedure
Influent to the
AROS unit.
Composited over a period of 16 hours
during two shifts. Two 2-liter dip samples
from the dirty rinse tank will be taken
per shift. Final composite will be split;
one sample will be sent to SAIC's laboratory,
the other will be analyzed by the Hewlett-
Packard laboratory.
Permeate
Composited over a period of 16 hours
during two shifts. Two 2-liter samples will
be taken per shift from a sample port. Final
composite will be split; one sample will be
sent to SAIC's laboratory, the other will be
analyzed by the Hewlett-Packard laboratory.
Concentrate
One 8-liter sample will be collected during
the two shifts. When the concentrate flow
occurs as observed from the AROS unit computer
monitor, a sample will be collected from the
sample port, or temporary storage will be
provided to get an 8-liter sample. The
sample will be split; one sample will be sent
to SAIC's laboratory, the other will be
analyzed by the Hewlett-Packard laboratory.
DI water
One 8-liter sample will be collected from the
DI water storage tank. The sample wuTbe
split; one sample will be sent to SAIC's
laboratory, the other will be analyzed by
the Hewlett-Packard laboratory.
56
-------
HP - QAPjP
Section No.:
Revision No.:
Date:
Page:
July 20.
of 7
u *
v o
^ 0 .
TIL ^ *
™ O '
w U 5
v
3 « <
g Jj c
is *^
e
v
jf a
E ~S a
III
a ee
l||
sap
Preservatioi
«^
t>
' .8
&
£
.2
^^
c
c
V"»
g
«->
C
I
i
|
M
J3
C
0
CM
a
oA
|>a
4>
o
2
\
<
"
JO
4)
<
O
C
|
or
o
1
eo
(N
O
I
O
•o
^
o
JB
y
!
<
<
4
4
•
o
^"*
C
i
o
in
a
ee
O
•S
<2
to
!
<
"
JO
(
4
V)
O
v»
j
"c
Q
fN
-g
Z
o
I
a
^
o
eO
-.
«o
g
-------
HP - QAPJP
Section No.:
Revision No.:
July 20. 1900
Pa8«: 4 of 7
The field personnel will document, on data sheets (Figure 4-3), the date and time
each aliquot is obtained from each stream. The volumes obtained for each aliquot will be
the same because the same 1 liter container (one bottle for each stream) will be filled'each
time an aliquot is obtained. (The 1 liter container will be filled more than once to obtain
the required volume for each aliquot or sample.)
The amount of preservative added will also be recorded. Samples will be labeled
(see Figure 4-4) and shipped by overnight delivery service to the laboratory in coolers
containing ice. If "blue" ice is used in the coolers, samples will be initially cooled .with
regular ice prior to being packed in the coolers with blue ice.
The Chain of Custody Record shown in Figure 4-5 will be completed for each cooler
shipped to a laboratory.
58
-------
HP - QAPJP
Section No.:
Revision No.:
Date:
Page:
July 20.
5 of 7
QUALITY ASSURANCE AND QUALITY CONTROL FORMS
FOR THE HEWLETT-PACKARD ARCS UNIT SAMPLING EVENT
SAMPLE: COMPOSITE GRAB
(Circle) DUPLICATE BLANK
DIP
PORT
OTHER
SAMPLE NUMBER:
SAMPLE TYPE:
(Circle)
LOW CONC.
AVERAGE CONC.
HIGH CONC.
SAMPLE TAKEN AT:
DATE
TIME:
AM/PM
FOR COMPOSITE SAMPLES ONLY:
Composite 1:
Composite 2:
Composite 3:
Composite 4:
Composite 5:
Composite 6:
Composite 7:
SHIFT:
SHIFT:'
SHIFT:"
SHIFT:"
SHIFT:"
SHIFT:"
SHIFT:"
Composite 8: SHIFT:"
DATE:
•DATE:
DATE:
DATE:
DATE:
DATE:
DATE:
DATE:
90 TIME:
90 TIME:
90 TIME:
90 TIME:
/90 TIME:
/90 TIME:
"90 TIME:
90 TZME:
AM/PM
AM/PM
AM/PM
AM/PM
AM/PM
AM/PM
AM/PM
AM/PM
VOL:
,VOL:
VOL:
VOL:
VOL:
VOL:
VOL:
VOL:
.I/ml
.I/ml
.I/ml
.I/ml
.I/ml
.I/ml
COMMENTS:
Figure 4-3. Sampling Data Sheet
59
-------
HP - QAPjP
Section No.: ±_
Revision No.: 0
Date: July 20. 199Q
6 of 7
8400 Westpark Drive, McLean, Virginia 22102
Location: Project No.:
Sample Date/Time:
Sample No.: Sample Location:
Analysis:
Collection Method: . Purge Volume:
Preservative:
Comments:
Collector's Initials:
Figure 4-4. Example Sample Label
60
-------
HP - QAPJP
Section No.: £_
Revision No.: Q_
Date: July ffl I99Q
Pa«e: 7 of 7
•s
a
*s
£
§
61
-------
HP - QAPJP
Section No.:
Revision No.: ^
Datc: Julv 20. iQgp
Pa8c: JLfl£_l__
5.0 ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES AND CALIBRATION
Analytical procedures for all critical measurements are referenced in Table 3-1. The
only other measurement is color or TOC that will be performed according to method 1103
or 415.1 from the same reference. These are all EPA procedures and specify the required
calibration to be performed. The samples for metal analysis will be digested according to
the procedure in Section 4.1.3 of the same reference. For those procedures requiring a
calibration curve, the calibration will be verified after this sample set is ma For example,
there will be two samples for metals analysis by flameless AA plus three QC samples for
a total of five samples. After initial calibration, these five samples will be analyzed followed
by a calibration check that must agree within _+ 20 percent of its original value.
62
-------
HP - QAPJP
Section No.: &
Revision No.: Q_
Date: July 20. 199Q
Pa8e: 1 of 1
6.0 DATA REDUCTION, VALIDATION, AND REPORTING
Data will be reduced by the procedures specified in the methods and reported by the
laboratory in the units also specified in the methods. The work assignment manager or his,
designee will review the results and compare the QC results with those listed in Table 3-1.
Any discrepancies will be discussed with the QA Manager.
All data will be reviewed to ensure that the correct codes and units have been
included. After reduction, data will be placed in tables or arrays and reviewed again for
anomalous values. An inconsistencies discovered will be resolved immediately, if possible,
by seeking clarification from the sample collection personnel responsible for data collection,
and/or the analytical laboratory.
63
-------
HP - QAPJP
Section No.: 1 ,
Revision No.: Jl_
Date: July 20. 1990
PaS«-' I of 2
7.0 INTERNAL QUALITY CONTROL CHECKS
Due to the nature of this project, the collection of field blanks, equipment blanks,
and trip blanks are not deemed necessary. The internal QC checks appropriate for the
measurement methods to be utilized for this project are summarized in Table 7-1. These
items are taken from the methods and the QC program outlined in Section 3 of this QAPjP.
Because the number of samples to be analyzed for this project is small, all samples and
related QC will be analyzed in one batch.
For this project, a matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate (MS/MSD) or laboratory
duplicate analysis will be performed on two samples, because the pure water streams (DI
water and permeate) and the contaminated water streams (AROS influent and concentrate)
are considered different matrices.
64
-------
Section No.:
Revision No.:
Date;
Page:
July 20. 1990
JL of 2
j
iti
ill
•a
^5
5
II
1
SI
Initial
Calibration
1
*
S
J
)
[• z
1 z
6 j
a w a
>* — £ |
1 -3
% 2
-
6?
•H
§•2
2*
M*
ffl en
— .=
i
s
JQ
g
g
•
z
-
*
0
1 -
a
03
h. e
« 8
* s,
32
•9 S
S -2
« I
? S
i s
8.-s
rtjs
§•1
its
S *
ven forconcentr
influent to the A
?£
a H
1 J
sa .
?^|
§ a 8
|||
g *
5 J
65
-------
HP - QAPJP
Section No.: &_
Revision No.: 0
Dale: July 20. 1990
Pa«c: 1 of 1
8.0 PERFORMANCE AND SYSTEM AUDITS
No audits are planned for this project.
66-
-------
HP - QAPJP
Section No.:
Revision No.:
Date:
Page:
9.0 CALCULATION OF DATA QUALITY INDICATORS
9.1 Accuracy
Accuracy for nickel, sulfate, chloride, and TOC will be determined as the percent
recovery of matrix spike samples (two per matrix). The percent recovery is calculated
according to the following equation:
% R = 100% x
Q-c0
where
%R = percent recovery
Q == measured concentration in spiked sample aliquot
^0 - measured concentration in unspiked sample aliquot
<-, = actual concentration for spike added
Accuracy for the other critical measurements, except PH, will be determined from
laboratory control samples according to the equation:
» 100%
' Q
where
%R = percent recovery
Cm = measured concentration of standard reference material
<~t - actual concentration for standard reference material
For pH, accuracy will be determined as bias according to the equation:
B = PH, - pH,
where
B == bias
pHm = measured pH of standard reference material
= actual pH of standard reference material
67
-------
HP-QAPJP
Section No.: $_
Revision No.: 0_
JuK 20. 1990
Pa«e: 2 of 2
93, Precision
Precision will be determined from the difference of percent recovery values; of MS
and MSDs for nickel, sulfate, chloride, and TOC, and duplicate laboratory analyses for other
parameters. The following equation will be used for all parameters except pH:
RPD = [Ci - CJ x 100%
IP, .+ CJ/2
where
RPD = Relative percent difference
CL = The larger of two observed values
GZ = The smaller of the two observed values
Precision for pH will be estimated by calculation of the range using the following
equation: 6
D(pH) = PHX - PH2
where
D(pH) = precision limits for pH
pHi,pH2 = observed values for duplicate samples
93 JComp]etenes$
Completeness will be calculated as the percent of valid data points obtained from the
total number of samples obtained.
% Completeness = VDP x 100
TOP
where
VDP = number of valid data points
TDP = total number of samples obtained.
68
-------
HP - QAPJP
Section No.: JQ
Revision No.: 0
Daf<«- T i_ ~* ~ '
jUfV 7f) 10QQ
Page: -UoL-L—
10.0 CORRECTIVE ACTION
Corrective actions will, be initiated whenever quality control limits (e.g., calibration
acceptance criteria) or QA objectives (e.g., precision, as determined by analysis of duplicate
matrix spike samples) for a particular type of critical measurement are not being met
Corrects actions may result from any of the following functions:
•
•
Performance evaluation audits
Technical systems audits
• Interlaboratory/interfield comparison studies
All corrective action initiations, resolutions, etc. will be implemented immediately and
will be reported in Sections One and Two (Difficulties Encountered and Corrective Actions
Taken, respectively) in the existing monthly progress reporting mechanisms established
between SAIC and EPA-RREI. and in the QA section of the final report Tne QA
Manager will determine if a correction action has resolved the QC problem.
69
-------
HP - QAPJP
Section No.: 1}
Revision No.: 0 .
Date: July 20. 199Q
Pa««: -Lof 1
11.0 QA/QC REPORTS TO MANAGEMENT
This section describes the periodic reporting mechanism, reporting frequencies, and
the final project report which will be used to keep project management personnel informed
of sampling and analytical progress, critical measurement systems performance, identified
problem conditions, corrective actions, and up-to-date results of QA/QC assessments As
a minimum, the reports will include, when applicable:
• Changes to the QA Project Plan, if any.
• Limitations or constraints on the applicability of the data, if any.
• The status of QA/QC programs, accomplishments and corrective actions.
• Assessment of data quality in terms of precision, accuracy, completeness,
method detection limit, representativeness, and comparability.
• The final report shall include a separate QA section that summarizes the data
quality indicators that document the QA/QC activities that lend support to
the credibility of the data and the validity of the conclusions.
For convenience, any QA/QC reporting will be incorporated into the already well-
established monthly progress reporting system between SAIC and EPA-RREL for all TESC
Work Assignments. Any information pertaining to the above-listed categories will be
reported under Sections One thru Three (Difficulties Encountered, Corrective Actions
Taken, and Current Activities, respectively) in the monthly reports.
70
-------
July 21, 1993
Format review for R-2022
WATTS NICKEL AND RINSE WATER RECOVERY VIA AN ADVANCED REVERSE
OSMOSIS SYSTEM
Project Officer: Lisa M. Brown
This draft report requires a few adjustments before it is ready for publication. This review
is for format only, not for editorial or for content. Needed changes are listed below.
Assistance in making these changes can be found in the Handbook for Preparing Office of
Research .and Development Reports.
1. The Abstract should have the work done under statement as the last paragraph.
(samples enclosed). Delete advertising of the company name and/or address at the top
or bottom of pages in Appendix B
2. The final camera ready copy must be typed within the image area shown on the
enclosed typing guide sheets with the page numbers centered. All text, including
figures and tables, must fit within the image area. Furnish originals or very good
reproducible copies of the figures and tables.
3. Your Project Summary has been sent out for editing and will be returned to you as
soon as possible.
4. After the adjustments are made, prepare your project report/project summary package
for clearance using the forms indicated in the checklist for clearance packages. After
clearance, we will need the adjusted camera-ready copy of the report plus two copies if
the report is going to NTIS only or camera-ready plus one if the report will be printed.
Adjust the project summary and supply us with corrected hard copy and a 31/2
in. disk, with latest revisions in WordPerfect 5.1 format. Be sure to
include all tables and graphics (with format identified) on the disk.
If you have any questions, please call.
Robert M. Roetker (513) 569-7926
-------
------- |