United States !
Environmental Protection
Agency : !
Enforcjement And
Compliance Assurance
(2221A)
EPA310-R-95-005
September 1995
Profile Of Tihe
Iron And Steel Industry
m
EPA'
\.
t (
NOTEBOOK^
EPA Office Of .Compliance Sector Notebook Projdct
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
THE ADMINISTRATOR
Message from the Administrator
Over the past 25 years, our nation has made tremendous progress in protecting public health and
our environment while promoting economic prosperity. Businesses as large as iron and steel
plants and businesses as small as the dry cleaner on the corner have worked with EPA to find
ways to operate cleaner, cheaper, and smarter. As a result, we no longer have rivers catching on
fire. Our skies are clearer. American environmental technology and expertise are in demand
throughout the world.
The Clinton Administration recognizes that to continue this progress, we must move beyond the
pollutant-by-pollutant approaches of the past to comprehensive, facility-wide approaches for the
future. Industry by industry and community by community, we must build a new generation of
environmental protection. !
Within the past two years, the Environmental Protection Agency undertook its Sector Notebook
Project to compile, for a number of key industries, information about environmental problems and
solutions, case studies and tips about complying with regulations. We called on industry leaders,
state regulators, and EPA staff with many years of experience in these industries and with their
unique environmental issues. Together with notebooks for 17 other industries, the notebook you
hold in your hand is the result. :
These notebooks will help business managers to better understand their regulatory requirements,
learn more about how others in their industry have undertaken regulatory compliance and the
innovative methods some have found to prevent pollution in the first instance. These notebooks
will give useful information to state regulatory agencies moving toward industry-based programs.
Across EPA we will use this manual to better integrate our programs and improve our compliance
assistance efforts.
I encourage you to use this notebook to evaluate and improve the way that together we achieve
our important environmental protection goals. I am confident that these notebooks will help us to
move forward in ensuring that — in industry after industry, community after community —
environmental protection and economic prosperity go hand in hand.
Carol M. Browni
Recycled/Recyclable • Printed with Vegetable Based Inks on Recycled Paper (20% Postconsumer)
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
EPA/310-R-95-005
EPA Office of Compliance
Profile of the Iron
Sector Notebook Project
and Steel Industry
September 1995
Office of Compliance
Office of Enforcement i nd Compliance Assurance
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M St., SW (MC 2221-A)
Washington, DC 20460
For sale by the U.S. Government Printing Office
Superintendent of Documents, Mail Stop: SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-9328
ISBN 0-1J5-048272-0
September 1995
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
This report is one in a series of volumes published by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) to provide information of general interest regarding environmental issues associated with
specific industrial sectors. The documents were developed under contract by Abt Associates
(Cambridge, MA), and Booz-Allen & Hamilton, Inc. (McLean, VA). This publication may be
purchased from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office. A listing
of available Sector Notebooks and document numbers are included on the following page.
All telephone orders should be directed to:
Superintendent of Documents
U.S. Government Printing Office
Washington, DC 20402
(202)512-1800
FAX (202) 512-2250
8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., ET, M-F
Using the form provided at the end of this document, all mail orders should be directed to:
U.S. Government Printing Office
P.O. Box 371954
Pittsburgh, PA 15250-7954 .'.'•'..
Complimentary volumes are available to certain groups or subscribers, such as public and
academic libraries, Federal, State, local, and foreign governments, and the media. For further
information, and for answers to questions pertaining to these documents, please refer to the
contact names and numbers provided within this volume.
Electronic versions of all Sector Notebooks are available on the EPA Enviro$en$e Bulletin
Board and via the Internet on the Enviro$en$e World Wide Web. Downloading procedures are
described in Appendix A of this document.
Cover photograph courtesy of American Iron and Steel Institute.
September 1995
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook. Project
Iron and Steel Industry
Contacts for Available Sector Notebooks
The Sector Notebooks were developed by the EPA Office of Compliance. Particular questions
regarding the Sector Notebook Project in general can be directed to the EPA Work Assignment
Managers:
Michael Barrette
US EPA Office of Compliance
401 M St., SW (2223-A)
Washington, DC 20460
(202) 564-7019
.Gregory Waldrip
US EPA Office of Compliance
401 M St., SW (2223-A)
Washington, DC 20460 j
(202)564-7024
Questions and comments regarding the individual documents can be directed to the appropriate
specialists listed below.
Document Number Industry
EPA/310.
EPA/310
EPA/310.
EPA/310-
EPA/310-
EPA/310-
EPA/310-
EPA/310-
EPA/310-
EPA/310-
EPA/310-
EPA/310-
EPA/310-
EPA/310-
EPA/310-
EPA/310-
EPA/310-
EPA/310-
-R-95-001.
-R-95-002.
-R-95-003.
-R-95-004.
-R-95-005.
-R-95-006.
-R-95-007.
-R-95-008.
•R-95-009.
•R-95-010.
•R-95-011.
•R-95-012.
•R-95-013.
•R-95-014.
•R-95-015.
•R-95-016,
•R-95-017.
R-95-018.
Dry Cleaning Industry • . ,
Electronics and Computejr Industry
Wood Furniture and Fixtures mdustry
Inorganic Chemical Industry
Iron and Steel Industry |
Lumber and Wood Products Industry
Fabricated Metal Products Industry
Metal Mining Industry
Motor Vehicle Assembly Industry
Nonferrous Metals Industry
Non-Fuel, Non-Metal Mining Ind.
Organic Chemical hidustjy
Petroleum Refining Industry
Printing Industry j
Pulp and Paper Industry
Rubber and Plastic Industry
Stone, Clay, Glass and Concrete hid.
Transportation Equip. Cleaning Ind.
Contact
Joyce Chandler
Steve Hoover
Bob Marshall
Walter DeRieux
Maria Malave
SethHemuiway .
Greg Waldrip
Keith Brown
Suzanne Childress
Jane Engert
Keith Brown
Walter DeRieux
Tom Ripp
Ginger Gotliffe
Maria Eisemann
Maria Malave
Scott Throwe
Virginia Lathrop
Phone
564-7073
564-7007
564-7021
564-7067
564-7027
564-7017
564-7024
564-7124
; 564-70 18
564-5021
564-7124
564-7067
564-7003
564-7072
564-7016
564-7027
564-7013
564-7057
September 1995
SIC 331
-------
-------
Sector ."Notebook. Proj cct
Iron and Steel Industry
Industry Sector Notebook Contents: Iron and Steel Industry
Exhibits Index | {{{
• • - • ... j • '-.••••
List of Acronyms v
I. INTRODUCTION TO THE SECTOR NOTEBOOK PROJECT 1
A: Summary of the Sector Notebook Project! f 1
B. Additional Information ............. j 2
. i , . .
II. INTRODUCTION TO THE IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY - 3
A. Introduction, Background, and Scope of ijhe Notebook 3
B. Characterization of the Iron and Steel Industry 3
1. Industry Size and Geographic Distribution 3
2. Product Characterization j '..... 8
3. Economic Trends .j 9
• I • • . ., ' • • '
III. INDUSTRIAL PROCESS DESCRIPTION J. . . ;. . . . .. .... . . 13
A. Industrial Processes in the Iron and Steel Industry 13
1. Steelmaking Using the Basic Oxygen rurnace 16
2. Steelmaking Using the Electric Arc Furnace (EAF) . .....' 21
3. Forming and Finishing Operations . j . 21
B. Raw Material Inputs and Pollution Outpujts ..... ^ 23
C. Management of Chemicals in the Production Process 25
IV. CHEMICAL RELEASE AND TRANSFER PROFILE ., 27
A. EPA Toxic Release Inventory for the Irbr. and Steel Industry ......;... 29
B. Summary of Selected Chemicals Released ......_ ,37
C. Other Data Sources j ...;..... /. '41
D. Comparison of Toxic Release Inventory Between Selected Industries 44
V. POLLUTION PREVENTION OPPORTUNITIES . 47
VI. SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE FEDERAL! STATUTES AND REGULATIONS ...:.. 53
A. General Description of Major Statutes . .1. .. '..... . . ... 53
B.' Industry Specific Regulatory Requirements , 63
C. Pending and Proposed Regulatory Requirements : . .. 68
September 1995
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
VII. COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT HISTORY .. 75
A. Iron and Steel Industry Compliance History 79
B. Comparison of Enforcement Activity Between Selected Industries 81
C. Review of Major Legal Action 86
1. Review of Major Cases 86
2. Supplementary Environmental Projects (SEPs) 86
Vffl. COMPLIANCE ACTIVITIES AND INITIATIVES 89
A. Sector-related Environmental Programs and Activities 89
B. EPA Voluntary Programs 90
B. EPA Voluntary Programs '. 94
C. Trade Association/Industry Sponsored Activity 95
1. Industry Research Programs 95
2. Summary of Trade Associations .......; 97
DC CONTACTS/ACKNOWLEDGMENTS/RESOURCE MATERIALS ............... 101
Endnotes 105
APPENDIX A: Instructions for Downloading Notebooks A-l
September 1995
11
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
Exhibits Index
Exhibit 1: Geographic Distribution of SIC 331 Establishments: Steel Works, Blast Furnaces,
Exhibit
Exhibit
Exhibit
Exhibit
Exhibit
Exhibit
Exhibit
Exhibit
Exhibit
Exhibit
Exhibit
Exhibit
Exhibit
Exhibit
Exhibit
Exhibit
Exhibit
Exhibit
Exhibit;
and Rolling and Finishing Mills . . . . . ......... .......... ...-..'.- ............ 7
2: Top U.S. Iron and Steel Producers .........'.. •'. ............. ', . . . .'. ....... 8
3: Iron and Steel Manufacturing Process Overview ." ..... ....... ........... . . . 15
4: Iron and Steel Manufacturing Cokemaking and Ironmaking ........ ........... 19
5 : Iron and Steel Manufacturing Steelmaking .............. ..... .......... .1 . 21
6: Source Reduction and Recycling Activity for Iron and Steel Industry
(SIC 331) as Reported within TRI .[. ...... ...... . , . ____ ........ ____ . .... 26
7: Releases for Iron and Steel Facilities! (SIC 33 1) in TRI, by Number of Facilities
Reporting . . ...... . ------ .... ...(.. ....... . . .... ...... ____ ... . ____ . . /. 32
8: Transfers for Iron and Steel Facilities in TRI, by Number of Facilities Reporting . . 34
9: Top 10 TRI Releasing Iron and Steel] Facilities ... ..... ,. . ...... ..... ..... . . 36
10: Top 10 TRI Releasing Facilities Reporting SIC 331 Operations ..... ...... ... 37
1 1 : Pollutant Releases (short tons/year); .............. ...... .......... ...... 43
12: Summary of 1993 TRI Data: Releases and Transfers by Industry ...... ....... 45
13: Toxics Release Inventory Data for Selected Industries .......... ....... ..... 46
14: Five- Year Enforcement and Compliance Summary for Iron and Steel . . . . . .... 80
15: Five- Year Enforcement and Compliance Summary for Selected Industries . . ... 82
16: One- Year Inspection and Enforcemnt Summary for Selected Industries ....... 83
17: Five- Year Inspection and Enforcement Summary by Statute, Selected Industries .
18: One- Year Inspection and Enforcement Summary by Statute, Selected Industries
1 9 : F Y- 1 993 - 1 994 Supplemental Environmental Proj ects Overview:
Iron and Steel Manufacture
20: SIC 331 Facilities Participating in the EPA's 33/50 Program 91
84
85
86
September 1995
in
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
List of Acronyms
AFS- AIRS Facility Subsystem (CAA database)
AIRS - Aerometric Information Retrieval System (CAA database)
BIFs - Boilers and Industrial Furnaces (RCRA)
BOD- Biochemical Oxygen Demand
CAA- Clean Air Act
CAAA- Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990
CERCLA - Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act
CERCLIS- CERCLA Information System
CFCs- Chlorofiuorocarbons ,
CO- Carbon Monoxide
COD- Chemical Oxygen Demand
CSI- Common Sense Initiative
CWA- Clean Water Act ,
D&B - Dun and Bradstreet Marketing Index
ELP- Environmental Leadership Program
EPA- United States Environmental Protection Agency
EPCRA- Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act
FIFRA- Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act :
FINDS- Facility Indexing System
HAPs- "Hazardous Air Pollutants (CAA)
HSDB - Hazardous Substances Data Bank
IDEA- Integrated Data for Enforcement Analysis
LDR- Land Disposal Restrictions (RCRA)
LEPCs- Local Emergency Planning Committees
MACT- Maximum Achievable Control Technology (CAA)
MCLGs - Maximum Contaminant Level Goals
MCLs - Maximum Contaminant Levels
MEK- Methyl Ethyl Ketone
MSDSs- Material Safety Data Sheets
NAAQS - National Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAA)
NAFTA - North American Free Trade Agreement
NCDB- National Compliance Database (for TSCA, FIFRA, EPCRA)
NCP - National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan
NEIC- National Enforcement Investigation Center
NESHAP- National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
NO2- Nitrogen Dioxide •
NOV- Notice of Violation
NOX - Nitrogen Oxide
NPDES - National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (CWA)
NPL- National Priorities List
NRC - National Response Center "
September 1995
IV
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
NSPS-
OAR-
OECA-
OPA-
OPPTS-
OSHA-
OSW -
OSWER-
OW-
P2-
PCS-
POTW -
RCRA-
RCRIS-
SARA-
SDWA -
SEPs-
SERCs-
SIC-
SO2 -
SOX-
TOC-
TRI-
TRIS -
TCRIS-
TSCA -
TSS -
UIC-
UST-
VOCs-
New Source Performance Standards (CAA)
Office of Air and Radiation
Office of Enforcement and Comp
iance Assurance
Oil Pollution Act
Office of Prevention, Pesticides, sjnd Toxic Substances
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
Office of Solid Waste
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
Office of Water
Pollution Prevention
Permit Compliance System (CWA Database)
Publicly Owned Treatments Works
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
RCRA Information System |
Superfund Amendments and Reaikthorization Act
Safe Drinking Water Act j
Supplementary Environmental Projects
State Emergency Response Commissions
Standard Industrial Classification!
Sulfur Dioxide
Sulfur Oxides
Total Organic Carbon
Toxic Release Inventory
Toxic Release Inventory System
Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System
Toxic Substances Control Act
, Total Suspended Solids
Underground Injection Control (SDWA)
Underground Storage Tanks (RCRA)
Volatile Organic Compounds
September 1995
SIC 331
-------
_
-------
Sector Notebook P.yojject
Iron and SteeJ Industry
I. INTRODUCTION TO THE SECTOR NOTEBOOK PROJECT
LA. Summary of the Sector Notebook Project j
Environmental policies based upon comprehensive analysis of air, water and
land pollution are an inevitable and logical supplement to traditional single-
media approaches to environmental protection. Environmental regulatory
agencies are beginning to embrace comprehensive, multi-statute solutions to
facility permitting, enforcement and compliance assurance, education/
outreach, research, and regulatory development issues. The central concepts
driving the new policy direction are that pollutant releases to each
environmental medium (ajir, water and land) affect each other, and that
environmental strategies ijnust actively identify and address these inter-
relationships by designing policies for the "whole" facility. One way to
achieve a whole facility focus is to design environmental policies for similar
industrial facilities. By doing so, environmental concerns that are common
to the manufacturing of similar products can be addressed in a
comprehensive manner. Recognition of the need to develop the industrial
; "sector-based" approach within the EPA Office of Compliance led to the
' creation of this document.
The Sector Notebook. Project was initiated by the Office of Compliance
within the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA) to
provide its staff and managers with summary information for eighteen
specific industrial sectors!. As other EPA offices, states, the regulated
community, environmental groups, and the public became interested in this
project, the scope of the original project was expanded. The ability to design
comprehensive, common sense environmental protection measures for
specific industries is dependent on knowledge of several inter-related topics.
. For the purposes of this project, the key elements chosen for inclusion are:
general industry information (economic and geographic); a description of
industrial processes; pollution outputs; pollution prevention opportunities;
Federal statutory and regulatory framework; compliance history; and a
description of partnerships that have been formed between regulatory
agencies, the regulated cormnunity and the public.
For any given industry, each topic listed above could alone be the subject of
a lengthy volume. However, in order to produce a manageable document,
this project focuses on providing summary information for each topic. This
format provides the reader with a synopsis of each issue, and references
where more in-depth information is available. Text within each profile was
researched from a variety of sources, and was usually condensed from more
detailed sources pertaining to specific topics. This approach allows for a
wide coverage of activities that can be further explored based upon the
citations and references listed at the end of this profile. As a check on the
September 1995
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
information included, each notebook went through an external review
process. The Office of Compliance appreciates the efforts of all those that
participated in this process and enabled us to develop more complete,
accurate and up-to-date summaries. Many of those who reviewed this
notebook are listed as contacts in Section IX and may be sources of
additional information. The individuals and groups on this list do not
necessarily concur with all statements within this notebook.
I.B. Additional Information
Providing Comments
OECA's Office of Compliance plans to periodically review and update the
notebooks and will make these updates available both in hard copy and
electronically. If you have any comments on the existing notebook, or if you
would like to provide additional information, please send a hard copy and
computer disk to the EPA Office of Compliance, Sector Notebook Project,
401 M St., SW (2223-A), Washington, DC 20460. Comments can also be
uploaded to the Enviro$en$e Bulletin Board or the Environ$ense World
Wide Web for general access to all users of the system. Follow instructions
in Appendix A for accessing these data systems. Once you have logged in,
procedures for uploading text are available from the on-line Enviro$en$e
Help System.
Adapting Notebooks to Particular Needs
The scope of the existing notebooks reflect an approximation of the relative
national occurrence of facility types that occur within each sector. In many
instances, industries within specific geographic regions or states may have
unique characteristics that are not fully captured in these profiles. For this
reason, the Office of Compliance encourages state and local environmental
agencies and other groups to supplement or re-package the information
included in this notebook to include more specific industrial and regulatory
information that may be available. Additionally, interested states may want
to supplement the "Summary of Applicable Federal Statutes and
Regulations" section with state and local requirements. Compliance or
technical assistance providers may also want to develop the "Pollution
Prevention" section in more detail. Please contact the appropriate specialist
listed on the opening page of this notebook if your office is interested in
assisting us in the further development of the information or policies
addressed within this volume. If you are interested in assisting in the
development of new notebooks for sectors not covered in the original
eighteen, please contact the Office of Compliance at 202-564-2395.
September 1995
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and. Steel Industry
II. INTRODUCTION TO THE IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY
This section provides background information on the size, geographic
distribution, employment, production, sales, and economic condition of the
iron and steel industry. The type of facilities described within the document
are also described in terms of their Standard Industrial Classification (SIC)
codes. Additionally, this section contains a list of the largest companies in
terms of sales.
II.A. Introduction, Background, and Scope of the Notebook
The iron and steel industry
the Standard Industrial
is categorized by the Bureau of the Census under
Classification (SIC) code 33, primary metal
industries. The industry 13 further classified by the three-digit codes 331,
Steel Works, Blast Furnaces, and Rolling and Finishing Mills, and 332 Iron
and Steel Foundries. Since steel works, blast furnaces, and rolling and
finishing mills account for the majority of environmental releases,
employees, and value of s|hipments, this profile concentrates on the three-
digit SIC 331. The environmental releases associated with foundries are
similar to the steel casting!and finishing processes included under SIC 331,
therefore SIC 332, will not
the profile focus specifica
be addressed in this notebook. Some sections of
ly on industries in the four-digit SIC 3312, since
virtually all establishments producing primary products (iron and steel) under
SIC 3312, also produce secondary products that fall under some of the other
iron and steel SIC codes under SIC 331. ,
II.B. Characterization of the Iron and Steel Industry
II.B.l. Industry Size and Geographic Distribution
There are approximately
1,118 manufacturing facilities under SIC 331
according to 1992 Census of Manufactures data.1 The payroll totaled $9.3
billion for a workforce of 241,000 employees, and value of shipments totaled
$58 billion. Net shipments of steel mill products for all grades including
carbon, alloy, and stainless totaled 92.7 million net tons in 19932 and 95.1
million net tons in 1994J3 In terms of environmental issues, value of
shipments, and number of employees, SIC 3312 (Blast Furnaces and Steel
Mills), is the most significant four-digit code under SIC 331. The 1992
Census data reported 247 establishments under SIC 3312, with an estimated
172,000 employees, a payroll of $7 billion, and a value of shipments totaling
$42 billion. For the same year, the American Iron and Steel Institute
estimated 114 companies operated 217 iron and steel facilities; this estimate
included any facility with one or more iron or steelmaking operation.4
The 1987 Census of Manufactured further categorizes SIC 3312 by the type
September 1995
I
. SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
of steel mill: integrated or non-integrated. A fully integrated facility
produces steel from raw materials of coal, iron ore, and scrap. Non-
integrated plants do not have all of the equipment to produce steel from coal,
iron ore, and scrap on-site, instead they purchase some of their raw materials
in a processed form. '
SIC Diversity
The Bureau of the Census categorizes the three- and four-digit SIC codes
related to iron and steel as follows:
SIC 331 - Steel works, blast furnaces, coke ovens, rolling and finishing mills
3312 - Steel works, blast furnaces, and rolling mills
3313 - Electrometailurgical products, except steel
3315 - Steel wiredrawing and steel nails and spikes
3316 - Cold-rolled steel sheet, strip, and bars
3317 - Steel pipe and tubes
The remainder of the industries! classified under SIC code 33 cover the
ferrous and non-ferrous foundriejs, and smelting, refining, and shaping of
nonferrous metals which are not covered in this profile.
Two Steel Industries
In the past fifteen years, the U.S. steel industry has lost over 61 percent of its
employees and 58 percent of its facilities. Slow growth in demand for steel,
markets lost to other materials, increased imports, and older, less efficient
production facilities are largely to blame for the industry's decline. While the
integrated steel industry was contracting, a group of companies, called
minimills, more than doubled their capacity in the same period and they
continue to expand into new markets. Minimills use electric arc furnaces
(EAFs) to melt scrap and other materials to make steel products, instead of
using coke, iron ore, and scrap as the integrated producers do. In addition to
fundamentally different production technologies, other differences between
the integrated steel mills and minimill are also significant: minimills have
narrow product lines, they often have small, non-unionized work forces that
may receive higher pay per hour than a comparable unionized work force, but
without union benefits. Additionally, minimills typically produce much less
product per facility (less than 1 million tons of steel per year). Lower scrap
prices in the 1960s and 1970s created opportunities for the minimill segment
of the market to grow rapidly. Initially, the EAF technology could only be
used in the production of low quality long products, such as concrete
reinforcing bar, but over the years minimill products have improved in
quality and have overcome technological limitations to diversify their
product lines. Recently, minimills have entered new markets, such as flat-
September 1995
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
rolled products, however!, more than half of the market for quality steel
products still remains beyond miriimill capability. The EAF producers do
face the problems of fluctuating scrap prices which are more volatile than the
prices of raw materials used by integrated producers.
Geographic Distribution
The highest geographic concentration of mills is in the Great Lakes region,
where most integrated plants are based (Exhibit 1). According to the 1987
Census of 'Manufactures,|46 percent of steel mills are located in six Great
Lakes states: New York, P'ennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan,
with a heavy concentration of steel manufacturing in the Chicago area.
Approximately 80 percentiof the U.S. steelmaking capacity is in these states.
The South is the next largest steel-producing region, although there are only
two integrated steel plants Steel production in the western U.S. is limited to
one integrated plant and several minirnills. historically, the mill sites were
selected for their proximity to water (tremendous amounts are used for
cooling and processing, and for transportation) and the sources of their raw
materials, iron ore and coal. Traditional steelmaking regions included the
Monongahela River valley near Pittsburgh and along the Mahoning River
near Youngstown, Ohio, f The geographic concentration of the industry
continues tp change as minimills are built anywhere electricity and scrap are
available at a reasonable cost and there is a local market for a single product. •
Size Distribution
Large, fully-integrated ste el mills have suffered considerably in the last 15
years, largely due to loss qf market share to other materials, competition, and
the high cost of pension liabilities. In comparing the 1992 Census of
Manufacture data with the data from 1977, these changes are clear. While
the number of establishments under SIC 3312 fell by 58 percent from 504
facilities in 1977 to 247 in 1992, the absolute number of integrated mills has
always been small, and the reduction is largely due to a drop in the number
of small establishments. A more relevant statistic is the reduction in
employees during the same time period. The work force for these facilities
was dramatically reduced as plants closed or were reorganized by bankruptcy
courts. Those that remained open automated,and streamlined operations
. resulting in a 61 percent reduction in the number of production employees
over the same 15 year period. Approximately 172,000 were still employed
in SIC 3312 establishments in 1992.
The 1987 Census of Manufactures breaks the SIC code 3312 down into four
sub-industries: Fully-integtated (consists of coke ovens, blast furnaces, steel
furnaces, and rolling and finishing mills), partially integrated with blast
furnace (consists of blast
furnaces, steel furnaces, and rolling and finishing
September 1995,
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
mills), partially integrated without blast furnaces (consists of steel furnaces
and either rolling and finishing mills or a forging department; includes mini
mills), and non-integrated (all others, including stand-alone rolling and
finishing mills, and stand-alone coke plants). This division highlights some
important characteristics about the size of facilities in this industry. Only 8
percent (20 plants) of the establishments under SIC 3312 in 1987 were folly
integrated mills. However, 46 percent of the industry's employees worked
in these 20 plants.
September 1995
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
I
Iron and Steel Inciusfay
Exhibit 1: Geographic Distribution of
Blast Furnaces, and Rolling
SIC 331 Establishments: Steel Works,
and Finishing Mills
September 1995
SIC 3,31
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
Top Steel Producers
Market Share Reporter, published by Gale Research Inc., annually compiles
reported market share data on companies, products, and services. The 1995
edition ranks top U.S. steel producers by 1993 sales in millions of dollars, as
shown in Exhibit 2.
Exhibit 2: Top U.S. Iron and Steel Producers
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Company
US Steel Group - Pittsburgh, PA
Bethlehem Steel Corp. - Bethlehem, PA
LTV Corp. - Dallas, TX . • -
National^ Steel Corp. - Pittsburgh, PA
Inland Steel Industries, Inc. - Chicago, IL
Armco Inc. - Parsippany, NJ
Weirton Steel Corp. - Weirton, WV
Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel - Pittsburgh, PA
1993 Sales
(millions of dollars)
5,422
4,219
3,868
2,418
2,175
1,595
1,201
1,047
Source: Market Share Reporter, 1995,
H.B.2. Product Characterization
The iron and steel industry produces iron and steel mill products, such as
bars, strips, and sheets, as well as formed products such as steel nails, spikes,
wire, rods, pipes, and non-steel electrometallurgical products such as
ferroalloys. Under SIC 3312, Blast Furnaces and Steel Mills, products also
include coke, and products derived from, chemical recoveiy in the coking
process such as coal tar and distillates.
Historically, the automotive and construction sectors have been the two
largest steel consuming industries. Consequently, fluctuations in sales and
choice of materials in these industries have a significant impact on the iron
and steel industry. Over the last two decades, the structure of the
steelmaking industry has changed dramatically due to new technologies,
foreign competition, and loss of market share to other materials. Many of the
large, fully-integrated facilities have closed, and those that are still operating,
have reduced their workforce, increased automation, and invested in new
technologies to remain competitive.
September 1995
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
II.B.3. Economic Trends
Domestic Market
After years of collapsing iriarkets, bankruptcies, mill closings and layoffs, the
steel industry experienced a turnaround in 1993. Shipments were at their
highest level since 1981.6 For the first time since 1989, steelmakers were
able to boost their prices. This increase in demand is due in part to the weak
dollar, which makes importing foreign steel more expensive than it used to
be. The relatively high level of shipments was also attributable to a strong
demand from the steel industry's two largest customers - the automotive and
construction sectors.7 Recently, prices for steel sold to the automotive -
industry have been set in long-term contracts. The prices set in the
automotive contracts tend to influence the steel prices of other contract
negotiations, such as thosejwith appliance manufacturers. Overall, more than
half of all steel sold in the U.S. is, covered by long-term contracts; the rest is
sold on the spot market.
International Trade
Problems in international
steel trade intensified in the last 5 years due in
large part to a worldwide weakening in demand. With the exception of
China, where rapid economic growth has led to a steady increase in steel
demand, the export market has been weak. The "voluntary restraint
arrangements" that limitedj imports in the 1980s expired in 1992. Since then,
the U.S. steel industry has discouraged imports by filing complaints that
products are being dumped - sold at less than the cost of production. Similar
cases have also been filed against U.S. exporters. To address the problems
of unfairly traded steell most major steel-producing countries have
participated in multilateral steel agreement (MSA) negotiations under the
General Agreement on Tariffs,and Trade (GATT).8
Steel imports for 1992 tote led 15.2 million metric tons. From 1989 to 1993,
the quantity of steel imported was fairly consistent, from 15.7 million metric
tons in 1989 to 15.3 million metric tons estimated for 1993. The exception
is a slight dip to 14.3 million metric tons in 1991. The forecast for 1994, at
16.3 million metric tons, is a more significant increase than has been seen in
the last five years. The export market has seen slightly more variability over
the same time period, withj a high of 5.7 million metric tons exported in 1991,
and 3.8 million metric tons in exports forecast for 1994.9
September 1995
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
Labor
According to 1992 Census of Manufactures, there were an estimated 172,000
people employed in SIC 3312 industries, with a payroll of $7 billion. This
was a 61 percent decrease from 1977 levels of 442,000 employees, and a
, 42% reduction from 1982 levels of 295,000 employees. This dramatic
reduction hi workforce was primarily due to reductions at the large integrated
facilities. For example, the U.S. Steel plant in Gary, Indiana, employed
30,000 people during the plant's peak employment in 1953. In 1992, there
were about 8,000 employees working at the 4,000-acre facility.
This reduction in workforce, coupled with investments in new equipment,
automation, and management restructuring has resulted in the increased
productivity that was essential for integrated mills to remain competitive in
the face of the severe competitive pressures both from EAF producers in the
U.S. and from abroad. With these changes, the U.S. industry has become one
of the lowest-cost producers in the developed world. Productivity in
steelmaking is often measured in man-hours per ton of finished steel. For
every ton produced, American steelmakers spend 5.3 man-hours, compared
with 5.6 for the Japanese and Canadian industries, and 5.7 for the British,
French, and Germans. The increase in productivity is also reflected in
changes in the value added by manufacture, as reported by the Census.
During the ten year period where employment in the industry dropped by
42% (1982 - 1992), the value added by manufacture increased by 39% from
$11.8 million in 1982 to $16.5 million in 1992.
Problems from such a sizable workforce reduction persist. The industry says
one big cost is "legacy costs" - obligations to pay pensions and health
benefits to the tens of thousands of retirees and their spouses. Some
integrated companies have five retired workers for every active employee.
For many of the large, integrated facilities, these pensions are underfinanced.
Of the 50 most underfinanced pension plans, five are in the steel industry.
This puts the newer minimills, who do not have such legacy costs, at a clear
competitive advantage.
hi addition to pension payments, major U.S. steel producers are now paying
out an average $5.30 per hour worked, 17 percent of total hourly employment
costs, for health care. The industry argues that these high costs place it at a
disadvantage with its major foreign competitors, some of whom pay no direct
health care expenses.
September 1995
10
SIC 331
-------
Sfefttor Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
Long-term Prospects
Production of steel products in 1993 totaled 89.0 million net tons which
represents an 89.1 percent! capacity utilization. Shipments for 1994 rose to
.95.1 million net tons and it is forecasted that demand will stay high, with
industry capacity utilization increasing through 1995.16 After years of losing
market share to other materials, steel appears to be regaining a competitive
position. In the automotive market, some parts that were recently made of
plastic, such as fenders, roofs, and hoods, are being returned to steel. The
decades-long downtrend in steel content in automobiles appears to have
slowed and recently has actually reversed. According to Ford Motor
Company, the average vehicle built in 1993 contained 1,726 pounds of steel,
up from 1,710 pounds in 1992, marking the second consecutive yearly
increase. A further increase is anticipated in 1994 due to new and expanding
applications of steel. In
sector, the residential construction sector is a potentially rich market for steel
producers. Steel framing
high strength alternative 13 wood framing. A galvanized steel frame for a
2,000 square foot house would weigh approximately one-fourth the weight
of a lumber structure.
ddition to increased orders from the automotive
for houses is being promoted as a light-weight,
September 1995
SIG331
-------
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
[ •
III. INDUSTRIAL PROCESS DESCRIPTION
This section describes the major industrial processes within the iron and steel
industry, including the materials and equipment used, and the processes
employed. The section is designed for those interested in gaining a general
understanding of the industry, and for those interested in the inter-
relationship between the industrial process and the topics described in
subsequent sections of this profile - pollutant outputs, pollution prevention
opportunities, and Federal (regulations. This section does not attempt to
replicate published engineering information that is available for this industry.
Refer to Section IX for a list of reference documents that are available.
.. i '. - • , •'''•'.....
This section specifically contains a description of commonly used production
processes, associated raw materials, the byproducts produced or released, and
fhe'materials either recycled or transferred off-site. This discussion, coupled
with schematic drawings of the identified processes, provide a concise
description of where wasteb may be produced in the process. This section
also describes the potential
waste products.
fate (via air,'water, and soil pathways) of these
III.A. Industrial Processes in the Iron and Steel Industry
• I •
In view of the high cost of most new equipment and the relatively long lead
time necessary to bring new equipment online in the steel industry, changes
in production methods and products in the steel industry are typically made
gradually. Installation of major pieces of new steelmaking equipment may
cost millions of dollars and require additional retrofitting of other equipment.
Even new process technologies that fundamentally improve productivity,
such as the continuous casting process (described below), are adopted only
over long periods of time. "' ~
steel industry, the ability
equipment is limited.
Environmental legislation is
more efficient steelmaking ^
substitute materials are forcing steelmakers' to invest in cost-saving and
quality enhancing technologies. In the long term, the steel industry will
likely continue to move! towards more simplified and continuous
manufacturing technologies) that reduce the capital costs for new mill
construction and allow smaljler mills to operate efficiently. The companies
that excel will be.those that have the resources and foresight to invest in such
technologies.
Given the recent financial performance of the
;o raise the capital needed to purchase such
challenging the industry to develop cleaner and
processes at the same time competition from
September, 1995
13
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
Steel is an alloy of iron usually containing less than one percent carbon. The
process of steel production occurs in several sequential steps (Exhibit 3).
The two types of steelmaking technology in use today are the basic oxygen
furnace (EOF) and the electric arc furnace (EAF). Although these two
technologies use different input materials, the output for both furnace types
is molten steel which is subsequently formed into steel mill products. The
EOF input materials are molten iron, scraprand oxygen. In the EAF,
electricity and scrap are the input materials used. BOFs are typically used
for high tonnage production of carbon steels, while EAFs are used to produce
carbon steels and low tonnage alloy and specialty steels. The processes
leading up to steelmaking in a EOF are very different than the steps
proceeding steelmaking in an EAF; the steps after each of these processes
producing molten steel are the same.
When making steel using a EOF, cokemaking and ironmaking precede
steelmaking; these steps are not needed for steelmaking with an EAF. Coke,
which is the fuel and carbon source, is produced by heating costl in the
absence of oxygen at high temperatures in coke ovens. Pig iron is then
produced by heating the coke, iron ore, and limestone in a blast furnace. In
the EOF, molten iron from the blast furnace is combined with flux and scrap
steel where high-purity oxygen is injected. This process, with cokemaking,
ironmaking, steelmaking, and subsequent forming and finishing operations
is referred to as fully integrated production. Alternatively, in an EAF, the
input material is primarily scrap steel, which is melted and refined by passing
an electric current from the electrodes through the scrap. The molten steel
from either process is formed into ingots or slabs that are rolled into finished
products. Rolling operations may require reheating, rolling, cleaning, and
coating the steel. A description of both steelmaking processes follows:
September 1995
14
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
ill?iff11If
September 1995
15
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
III.A.l. Steelmaking Using the Basic Oxygen Furnace
The process of making steel in a Basic Oxygen Furnace (BOF) is preceded
by cokemaking and ironmaking operations. In cokemaking, coke is produced
from coal. In ironmaking, molten iron is produced from iron ore arid coke.
Each of these processes and the subsequent steelmaking process in the BOF
are described below.
Cokemaking
Coal processing in the iron, and steel industry typically involves producing
coke, coke gas and by-product chemicals from compounds released from the
coal during the cokemaking process (Exhibit 4). Coke is carbon-rich and is
used as a carbon source and fuel to heat and melt iron ore in ironmaking.
The cokemaking process starts with bituminous pulverized coal charge which
is fed into the coke oven through ports in the top of the oven. After charging,
the oven ports are sealed and the coal is heated at high temperatures (1600
to 2300°F), in the absence of oxygen. Coke manufacturing is done in a batch
mode where each cycle lasts for 14 to 36 hours. A coke oven battery
comprises a series of 10 to 100 individual ovens, side-by-side, with a heating
flue between each oven pair. Volatile compounds are driven from the coal,
collected from each oven, and processed for recovery of combustible gases
and other coal byproducts.11 The solid carbon remaining in the oven is the
coke. The necessary heat for distillation is supplied by external combustion
of fuels (e.g., recovered coke oven gas, blast furnace gas) through flues
located between ovens.12 At the end of the heating cycle, the coke is pushed
from the oven into a rail quench car. The quench car takes it to the quench
tower, where the hot coke is cooled with a water spray. The coke is then
screened and sent to the blast furnace or to storage.
In the by-products recovery process, volatile components' of the coke oven
gas stream are recovered including the coke oven gas itself (which is used as
a fuel for the coke oven), naphthalene, ammonium compounds, crude light
oils, sulfur compounds, and coke breeze (coke fines). During the coke
quenching, handling, and screening operation, coke breeze is produced.
Typically, the coke breeze is reused in other manufacturing processes on-site
(e.g., sintering) or sold off-site as a by-product.13
The cokemaking process is seen by industry experts as one of the steel
industry's areas of greatest environmental concern, with air emissions and
quench water as major problems. In efforts to reduce the emissions
associated with cokemaking, U.S. steelmakers are turning to technologies
such as pulverized coal injection, which substitutes coal for coke in the blast
furnace. Use of pulverized coal injection can replace about 25 to 40 percent
September 1995
16
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
of coke in the blast furndce, reducing the amount of coke required and the
associated emissions. Stejel producers also inject other fuels, such as natural
gas, oil, and tar/pitch to Replace a portion of the coke.
Quench water from cokeiiiaking is also an area of significant environmental
concern. In Europe, some plants have implemented technology to shift from
water quenching to dry quenching which eliminates suspected carcinogenic
particulates and VOCs. However, major construction changes are required
for such a solution and considering the high capital costs of coke batteries,
combined with the depressed state of the steel industry and increased
regulations for cokemaking, it is unlikely that new facilities will be
constructed. Instead, industry experts expect to see an increase in the amount
of coke imported.
Ironmaking
In the blast furnace, moltejn iron is produced (Exhibit 4). Iron ore, coke, and
limestone are fed into the top of the blast furnace. Heated air is forced into
the bottom of the furnace through a bustle pipe and tuyeres (orifices) located
around the circumference; of the furnace. The carbori monoxide from the
burning of the coke reduces iron ore to iron. The acid part of the ores reacts
with the limestone to create a slag which is drawn periodically from the
furnace. This slag contaibs unwanted impurities in the ore, such as sulfur
from the fuels. When the furnace is tapped, iron is removed through one set
of runners and molten slag via another. The molten iron is tapped into
refractory-lined cars for transport to the steelmaking furnaces. Residuals -
from .the process are mainly sulfur dioxide or hydrogen sulfide, which are
driven off from the hot slag. The slag is the largest by-product generated
from the ironmaking process and is reused extensively in the construction
industry.14 Blast furnace flue gas is cleaned and used to generate steam to
preheat the air coming intjo the furnace, or it may be used to supply heat to
other plant processes. The cleaning of the gas may generate air pollution
control dust in removing coarse particulates (which may be reused in the
sintering plant or landfilled), and water treatment plant sludge in removing
fine particulates by venturi scrubbers.
Sintering is the process that agglomerates fines (including iron ore fines,
pollution control dusts, cbke breeze, water treatment plant sludge, coke
breeze, and flux) into a porous mass for charging to the blast furnace.15
Through sintering operations, a mill can recycle iron-rich material, such as
mill scale and processed slag. Not all mills have sintering capabilities. The
input materials are mixed together, placed on a slow-moving grate and
ignited. Windboxes under jthe grate draw air through the materials to deepen
the combustion throughout the traveling length of the grate. The coke breeze
provides the carbon source for sustaining the controlled combustion. In the
September 1995
17
SIG331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
process, the fine materials are fused into the sinter agglomerates, which can
be reintroduced into the blast furnace along with ore. Air pollution control
equipment removes the particulate matter generated during the thermal fusing
process. For wet scrubbers, water treatment plant sludge are generally land
disposed waste. If electrostatic precipitators or baghouses are used as the air
pollution control equipment, the dry particulates captured are typically
recycled as sinter feedstock, or are landfilled as solid waste.
Steelmaking Using the Basic Oxygen Furnace
Molten iron from the blast furnace, flux, alloy .materials, and scrap are placed
in the basic oxygen furnace, melted and refined by injecting high-purity
oxygen. A chemical reaction occurs, where the oxygen reacts with carbon
and silicon generating the heat necessary to melt the scrap and oxidize
impurities. This is a batch process with a cycle time of about 45 minutes.
Slag is produced from impurities removed by the combination of the fluxes
with the injected oxygen. Various alloys are added to produce different
grades of steel. The molten steel is typically cast into slabs, beams or billets.
The waste products from the basic oxygen Steelmaking process include slag,
carbon monoxide, and oxides of iron emitted as dust. Also, when the hot iron
is poured into ladles or the furnace, iron oxide fumes are released and some
of the carbon in the iron is precipitated as graphite (kish). The BOF slag can
be processed to recover the high metallic portions for use in sintering or blast
furnaces, but its applications as a saleable construction materials are more
limited than the blast furnace slag.
Basic oxygen furnaces are equipped with air pollution control systems for
containing, cooling, and cleaning the volumes of hot gases and sub-micron
fumes that are released during the process. Water is used to quench or cool
the gases and fumes to temperatures at which they can be effectively treated
by the gas cleaning equipment. The resulting waste streams from the
pollution control processes include air pollution control dust and water
treatment plant sludge. About 1,000 gallons of water per ton of steel (gpt)
are used for a wet scrubber. The principal pollutants removed from the off-
gas are total suspended solids and metals (primarily zinc, and some lead).16
September 1995
18
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
September 1995
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
(9
£
2 a
m
iuiui
UJ UJ UJ
(A CO
Q
September 1995
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steei Industry
III.-A.2. Steelmaking Using the Electri
: Arc Furnace (EAF)
In the steelmaking process that uses an electric arc furnace (EAF), the
primary raw material is jjcrap metal, which is melted and refined using
electric energy. During melting, oxidation of phosphorus, silicon,
manganese; carbon and other materials occurs and a slag containing some of
these oxidation products fcfahs on top of the molten metal.17 Oxygen is used
to decarburize the molten steel and to provide thermal energy. This is a
batch process with a cycle time of about two to three hours. Since scrap
metal is used instead of molten iron, there are no cokemaking or ironmaking
operations associated with
steel production that uses an EAF.
The process produces metal dusts, slag, and gaseous products. Particulate
matter and gases evolve together during the steelmaking process and are
conveyed into a gas cleaning system. These emissions are cleaned using a
.wet or dry system. The particulate matter that is removed as emissions in the
dry system is referred to as EAF dust, or EAF sludge if it is from a wet
system' and it is a listed hazardous waste (RCRAK061). The composition
of EAF dust can vary greatly depending on the scrap composition and
furnace additives. The primary component is iron or iron oxides, and it may
also contain flux (lime and/or fluorspar), zinc, chromium and nickel oxides
(when stainless steel is being produced) and other metals associated with the
scrap. The two primary hazardous constituents of EAF emission control dusf
are lead and cadmium.18 Generally, 20 pounds of dust per ton of steel is
expected, but as much as 40 pounds of dust per ton of steel may be generated
depending on production practices. 19 Oils are burned off "charges" of oil-
bearing scrap in the furnace. Minor amounts of nitrogen oxides and ozone '-
are generated during the melting process. The furnace is extensively cooled
by water; however, this water is recycled through cooling towers.
III. A.3. Forming and Finishing Operations
Whether the molten steel is
into a product, it must be solidified
produced using a EOF or an EAF, to convert it
" into a shape suitable and finished,
Forming
The traditional forming method, called ingot teeming, has been to pour the
metal into ingot molds, allowing the steel to cool and solidify. The
alternative method of forming steel, called continuous casting accounted for
more 86% of raw steel produced in the U.S. in 199220, compared with
approximately 30 percent in 1982. The continuous casting process bypasses
several steps of the conventional ingot teeming process by casting steel
directly into semifinished shapes. Molten steel is poured into a reservoir
from which it is released intb the molds of the casting machine. The metal
;is cooled as it descends through the molds, and before emerging, a hardened
outer shell is formed. As the semifinished shapes proceed on the runout
table, the center also solidifies, allowing the cast shape to be cut intb lengths.
September 1995
21
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
Process contact water cools the continuously cast steel and is collected in
settling basins along with oil, grease, and mill scale generated in the casting
process The scale settles out and is removed and recycled for sintering
operations, if the mill has. a Sinter Plant. Waste treatment plant sludge is also
generated.21
The steel is further processed to produce slabs, strips, bars, or plates through
various forming operations. The most common hot forming operation is hot
rolling, where heated steel is passed between two rolls revolving in opposite
directions. Modern hot rolling units may have as many as 13 stands, each
producing an incremental reduction in thickness. The final shape and
characteristics of a hot formed piece depend on the rolling temperature, the
roll profile, and the cooling process after rolling. Wastes generated from hot
rolling include waste treatment plant sludge and scale.
In subsequent cold forming, the cross-sectional area of unheated steel is
progressively reduced in thickness as the steel passes through a series of
rolling stands. Generally, wires, tubes, sheet and strip steel products are
produced by cold rolling operations. Cold forming is used to obtain
improved mechanical properties, better machinability, special size accuracy,
and the production of thinner gages than hot rolling can accomplish
economically.22 During cold rolling, the steel becomes hard and brittle. To
make the steel more ductile, it is heated in an annealing furnace.
Process contact water is used as a coolant for rolling mills to keep the surface
of the steel clean between roller passes. Cold rolling operations also
produce a waste treatment plant sludge, primarily due to the lubricants
applied during rolling. Grindings from resurfacing of the worn rolls and
disposal of used rolls can be a significant contributor to the plant's
wastestream.
Finishing
One of the most important aspects of a finished product is the surface quality.
To prevent corrosion, a protective coating may be applied to the steel
product. Prior to coating, the surface of the steel must be cleaned so the
coating will adhere to the steel. Mill scale, rust, oxides, oil, grease, and soil
are chemically removed from the surface of steel using solvent cleaners,
pressurized water or air blasting, cleaning with abrasives, alkaline agents or
acid pickling. In the pickling process, the steel surface is chemically cleaned
of scale, rust, and other materials. Inorganic acids such as hydrochloric or
sulfuiic acid are most commonly used for pickling. Stainless steels are
pickled with hydrochloric, nitric, and hydrofluoric acids. Spent pickle liquor
may be a listed hazardous waste (RCRA K062), if it contains considerable
residual acidity and high concentrations of dissolved iron salts. Pickling
prior to coating may use a mildly acidic bath which is not considered K062.
September 1995
22
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
Steel generally passes fijom the pickling bath through a series of rinses.
Alkaline cleaners may also be used to remove mineral oils and animal fats
and oils from the steel surface prior to cold rolling. Common alkaline
cleaning agents include: caustic soda, soda ash, alkaline silicates, phosphates.
Steel products are often given a coating to inhibit oxidation and extend the
life of the product. Coaied products can also be painted to further inhibit
corrosion. Common coating processes include: galvanizing (zinc coating),
tin coating, chromium coating, aluminizing, and terne coating (lead and tin).
Metallic coating application processes include hot dipping, metal spraying,
metal cladding (to produce bi-metal products), and electroplating.
Galvanizing is a common coating process where a thin layer of zinc is
deposited on the steel surface.
III.B. Raw Material Inputs and Pollution Outputs
Numerous outputs are prjoduced as a result of the manufacturing of coke,
iron, and steel, the forming of metals into basic shapes, and the cleaning and
scaling of metal surfaces. These outputs, categorized by process (RCRA
waste code provided whe
Cokemaking
Inputs:
•e applicable),, include:
1 Coal, heat, quench water
Outputs:
• Process residues from coke by-product recovery (RCRA K143, K148)
• Coke oven gas by-products such as coal tar, light oil, ammonia liquor, and
, the remainder of the gas stream is used as fuel. Coal tar is typically refined
to produce commercial and industrial products including pitch, creosote oil,
refined tar, naphthalene, and bitumen.
• Charging emissions (fine' particles of Coke generated during oven pushing,
conveyor transport, loading and unloading of coke that are captured by
pollution control equipment. Approximately one pound per ton of coke
produced are captured anc[ generally land disposed).
• Ammonia, phenol, cyanide and hydrogen sulfide
• Oil (K143 and K144) '
• Lime sludge, generated from the ammonia still (K060)
• Decanter tank tar sludge (K087) <
• Benzene releases in coke by-product recovery operations
• Naphthalene residues, generated in the final cooling tower
• Tar residues (K035, K141, K142, and K147)
• Sulfur compounds, emitted from the stacks of the coke ovens
• Wastewater from cleaning and cooling (contains zinc, ammonia still lime
, (K060), or decanter tank tar (K087), tar distillation residues (K03 5))
• Coke oven gas condensate from piping and distribution system; may be a
RCRA characteristic waste for benzene.
September 1995
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
Ironmaking
Inputs:
• Iron ore (primarily in the form of taconite pellets), coke, sinter, coal,
limestone, heated air
Outputs:
• Slag, which is either sold as a by-product, primarily for use in the
construction industry, or landfilled
• Residual sulfur dioxide or hydrogen sulfide
• Particulates captured in the gas, including the air pollution control (APC)
dust or waste treatment plant (WTP) sludge
• Iron is the predominant metal found in the process wastewater
• Blast furnace gas (CO)
Steelmaking
Inputs:
• In the steelmaking process that uses a basic oxygen furnace (EOF), inputs
include molten iron, metal scrap, and high-purity oxygen
• In the steelmaking process that uses an electric arc furnace (EAF), the
primary inputs are scrap metal, electric energy and graphite electrodes.
• For both processes, fluxes and alloys are added, and may include: fluorspar,
dolomite, and alloying agents such as aluminum, manganese, and others.
Outputs:
• Basic Oxygen Furnace emission control dust and sludge, a metals-bearing
waste.
• Electric Arc Furnace emission control dust and sludge (K061); generally,
20 pounds of dust per ton of steel is expected, but as much as 40 pounds of
dust per ton of steel may be generated depending on the scrap that is used.
• Metal dusts (consisting of iron particulate, zinc, and other metals associated
with the scrap and flux (lime and/or fluorspar)) not associated with the EAF.
• Slag.
• Carbon monoxide.
• Nitrogen oxides and ozone, which are generated during the melting
process. . ;
Forming, Cleaning, and Descaling
Inputs:
•Carbon steel is pickled with hydrochloric or sulfuric acid; stainless steels
are pickled with hydrochloric, nitric, and hydrofluoric acids.
• Various organic chemicals are used in the pickling process.
• Alkaline cleaners may also be used to remove mineral oils and animal fats
and oils from the.steel surface. Common alkaline cleaning agents include:
caustic soda, soda ash, alkaline silicates, phosphates.
September 1995
24
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
Outputs:
1 Wastewater sludge from
rolling, cooling, descaling, and rinsing operations
which may contain cadmium (D006), chromium (D007), lead (D008)
• Oils and greases from hot and cold rolling
• Spent pickle liquor (K0^2)
• Spent pickle liquor rinse water sludge from cleaning operations
• Wastewater from the rinse baths. Rinse water from coating processes may
contain zinc, lead, cadmium, or chromium.
• Grindings from roll reftyiishing may be RCRA characteristic waste from
chromium (D007)
• Zinc dross
III.C. Management of Chemicals in the Production Process
The Pollution Prevention Act of 1990 (PPA) requires facilities to report
information about the management of TRI chemicals in waste and efforts
made to eliminate or reduce those quantities. These data have been collected
annually in Section 8 of Hie TRI reporting Form R beginning with the 1991
reporting year. The data summarized below cover the years 1992-1995 and
is meant to provide a basics understanding of the quantities of waste handled
by the industry, the methods typically used to manage this waste, and recent
trends in these methods. TRI waste management data can be used to assess
trends in source reduction within individual industries and facilities, and for
specific TRI chemicals. This information could then be used as a tool in
identifying opportunities
activities.
for pollution prevention compliance assistance
From the yearly data presented below it is apparent that the portion of TRI
wastes reported as recycled on-site has increased and the portions treated or
managed through energy recovery on-site have decreased between 1992 and
1995 (projected). While the quantities reported for 1992 and 1993 are
estimates of quantities already managed, the quantities reported for 1994 and
1995 are projections only. The PPA requires these projections to encourage
facilities to consider future waste generation and source reduction of those
quantities as well as movement up the waste management hierarchy. Future-
year estimates are not commitments that facilities reporting under TRI are
required to meet. , • , ,
Exhibit 6 shows that the i-on and steel industry managed about 1.3 billion
pounds of production-related waste (total quantity of TRI chemicals in the
waste from routine production operations) in 1993 (column B). Column C
reveals that of this produjction-related waste, over half (52%) was either
transferred off-site or released to the environment, and most of this quantity
was recycled off-site (typically in a metals recovery process). Column C is
calculated by dividing th^ total TRI transfers and releases by the total
quantity of production-related waste. In other words, about 48% of the
industry's TRI wastes were managed on-site through recycling, energy
September 1995
25
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
recovery, or treatment as shown in columns E, F and G, respectively. The
majority of waste that is released or transferred off-site can be divided into
portions that are recycled off-site, recovered for energy off-site, or treated
off-site as shown in columns H, I and J, respectively. The remaining portion
of the production related wastes (15% for 1993), shown in column D, is
either released to the environment through direct discharges to air, land,
water, and underground injection, or it is disposed off-site.
Exhibit 6: Source Reduction and Recycling Activity for Iron and Steel Industry
(SIC 331) as Reported within TRI
A
Year
1992
1993
1994
1995
B
Quantity of
Production-
Related
Waste
(106 Ibs.)1
1,301
1,340
1,341
1,357
C
% Released
and
Transferred1"
40%
52%
—
D
% Released
and
Disposed0
Off-site
10%
15%
15%
15%
Qn-Site
E
%
Recycled
32%
24%
23%
22%
F
%
Energy
Recovery
2%
1%
1%
1%
G
%
Treated
16%
17% .
18%
18%
Off-Site
H
%
Recycled
34%
35%
37%
38%
I
%
Energy
Recovery
1%
1%
1%
1%
J
%
Treated
5%
6%
6%
6%
* Does not include any accidental, non-production related wastes.
k Total TRI transfers and releases as reported in Section 5 and 6 of Form R as a percentage of production related
wastes; this value may not equal the sum of the percentages released and transferred due to reporting errors in
Section 8.
e Percentage of production related waste released to the environment and transferred off-site for disposal.
September 1995
26
•SIC 331
-------
Sector 'N otebooVt Proj cct
Iron and Steel Industry
IV. CHEMICAL RELEASE AND TRANSFER PROFILE
This section is designed to! provide background information on the pollutant
releases that are reported py this industry. The best source of comparative
^pollutant release information is the Toxic Release Inventory System (TRI).
Pursuant to the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act,
TRI includes self-reported facility release and transfer data for over 600 toxic
chemicals. Facilities within SIC Codes 20-39 (manufacturing industries) that
have more than 10 employees, and that are above weight-based reporting
>' thresholds are required to report TRI on-site releases and off-site transfers.
The information presentejl within the sector notebooks is derived from the
most recently available (1993) TRI reporting year (which then included 3.16
chemicals), and focuses primarily on the on-site releases reported by each
sector. Because TRI requires consistent reporting regardless of sector, it is
an excellent tool for drawing comparisons across industries.
Although this sector no
tebook does not present historical information
regarding TRI chemical releases, please note that in general, toxic chemical
releases reported in TRI have been declining. In fact, according to the 1993
Toxic Release Inventory Data Book, reported releases dropped by 42.7%
between 1988 and 1993. Although on-site releases have decreased, the total
amount of reported toxic waste has not declined because the amount of toxic
chemicals transferred off-site has increased. Transfers have increased from
3.7 billion pounds hi 1991 to-4.7 billion pounds hi 1993. Better management
practices have led to increases in off-site transfers of toxic chemicals for
recycling. More detailed information can be obtained from EPA's annual
Toxics Release Inventory Public Data Release book (which is available
through the EPGRA Hotline at 1-800-535-0202), or directly from the Toxic
Release Inventory System database (for user support call 202-260-1531).
Wherever possible, the sector notebooks present TRI data as the primary
indicator of chemical release within each industrial category. TRI data
provide the type, amount and media receptor of each chemical released or
transferred. When other sources of pollutant release data have been
obtained, these data have been included to augment the TRI information.
TRI Data Limitations
The reader should keep in
mind the following limitations regarding TRI data.
Within some sectors,'the majority of facilities are not subject-to TRI
reporting because they are not considered manufacturing industries, or
because they are below TRI reporting thresholds. Examples are the mining,
dry cleaning, printing, and transportation equipment cleaning sectors. For
these sectors, release information from other sources has been included.
September 1995
27
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
, The reader should also be aware that TRI "pounds released" data presented
within the notebooks is not equivalent to a "risk" ranking for each industry.
Weighting each pound of release equally does not factor in the relative
toxicity of each chemical that is released. The Agency is in the process of
developing an approach to assign toxicological weightings to each chemical
released so that one can differentiate between pollutants with significant
differences in toxicity. As a preliminary indicator of the environmental
impact of the industry's most commonly released chemicals, the notebook
briefly summarizes the toxicological properties of the top five chemicals (by
weight) reported by each industry.
Definitions Associated With Section IV Data Tables
General Definitions
SIC Code ~ is the Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) is a statistical
classification standard used for all establishment-based Federal economic
statistics. The SIC codes facilitate comparisons between facility and industry
data. ,
TRI Facilities -- are manufacturing facilities that have 10 or more full-time
employees and are above established chemical throughput thresholds.
Manufacturing facilities are defined as facilities in Standard Industrial
Classification primary codes 20-39. Facilities must submit estimates for all
chemicals that are on the EPA's defined list and are above throughput
thresholds.
Data Table Column Heading Definitions
The following definitions are based upon standard definitions developed by
EPA's Toxic Release Inventory Program. "The categories below represent the
possible pollutant destinations that can be reported.
RELEASES ~ are an on-site discharge of a toxic chemical to the
environment. This includes emissions to the air, discharges to bodies of
water, releases at the facility to land, as well as contained disposal into
underground injection wells.
Releases to Air (Point and Fugitive Air Emissions) -- Include all air
emissions from industry activity. Point emission occur through confined air
streams as found in stacks, ducts, or pipes. Fugitive emissions include losses
from equipment leaks, or evaporative losses from impoundments, spills, or
leaks.
Releases to Water (Surface Water Discharges) -- encompass any releases
going directly to streams, rivers, lakes, oceans, or other bodies of water. Any
estimates for storm water runoff and non-point losses must also be included.
September 1995
28
SIC 331
-------
Sector TSotetoook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
Releases to Land — includes disposal of toxic chemicals in waste to on-site
landfills, land treated or incorporation into soil, surface impoundments,
spills, leaks, or waste -pilejs. These activities must occur within the facility's
boundaries for inclusion in this category.
Underground Injection |~ is a contained release of a fluid into a subsurface
well for the purpose of w'aste disposal.
TRANSFERS -- is a transfer of toxic chemicals in wastes to a facility that
is geographically or physically separate from the facility reporting under
TRI. The quantities reported represent a movement of the chemical away
from the reporting facility. Except for off-site transfers for disposal, these
quantities do not necessarily represent entry of the chemical into the
environment.
Transfers to POTWs -- *re wastewaters transferred through pipes or sewers
to a publicly owned treatments works (POTW). Treatment and chemical
.removal depend on the
Chemicals not treated or
chemical's nature and treatment methods used.
destroyed by the POTW are generally released to
surface waters or landfilled within the sludge.
Transfers to Recycling j- are sent off-site for the purposes of regenerating
or recovering still valuable materials. Once these chemicals have been
returned to the originating facility or sold
recycled, they
"commercially.
may be
Transfers to Energy Rec overy — are wastes combusted off-site in industrial
furnaces for energy recovery. Treatment of a chemical by incineration is not
considered to be energy recovery.
Transfers to Treatment — are wastes moved off-site for either
neutralization, incineration, biological destruction, or physical separation.
In some cases, the chemicals are not destroyed but prepared for further waste
management. • ,
1 Transfers to Disposal - are wastes taken to another facility for disposal
generally as a release to land or as an injection underground.
IV.A. EPA Toxic Release Inventory for,the Iron and Steel Industry
r
This section summarizes TpRI data of facilities involved in the production of
iron and steel products who report their operations under SIC 331. These
include blast furnaces and steel mills, steel wire manufacture, and cpld rolled
steel products but also.include a small number of nonferrous operations (such
as facilities manufacturing nonferrous electrometalurgical products under
SIC 3313). The Census of Manufactures reports 1,118 iron and steel
establishments under SIC
331. Although 381 iron and steel facilities filed
September 1995
29
'SIC 331-
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
TRI reports in 1993 (under SIC 3312, 3313, 3315, 3316, 3317), the 155
facilities (41 percent) classified under SIC 3312 (blast furnaces and steel
mills) are responsible for over. 75 percent of reported releases and transfers.
TRI information is likely to provide a fairly different profile for the facilities
not reporting under 3312 (non-steel producing facilities).
According to TRI data, the iron and steel industry released and transferred
a total of approximately 695 million pounds of pollutants during calendar
.year 1993. These releases and transfers are dominated by large volumes of
metal-bearing wastes. The majority of these wastes (70 percent or 488
million pounds) are transferred off-site for recycling, typically for recovery
of the metal content. Transfers of TRI chemicals account for 86 percent of
the iron and steel industry's total TRI-reportable chemicals (609 million
pounds) while releases make up 14 percent (85 million pounds). Metal-
bearing wastes account for approximately 80 percent of the industry's
transfers and over fifty percent of the releases.
Releases from the industry continue to decrease, while transfers increased
from 1992 to 1993. The increase in transfers is likely due to increased off-
site shipments for recovery of metals from wastes. This shift may also have
contributed to the decrease in releases. Another factor influencing an overall
downward trend since 1988 in releases and transfers is the steel mill
production decrease during the 1988 to 1993 period. In addition, pollution
control equipment and a shift to new technologies, such as continuous
casting, are responsible for significant changes in the amount and type of
pollutants released during steelmaking. Finally, the industry's efforts in
pollution preventing also play a role in driving pollutant release reductions.
Evidence of the diversity of processes at facilities reporting to TRI is found
in the fact that the most frequently reported chemical (sulfuric acid) is
reported by only 41 percent of the facilities; the sixth most frequently
reported chemical was used by just one-fourth of TRI facilities. The
variability in facilities' pollutant profile may be attributable to a number of
factors. Fewer than 30 of the facilities in the TRI database for SIC 331 are
fully integrated plants making coke, iron, and steel products. The non-
integrated facilities do not perform one or more of the production steps and,
therefore, may have considerably different emissions profiles. Furthermore,
steel making operations with electric arc furnaces have significantly different
pollutant profiles than those making steel with basic oxygen furnaces.
Releases
The iron and steel industry releases just 14 percent of its TRI total poundage.
Of these releases, over half go to on-site land disposal, and one quairjter of
releases are fugitive or point source air emissions (Exhibit 7). Manganese,
zinc, chromium, and lead account for over 90 percent of the on-site land
disposal. The industry's air releases are associated with volatilization, fume
September 1995
30
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook. Project
Iron and Steel Industry
or 'aerosol formation inj the high temperature furnaces and" byproduct
processing. Ammonia, lighter weight organics, such as methanol, acids and
metal contaminants found in the iron ore are the principal types of chemicals
released to the air. In addition to air releases of chemicals reported in TRI,
the iron and steel industry is a significant source of particulates, carbon
monoxide, nitrogen oxides and sulfur compounds due to combustion.
Ammonia releases account for the largest part of the fugitive releases
(approximately 42 percent) and 1,1,1-trichloroethane, hydrochloric acid, zinc
compounds, and trichloroethylene each contribute another 4 - 5 percent.
Underground injection (principally of hydrochloric acid) makes up about 14
percent of the releases re; jorted by the industry.
Transfers
Eighty percent of transfers reported by SIC 331 industries are sent off-site for
recycling. Zinc, manganese, chromium, copper, nickel, and lead are the six
metals transferred by the
greatest number of facilities (Exhibit 8).
Acids used during steel finishing, such as hydrochloric, sulfuric, nitric, and
phosphoric acids, account for another 17 percent of transfers. These acids
are most often sent off-site for recycling or for treatment. Hydrochloric acids
are also managed by on-site underground injection. The next class of
chemicals of significant Atolume in TRI are solvents and lightweight carbon
byproducts, including: 1,1,1 -trichloroethane, trichloroethylene, phenol,
xylene, methanol, and toluene. These solvents are primarily released as
fugitive air emissions, but also from point sources. A small percentage of
these solvents are transferred off-site for recycling.
Chemicals sent off-site for disposal (primarily zinc, sulfuric acid, manganese,
and ammonium sulfate) account for another 10 percent of transfers. Only
approximately 7 percent of chemicals transferred off-site go to treatment.
These chemicals are primarily hydrochloric acid, sulfuric acid, and nitric
acid. Only about one percent of transfers by weight are POTW discharges
(mainly sulfuric acid). Another one percent of transfers are sent for energy
recovery (with hydrochloric acid as the most significant contributor).
September 1995 .
31
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
wo
'.3
P*
o
0.
os
CO
.«
-*-»
iw^
"o
R
£&
.^
o
•~
ja
S
a
IS '*"*
^ a
~2 ew
5 "3
H e
Mrt
•^ Q.
t?.s
u 1
£ S
*-IL-* p%
CO I*
~ s
*t3 T«*
CM ^"**
e
o
•«
eg
3
«""*
5
O .J
S 5
H s
^ ^a
£jg
u
cd
1
<
0
^
u
O
f^ O) \O t~* fl OO ^^ Cv O V
T vo c\ c\ *n -r ^ r-^ of c\
S 22
^mMoo£^!SSPo
CN oo ro o vi O vo r^- fi rr
cC f*C cC o" cC so" — •• r~- cC CT-
PSZ^ooo^rcJso — S
of of vCrn"
ooo*»— *rmoo — «rir^
f** T ^O ^T l"^- OO — •* *n rO f*
-r of co" r-»" «n' ^-" ^ so" 'i-"
o|S? ^r^S^J^
^- ^-Tr*^
01 —
OOOOOGOGOG
oo^ oo_ 01 cn_ ™i °l
-r rj- sg « en
— ' ^
^~
ou^r*-^-u-ioic\r-GON
oc\GGo»cnvooc\m
r*^ vT n •— •" "^i** cC — " cC •
01 21 "^ 2 t^- — •
3lOOt^OOMCSOOO^OO
vo ^^ CN *n vo ON C""" ^™ oo oo
•-M
»sSsssss§s
w-T rs* oT \d* rs* o" oo" oC o" MS"
M-T ^ "°
t- ooo oo« -r, t- vo mvo
SnSSS"^0*00 °° ^
Q g
E^-* K y ^
O 3 Q
sells 1
owugo w5 o
2Sg§^§«6 §
^^•SSoS^'-1>-!rj
?5?O^^O^9H^>(
32sS^a§yHfc:i
SSONjBCjSZZZ.
iSss^^sIS
-r o" — ' rr — " — " pc r--' so
O4 O **". • —
vof^—'r^^^^'oo —
SO SO Ol Tf Ol O» OO V> "T"
i/% O OO C\ G "-1 GOO
O4 04 OO_ 0» SO fN r>j OJ
~ z: ~ "T
^5^2iJ^^§r^S
"f "o Tf oo G <•*} G oi r>-
so" K" so* of oo" so' — " o'
£1 O ^ Jrl "~" Ir( ™
—Z — r f*-*
.
OOGOGOGGG
§ 2,
G" —•
oo o\ "">'(
jj•
g t 0
^ <-), w ta w
z ' ffi z Q >— w w
3 E M § O >• >-
D *T oj '>- E H h<
— Z, CQ CJ O W PJ
JSS2S|S|i
" oo" o" o" cC r* *r
oo^r^^SSSc
Ti-r-Troosor-t^sc
* *rT *X" tn" oC ^ cC r*^ OJ
£ ?j "" ^ ^J 2 2£
*~*
S^00!^^0^'3
OO 00 O / '
o" m" G"
— rs --j
GGOOOOOO
G
o
so"
Ol TT Ol
of o" of
— en 01
OOIVO^JOCNOOON
Ol ON VO VO VI SO
-SnPSs
oo t*^ oo^ o1^ v^ •— « o* v»
•^ m" —<*' «rT oo" r*" of
OO G Ol OO
CN ON r- vo «n m Tj-
^— 1—1 ^^ t—l -—I ^-l 1— 1 t-H
p
W D
co < cA
9 H ° '
pg i ^
2§g .& S
?N •"" *~* • • rrl -i d:
O 32 W 2 S J P
y Q n
oo!nooctGPPso§So«
O'ooovomrn'noooN'^^r'-
o" o* so" w~T of «n" u*T •^j*" o-" "S1" oo" o
-* — g ^ S
"~"
*O SO G
so" co"
GGGGOOOGGGGC
so '/^ ON o to " rX"
V^OG°O^^OOO\^OOGC
00 OO SO 'fO VO SO £*•• Ol t1** OO OC
OO - SO VO
•^r 01 01
fi'*sfc*»»nTTro>i'nv)OOi— UC
September 1995
32
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
W)
e
• •M
"£
O
. i a.
-^
~i 4J
'•*•*•
'3
r-r,
t*«
• • . o
•~ .
.0
S
s
' ' - ' ^
>>
•^ ,—v
1 ' 2 2
H ~b
c 45
^ c
fv 2
f> ••"
y--s
So *n
-2
• P* O
• s §•
— C3
^ CJ
oo p^ ••
"O (T)
C o\
CS ON :
O '' '
•_
en
S
<
,
5 UJ
O "*
H _j
2
'$ 03
J O
00
5
a z
S 2
0 £
a 5
e! Z
Q
1 •—
C^ O3
w w
^0
u
00
Q
f- e!
2
> -3
H
g
^
io
H ~
,|5
u
^
' .Z
"^
O
S
S
U
Tf -r ' r* P*. ' n-
f*1 *-O r*- - O r*) ^f O — • w^ O ' C**
— r-j — r^ — i o) O
"™ — "^ *"•! •—
Iron and Steel Jndusti-y
OOOOOSf^)CT\OOOOOCOO O O O
Tt~ v~t o w^ OJ 01 01 ^^ ^ 01 01
«S" ',r^* TT • -f"
— OJ — Ol
— < — •W^OIOIOIOIO'^'VOO 3OJC^ — O OOI OI Ol — • C*i O)CN
oioro oow^oco r^o —
.-o «— •
oooioooo-^i-oo'ooo
O^ rn 0^ O^
' — Ol
^^
•r, 0 0 0 00 0 00 0000
— 'OmOinOO^O O 0 00
O c*l •"• " • *— ' f) O
OO^ *O «n TJ- (S fS ,
' • .
;
OSTfO-— -OOOVOOOOOOO
o" o"
'
o v-i oo — -r
Ol W~i O1 Ol
*
ooooooopo.oopoooop
ooooooooooooooooo
o
(N
• ' °°" .
O O OOOf-OOOOOOOOOOO
§V0
r^ • ,
ooor-oo.owiooooooooo
"5.S., - ;.§
v-i OJ '. —• '
oinootnoow-ioo o'o o o o o o
ooro«— 'Oocsoot^oicxoo c'jjo ow> «n ir» •— < tr>
CO
VOVO«^-9-Tfn««mm.«N<
S S ^,J^K w-S^p^^il^^^ ^§;^^>^SwS§H
^SS'SSyo^SDODn'^o^^cii^SoSn^^SSH^
S^^^^^HSSCQ^ocQ^c^'KfcwS^s^^fflKsHQ^^^
5 offe § S w S ^ < y § ^ ^!^ S S § j §-2 S SS ^ t3 rf'§ d S 3
O'^^S^H -OO
September 1995 , , 3
QffiSZ«P<<; MM CJ 2 £ a, co -"es
?
V
o*
r^
V
x
p-
r-
a
c-
V
oe
c
c
2
^
Tt
c
P-
•f-
"
'
V£
oe
CT
CT
^
c
fv
c
CT
c
j:
—
oe
^
^
t-
-
'
... ,
3 ' • .. . . SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
on
e
'•S
fi.
*"' CM
**• iii
••• i T3
II
Hs o<
W 4*
— *"
"3 «£!
at en
*•• e
c/3 «
•§£
« CO
§ ^
&M ^
^
'cn
en
C
63
H
• *
oo
•ti
.-2
X
Qd
gg
M •-
el
gl
-J CO
< e>
t-I U
bg
2
O c
Cr! g
W u
a
^
•T'
*ti
2
a:
H
O
2
CJ
i
u:
a:
*J
Cfl
0
CU
a
_*• W
P|
O f$
32
O
CO
Q
0^
eS S
O Id
§3
CHEMICAL NAME
iKlsll5li3S^SII?Ssl32§s§s0sl^fg°-^sii§R5l5ils
sov^cssosor^ro'ooNOfN-- oo" ON 01 ^^-^&™~™o.^^&^*~c^^<*r*vao&~^<*o^^^m^r*r
£ooro3^£oo^S^oo~r^coPo^o??co — ~«o oi Pi 01 00 = 00 Psoooo^ooofoooI^Srsov-
V^OO*OmOOfcn(NOSO^OOOsOOTTOTi'(NOo"oOOOSO^f=ON O — < Tt" nfnt^-rx-ov-iu->--''— so'— fs ro "£ <"" a'1"" - K s ^ -s" 1" ^
oo"
fOO\oovor-.vo^-*r-oo^\ooc\mm — ooo,t- — r-oooooooor)t-oo ooovo or~ < in —
oKS?)2SrJS° — — MS^^SSoSooi^ln??] o ^ S rSf2 m cJ13!3°
CO ^" O1 ^H ^^ SO O >— ' t**- (+) — -> CS V> ON V) f*^ OS t^- t^- rO ^ CO ' "^ CO OO CO ""* *~? Oo" «— •"
co ^^ ^^ of oo ro **J" 01 v* t*^ o •— < co ON oi — •• o^ ro o " *o
«n co ro
go2g-g5cog^::5oo,s^So^ooSo25.o?o-oooooo-ovoo?ooo,j;c=o =
oooo\oo»-*roONON>rjo*-"t^« o«— '"oo-coor^- ri- w>oi ooo o rot^>o ^ o oico
so •-• v\ vo oo" vT so" ^^ — « TT of co" oo* oo* oo" -^" r-*" nfococo^^- so ^r
COO^rO*^SO*OOS'--ONO'OO»SOO1^'OO1^'OOO'OC
fo^S^^P^S^oJ^^ooosD^ONolsDv-IsocoS^eso^ OIOM ^ f^ soc^rov-ioPio ^ w-
lHSssii^s1SiR§g;s§ g-.^^^^s g^^^g w s§ §
•-co -
t*"» OO CO i i OO ON i OO i f^. c«i f^. ^ Q\ O SO 00 00 O O OO ^" CO O O O O O O Vi Vi O O O O O O O -O I/I O ^ O 10 W~i V
2 °r co vo 2 S ^ 5o o oi o^ 2 S\ ? o^ co co co £ £ £ co
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
. 0*
fi
"£
o
o.
' ' • (S • ••
.-
- ' «ts
^3
V*
fe
o'
• o3
pfi
: S .'
5* ^
2! .es '
*' ~«5
*H" *Q
D5 S
L O
S 0.
'« .S
4j —
S "2
- ' - Sp3 "*•*
U C
rv. £^
, 0)
O "
" W £
• "0 2
c S
es g .
a H
O uh
• *« S?
t.-«s
«2 ^
1
<»
C
. es
' H
• •
- "S
o
•Q
• . oo
.'••''.' ' •-
• ; •' S
'
September 1995
a! >•
M H-l
2 O
Cd tlrf
^ —
**.
^ UJ
2 ^
%
*-> >"
O oi
OS W
w >
Z 0
tJ U
U)
• J_
z
S
. H
• w
PS
C3
• s
6
OS
,
<
o
c-
ao
5
1|
O
00
5
i^
pH
os 2
O w
W o
OS
[CALNAME
"£
w
-K
O
(N ^~" f"* f'l ^ O *3* fl -
CO W~i — ^- (*l
1
£S^£oo£m^?SS
•" ' ^" •"• ^* fO O
**1 "
n .-H
>n o o o o o o o o o o o c
•«ovo««Ti-*n«cn««oc
p"
El3 ' ro .• 03
•Z co Z D
wg w a^
11' .pp
11 I ill!
WWJx ,>-:j ^E^S^r
Sg^^^ffi^^^^DSs
Of^-^W^t5^D|20Q*?^jc
Q ^- f~r nC f— < r , fr'j 2 O rS *21 t_J C
C3o*'^£3Zu3O*3,*lipq*t. o o oooor*-ooooooooooo
'.•'.•' ~ *f
• " ' IX ^
) O 0 OO'vOOOOOOOOOOOOO
SO /• "
CN" ' '
• oooooooooooo»-*ovooo
ON CO
'" • • • ^ f--.
oo"
. • . ' =•"*
>oooo»noooooooooooo
JOOCStSCN.O'— OOOOO'-'O'-'OO
2
W >•
W ' O 33 "^ O IE
5- 2 • fi "a H on co
w 5 .- & ' i S gS i ri
islSo ! ||
' *H- O ^J •"• ^^ ^ CJ t""1 fO py i 1 M y. |D ^ [y-1
jO^^C^^CSO-JO^fj^StS
|KftJEi;crw25ro2K«SDHsiQ'^^^
! Q E~ * K ^ S^ r~3 53 O F~* S f"^ 2 D^ [j ®
.S^^iJ^ffii-JCrfC^w^SO^W*^1^"
lQa-sZcoH<
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
The TRI database contains a detailed compilation of self-reported, facility-
specific chemical releases. The top reporting facilities for this sector based
on pounds released are listed below. Facilities that have reported only the
SIC codes covered under this notebook appear on the first list. The second
list contains additional facilities that have reported the SIC code covered
within this report, and one or more SIC codes that are not within the scope
of this notebook. Therefore, the second, list includes facilities that conduct
multiple operations - some that are under the scope of this notebook, and
some that are not. Currently, the facility-level data do not allow pollutant
releases to be broken apart by industrial process.
Exhibit 9: Top 10 TRI Releasing Iron and Steel Facilities"
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Facility
Elkem Metals Co* - Marietta, OH
Northwestern Steel & Wire Co. - Sterling, IL
Granite City Steel - Granite City, IL
Midwest Steel Div. Midwest Steel Div. - Portage, IN
AK Steel Corp. Middletown Works - Middletowri, OH
Bethlehem Steel Corp. Burns Harbor Div. - Burns
Harbor, IN
Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel Corp Mingo Junction Plant -
Mingo, Junction, OH
USS Gary Works - Gary, IN
LTV Steel Co. Inc. Cleveland Works - Cleveland, OH
Gulf States Steel Inc. - Gadsden, AL
Total TRI
Releases in
Pounds
18,604,572
14,274,570
5,156,148
4,735,000
4,189,050
3,899,470
3,089,795
2,403,348
1,985,131
1,959,707
Source: U.S. EPA Toxic Release Inventory Database, 1993.
* This is an Electrometallurgical Products facility (SIC 3313), not a steel mill.
* Being included on this list does not mean that the release is associated with non-compliance with environmental
laws.
September 1995
36
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
Exhibit 10: Top 10 TRI Releasing JFacilities Reporting SIC 331 Operations"
Rank
. \ 1
.2 '
3
4
5
6
, ,? ;
8
9
10
SIC Codes
Reported
in TRI
3313 .
3312,3315
3312,3274
3313,2819
3312
3316
3312 •
3312
3312
3312
Facility
.
[• - - •
Elkem Metals Co[ - Marietta, OH ,
Northwestern Steel & Wire Co. - Sterling, IL
Inland Steel Co. - East Chicago, IN
Kerr-McGee Che
Hamilton, MS*
Granite City Steel •
nical Corp. Electrolytic Plant -
Granite City, IL
• • • ' 1' ' • ' • • '
Midwest Steel Div.| Midwest Steel Div. - Portage, IN
AK Steel Corp. Mi|idletown Works - Middletown, OH .
Bethlehem Steel C<
IN
Wheeling-Pittsburg
Mingo Junction, O
irp. Burns Harbor Div. - Burns Harbor,
h Steel Corp Mingo Junction Plant -
I
USS Gary Works -JGary, IN
Total TRI
Releases in
Pounds
18,604,572
14,274,570
10,618,719
5,446,555
5,156,148
4,735,000
4,189,050
3,899,470
3,089,795
2,403,348
. . | •_--•;
Source: U.S. EPA Toxic Release Inventory Database, 1993. .
* • J •
This is an Electrometallurgical Products facility (SIC 3J313), not a steel mill.
IV.B. Summary of Selected Chemicals Released
The following is a synopsis of current scientific toxicity and fate information
for the top chemicals (by weight) that facilities within this sector self-
reported as released to the |environment based upon 19,93 TRI data. Because
this section is based upon self-reported release data, it does not attempt to
provide information on .management practices employed by the sector to
reduce the release of these chemicals. Information regarding pollutant
release reduction over time may be available from EPA's TRI and 33/50
programs, or directly from the industrial trade associations that are listed in
Section IX of this document. Since these descriptions are cursory, please
consult the sources referenced below for a more detailed description of both
the chemicals described in- this section, and the chemicals that appear on the
full list of TRI chemicals appearing in Section IV. A.
b Being included on this list does not mean that the release
laws.
is associated with non-compliance with environmental
September 1995
J7
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
The brief descriptions provided below were taken from the 1993 Toxics
Release Inventory Public Data Release (EPA, 1994), and the Hazardous
Substances Data Bank (HSDB), accessed via TOXNET. TOXNET is a
computer system run by the National Library of Medicine. It includes a
number of toxicological databases managed by EPA, the National Cancer
Institute, and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.6
HSDB contains chemical-specific information on manufacturing and use,
chemical and physical properties, safety and handling, toxicity and
biomedical effects, pharmacology, environmental fate and exposure
potential, exposure standards and regulations, monitoring and analysis
methods, and additional references. The information contained below is
based upon exposure assumptions that have been conducted using standard
scientific procedures. The effects listed below must be taken in context of
these exposure assumptions that are more fully explained within the full
chemical profiles hi HSDB. For more information on TOXNET, contact the
TOXNET help line at 1-800-231-3766.
Ammonia (CAS: 7664-41-7)
Sources, hi cokemaking, ammonia is produced by the decomposition of the
nitrogen-containing compounds which takes place during the secondary
thermal reaction (at temperatures greater than 700°C (1296°F)), The
ammonia formed during coking exists in both the water and gas that form
part of the volatile products. The recovery of this ammonia can be
accomplished by several different processes Where the by-product
ammonium sulfate is formed by the reaction between the ammonia and
sulfuric acid.23
Toxicity. Anhydrous ammonia is irritating to the skin, eyes, nose, throat, and
upper respiratory system.
Ecologically, ammonia is a source of nitrogen (an essential element for
aquatic plant growth), and may therefore contribute to eutrophication of
standing or slow-moving surface water, •particularly in nitrogen-limited
waters such as the Chesapeake Bay. In addition, aqueous ammonia is
moderately toxic to aquatic organisms.
Carcinogenicity. There is currently no evidence to suggest that this
chemical is carcinogenic.
c Databases included in TOXNET are: CCRIS (Chemical Carcinogenesis Research Information System), DART
(Developmental and Reproductive Toxicity Database), DBIR (Directory of Biotechnology Information Resources),
EMICBACK (Environmental Mutagen Information Center Backfile), GENE-TOX (Genetic Toxicology), HSDB
(Hazardous Substances Data Bank), IRIS (Integrated Risk Information System), RTECS (Registry of Toxic Effects
of Chemical Substances), and TRI (Toxic Chemical Release Inventory).
September 1995
38
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
' •- ""; I- • • '"*"• .
Environmental Fate. Ammonia combines with sulfate ions in the
atmosphere and is washep out by rainfall, resulting in rapid return of
ammonia to the soil and surface waters.
Ammonia is a central compound in the environmental cycling of nitrogen.
Ammonia in lakes, rivers, and streams is converted to nitrate.
Physical Properties. Ammonia is a corrosive and severely irritating gas
with a pungent odor.
Hydrochloric Acid (CAS:
Sources. During hot rollin
of,the steel. This "scale1
which commonly uses
Toxicity. Hydrochloric ac
7647-01-1)
y, a hard black iron oxide is formed on the surface
is removed chemically in the pickling process
hydrochloric acid.24
d is primarily a concern in its aerosol form. Acid
aerosols have been implicated in causing and exacerbating a variety of
respiratory ailments. Dermal exposure and ingestion of highly concentrated
hydrochloric acid can result in corrosivity.. .
Ecologically,,accidental releases of solution forms of hydrochloric acid may
adversely affect aquatic life by including a transient lowering of the pH (i.e.,
increasing the acidity) of surface waters.
Carcinogenicity. There
chemical is carcinogenic.
is currently no evidence to suggest that this
Environmental Fate. Releases of hydrochloric acid to surface waters and
soils will be neutralized to an extent due to the buffering capacities of both
systems. The extent of these reactions will depend on the characteristics of
the specific environment.
Physical Properties. Concentrated hydrochloric acid is highly corrosive.
Manganese and Manganese Compounds (CAS: 7430-96-5; 20-12-2)
Sources. Manganese is found in the iron charge and is used as an addition
agent added to alloy steel to obtain desired properties in the final product.
In carbon steel, manganese is used to combine with sulfur to improve the
ductility of the steel. An alloy steel with manganese is used for applications
involving relatively small sections which are subject to severe service
conditions, or in larger sections where the weight saving derived from the
higher strength of the alloy steels is needed.25
Toxicity. There is currently no evidence that human exposure to manganese
at levels commonly observed hi ambient atmosphere results hi adverse health
effects. However, recent EPA review of the fuel additive MMT
September 1995
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
(methylcyclopentadienyl manganese tricarbonyl) concluded that use of MMT
in gasoline could lead to ambient exposures to manganese at a level sufficient
to cause adverse neurological effects in humans.
Chronic manganese poisoning bears some similarity to chronic lead
poisoning. Occurring via inhalation of manganese dust or fumes, it primarily
involves the central nervous system. Early symptoms include languor,
speech disturbances, sleepiness, and cramping and weakness in legs. A stolid
mask-like appearance of face, emotional disturbances such as absolute
detachment broken by uncontrollable laughter, euphoria, and a spastic gait
with a tendency to fall while walking are seen in more advanced cases.
Chronic manganese poisoning is reversible if treated early and exposure
stopped. Populations at greatest risk of manganese toxicity are the very
young and those with iron deficiencies.
Ecologically, although manganese is an essential nutrient for both plants and
animals, in excessive concentrations manganese inhibits plant growth.
Carcinogenicity. There is currently no evidence to suggest that this
chemical is carcinogenic.
Environmental Fate. Manganese is an essential nutrient for plants and
animals. As such, manganese accumulates in the top layers of soil or surface
water sediments and cycles between the soil and living organisms. It occurs
mainly as a solid under environmental conditions, though may also be
transported in the atmosphere as a vapor or dust.
1.1.1-Trichloroethane TCAS: 71-55-6^
Sources. Used for surface cleaning of steel prior to coating.
Toxicity. Repeated contact of 1,1,1-trichloroethane (TCE) with skin may
cause serious skin cracking and infection. Vapors cause a slight smarting of
the eyes or respiratory system if present in high concentrations.
Exposure to high concentrations of TCE causes reversible mild liver and
kidney dysfunction, central nervous system depression, gait disturbances,
stupor, coma, respiratory depression, and even death. Exposure to lower
concentrations of TCE leads to light-headedness, throat irritation, headache,
disequilibrium, impaired coordination, drowsiness, convulsions and mild
changes in perception.
Carcinogenicity. There is currently no evidence to suggest that this
chemical is carcinogenic.
Environmental Fate. Releases of TCE to surface water or land will almost
entirely volatilize. Releases to air may be transported long distances and
may partially return to earth in rain, hi the lower atmosphere, TCE degrades
September 1995
40
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
very slowly by photooxidation and slowly diffuses to the upper atmosphere
where photodegradation is rapid. •
Any TCE that does not evaporate from soils leaches to groundwater.
Degradation in soils and water is slow. TCE does not hydrolyze in water, nor
does it significantly biocdncentrate in aquatic organisms.
Zinc and Zinc Compounds (CAS: 7440-66-6: 20-19-9^)
Sources. To protect steel ifrom rusting, it is coated with a material that will
protect it from moisture and air. hi the galvanizing process, steel is coated
with zinc.26
Toxicity. Zinc is a nutriti mal trace element; toxicity from ingestion is low.
Severe exposure to zinc might give rise to gastritis with vomiting due to
swallowing of zinc dusts. Short-term exposure to very high levels of zinc is
linked to lethargy, dizziness, nausea, fever, diarrhea, and reversible
pancreatic and neurological damage. Long-term zinc poisoning causes
irritability, muscular stiffness and pain, loss of appetite, and nausea.
Zinc chloride fumes cause injury to mucous membranes and to the skin.
Ingestion of soluble zinc salts may cause nausea, vomiting, and purging.
Carcinogenicity. Ther^ is currently no evidence to suggest that this
chemical is carcinogenic. >
Environmental Fate. Significant zinc contamination of soil is only seen in
the vicinity of industrial pinnt sources. Zinc, is a relatively stable soft metal,
though burns in air. Zinc
IV.C. Other Data Sources
bioconcentrates in aquatic organisms.
The toxic chemical release data obtained from TRI captures the vast majority
of facilities in the iron arid steel industry. It also allows for a comparison
across years and industry sectors. Reported chemicals are limited however
to the 316 reported chemicals. Most of the hydrocarbon emissions from iron
and steel facilities are not captured by TRI.27 The EPA Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards has compiled air pollutant emission factors for
determining the total air emissions of priority pollutants (e.g., total
hydrocarbons, SOx, NOx, CO, particulates, etc.) from many iron and steel
manufacturing sources.28
The Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS) contains a wide range
of information related to. stationary sources of air pollution, including the
emissions of a number of air pollutants which may be of concern within a
particular industry. With the exception of volatile organic compounds
(VOCs), there is little overlap with the TRI chemicals reported above.
Exhibit 11 summarizes annual releases (from the industries for which a
September 1995, ,
41
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
Sector Notebook Profile was prepared) of carbon monoxide (CQ), nitrogen
dioxide (NO2), participate matter of 10 microns or less (PM10), total
participates (PT), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and volatile organic compounds
(VOCs). With 1.5 million short tons/year of carbon monoxide, the iron and
steel industry emissions are estimated as more than twice as much as the next
largest releasing industry, pulp and paper. Of the eighteen industries listed,
the iron and steel industry also ranks as one of the top five releasers for NO2,
PM10, PT, and SO2. Carbon monoxide releases occur during ironmaking (in
the burning of coke, CO produced reduces iron oxide ore), and during
steelmaking (in either the basic oxygen furnace or the electric arc furnace).
Nitrogen dioxide is generated during steelmaking. Particulate matter may be
emitted from the cokemaking (particularly in quenching operations),
ironmaking, basic oxygen furnace (as oxides of iron that are emitted as sub-
micron dust), or from the electric arc furnace (as metal dust containing iron
participate, zinc, and other materials associated with the scrap). Sulfur
dioxide can be released in ironmaking or sintering.
September 1995
42
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
Exhibit 11: Pollutant Releases (short tons/year)
Industry Sector
U.S. Total
Metal Mining
Nonmetal Mining
Lumber and Wood
Production , . ,
Furniture and Fixtures
Pulp and Paper
Printing ,
Inorganic Chemicals
Organic Chemicals
Petroleum Refining
Rubber and Misc. Plastics
Stone, Clay and Concrete
Iron and Steel
Nonferrous Metals
Fabricated Metals
Computer and Office
Equipment •
Electronics and Other
Electrical Equipment and
Components
Motor Vehicles, Bodies,
Parts and Accessories
Dry Cleaning
CO
97,208,000
5,391
4,525
123,756
2,069
624,291
8,463
166,147
, 146,947
419,311
2,090
58,043
1,518,642
448,758
3,851
24
367
35,303
101
NO,.
23,402,000
28,583
28,804
42,658
2,981
3,94,448
•;
4,915
03,575
36,826
380,641
11,914
3,38,482
138,985
55,658
-16,424
0
1,129
23,725
179
. PMIO
45,489,000
39,359
59,305
-', 14,135
- 2,165
35,579
399
1 4,107
26,493
18,787
2,407
74,623
42,368
20,074
1,185
. 0
f
207
2,406
3
PT
7,836,000
140,052
167,948
63,761
3,178
113,571
1,031
39,062
44,860
36,877
- 5,355
171,853
83,017
22,490
-3,136
0
293
12,853
28
SO2
21,888,000
84,222
24,129
9,419
1,606
541,002
1,728
182,189
132,459
648,155
29,364
339,216
238,268
373,007
4,019
0
453
25,462
152
voc
23,312,000
1,283
1,736
41,423
59,426
96,875
101,537
52,091
201,888
369,058
140J41
30,262
82,292
27,375
102,186
0
4,854
101,275
7,310
. - - • - 1 '•• . •
Source: U.S. EPA Office of Air and Radiation, AIRS Database, May 1995.
September 1995
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
IV.D. Comparison of Toxic Release Inventory Between Selected Industries
The following information is presented as a comparison of pollutant release
and transfer data across industrial categories. It is provided to give a general
sense as to the relative scale of releases and transfers within each sector
profiled under this project. Please note that the following figure and table do
not contain releases and transfers for industrial categories that are not
included in this project, and thus cannot be used to draw conclusions
regarding the total release and transfer amounts that are reported to TRI.
Similar information is available within the annual TRI Public Data Release
Book. ;
Exhibit 12 is a graphical representation of a summary of the 1993 TRI data
for the iron and steel industry and the other sectors profiled in separate
notebooks. The bar graph presents the total TRI releases and total transfers
on the left axis and the triangular points show the average releases per
facility on the right axis. Industry sectors are presented in me order of
increasing total TRI releases. The graph is based on the data shown in
Exhibit 13 and is meant to facilitate comparisons between the relative
amounts of releases, transfers, and releases per facility both within and
between these sectors. The reader should note, however, that differences in
the proportion of facilities captured by TRI exist between industry sectors.
This can be a factor of poor SIC matching and relative differences in the
number of facilities reporting to TRI from the various sectors. In the case of
the iron and steel industry, the 1993 TRI data presented here covers 381
facilities. These facilities listed SIG 331 (Steel Works, Blast Furnaces, and
Rolling and Finishing Mills) as a primary SIC code.
September 1995
44
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook. Project
Iron and Steel industry
J9d
3
§ 8
R o"
— - • o
— oo . •
I fc- ' : '
O
0
o
o"
o
1. u.
o
8
o
o
1 1 '
1 1 1
o
o
o
o" • - '
o
CM C
SH
s i
•a i
w
.a
!a
I
(suoi|jrai) spiraoj
I
D
Sect
a
S
U
-
September 1995
45
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
S
•§
ts
d
t3
_
c/)
i-
«8
"o3
3
a
j£
|_4
GJ
CO
03
«>
P5
co
O
H
fO
TH
-*-»
2
•,••*
M
w
1
c
es
5
H
1
Releases
fa
os
T— i
u
Illtl
S jj «5 u g
H
+ w "oT
3 I1! a
' ® ai 2 »S
t^ J5 ™ ^2
(2 H ^
1
* g ^ .
^
S
Ss
E "
fe
-. 4>
rj gjQ
M B
(» a
P5
Industry Sector
o
o
o
vo"
Tf
oo
CN
O
o
0
^
CN
CN
O
o
o
VO
vo
CN
Tl-
VO
CN
en
15
|
1
u
1
••*=
c«
o
I
OS
^
o
C5
0
^
Tl
o
T-H
•*
oo
0,
^"
CN
42
o
"8
Lumber and Wood Pn
0
o
ob"
^j.
vo
o
o
o
~
CN
O
0
CN
9
2
en
CN
Furniture and Fixtures
0
o
0
5?
f^
vo
o
0
o
en
CN
O
O
o
1 — 1
•/•>
VO
en
oo
en
oo
t^
i
*^
CN
fcj
1
§
0.
en"
en
t^
en
o
0
o
T-H
T-H
^
O
o
c^
f-
VO
o
en
« Electronic Equip, and
Components
o
0
o
s"
T-H
•rt-
en
^^
o
§
CN
ft
0
f-
^f.
co
T-H
1—1
t--
"V,
o
en
en
O
••a
|| Rubber and Misc. Pla:
o
0
o
oC
en
oq
^
CN
O
o
0
en
CN
u-i
T-H
en
en
•gi
Os
O
vo
T-H
en .
I
CH
S
« Motor Vehicles, Bodii
and Accessories
o
o
o
vo"
T-H
oo
CN
o
o
0
r-
T^-
oo'
§
c^
t-;
VO
'~~t
OS
d
en
en
vo
CN
i
VO
CN
t-l
OS
T-H
00
CN
1
CN
T-H
oo
CN
Inorganic Chem. Mfg,
0
o
0
ob"
oo
o
en
OS
oo
o
o
o
vo
CN
«O
T-H
o
o
o
CN
T-H
m
vS
*o
T-H
—
OS
CN
,
Petroleum Refining
§
0,
en"
CN
T-H
t-.
VO
CN
O
0
o
en"
oo
t--
Os
O
o
o"
en
CN
^
en
vo
en
e>f
•*
en
Fabricated Metals
o
o
o
$
s
en
>r>
vo
o
o
o
VO
T— <
•n
S
vo
o
o
oo
00
oo
fO
T— 1
CO
•a
1
O
O
o
< — I
t--
o
oo
CN
O
0
o
CN"
CN
oo
Os
o
o
<=
r-
r-
oo
U1
CN
OO
1 — I
oo
o
CN
rt-
en
en
en"
en
en
Nonferrous Metals
o
0
CN"
""
Tt
00
.^t'
o
§
oo"
00
VO
t~-
vo
oo
CN
o
o
c^
vo
en
vq
vi
*~~t
^
"^
Os
VO
OO
CN
i
vo
oo
CN
.oh
|| Organic Chemical Mf
oi
1
o
o.
2
H
u
1
1
1
i
o
01]
.S
!s
1
'€
o
&
a
H
S
u
3
en
15
a
1
Industry sec
i — i
II Nonmetal Mining
bi)
.S
o
a
a
o
JO
1
s
Industry sec
S
CN
t"«*
Dry Cleaning
en
Os
Os
T-H
VI
1
TO
Q
g?
O
i
a
J
^
"1
00
D
g
§
&o
September 1995
46
SIC 331
-------
Notebook. Project
Iron and Steel Industry
V. POLLUTION PREVENTION OPPORTUNITIES
The best way to reduce pollution is to prevent it in the first place. Some
companies have creatively Implemented pollution prevention tephniques that
improve efficiency and incjrease profits while at the same time minimizing
environmental impacts. This can be done in many ways such as reducing
material inputs, re-engineering processes to reuse by-products, improving
management practices, and bmploying substitution of toxic chemicals. Some
smaller facilities are able to actually get below regulatory thresholds just by
reducing pollutant releases through aggressive pollution prevention policies.
In order to encourage these approaches, this section provides both general
and company-specific descriptions of some pollution prevention advances
that have been implemented within the iron and steel industry. While the list
is not exhaustive, it does provide core information that can be used as the
starting point for facilitiejs interested in beginning their own pollution
prevention projects. This section provides summary information from
activities that may be, or are being implemented by this sector. When
possible, information is provided that gives the context in which the
technique can be effectively used. Please note that the activities described
in this section do not necessarily apply to all facilities that fall within this
sector. Facility-specific conditions must be carefully considered when
pollution prevention options are evaluated, and the full impacts of the change
must examine how each op
ion affects air, land and water pollutant releases.
Most of the pollution preve: ition activities in the iron and steel industry have
concentrated on reducing cokemaking emissions, Electric Arc Furnace (EAF)
dust, and spent acids used |in finishing operations. Due to the complexity,
size, and age of the equipment used in steel manufacturing, projects that have
the highest pollution prevention potential often require significant capital
investments. This section describes pollution prevention opportunities for
each of the three focus areas (cokemaking, EAF dust, and finishing acids),
and then lists some general pollution prevention opportunities that have been
identified by the iron and s :eel industry.
Cokemaking
The cokemaking process is seen by industry experts as one of the steel
industry's areas of greatest environmental concern, with coke oven air
emissions and quenching waste water as the major problems. In response to
expanding regulatory constraints, including the Clean Air Act National
Emission Standards for coke pvens completed hi 1993, U.S. steelmakers are
turning to new technologiejs to decrease the sources of pollution from, and
their reliance on, coke. Pollution prevention in cokemaking has focused on
two areas: reducing coke oven emissions and developing cokeless
ironmaking techniques. Although these processes have not yet been widely
demonstrated on a commercial scale, they may provide significant benefits
for the integrated segment o|f the industry in the form of substantially lower
air emissions and wastewater discharges than current operations.
September 1995
47
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
Eliminating Coke with Cokeless Technologies
Cokeless technologies substitute coal for coke in the blast furnace,
eliminating the need for cokemaking. Such technologies have enormous
potential to reduce pollution generated during the steelmaking process. The
capital investment required is also significant. Some of the cokeless
technologies in use or under development include:
• The Japanese Direct Iron Ore Smelting (DIOS) process. This process .
produces molten iron directly with coal and sinter feed ore. A 500 ton per
day pilot plant was started up in October, 1993 and the designed production
rates were attained as a short term average. During 1995, the data generated
will be used to determine economic feasibility on a commercial.scale.
• HIsmelt process. A plant using the HIsmelt process for molten iron
production, developed by HIsmelt Corporation of Australia, was started up
in late 1993. The process, using ore fines and coal, has achieved a
production rate of 8 tons per hour using ore directly in the smelter.
Developers anticipate reaching the production goal of 14 tons per hour.
During 1995, the data generated will be used to determine economic
feasibility on commercial scale. If commercial feasibility is realized, Midrex
is expected to become the U.S. engineering licensee of the HIsmelt process.
• Cor ex process. The Corex or Cipcor process has integral coal desul&rizing,
is amenable, to a variety of coal types, and generates electrical power in
excess of that required by an iron and steel mill which can be sold to local
power grids. A Corex plant is in operation in South Africa, and other plants
are expected to be operational in the next two years in South Korea and
India. ,
Reducing Coke Oven Emissions
Several technologies are available or are under development to reduce the
emissions from coke ovens. Typically, these technologies reduce the
quantity of coke needed by changing the method by which coke is added to
the blast furnace or by substituting a portion of the coke with other fuels.
The reduction in the amount of coke produced proportionally reduces the
coking emissions. Some of the most prevalent or promising coke reduction
technologies include:
• Pulverized coal injection. This technology substitutes pulverized coal for
a portion of the coke in the blast furnace. Use of pulverized coal injection
can replace about 25 to 40 percent of coke in the blast furnace, substantially
reducing emissions associated with cokemaking operations. This reduction
' ultimately depends on the fuel injection rate applied to the blast furnaces
which will, in turn be dictated by the aging of existing coking facilities, fuel
costs, oxygen availability, capital requirements for fuel injection, and
available hot blast temperature.
September 1995
48
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
• Non-recovery coke battery. As opposed to the by-product recovery coke
plant, the non-recovery coke battery is designed to allow combustion of the
gasses from the coking process, thus consuming the by-products that are
typically recovered. The process results in lower air emissions and
substantial reductions in c oking process wastewater discharges.
• The Davy Still Autoproc ess. In this pre-combustion cleaning process for
coke ovens, coke oven battery process water is utilized to strip ammonia arid
hydrogen sulfide from coke oven emissions.
•Alternative fuels. Steel producers can also inject other fuels, such as natural
gas, oil, and tar/pitch, instead of coke into the blast furnace, but these fuels
. can only replace coke in 1 mited amounts.
Recycling of Coke By-products
Improvements in the in-pjrocess recycling of tar decanter sludge, a RCRA
listed hazardous waste (KJ087) are common practice.. Sludge can either be
injected into the ovens to
c6ntribute to coke yield, or converted into a fuel
that is suitable for the blast furnace.
Reducing Wastewater Volume
In addition to air emissions, quench water from cokemaking is also an area
of significant environmental concern. In Europe,, some plants have
implemented technology to shift from water quenching to dry quenching in
order to reduce energy costs. However, major construction changes are
required for such a solution and considering the high capital costs of coke
batteries, the depressed state of the steel industry, and increased regulations
for cokemaking, it is unlikjely that this pollution prevention opportunity will
be widely adopted in the U.S. ~ -
Electric Arc Furnace Di st
Dust generation in the, EAF, and its disposal, have also been recognized as
a serious problem, but one with potential for pollution prevention through
material recovery. EAF dust is a RCRA listed waste (K0.61) because of its
high concentrations of lead and cadmium. With 550,000 tons of EAF dust
generated annually in the U.S., there is great potential to reduce the volume
of this hazardous waste. I Steel companies typically payxa disposal fee of
$150 to $200 per ton of dust. With an average zinc concentration of 19
percent, much of the EAF dust is shipped off-site for zinc reclamation. Most
of the EAF dust recovery <|>ptions are only economically viable for dust with
a zinc content of at least 15 - 20 percent. Facilities producing specialty steels
such as stainless steel witi a lower zinc content,.still have opportunities to
recover chromium and nickel from the EAF dust.
September 1995
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
In-process recycling of EAF dust involves pelletizing and then reusing the
pellets in the furnace, however, recycling of EAF dust on-site has not proven
to be technically or economically competitive for all mills. Improvements
in technologies have made off-site recovery a cost effective alternative to
thermal treatment or secure landfill disposal.
Pickling Acids
In finishingj pickling acids are recognized as an area where pollution
prevention efforts can have a significant impact in reducing the
environmental impact of the steel mill. The pickling process removes scale
and cleans the surface of raw steel by dipping it into a tank of hydrochloric
or sulfuric acid. If not recovered, the spent acid may be transported to deep
injection wells for disposal, but as those wells continue to close, alternative
disposal costs are rising.
Large-scale steel manufacturers commonly recover hydrochloric acid in their
finishing operations, however the techniques used are not suitable for small-
to medium-sized steel plants.28 Currently, a recovery technique for smaller
steel manufacturers and galvanizing plants is in pilot scale testing. The
system under development removes iron chloride (a saleable product) from
the hydrochloric acid, reconcentrates the acid for reuse, and recondenses the
water to be reused as a rinse water in the pickling process. Because the only
by-product of the hydrochloric acid recovery process is a non-hazardous,
marketable metal chloride, this technology generates no hazardous wastes.
The manufacturer projects industry-wide hydrochloric acid waste reduction
of 42,000 tons/year by 2010. This technology is less expensive than
transporting and disposing waste acid, plus it eliminates the associated long-
term liability. The total savings for a small- to medium-sized galvanizer is
projected to be $260,000 each year.
The pilot scale testing project is funded in part by a grant from the U.S.
Department of Energy under the NICE3 program (see section VIII.B. for
program information) and the EPA. (Contact: Bill Ives, DOE, 303-275-4755)
To reduce spent pickling liquor (K062) and simultaneously reduce fluoride
in the plant effluent, one facility modified their existing treatment process to
recover the fluoride ion from rinse water and spent pickling acid raw water
waste streams. The fluoride is recovered as calcium fluoride (fluorspar), an
input product for steelmaking. The melt shop in the same plant had been
purchasing 930 tons of fluorspar annually for use as a furnace flux material
in the EAF at a cost of $100 per ton. Although the process is still under
development, the recovered calcium fluoride is expected to be a better grade
than the purchased fluorspar, which would reduce the amount of flux used by
approximately 10 percent. Not only would the generation rate of sludge from
spent pickling liquor treatment be reduced (resulting in a savings in off-site
sludge disposal costs), but a savings in chemical purchases would be
realized.
September 1995
50.
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
Other areas with pollution prevention opportunities
Other areas in iron and steel manufacturing where opportunities may exist for
pollution prevention are listed .below, in three categories: process
modifications, materials substitution, and recycling.
Process Modification
Redesigning or modifying process equipment can reduce pollution output,
maintenance costs, and eriergy consumption, for example:
. • Replacing single-pass wastewater systems with closed-loop systems to
minimize chemical use in wastewater treatment and to reduce water use.
• Continuous casting, now used for about 90% of crude steel cast in the U.S.,
offers great improvements in process efficiency when compared to the
traditional ingot teeming method. This increased efficiency also results in a
considerable savings in energy and some reduction in the volume of mill
wastewater.
Materials Substitution
• Use scrap steel with low lead and cadmium content as a raw material, if
possible. . , .
• Eliminate the generation of reactive desulfurization slag generated in
foundry work by replacing calcium carbide with a less hazardous material.
Recycling
Scrap and other materials are recycled extensively in the iron and steel
industry to reduce the raw materials required and the associated pollutants.
Some of these recycling activities include:
• Recycle or reuse oils arid greases.
• Recover acids by removing dissolved iron salts from spent acids.
• Use thermal decomposition for acid recovery from spent pickle liquor.
• Use a bipolar membrane/electrodialytic process to separate acid from metal
by-products in spent NO3JHF pickle liquor.
• Recover sulfuric acid using low temperature separation of acid and metal
crystals.
September 1995
51
SIC 331
-------
-------
Sector Notebook. Project
Iron and Steel Industry
VI. SUMMARY OF APPLICABLE FEDERAL STATUTES AND REGULATIONS
This section discusses the Federal regulations that may apply to this sector.
The purpose of this sectiorij is to highlight and briefly describe the applicable
Federal requirements, and to provide citations for more detailed information.
- The three following sections are included:
• Section VIA. contains a general overview of major statutes
• ' • Section VLB. contains a list of regulations specific to this industry
• Section VI.C. contains a list of pending and proposed regulations
The descriptions within
information. Depending
Section VI are intended solely for general
upon the nature or scope of the activities at a
particular facility, these summaries may or may not necessarily describe all
applicable environmental requirements. Moreover, they do not constitute
formal interpretations or clarifications of the statutes and regulations. For
further information, readers should consult the Code of Federal Regulations
and other state or local regulatory agencies. EPA Hotline contacts are also
provided for each major statute.
VI.A. General Description of Major Statutes
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
, The Resource Conservation And Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 which
amended the Solid Waste Disposal Act, addresses solid (Subtitle D) and
hazardous (Subtitle C) waste management activities. The Hazardous and
Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of 1984 strengthened RCRA's waste
management provisions ar.d added Subtitle I, which governs underground
storage tanks (USTs).
Regulations promulgated pursuant to Subtitle C of RCRA (40 CFR Parts
1 260-299) establish a "cradle-to-grave" system governing hazardous' waste
from the point of generation to disposal. RCRA hazardous wastes include
the specific materials listed in the regulations (commercial chemical
products, designated with the code. "P" or "U"; hazardous wastes from
specific industries/sources!, designated with the code "K"; or hazardous
wastes from non-specific sources, designated with the code "F") or materials
which exhibit a hazardous waste characteristic (ignitability, corrosivity,
reactivity, or toxicity and designated with the code "D").
Regulated entities that generate hazardous waste are subject to waste
accumulation, manifesting, and record keeping standards. Facilities that
treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste must obtain a permit, either from
EPA or from a State agency which EPA has authorized to implement the
permitting program. Subtitle C permits contain general facility standards
such as contingency plans, emergency procedures, record keeping and
reporting requirements, fir ancial assurance mechanisms, and unit-specific
September 1995
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
standards. RCRA also contains provisions (40 CFR Part 264 Subpart S and
§264.10) for conducting corrective actions which govern the cleanup of
releases of hazardous waste or constituents from solid waste management
units at RCRA-regulated facilities.
Although RCRA is a Federal statute, many States implement the RCRA
program. Currently, EPA has delegated its authority to implement various
provisions of RCRA to 46 of the 50 States.
Most RCRA requirements are not industry specific but apply to any company
that transports, treats, stores, or disposes of hazardous waste. Here are some
important RCRA regulatory requirements:
Identification of Solid and Hazardous Wastes (40 CFR Part 261)
lays out the procedure every generator should follow to determine
whether the material created is considered a hazardous waste, solid
waste, or is exempted from regulation.
Standards for Generators of Hazardous Waste (40 CFR Part 262)
establishes the responsibilities of hazardous waste generators
including obtaining an ID number, preparing a manifest, ensuring
proper packaging and labeling, meeting standards for waste
accumulation units, and record keeping and reporting requirements.
Generators can accumulate hazardous waste for up to 90 days (or 180
days depending on the amount of waste generated) without obtaining
a permit.
• Land Disposal Restrictions (LDRs) are regulations prohibiting the
disposal of hazardous waste on land without prior treatment. Under
the LDRs (40 CFR 268), materials must meet land disposal restriction
(LDR) treatment standards prior to placement in a RCRA land
disposal unit (landfill, land treatment unit, waste pile, or surface
impoundment). Wastes subject to the LDRs include solvents,
electroplating wastes, heavy metals, and acids. Generators of waste
subject to the LDRs must provide notification of such to the
designated TSD facility to ensure proper treatment prior to disposal.
Used Oil Management Standards (40 CFR Part 279) impose
management requirements affecting the storage, transportation,
burning, processing, and re-refining of the used oil. For parlies that
merely generate used oil, regulations establish storage standards. For
a party considered a used oil marketer (one who generates and sells
off-specification used oil directly to a used oil burner), additional
tracking and paperwork requirements must be satisfied.
• Tanks and Containers used to store hazardous waste with a high
volatile organic concentration must meet emission standards under
RCRA. Regulations (40 CFR Part 264-265, Subpart CC) require
September 1995
54
SIC3'31
-------
Sector INotcbook ^Project
Iron and Steel Industry
generators to test he waste to determine the concentration of the
waste, to satisfy tank and container emissions standards, and to
inspect and monitor regulated units. These regulations apply to all
facilities who store jsuch waste, including generators operating under
the 90-day accumulation rule. •
Underground Storage Tanks (USTs) containing petroleum and
hazardous substance are regulated under Subtitle I of RCRA.
Subtitle I regulations (40 CFR Part 280) contain tank design and
release detection requirements, as well as financial responsibility and
corrective action standards for USTs. The UST program also
establishes increasingly stringent standards, including upgrade
requirements for existing tanks, that must be met by 1998.
Boilers and Industrial Furnaces (BIFs) that use or burn fuel
containing hazardous waste must comply with design and operating
standards. BIF regulations (40 CFR Part 266, Subpart H) address
unit design, provide performance standards, require emissions
monitoring, and restrict the type of waste that may be burned.
i
EPA's RCRA/Superfund/yST Hotline, at (800) 424-9346, responds to
questions and distributes guidance regarding all RCRA regulations. The
RCRA Hotline operates weekdays from 8:30 a.m. to 7:30 p.m., ET, excluding
Federal holidays.
Comprehensive Environmental Response^
Compensation, And Liability Act
The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act (CERCLA), a 1980 lay commonly known as Superfund, authorizes EPA
to respond to releases, or threatened releases, of hazardous substances that
may endanger public health, welfare, or the environment. CERCLA also
enables EPA to force parties responsible for environmental contamination to
clean it up or to reimburse the Superfund for response costs incurred by EPA.
The Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) of 1986
revised various sections of CERCLA, extended the taxing authority for the
Superfund, and created a free-standing law, SARA Title III, also known as
the Emergency Planning a id Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA).
The CERCLA hazardous substance release reporting regulations (40 CFR
Part 302) direct the person in charge of a facility to report to the National
Response Center (NRC) any environmental release of a hazardous substance
which exceeds a reportable quantity. Reportable quantities are defined and
listed in 40 CFR §302.4. A release report may trigger a response by EPA, or
by one or more Federal or
State emergency response authorities.
EPA implements hazardous substance responses according to procedures
outlined iri the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution
Contingency Plan (NCP) (40 CFR Part 300). The NCP includes provisions
September 1995
55
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
for permanent cleanups, known as remedial actions, and other cleanups
referred to as "removals." EPA generally takes remedial actions only at sites
on the National Priorities List (NPL), which currently includes approximately
1300 sites. Both EPA and states can act at other sites; however, EPA
provides responsible parties the opportunity to conduct removal and remedial
actions and encourages community involvement throughout the Superfund
response process.
EPA'sRCRA/Superfund/USTHotline, at (800) 424-9346, answers questions
and references guidance pertaining to the Superfund program. The CERCLA
Hotline operates weekdays from 8:30 a.m. to 7:30 p.m., ET, excluding
Federal holidays.
Emergency Planning And Community Right-To-Kno\v Act
The Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) ,of 1986
created the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act
(EPCRA, also known as SARA Title III), a statute designed to improve
community access to information about chemical hazards and to facilitate the
development of chemical emergency response plans by State and local
governments. EPCRA required the establishment of State emergency
response commissions (SERCs), responsible for coordinating certain
emergency response activities and for appointing local emergency planning
committees (LEPCs).
EPCRA arid the EPCRA regulations (40 CFR Parts 350-372) establish four
types of reporting obligations for facilities which store or manage specified
chemicals:
• EPCRA §302 requires facilities to notify the SERC and LEPC of the
presence of any "extremely hazardous substance" (the list of such
substances is in 40 CFR Part 355, Appendices A and B) if it has such
substance in excess of the substance's threshold planning quantity,
and directs the facility to appoint an emergency response coordinator.
EPCRA §304 requires the facility to notify the SERC and the LEPC
in the event of a release exceeding the reportable quantity of a
CERCLA hazardous substance or an EPCRA extremely hazardous
substance.
• EPCRA §311 and §312 require a facility at which a hazardous
chemical, as defined by the Occupational Safety and Health Act, is
. present in an amount exceeding a specified threshold to submit to the
SERC, LEPC and local fire department material safety data sheets
(MSDSs) or lists of MSDS's and hazardous chemical inventory forms
(also known as Tier I and II forms). This information helps the local
government respond in the event of a spill or release of the chemical.
September 1995
56
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook. Project
Iron and Steel Industry
• EPCRA §313 requires manufacturing facilities included in SIC codes
20 through 39, which have ten or more employees, and which
manufacture, process, or use specified chemicals in amounts greater
than threshold quantities, to submit an annual toxic chemical release
report. This reportj commonly known as the Form R, covers releases
and transfers of( toxic chemicals to various facilities and
environmental media, and allows EPA to compile the national Toxic
Release Inventory (TRI) database.
All information submitted pursuant to EPCRA regulations is publicly
accessible, unless protected by a trade secret claim.
EPA's EPCRA Hotline, at (800) 535-0202, answers questions and distributes
guidance regarding the emergency planning and community right-to-know
regulations. The EPCRA tiotline operates weekdays from 8:30 afm. to 7:30
p.m., ET, excluding Federal holidays. .
Clean Water Act
The primary objective of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, commonly
referred to as the Clean Water Act (CWA), is to restore and maintain the
chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation's surface waters.
Pollutants regulated under the CWA include "priority" pollutants, including
various toxic pollutants; "conventional" pollutants, such as biochemical
oxygen demand (BOD), to al suspended solids (TSS), fecal coliform, oil and
grease, and pH; and "ndn-conventional" pollutants, including any pollutant
not identified as either conventional; or priority. ,
The CWA regulates both direct and indirect discharges. The National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program (CWA §402)
controls direct discharges into navigable waters. Direct discharges or "point
source" discharges are from sources such as pipes and sewers. NPDES
permits, issued by either EPA or an authorized State (EPA has authorized
approximately forty States to administer the NPDES program), contain
industry-specific, technology-based and/or water quality-based limits, and
establish pollutant monitoring requirements. A facility that intends to
discharge into the nation's waters must obtain a permit prior to initiating its
discharge. A permit applicant must provide quantitative analytical data
identifying the types of pollutants present in the facility's effluent. The
permit will then set forth tijie conditions and effluent limitations under which
a facility may make a discharge.
A NPDES permit may also include discharge limits based on Federal or State
water quality criteria or standards, that were designed to protect designated
uses of surface waters, such as supporting aquatic life or recreation. These
standards, unlike the technological standards, generally do not take into
account technological feasibility or costs. Water quality criteria and
standards vary from State to State, and site to site, depending on the use
September 1995
57
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
classification of the receiving body of water. Most States follow EPA
guidelines which propose aquatic life and human health criteria for many of
the 126 priority pollutants.
Storm Water Discharges
In 1987 the CWA was amended to require EPA to establish a program to
address storm water discharges. In response, EPA promulgated the 1MPDES
storm water permit application regulations. Storm water discharge associated
with industrial activity means the discharge from any conveyance which is
used for collecting and conveying storm water and which is directly related
to manufacturing, processing, or raw material storage areas at an industrial
plant (40 CFR 122.26(b)(14)). These regulations require that facilities with
the following storm water discharges apply for an NPDES permit: (1) a
discharge associated with industrial activity; (2) a discharge from a large or
medium municipal storm sewer system; or (3) a discharge which EPA or the
State determines to contribute to a violation of a water quality standard or is
a significant contributor of pollutants to waters of the United States.,
The term "storm water discharge associated with industrial activity" means
a storm water discharge from one of 11 categories of industrial activity
defined at 40 CFR 122.26. Six of the categories are defined by SIC codes
while the other five are identified through narrative descriptions of the
regulated industrial activity. If the primary SIC code of the facility is one of
those identified in the regulations, the facility is subject to the storrn water
permit application requirements. If any activity at a facility is covered by
one of the five narrative categories, storm water discharges from those areas
where the activities occur are subject to storm water discharge permit
application requirements.
Those facilities/activities that are subject to storm water discharge permit
application requirements are identified below. To determine whether a
particular facility falls within one of these categories, consult the regulation.
Category i: Facilities subject to storm water effluent guidelines, new source
performance standards, or toxic pollutant effluent standards.
Category ii: Facilities classified as SIC 24-lumber and wood products
(except wood kitchen cabinets); SIC 26-paper and allied products (except
paperboard containers and products); SIC 28-chemicals and allied products
(except drugs and paints); SIC 291-petroleum refining; and SIC 31 l--leather
tanning and finishing.
Category iii: Facilities classified as SIC 10-metal mining; SIC 12-coal
mining; SIC 13-oil and gas extraction; and SIC 14-nonmetallic mineral
mining.
Category iv: Hazardous waste treatment, storage, or disposal facilities.
September 1995
58
SIC 331
-------
•Sector Notebook. Project
Iron and Steel Industry
Category v: Landfills, land application sites, and open dumps that receive
or have received industria
wastes.
Category vi: Facilities classified as SIC 5015-usedmotor vehicle parts; and
SIC 5093-automotive scrap and waste material recycling facilities.
Category vii: Steam electric power generating facilities.
Category viii: Facilities c assified as SIC 40-railroad transportation; SIC 41-
local passenger transportation; SIC 42-trucking and warehousing (except
public warehousing and storage); SIC 43-U.S. Postal Service; SIC 44-water
transportation; SIC 45-transportation by air; and SIC 5171-petroleum bulk
,storage stations and terminals.
Category ix: Sewage treatment works. . ,
Category x: Construction activities except operations that result in the
disturbance of less than five acres of total land area.
i ; "•'•''''.'
Category xi: Facilities classified as SIC 20-food and kindred products; SIC
21-tobacco products; SIC 22-textile mill products; SIC 23-apparel related
products; SIC 2434-wood kitchen cabinets manufacturing; SIC 25-furniture
and fixtures; SIC 265-paperboard containers and boxes; SIC 267-converted
paper and paperboard prpducts; SIC 27-pfinting, publishing, and allied
industries; SIC 283-drugs;jSIC 285-paints, varnishes, lacquer, enamels, and
allied products; SIC 30-rubber and plastics; SIC 3 Weather and leather
products (except leather arid tanning and finishing); SIC 323-glass products;
SIC 34-fabricated metal products (except fabricated structural metal); SIC
35-industrial and commercial machinery and computer equipment; SIC 36-
electronic and other electrical equipment and components; SIC 37-
transportation equipment (except ship and boat building and repairing); SIC
38-measuring, analyzing, arid controlling instruments;"SIC 39-miscellaneous
manufacturing industries] and SIC 4221-4225-public warehousing and
storage.
Pretreatment Program
Another type of discharge
that is regulated by the CWA is" one that goes to
a publicly-owned treatment works (POTWs). The national pretreatment
program (CWA §307(b)i controls the indirect discharge of pollutants to
POTWs by "industrial users." Facilities regulated under §307(b) must meet
certain pretreatment standjards. The goal of the pretreatment program is to
protect municipal wastewater treatment plants from damage that may occur
when hazardous, toxic, OB other wastes are discharged into a sewer system
and to protect the quality of sludge generated by these plants. Discharges to
a PQTW are regulated primarily by the POTW itself, rather than the State or
EPA. . .; •''. ' ,| •' •. . •" • '.'
September 1995
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
EPA has developed technology-based standards for industrial users of
POTWs. Different standards apply to existing and new sources within each
category. "Categorical" pretreatment standards applicable to an industry on
a nationwide basis are developed by EPA. In addition, another kind of
pretreatment standard, "local limits," are developed by the POTW in order
to assist the POTW in achieving the effluent limitations in its NPDES permit.
Regardless of whether a State is authorized to implement either the NPDES
or the pretreatment program, if it develops its own program, it may enforce
requirements more stringent than Federal standards.
Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure Plans
The 1990 Oil Pollution Act requires that facilities posing a substantial threat
of harm to the environment prepare and implement more rigorous Spill
Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan required under the
CWA (40 CFR §112.7). As iron and steel manufacturing is an energy
intensive industry, an important requirement affecting iron and steel facilities
is oil response plans for above ground storage. There are also criminal and
civil penalties for deliberate or negligent spills of oil. Regulations covering
response to oil discharges and contingency plans (40 CFR Part 300), and
Facility Response Plans to oil discharges (40 CFR Part 112) and for PCB
transformers and PCB-containing items are being revised and finalized in
1995.29 .
EPA's Office of Water, at (202) 260-5700, will direct callers with questions
about the CWA to the appropriate EPA office. EPA also maintains a
bibliographic database of Office of Water publications which can be
' accessed through the Ground Water and Drinking Water resource center, at
(202)260-7786.
i •
Safe Drinking Water Act
The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) mandates that EPA establish
regulations to protect human health from contaminants in drinking water.
The law authorizes EPA to develop national drinking water standards and to
create a joint Federal-State system to ensure compliance with these
standards. The SDWA also directs EPA to protect underground sources of
drinking water through the control of underground injection of liquid wastes.
EPA has developed primary and secondary drinking water standards under
its SDWA authority. EPA and authorized States enforce the primary
drinking water standards, which are, contaminant-specific concentration
limits that apply to certain public drinking water supplies. Primary drinking
water standards consist of maximum contaminant level goals (MCLGs),
which are non-enforceable health-based goals, and maximum contaminant
levels (MCLs), which are enforceable limits set as close to MCLGs as
possible, considering cost and feasibility of attainment.
September 1995
60
SIC 331
-------
Rector yjotcbppk.Project
Iron and Steel Industry
The SDWA Underground- Injection Control (UIC) program (40 CFR Parts
144-148) is a permit program which protects underground sources of
drinking water by regulating five classes of injection wells. UIC permits
include design,.operating, inspection, and monitoring requirements. Wells,
used to inject hazardous wastes must also comply with RCRA corrective
action standards in order (to be granted a RCRA permit, and must meet
applicable RCRA land disposal restrictions standards. The UIC permit
:• program is primarily State-tenforced, since EPA has authorized all but a few
States to administer the program.
The SDWA also provides
may contaminate the sole
br a Federally-implemented Sole Source Aquifer
program, which prohibits Federal funds from being expended on projects that
or principal source of drinking water for a given
area, and for a State-implemented Wellhead Protection program, designed to
protect drinking water wells and drinking water recharge areas.
EPA's Safe Drinking Water Hotline, at (800) 426-4791, answers questions
and distributes guidance] pertaining to SDWA standards. The Hotline
operates from 9:00 a.m. th *ough 5:30 p.m., ET, excluding Federal holidays.
Toxic Substances Control Act
The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) granted EPA authority to create
a regulatory framework to collect data on chemicals in order to evaluate,
assess, mitigate, and control risks which may be posed by their manufacture,
processing, and use. TSCA provides a variety of control methods to prevent
chemicals from posing unreasonable risk.
TSCA standards may apply at any point during a chemical's life cycle.
-Under TSCA §5, EPA has
established an inventory of chemical substances.
If a chemical is not already on the inventory, and has not been excluded by
.TSCA, a premanufacture notice (PMN) must be submitted to EPA prior to
manufacture or import. The PMN must identify the chemical and provide
available information on health and environmental effects. If available data
are not sufficient to evaluate the chemicals effects, EPA can impose
restrictions pending the development of information on its health and
environmental effects. EPA can also. restrict significant new uses of
chemicals based upon factors such as the projected volume and use of the
chemical.
Under TSCA §6, EPA can ban the manufacture or distribution in commerce,
limit the use, require labeling, or place other restrictions on chemicals that
pose unreasonable risks.
Among the chemicals EPA regulates under §6
authority are asbestos, chlorofiuorocarbons (CFCs), and polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCBs). '
EPA's, TSCA Assistance Information Service, at (202) 554-1404, answers
questions and distributes guidance pertaining to Toxic Substances Control
I
September 1995
SIC 331
-------
r
Sector Notebook Project
Iroin and Steel Industry
Act standards. The Service operates from 8:30 a.m. through 4:30 p.m., ET,
excluding Federal holidays.
Clean Air Act
The Clean Air Act (CAA) and its amendments, including the Clean Air Act
Amendments (CAAA) of 1990, are designed to "protect and enhance the
nation's air resources so as to promote the public health and welfare and the
productive capacity of the population." The CAA consists of six sections,
known as Titles, which direct EPA to establish national standards for.
ambient air quality and for EPA and the States to implement, maintain, and
enforce these standards through a variety of mechanisms. Under the CAAA,
many facilities will be required to obtain permits for the first time. State and
local governments oversee, manage, and enforce many of the requirements
of the CAAA. CAA regulations appear at 40 CFR Parts 50-99.
Pursuant to Title I of the CAA, EPA has established national ambient air
quality standards (NAAQSs) to limit levels of "criteria pollutants," including
carbon monoxide, lead, nitrogen dioxide, particulate matter, ozone, and
sulfur dioxide. Geographic areas that meet NAAQSs for a given pollutant
are classified as attainment areas; those that do not meet NAAQSs are
classified as non-attainment areas. Under §110 of the CAA, each State must
develop a State Implementation Plan (SIP) to identify sources of air pollution
and to determine what reductions are required to meet Federal air quality
standards.
Title I also authorizes EPA to establish New Source Performance Standards
(NSPSs), which are nationally uniform emission standards for new stationary
sources falling within particular industrial categories. NSPSs are based on
the pollution control technology available to that category of industrial
source but allow the affected industries the flexibility to devise a
cost-effective means of reducing emissions.
Under Title I, EPA establishes and enforces National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs), nationally uniform standards oriented
towards controlling particular hazardous air pollutants (HAPs). Title III of
the CAAA further directed EPA to develop a list of sources that emit any of
189 HAPs, and to develop regulations for these categories of sources. To
date EPA has listed 174 categories and developed a schedule for the
establishment of emission standards. The emission standards will be
developed for both new and existing sources based on "maximum achievable
control technology" (MACT)." The MACT is defined as the control
technology achieving the maximum degree of reduction in the emissibn of
the HAPs, taking into account cost and other factors.
Title II of the CAA pertains to mobile sources, such as cars, trucks, buses,
and planes. Reformulated gasoline, automobile pollution control devices,
and vapor recovery nozzles on gas pumps are a few of the mechanisms EPA
September 1995
62
• SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook. Project
Iron and Steel Industry
uses to regulate mobile air emission sources.
Title IV establishes a sijilfur dioxide nitrous oxide emissions program
'• designed to reduce the formation of acid rain. Reduction of sulfur dioxide
releases will be obtained by granting to certain sources limited emissions
' allowances, which, beginning in 1995, will be set below previous levels of
sulfur dioxide releases.
Title V of the CAAA o
of the operating permit is
requirements that apply to
1990 created a permit program for all "major
sources" (and certain other sources) regulated under the CAA. One purpose
to include in a single document all air emissions
a given facility. States are developing the permit
programs in accordance vrith guidance and regulations from EPA. Once a
State program is approved by EPA, permits will be issued and monitored by
that State.
Title VI is intended to
manufacture of ozone-d
distribution. Production
Drotect stratospheric ozone by phasing out the
epleting chemicals and restrict their use and
of Class I substances, including 15 kinds of
U1SU1UUUU11. JTIUUUV^LIVJI UJ. V^iaao i OLIUOICUIV^O, lll^l uviiiig, JL~- JLVJ.XJ.VIO \ji
chlorofluorocarbons (CFGs), will be phased out entirely by the year 2,000,
while certain hydrochlor jfluorocarbons (HCFCs) will be phased out by
2030. , , -
EPA's Control Technology Center, at (919) 541-0800, provides general
assistance .and information on CAA standards. The Stratospheric Ozone
Information Hotline, at (800) 296-1996, provides general information about
regulations promulgated! under Title VI of the CAA, and EPA's EPCEA
Hotline, at (800) 535-0202, answers questions about accidental release
. prevention under CAA §112(r). In addition, the Technology Transfer
Network Bulletin Board System (modem access (919) 541-5742)) includes
recent CAA rules, EPA guidance documents, and updates of EPA activities.
VLB. Industry Specific Regulatory Requiren
cuts
The steel industry has ir Vested substantial resources in compliance with
environmental regulations. Expenditures for environmental air control
totaled $279 million in 19J91, while water and solid waste control combined
totaled $66 million. This translates to 15 percent of total capital expenditures
for the industry in 1991. The high percentage of total environmental capital
expenditures for air control (81 percent) is primarily due to keeping coke
ovens operating in compliance with the Clean Air Act. Although coke ovens
are considered by many industry experts to be the biggest environmental
problem of the iron and steel industry, environmental regulations affect the
industry throughout all stages of the manufacturing and forming processes.
An overview of how federal environmental regulations affect this industry
follows.
September 1995
63
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
Clean Air Act (CAA)
The CAA, with its 1990 amendments (CAAA), regulates the pollutants that
steel mills can add to the air. Title I of the Act addresses,requirements for
the attainment and maintenance of the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS) (40 CFR, §50). EPA has set NAAQS for six criteria
pollutants, which states must plan to meet through state implementation
plans (SIPs). NAAQS for nitrogen dioxide, lead, and particulate matter
frequently affect the iron and steel industry.
One of the most significant impacts of the CAAA on the iron and steel
industry is tied to the standards developed for toxic air emissions or
Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs). For the steel industry, these standards,
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs), have
a significant effect on the industry's coke ovens. In late 1991, the coking
industry entered into a formal regulatory negotiation with EPA and
representatives of environmental groups, state and local air pollution control
agencies, and the steelworkers union to develop a mutually acceptable rule
to implement the terms of the Act's coke oven provisions. After a year of
discussions, an agreement on a negotiated rule was signed. In exchange for
a standard that is structured to give operators certainty and flexibility in the
manner they demonstrate compliance, the industry agreed to daily
monitoring, to install flare systems to control upset events, and to develop
work practice plans to minimize emissions. National Emissions Standards
currently in effect that pertain to the iron and steel industry include:
Coke Oven Batteries (40 CFR §63 Subpart L). As of April 1, 1992,
there were 30 plants with 87 by-product coke oven batteries that
would be affected by this regulation.
• Benzene Emissions from Coke By-product Recovery Plants (40 CFR
§61 Subpart L). Regulates benzene sources in coke by-product
recovery operations by requiring that specified equipment be
enclosed and the emissions be ducted to an enclosed point in the by-
product recovery process where they are recovered or destroyed.
Monitoring requirements are also stated.
Halogenated Solvent Cleaning (40 CFR §63 Subpart T). Emission
standards for the source categories listed in §112(d), including
solvents used in the iron and steel industry such as 1,1,1-
trichloroethane, trichloroethylene, and methylene chloride.
Chromium - Industrial Process Cooling Towers (40 CFR §63 Subpart
Q). This standard will eliminate chromium emissions from industrial
process cooling towers. Industrial process cooling towers using
chromate-based water treatment programs have been identified as.
potentially significant sources of chromium air emissions; chromium
compounds being among the substances listed as HAPs in §112(e).
September 1995
64
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
The CAA also impacts the( minimill segment of the industry. The Electric
Arc Furnace was identified as a possible source of hazardous air pollutants
subject to a MACT determination, however, EPA data indicates that the
impact is much less than originally anticipated and mere are currently no
plans for establishing a MACT standard. \ •
The 1990 CAAA New So'urce Review (NSR) requirements apply to new
facilities, expansions of existing facilities, or process modifications. New
sources of the "criteria" pollutants regulated by the NAAQS in excess of
levels defined by EPA as "major".are subject to NSR requirements (40 CFR
Section 52.21(b)(l)(i)(a)-(ft>)). NSRs are typically conducted by the state
agency under standards set by EPA and adopted by the state as part of its
state implementation plan (SIP). There are two types of NSRs: Prevention
of Significant Deterioration (PSD) reviews for facilities in areas that are
meeting the NAAQS, and] Nonattainment (NA) reviews for areas that are
violating the NAAQS. Permits are required to construct or operate the new
source for PSD and NA areas.
]•
auire
For NA areas, permits require the new source to meet the lowest achievable
emission rate (LAER) standards and the operator of the new source must
procure reductions in emissions of the same pollutants from other sources in
the NA area in equal or greater amounts to the new source. These "emission
offsets" may be banked and traded through state agencies.
For PSD areas, permits
require the best available control technology
(BACT), and the operator or owner of the new source must conduct
continuous on-site air quality monitoring for one year prior to the new source
addition to determine the effects that the new emissions may have on air
quality. This one year waiting period before construction can be disruptive
to some mills' expansion plans. In several cases, mills looking to construct
or expand have attempted| to be reclassified as a "synthetic minor," where
they ask the state to put tighter restrictions on their quantity of emissions
allowed on their air permit. With these reduced emissions, they become a
minor instead of a major source, thereby becoming exempt from the lengthy
and expensive PSD revie\
EPA sets the minimum standards for LAER and BACT for iron and steel mill
NSRs in its new source performance standards (NSPS), 40 CFR 60:
Standards of Performance for Steel Plants: Electric Arc Furnaces
(40 CFR §60, Sub part AA). Regulates the opacity and particulate
discharged from EAFs constructed after October
matter m any gases
21, 1974 and on
'or before August 17, 1983. Also requires a
continuous monitoring system for the measurement of the opacity of
emissions discharged-from control equipment.
Standards of Performance for Steel Plants: Electric Arc Furnaces and
Argon-Oxygen D^carburization Vessels (AODs) (40 CFR §60,
September 1995
65
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
Subpart AAa). Regulates the opacity and particulate matter in any
gases discharged from EAFs and AODs (used to blow argon and
oxygen or nitrogen into molten steel for further refining) constructed
after August 7,1983. Also requires a continuous monitoring system
for the measurement of the opacity of emissions discharged from
EAF and AOD air pollution control equipment.
Standards of Performance for Primary Emissions from Basic Oxygen
Process Furnaces (BOPF) (40. CFR §60, Subpart N). Regulates the
discharge of gases for particulate matter and opacity. These
standards apply to BOPFs for which construction is commenced after
June 11, 1973. ' Primary emissions refer to particulate matter
emissions from the BOPF generated during the steel production cycle
and captured by the BOPF primary control system.
Standards of Performance for Secondary Emissions from. Basic
Oxygen Process Steelmaking Facilities (40 CFR §60, Subpeirt Na).
Regulates the discharge of gases for particulate matter and opacity
for BOPFs for which construction is commenced after January 20,
1983. Secondary emissions means particulate matter emissions that
are not captured by the BOPF primary control system.
Clean Water Act (CWA)
The steel industry is a major water user and 40 CFR 420 established Effluent
Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Iron and Steel Manufacturing
Point Source Category. These are implemented through the NPDES permit
program and through state and local pretreatment programs. Part 420
contains production-based effluent limitations guidelines and standards,
therefore steel mills with higher levels of production will receive higher
permit discharge allowances. The regulation contains 12 subparts for 12
distinct manufacturing processes:
A. Cokemaking
B. Sintering
C. Ironmaking
D. Steelmaking
E. Vacuum Degassing
F. Continuous Casting
G. Hot Forming
H. Salt Bath Descaling
I. Acid Pickling
J. Cold Forming
K. Alkaline Cleaning
L. Hot Coating
The pollutants regulated by 40 CFR 420 are divided into three categories:
1. Conventional Pollutants: Total Suspended Solids, Oil and Grease, pH
2. Nonconvention Pollutants: Ammonia-N, Phenols
3. Priority or Toxic. Pollutants: Total cyanide, total chromium, hexavalent
chromium, total lead, total nickel, total zinc, benzene, benzo(a)pyrene,
naphthalene, tertrachloroethylene.
September 1995
66
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron arid Steel Industry
Wastewater is often recycled "in-plant" and at the "end-of-pipe" to reduce the
volume of discharge. Process wastewater is usually filtered, and/or clarified
on-site before being directly or indirectly discharged. Oil and greases are
removed from the process wastewater by several methods which include oil
skimming, filtration, and ^ir flotation. These oils can then be used as
lubricants and preservative! coatings. The remaining sludge contains waste
metals and organic chemicals. Iron in the sludges can be recovered and
reclaimed through sintering and pelletizing operations. Many steel mills
discharge industrial waste v rater through sewers to publicly owned treatment
works.
The Storm Water Rule (40 CFR 122.26(b)(14) subparts (i, ii)) requires the
capture and treatment of storm water at primary metal industry facilities
including iron and steel manufacturing. Management of storm water will
reduce discharges with respect to conventional pollutants (suspended solids
and biological oxygen demand (BOD)), as well as other pollutants, such as
•- certain metals and oil and grease.
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA
Several RCRA-listed wastes are produced during coke, iron, 'and
steelmaking, forming, and tleaning/descaling operations-. These wastes are
identified below by process, ' .
Coke Manufacturing
Tar residues (K035, K087, K1.41, K142, and K147) .
Oil (K143 and K144)
Naphthalene residues (K145) . . ' ' <
Lime sludge (K06Q)
Wastewater sump residues containing benzene and polynuclear
aromatic hydrocarbons (K144)
Coke oven gas cone .ensate from transfer and distribution lines
Iron and Steel Manufacturing
EAF emission control dust and sludge (K061). Annually,
550,000 short tonsjbf K061 are produced; 90 percent of this
waste (500,000 short tons) is managed for metal recovery.
29
Finishing
Wastewater sludg; from cooling, descaling, and rinsing
(D006, D007, D00.8, D009, D010, and D011)
Spent pickle liquor! (K062). An exemption for this waste is detailed
in 40 CFR 261.3(c)(2)(ii)(A). 904,945 short tons of K062 are"
generated annually in the U.S. and 52 percent of this waste is
managed for recovery of iron, chromium, and nickel.30
September 1995
67
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA)
The metals and metal compounds used in steelniaking, as well as
steelmaking process chemicals, are often found in steel mills' air emissions,
water discharges, or waste shipments for off-site disposal include chromium,
manganese, nickel copper, zinc, lead, sulfuric acid, and hydrochloric acid.
Metals are frequently found at CERCLA's problem sites. When Congress
ordered EPA and the Public Health Service's Agency for Toxic Substances
and Disease Registry (ATSDR) to list the hazardous substances most
commonly found at problem sites and that pose the greatest threat to human
health, lead, nickel, and aluminum all made the list.31 Several sites of former
steel mills are on the National Priorities List. Compliance with the
requirements of RCRA lessens the chances that CERCLA compliance will
be an issue in the future.
Vl.C. Pending and Proposed Regulatory Requirements
The iron and steel industry has been identified in the Source Reduction
' Review Project (SRRP) as an industry for which a more integrated (across
environmental media) approach to rulemaking is warranted. Efforts such as
the Office of Water's review of the need for revised effluent guidelines for
the industry (described below) and the technology-based standards for coke
oven emissions under the Clean Air Act Amendments will be coordinated
among several media offices.
Clean Air Act
Even with the flexibility the industry gained through the formal negotiations
to develop the rule to implement the coke oven provisions of the CAA, coke-
producing steel companies face difficult decisions of how best to utilize
scarce capital to meet the CAAA standards. Additionally, coke oven
operators still face unknown technology-based standards in 2010 and risk-
based standards in 2020.
The Act's air toxic provisions will also ultimately have other major impacts.
Included on the list of chemicals under the air toxics program are compounds
of chromium, nickel, manganese, cadmium and other heavy metals. Because
many of these metals are routinely found hi iron ore, scrap, and alloying
materials that are processed in iron and steel plants, most steelmaking
processes will be affected in some way. EPA's priority list of source
categories calls for the development of regulations for most of these sources
by 2000, but until EPA identifies the technology corresponding to MACT for
these sources and promulgates regulations, it is difficult to determine the
additional impacts and costs to the industry for this program.
Tightening the national ambient air quality standard for particulate matter
(PM-10) may also affect the iron and steel industry. Under the CAAA, EPA
will be reviewing the basis for the existing ambient air PM-10 standard. A
lower standard may cause more areas of the country to be classified as non-
September ,1995
68
SIC 331
-------
Sector .Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
" - I ., ' -if- ,
attainment areas and would trigger requirements for states to impose much
more stringent emission control standards for sources of particulate matter,
including iron and steel so irces.
Hydrochloric acid and chlorine are among the pollutants listed as hazardous
air pollutants in §112 of
the CAAA. Steel pickling processes that use
hydrochloric acid have been identified by the EPA as potentially significant
sources of hydrochloric acid and chlorine air emissions and, as such, a source
category for which nationa
the final rule promulgatior
emission standards are likely. EPA is expected
to make a determination on the steel pickling process sometime in 1995, with
L scheduled for 11/96. Many facilities either are
already in compliance, or they have the required control equipment, but need
to upgrade it or perform niaintenance procedure to come into compliance.
(Contact: James Maysilles, EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, 919-541-3265)]
Title III of the CAAA, requires EPA to develop national emission standards
for hazardous air pollutarits (NESHAP) from specific stationary sources
including iron and steel mills (contact: Phil Murine, EPA Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, 919-541-5289) and iron and steel foundries
(contact: James Maysilles, EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, 919-541-3265). Both of these types of facilities have been
identified by the EPA as potentially significant sources of air emissions of
substances that are among the pollutants listed as hazardous air pollutants in
§112 of the CAAA- As such, these industries may be source categories for
which national emission standards may be warranted. In integrated iron and
steel mills, air emission of HAPs may include compounds of chromium, lead,
manganese, and polycyclic organic matter, in quantities sufficient to
designate these facilities ajs major sources. Emission standards were to be
developed for Electric Arc Furnaces also. However, EPA data does not show
that EAFs emit sufficient hjazardous pollutants to include them on the list of
major sources of these pollutants. Therefore, a proposed regulatory action
is scheduled to remove this category from the list of sources where new
regulations will be promulgated.
Other, more general, proposed regulatory actions under the CAA have an
effect on some facilities within the iron and steel industry. These include:
• Risk Management Program for Chemical Accidental Release Prevention
(40 CFR 68). Requires facilities where a regulated substance is present
(defined by the list, with threshold quantities, promulgated under §112(r)(3))
to prepare and implement
a risk management plan and provide emergency
response. The final rule will be promulgated by 3729'796.
New Source Review Reform (40 CFR 51, 52). This action will amend the
new source review regula
The final rule will be promulgated 1/96.
ions to reduce the level of program complexity.
September 1995
69
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
• Revised New Source Performance Standard for NOx (40 CFR 60, Subpart
Db). Revisions apply to NOx emissions from fossil fuel-fired steam
generating units, including industrial boilers and must reflect improvements
in NOx reduction methods. The final rule will be promulgated by 12/31/96.
• Title V Federal Air Operating Permit Rules (40 CFR 70 and 71). Sets
requirements for state permitting programs for major stationary air
pollutants. Also establishes a federal permitting program for use where
states fail to establish or implement an adequate program. The final rule will
be promulgated by 11/95.
• Title V State Air Operating Permit Rules (40 CFR 70). Revisions of the
state operating permit rules promulgated in 1992. This regulation is intended
to restructure the process for issuing and revising permits, to give state
agencies more flexibility. States will be allowed to issue a single permit
covering both.New Source Review and Title V permitting requirements.
Clean Water Act (CWA)
Since approximately 80 percent of the nation's integrated steelmaking
capacity is located in the Great Lakes states, the current efforts to develop
uniform water quality standards under the Great Lakes Water Quality
Initiative may have a significant impact on the industry. According to the
American Iron and Steel Institute (AISI), the industry is concerned with the
establishment of uniform water quality guidance for all waters. AISI
believes that states should "be given the responsibility of designating uses and
associated water quality standards for all water bodies within their
jurisdictions. These designations, AISI believes, should take into account the
feasibility of the attainment of swimmable and fishable waters where
naturally occurring pollutants prevent its attainment, where pollution sources
prevent attainment and correction of these sources would cause more
environmental harm than good, or where attainment would result in
unreasonable social and economic impacts. AISI concludes that requiring
discharges of non-contact cooling water to be cleaner than when drawn from
the stream or lake, while at the same time disregarding the water quality
impacts of non-point sources such as urban or agricultural runoff, will
impose huge costs, restrict growth, or force zero discharge on direct
dischargers. By March 23, 1997, the Great lakes states (Illinois, Indiana,
Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Wisconsin), as
well as tribes in the area, must adopt rules and procedures consistent .with the
Water Quality Guidance for the Great Lakes System (40 CFR 132; also
amends 122, 123, and 131). The Guidance places particular emphasis on
decreasing bioaccumulative toxics and also provides a process for addressing
both point and non-point source pollution.
The EPA is currently revisiting the CWA Effluent Guidelines and Standards
for Iron and Steel Manufacturing Point Source Category. A two-year study
is scheduled to be completed in late 1995 which reviews the existing
September 1995
70
SIC 331
-------
Sector Ndtebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
regulations to determine What changes have been made in the industry since
the 1982 regulations werje promulgated. One focus of the project is to
investigate the types of
implemented. The study
Defense Council (NRDC)'
of Water, 202-260-7151).
pollution prevention measures that have been
was initiated as a result of a Natural Resources
consent decree. (Contact: George Jett, EPA Office
.The Office of Water is also initiating a 3-year data collection and analysis
effort (which began in 1994) to quantify the adverse impacts from cooling
water intake structures arid the efficacy of certain control mechanisms^
Regulatory options will be developed and a regulation proposed based on the
study results. This regulation may have a relatively significant impact on the
iron and steel industry.
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRti)
Under RCRA, emission control dust and sludge from electric arc furnaces
(EAF) are a listed hazardous waste (K061) and are subject to land disposal
restrictions. This pollution" control dust/sludge is composed of various
metals: primarily iron with lesser concentrations of zinc, lead, cadmium, and
sometimes nickel and chromium. The metajs primarily recovered are iron
or nickel alloys or zinc. Two or the primary hazardous constituents, lead and
cadmium, are not initially recovered, although they are usually shipped off-
site for further recovery. Annually, 550,000 short tons of K061 are
produced; 90 percent of this waste (500,000 short tons) is managed for metal
recovery.32 EPA's treatment standards were originally based on high
temperature metals recovery, but were recently revised to generic treatment
levels. As a result, a generator may select one of a variety of options,
including stabilization, as alternatives to recycling. Other recovery
alternatives include: use as a fertilizer ingredient, use an ingredient in glass
grit for abrasive blast, roofing shingles, glass ceramic or ceramic glaze, use
as an ingredient in the p:
production of special agg
•oduction of cement, use as an ingredient in the
•egates.
33
Such recovery practices reduce the quantity of hazardous waste disposed of,
however, the industry is concerned with the limitations that are placed on the
disposal or uses of non-hazardous residuals from the high temperature metals
recovery processes that might serve to discourage or inhibit metal recovery
practices. According to several steel industry trade associations (SMA,
SSINA, AISI), RCRA has discouraged metal recovery from hazardous
wastes generated in steel production. For example, the derived-from rule has
discouraged investment in on-site or regional recycling operations because
of the additional cost of residual management. The trade associations also
state that the lack of adequate metal recovery capacity in the U.S. requires
their members to spend ata average of $650,000 annually in transportation
costs to ship K061 off-site, and a total of $1.4 million annually to recycle
.-- K061.34 Other RCRA impediments stated by the trade associations include
the 90-day storage limit for generators, and corrective action/financial
September 1995
71
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
assurance.
As part of a 1992 settlement agreement, EPA has agreed to propose (by June
30, 1995) and promulgate (by June 30, 1996) regulations for land disposal
restrictions on mineral processing wastes. These regulations will set land
disposal restrictions and standards for those mineral processing wastes that
are found to be hazardous under RCRA Subtitle G. Currently, all extraction
and beneficiation wastes, as well as 20 mineral processing wastes, are
exempt from federal hazardous waste regulations.
Under a proposed regulation, "Hazardous Waste Management System:
Amendment to Generic Exclusion for Encapsulated Uses (K061, K062,
F006)," (40 CFR 261), the slags created from the treatment of pollution
control dusts resulting from scrap metal recycling (i.e., electric arc furnace
dust), will be reclassified as nonhazardous and be allowed for road-related
uses if the toxic metals in the wastes have been reduced to safe levels by
treatment. The,final rule will be promulgated by 6/13/96.
.Also under RCRA Subtitle C (40 CFR 261), the "Hazardous Waste
Identification Rule" will be proposed in 1995 to allow listed wastes which
are low risk to be removed from the hazardous waste regulatory scheme.
This rule is intended to better align the burden of RCRA regulation with the
risks being controlled.
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA)
Steel companies involved in Superfund sites would be affected by changes
under impending CERCLA reauthorization! Questions of liability, funding
mechanisms, selection of remedial actions, and application of risk concepts
are all of concern to the steel industry.
Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) .
The 1986 SDWA amendments required EPA to complete a study of Class V
underground injection wells. These are all wells not included in Classes I
through IV; they vary from simple septic systems and shallow cesspools to
deep, technically sophisticated wells with a wide range of environmental
impacts. As a follow up to the study, EPA developed a strategy to assess
whether additional controls of these wells would be appropriate. A proposed
regulation on Class V wells is being developed as part of this strategy and
could potentially affect some iron and steel facilities. Final rule promulgation
is scheduled for 11/96.
Global Climate Change
Legislative initiatives .that address global climate change will also affect the
iron and steel industry. Steel is a highly energy intensive industry, where 15
to 20 percent of the manufacturing cost of steel is for energy. Most of that
September 1995
72
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
energy is derived from coal, principally in the form of coke. Consequently,
a carbon tax could have ajmajor impact on the steel industry. While such a
tax is designed to reduce carbon dioxide emissions and to curb energy
consumption, industry analysts expect such a tax would also results in
177,000 to 362,000 job (losses across the country, according to Wilbur
Steger, president of COl^SAD Research Corp., as reported in the March
1993 issue of Iron Age.
Increasing the corporate
been identified as a means
carbon dioxide emissions.
to downsizing automobi
demand-for certain steel products.
verage fuel economy (CAFE) of automobiles has
of encouraging energy conservation and reducing;
An increase in fuel economy standards may lead
es, which will affect steel markets by reducing
September 1995
SIC 331
-------
-------
Sector Notebook. Project
Iron and Steel Industry
VII. COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT HISTORY
Background
To date, EPA has focused much of its attention on measuring compliance
with specific environmental statutes. This approach allows the Agency to
track compliance with the Clean Air Act, the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act, the Clean! Water Act, and other environmental statutes.
Within the last several years, the Agency has begun to supplement single- .
media compliance indicators with facility-specific, multimedia indicators of
compliance. In doing so, EPA is hi a better position to track compliance with
all statutes at the facility level, and within specific industrial sectors.
A major step in building the capacity to compile multimedia data, for
industrial sectors was the cjreation of EPA's Integrated Data for Enforcement
Analysis (IDEA) system. IDEA has the capacity to "read into" the Agency's
single-media databases, extract compliance records, and match the records
to individual facilities. Tfhe IDEA system can match Air, Water, Waste,
Toxics/Pesticides/EPCRAj TRI, and Enforcement Docket records for a given
facility, and generate a list !of historical permit, inspection, and enforcement
activity. IDEA also has the capability to analyze data by geographic area
and corporate holder. As
data improves, EPA will
the capacity to generate multimedia compliance
make available more in-depth compliance and
enforcement information. Additionally, sector-specific measures of success
for compliance assistance lefforts are under development.
i . ' f '
Compliance and Enforcement Profile Description
Using inspection, violation and enforcement data from the IDEA system, this
section provides inform;
ition regarding the historical compliance and
enforcement activity of this sector. In order to mirror the facility universe
reported in the Toxic Chemical Profile, the data reported within this section
consists of records only frojm the TRI reporting universe. With this decision,
the selection criteria are consistent across sectors with certain exceptions.
For the sectors that do not normally report to the TRI program, data have
been provided from EPA's Facility Indexing System (FINDS) which tracks
facilities in all media databases. Please note, in this section, EPA does not
attempt to define the actual number of facilities that fall within each sector.
Instead, the section portrays the records of a subset of facilities within the
sector that are well defined within EPA databases.
As a check on the relative size of the full sector universe, most notebooks
contain an estimated number of facilities within the sector according to the
Bureau of Census (See Section II). With sectors dominated by small
businesses, such as metal finishers and printers, the reporting universe within
the EPA databases may be small in comparison to Census data. However,
the group selected for inclusion in this data analysis section should be
consistent with this sector's general make-up.
September 1995
75
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
Following this introduction is a list defining each data column presented
within this section. These values represent a retrospective summary of
inspections and enforcement actions, and solely reflect EPA, State, and local
compliance assurance activities that have been entered into EPA databases.
To identify any changes in trends, the EPA ran two data queries, one for the
past five calendar years (August 10, 1990 to August 9, 1995) and the other
for the most recent twelve-month period (August 10, 1994 to August 9,
1995). The five-year analysis gives an average level of activity for that
period for comparison to the more recent activity.
Because most inspections focus on single-media requirements, the data
queries presented in this section are taken from single media databases.
These databases do not provide data on whether inspections are state/local
or EPA-led. However, the table breaking down the universe of violations
does give the reader a crude measurement of the EPA's and states' efforts
within each media program. The presented data illustrate the variations
across regions for certain sectors."1 This variation may be attributable to
state/local .data entry variations, specific geographic concentrations,
proximity to population centers, sensitive ecosystems, highly toxic chemicals
used in production, or historical noncompliance. Hence, the exhibited data
do not rank regional performance or necessarily reflect which regions may
have the most compliance problems.
Compliance and Enforcement Data Definitions
General Definitions
Facility Indexing System (FINDS) -- this system assigns a common facility
number to EPA single-media permit records. The FINDS identification
number allows EPA t6 compile and review all permit, compliance,
enforcement and pollutant release data for any given regulated facility.
Integrated Data for Enforcement Analysis (IDEA) -- is a data integration
system that can retrieve information from the major EPA program office
databases. IDEA uses the FINDS identification number to "glue together"
separate data records from EPA's databases. This is done to create a "master
list" of data records for any given facility. Some of the data systems
accessible through IDEA are: AIRS (Air Facility Indexing and Retrieval
System, Office of Air and Radiation), PCS (Permit Compliance System,
Office of Water), RCRIS (Resource Conservation and Recovery Information
System, Office of Solid Waste), NCDB (National Compliance Data Base,
Office of Prevention, Pesticides, and Toxic Substances), CERCLIS
(Comprehensive Environmental and Liability Information System,
* EPA Regions include the following states: I (CT, MA, ME, RI, NH, VT); II (NJ, NY, PR, VI); III (DC, DE, MD,
PA, VA, WV); IV (AL, FL, GA, KY, MS, NC, SC, TN); V (IL, IN, MI, MN, OH, WI); VI (AR, LA, NM, OK, TX);
VII (IA, KS, MO, NE); VIII (CO, MT, ND, SD, UT, WY); IX (AZ; CA, HI, NV, Pacific Trust Territories); X (AK,
ID,OR,WA).
September 1995
76
. SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook. Project'
Iron and Steel Industry
Superfund), and TRIS ('
'oxic Release Inventory System). IDEA also
contains information from outside sources such as Dun and Bradstreet and
the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). Most date
queries displayed in notebook sections IV and VII were conducted using
IDEA.
Data Table Column Heading Definitions
1 Facilities in Search— are based on the universe of TRI reporters within the
listed SIC code range. For industries not covered under TRI reporting
requirements, the notebook uses the FINDS universe for executing data
queries. The SIC code range selected for each search is defined by each
notebook's selected SIC code coverage described in Section II.
Facilities Inspected — indicates the level of EPA and state agency
inspections for the facilities in this data search. These values show what
percentage of the facility universe is inspected in a 12 or 60 month period.
Number of Inspections
conducted in this sector.
entered into a single media
-- measures the total number of inspections
An inspection event is counted each time it is
database.
Average Time Between Inspections -- provides an average length of time,
expressed hi months, between compliance inspections at a facility within the
defined universe. '
Facilities with One or More Enforcement Actions -- expresses the number
of .facilities that were the subject of at least one enforcement action within
the defined time period. This category is broken down further into federal
and state actions. Data are obtained for administrative, civil/judicial, and
criminal enforcement actions. Administrative actions include Notices of
Violation (NOVs). A facility with multiple enforcement actions is only
counted once in this column (facility with 3 enforcement actions counts as
' " ' ' '
Total Enforcement Actions -- describes the total number of enforcement
actions identified for an iridustrial sector across all environmental statutes.
A facility with multiple enforcement actions is counted multiple times (a
facility with 3 enforcement actions counts as 3).
State Lead Actions -- shows what percentage of the total enforcement
actions are taken by state and local environmental agencies. Varying levels
of use by states of EPA data systems may limit the volume- of actions
accorded state enforcement activity. Some states extensively report
enforcement activities into EPA data systems, while other states may use
their own data systems.
September 1995
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
Federal Lead Actions — shows what percentage of the total enforcement
actions are taken by the United States Environmental Protection Agency.
This value includes referrals from state agencies. Many of these actions
result from coordinated or joint state/federal efforts.
Enforcement to Inspection Rate ~ expresses how often enforcement
actions result from inspections. This value is a ratio of enforcement actions
to inspections, and is presented for comparative purposes only. This measure
is a rough indicator of the relationship between inspections and enforcement.
This measure simply indicates historically how many enforcement actions
can be attributed to inspection activity. Reported inspections and
enforcement actions under the Clean Water Act (CWA), the Clean Air Act
(CAA) and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) are
included in this ratio. Inspections and actions from the TSCA/FIFRA/
EPCRA database are not factored into this ratio because most of the actions
taken under these programs are not the result of facility inspections. This
ratio does not account for enforcement actions arising from non-inspection
compliance monitoring'activities (e.g., self-reported water discharges) that
can result in enforcement action within the CAA, CWA, and RCRA.
Facilities with One or More Violations Identified — indicates the
percentage of inspected facilities having a violation identified in one of the
following data categories: In Violation or .Significant Violation Status
(CAA); Reportable Noncompliance, Current Year Noncompliance,
Significant Noncompliance (CWA); Noncompliance and Significant
Noncompliance (FIFRA, TSCA, and EPCRA); Unresolved Violation and
Unresolved High Priority Violation (RCRA). The values presented for this
column reflect the extent of noncompliance within the measured time frame,
but do not distinguish between the severity of the noncompliance. .Violation
status may be a precursor to an enforcement action, but does not necessarily
indicate that an enforcement action will occur.
Media Breakdown of Enforcement Actions and Inspections -- four
columns identify the proportion of total inspections and enforcement actions
within EPA Air, Water, Waste, and TSCA/FIFRA/EPCRA databases. Each
column is a percentage of either the "Total Inspections," or the "Total
Actions" column. -
September 1995
78
SIC 331
-------
Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
VILA. Iron and Steel Industry Compliance History
Exhibit 14 provides an overview of the reported compliance and enforcement
data for the iron and steel industry over the past five years (August 1990 to
August 1995). These da a are also broken out by EPA Region thereby
permitting geographical co: nparisons. A few points evident from the data are
listed below.
' '. " ^ . '•'".''•'
• Eighty-five percem of iron and steel facility inspections occurred in
Regions III, IV, and V, where the most facilities are located.
Within the three regions where iron and steel mills are concentrated,
the proportion of state-lead enforcement actions was significantly
greater than federal action for Regions IE and IV (87% state-lead and
91% state-lead, respectively). In Region V, the region with the
greatest number of iron and steel facilities, enforcement actions were
fairly evenly split between state-lead and federal-lead..
Of the 275 facilities inspected over the five-year period examined,
115 had one or more enforcement actions (42%), however, the
aggregate Enforcement to Inspection Rate across all Regions was
0.14 (499 enforcement actions/3,555 inspections).
September 1995
79
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
3
CC
•o
a
a
2
^•4
hi
«s
£«
03
&
S
1
2
cS
a
W
1
J^K
3 jj '•§
0* £ <
GO
's
— Is
•f S -2
<2 -^j
c
(M
fila
| S S |
= o C
« -g g '•§
« o -C *"
•< S pj ™
M
•s s
u .2
a> -w
C S
S a.
3 g
m 13
11
'"5 a-
eg w
, fe «
M JS
cn
i — i
^ <
cs
ON
in
m
>
cs
en
o
° ,
vo
ON
en
ON
m
r-
o
in
oo
»— 4
1 1
CS
cs
en
>
VO
f— 4
o
0
v%
op
0?
,
"~~
cs
2
g>
t--
o
5
cs
o
0^
1—4
0?
en
oo
vo
cs
o
ON
CS
en
ON
0
0
o
o
o
1 — i
cs
en
ON
cs
en
cs
VO
,__<
1—1
X
cs
o
0
o
m
O
m
o
t— 4
— '
^
cs
cs
en
X
-2
o
.
00
cs
SN
CS
r-
ON
ON
• "*
in
VO
in
•n
en"
in
f-
cs
^j-
r-
en
J
H
&
September 1995
80
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
VII.B. Comparison of Enforcement Activity Between Selected Industries
Exhibits 15 and 16 allow
to be compared to the
identification of trends
industry by comparing
the compliance history of the iron and steel sector
other industries covered by the industry sector
notebooks. Comparisons between Exhibits 15 and, 16 permit the
n compliance and enforcement records of the
ita covering the last five years to that of the past
year.' Some points evident from the data are listed below.
• Of those sectors Ijisted, facilities in iron and steel sector have been
one of the most frequently inspected industries over the past five
years with an average of 6 months between inspections. Only
petroleum refining and pulp and paper facilities were inspected, on
average, more frequently.
• Over the past yean the enforcement to inspection rate for the iron and
steel industry has decreased from 0.14 for 1990 through 1995 to 0.09
for August 1994 through August 1995.'
Exhibits 17 and 18 provide a more in-depth comparison between iron and
steel industry and other sectors by breaking out the compliance and
enforcement data by em ironmental statute. As in the previous Exhibits
(Exhibits 15 and 16), the data cover the last five years (Exhibit 17) and the
last one year (Exhibit 18) to facilitate the identification of recent trends. A
few points evident from the data are listed below.
• The percentage of inspections carried out under each environmental
statute has changed little between the average of the past five years
and that of the past year. Inspections are roughly divided equally
among, CAA, CWA, and RCRA, although the past year has shown
a slight increase :n the percentage of CAA inspections and a slight
decrease in the percentage of RCRA inspections.
• While approximaely one-third of inspections are carried out under
each statute (CAA, CWA, and RCRA), the majority of the
enforcement actions are taken under RCRA.
September 1995
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Irom and Steel Industry
en
O
£
•a
a
1
«
"3
3U
fr
st
S
3
1^5
«
a
.S
a.
S
o
U
a
•*-»
a
S
-3
•"*
M
o
&<
id
1-5
u
05
«
•to*
1 1
i - u -2
u £
•w « en
n J E
*S o Q*
< « ca S
*«-t «
o c
fe "S
•° ^
£ a.
3 en
1 '
s "2
^ a<
.a
t/t JS
'•H t-
« OT
J«r
1
CO
en
•a
,3
o
CN
•fe
s
in
2
i "<
m
vo
CO
in
vo
CM
vo
o
CO
Pulp and Paper
»— i
O
?n
*— t
oo
2
vo
t--
(•in*
cs
CO
t^-
>n
0
t-H
vo
o
1— t
"*
M
C
S
V— 4
O
??
CM
S
CM
eo
ON
OS
t— »
Tt-
S
CO
oo
OS
CM
oo
m
Inorganic Chemical
i— i
0
$
CO
VO
VO
vo
CM
CN
' '
VO
VO
CO
vo
CO
CM
•^t
Organic Chemicals
CM
0
§
CO
VO
VO
r-
r--
o
1 '
CO
a
ro"
in
rj-
VO
in
r— *
Petroleum Refining
i«»<
o
.•-
1
CO
o
CM
oo
' OO
CO
CO
VO
in
CM
CO
CO
OS
Dry Cleaning
*— i
o
CO
$
E
5
CO
OS
m
1— H
Os
CO
CO
<5
oo
00
_e
s
%
0
o
^
CM
VO
f-
Os
s
o
CM
CM
CO
, ,
co-
VO
q>
^-4
*~H
2
s
o -S
T— 4
o
0^
CN
gi
CM
ro
CM
00
r-
2
OS
t— «
,_<
C3
CO
s
rf
Lumber and Wood
o
0
fc
5s
Os
ro
1 '
CO
in
t--
ro
l-H
cs
CO
CM
purniture
i—*
o
CM
OO
1— 1
ON
CO
VO
1 '
o
ro
vo
oo
CO
Os
CO
VO
vo
' '
Rubber and Plastic
1 — 1
o
ft
ro
O
r-
s
ro
P
T— i
§
CM
OO
vo
oo
VO
en
O
T3
C
to
Sf
U
I
CO
'*— •
0
o
CM
oo
oo
o
oo
CM
vo
CM
1
l/"l
Q
CO
*""*
vo
<";
CM
Fabricated Metal
I—*
0
c£
CM
vo
t-.
o
r--
rt-
rt-
1 '
VO
f-
OS
CO
T;}.
!?
•*
oo
L
[[Nonferrous Metal
-------
sector Notebook Project
-*•• x
'S
M
S
•s
^3
1
^
©
b
H
S
• s
«
g
S
.a
cS
S5
• *^
•s
. a
CJ
a
o
4)
a
on
^
«
S
©
ve
TH
.•a
•R
•a
H
n
o.
EM
G
U
S:BO
to; -
h
oa
•- .' f
1
in
T— (
O
oo
oo
>n
i — i
oo
n
,
Iron and Steel
September 1995
" ' • ' • . ' • . '
Iron and Steel Industry
o
T—l
O
t— 1
r-H
'S
in
•tf
VO
»—<
* — t
00
en
».
Dry Cleaning
en
O
.s
T— t
VO
t— 1
f-
oo
1 — 1
1 — 1,
1 — 1
en
Vfetal Mining
en
T— 1
O
in
2
T-H
oo
fe
en
C-
cQ
in
ts .
en
^-T
^S
2
2
f-H
0
«s
en
00
^
o
t— t
s
QJ
1 — 1
^.
vo
Dumber and Wood
0
0
CM
en
*
»— i
«
en
O
VO
(—1
en
OS
t
*
o
OS
m
£
OS
t-H
g
t— t
OS
oo
es
m
en
-
»— i
cs
m
vo
i— i
Rubber and Plastic
o
cS
o
vo
VO
$
,— J
CS
OS
£
o
en
en
^
* — i
OO
'en
a,
.0
i
00
1 — t
o
^
1 — I
01
cs
o
1—4
oo
cs
g
es
o
es
.^j.
OO
STonferrous Metals
in
r— 1
O
r-4
O
I— C
VO
•<3*
O
*"H
in
cs
m
£
t-
r-
VO
en
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
*3j
•a g
*rf O
o *^3
w
t3
O
O.
cn
t
i *•
rt u
a •<
8 fc 15
tf S g
IM
i
s
U
8
111
*S
w
31
01
01
•^
cn
i
VI
d Paper
PH
1
Non-m
ng
o
3
September 1995
84
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook. Project
Iron and Steel Industry
w
H '
C
"rt
"S
CO
o
-I
es
- •**
«!
'S
CO
"S
i
s
g
'a
*«
[nspection ai
One- Year ]
oo
»po4
OQ ^
t^ ^^
-S
§ 15
8 g ^
- Resou
Conserval
Recover
15
fe
•H
1 Clean Wa
h
""5
U
i/i
*3r
"-? ° ""3
if
•sal'
v» O -C
1 1
o M
•sal
*«M
% of Total
Inspections
-•a- S
0 & .8
% of Total
Inspections
Total
Enforcement
Actions
, I |
Facilities
Inspected
[ndustry Sector
CO
o
p-
o
i — t
i — i
04
CO
ON
VO
v^
VD
OO
OO
VO
in
ON
OO
1 — t
[[Pulp and Paper
0?
•ct-
0s-
O
S .
"*
•co
m
f-
^s
o
m
04
c-
VO
c—
ON
CO
CL,
V^>
O
VO
CO
in
04
ON'
O4
. OO
CO
""x
VO
0)
ON
f-
04
OO
in
Inorganic Chemicals
i — i
i — i
1
0?
O
in
r-H
CO
I— 1
CO
s=
VO
CO
00)
f — 1
r-H
in
**•
in
m
ON..
i — (
[[Organic Chemicals
VO
i — i
1
o
CO
VD
r-H
ON
CO '
iv
O
in
! 1
1 1
9.
ON
0
1 — 1
&
vo
o
1
vo
vo
CO
oo
r- (
s«
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
VII.C. Review of Major Legal Action
Major Cases/Supplemental Environmental Projects
This section provides summary information about major cases that have
affected this sector, and a list of Supplemental Environmental Projects
(SEPs). SEPs are compliance agreements that reduce a facility's non-
compliance penalty in return for an environmental project that exceeds the
value of the reduction. Often, these projects fund pollution prevention
activities that can significantly reduce the future pollutant loadings of a
facility.
VII.C.1. Review of Major Cases
The Office of Regulatory Enforcement does not regularly compile
information related to major cases and pending litigation within an industry
sector. The staff are willing to pass along such information to Agency staff
as requests are made. (Contact: Pete Rosenberg 202-260-8869) In addition,
summaries of completed enforcement actions are published each fiscal year
in the Enforcement Accomplishments Report; the summaries are not
organized by industry sector. (Contact: Robert Banks 202-260-8296).
VII.C.2. Supplementary Environmental Projects (SEPs)
Supplemental environmental projects (SEPs) are enforcement options that
require the non-compliant facility to complete specific projects. Regional
summaries of SEPs undertaken in the 1993 and 1994 federal fiscal years
were reviewed. Three projects were undertaken that involved iron and steel
facilities, as shown in Exhibit 19.
In the iron and steel sector, SEPs resulted from violations of EPCRA,
CERCLA, and RCRA. Due to differences in regional descriptions, the
specifics of the original violations are not known. The cost for the projects
ranged from $53,000 to $900,000 corresponding to initial penalties ranging
from $110,000 to $746,438. . .
September 1995
86
SJC331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
i ' S ' '
• " - -
•
.
J»
Manufactui
1
^.'
' e
'O
t_
1^4
• •
1
£
-*2
.8
£
PH
1
tt
e
o
2
"?
a
,
cs
a
1
"a.
Q.
cc
o\
ON
i
i
£
ON
TH
|
m
vironmental Project
Supplemental En'
Description
I
3
Pollution Re<
,
_
.2
1
1
"ed
.2
1
<2
"3
g
1
a.!'
II
a, c&
Pollutant
Concern
2
0 o.
'&•§•
50 O
.13
Cu "^
S O
' • if'
•3 g
.S o
£ ft
if
£ &•(
' S
it
&
ll
0^
•»
^
o
a*
l:
>cess modified by
roethylene with a
Parts cleaning prc
replacing perchlo
non-toxic
-C*
—
|
fS
Perchloro-
ethylene
o
o
S1 ' •
s
**
j
1
o"
o
V5-
,
g
g
-
^
Is
s.' ;
"B
0?
3 o
1
:a •
ess eliminated and
age control installed
Zinc preflux proc
sulfuric acid spill
s^
o =1 ^
0 o ^
III
>n '3 "N '
S3 8 on <
|
e^
^
§'
f»^
•G
o
C-4*1
W
O
o
o
0 -
3-
1
^
„ 1 -9
. --•-*.
-,..•• L - • - i
Illll
§OTtiffl(§
•i
s
imonia emissions
m of zinc plating line •
the use of anhydrous
Will eliminate an
through conversk
bath to eliminate
ammonia
•1
o
1
§"
*f»
i .
§
o
-------
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
VIII. COMPLIANCE ACTIVITIES AND INITIATIVES
This section highlights the activities undertaken by this industry sector and
public agencies to voluntarily improve the sector's environmental
performance. These activities include those independently initiated by
industrial trade associations. In this section, the notebook also contains a
listing and description of national and regional trade associations.
VIII.A. Sector-related Environmental Programs and Activities
Common Sense Initiative
The EPA's Common Sens; Initiative (CSI)was announced in November of
1993 to encourage pollution prevention in a few pilot industrial sectors
including: iron and ste'el, electronics, metal plating and finishing,
automobiles, printing, and oil refining. The .program shifts regulatory focus
from concentrating on individual toxic chemicals and media, to industry-
wide approaches to environmental problems. A subcommittee will be
formed for each industry and a strategic plan will be drawn up to identify
opportunities to coordinate rulemaking, to streamline record-keeping and
permitting requirements, and to identify innovative approaches in pollution
prevention and environmental technology. For the iron and steel industry,
a subcommittee has been formed and four workgroups have been established.
The .workgroups include representatives from industry, EPA (federal and
regional), state environmental agencies, public interest groups, trade
associations, and research! institutions. The iron and steel CSI workgroups
include: Innovative Technology, Permits Process, Compliance, and
Brownfields. Projects proposed by each of the workgroups are subject to
approval by the subcommittee. Project approval is expected in May, 1995.
Common Sense Initiative contacts at EPA are:
t
Designated Federal Official (EPA Office of Water):
MaheshPpdar, 202-260-53 87
Subcommittee Co-Chair (EPA Office of Water):
. Bo 3 Perciasepe, 202-260-5700
Subcommittee Co-Chair (0EPA Region V):
. Dave Ullrich, 312-886-3000
OECA contact (Compliance Workgroup):
- Maria Malave, 202-564-7027
lits Pr
OECA contact (Permits Pjrocess Workgroup):
Mike Calhoun, 202-564-6031
September 1995
89
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Imdustry
VIII.B. EPA Voluntary Programs
33/50 Program
The "33/50 Program" is EPA's voluntary program to reduce toxic chemical
releases and transfers of seventeen chemicals from manufacturing facilities.
Participating companies pledge to reduce their toxic chemical releases and
transfers by 33% as of 1992 and by 50% as of 1995 from the 1988 baseline
year. Certificates of Appreciation have been given out to participants
meeting their 1992 goals. The list of chemicals includes seventeen high-use
chemicals reported in the Toxics Release Inventory. Exhibit 20 lists those
companies participating in the 33/50 program that reported the SIC code 331
to TRI. Many of the companies shown listed multiple SIC codes and,
therefore, are likely to carry out operations in addition to the iron and steel
industry. The SIC codes reported by each company are listed in no particular
order. In addition, the number of facilities within each company that are
participating hi the 33/50 program and that report SIC 331 to TRI is shown.
Finally, each company's total 1993 releases and transfers of 33/50 chemicals
and the percent reduction in these chemicals since 1988 are presented.
Thirteen of the seventeen target chemicals are used in the iron and steel
industry. Of all TRI chemicals released by the iron and steel industry,
chromium and chromium compounds, a 33/50 target chemical, were released
most frequently (from 347 facilities), and were the third greatest volume.
Other target chemicals that were in the top ten TRI releases by volume and
by number of facilities reporting that chemical released were nickel and
nickel compounds, lead and lead compounds, and l,l,lrtrichloroethane.
Approximately twelve percent of eligible iron and steel companies are
currently participating in the program. Exhibit 20 shows that 49 companies
comprised of 115 facilities reporting SIC 331 are participating in the 33/50
program. (Contact: Mike Burns 202-260-6394 or 33/50 Program 202-260-
6907).
September 1995
90
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and 'Steel Industry
Exhibit 20: SIC 331 Facilities Participating in the EPA's 33/50 Program* '
Parent Company
Acme Metals Inc. ,
Allegheny Ludlum Corporation
American Cast Iron Pipe Co.
Ameron Inc Delaware
Amsted Industries Incorporated
Arrnco Inc. . ...
Armco Steel Company L.P,
Avesta Sheffield Holding Co.
Bayou Steel Corporation
Bethlehem Steel Corporation
Cargill Detroit Corporation
Carpenter Technology Corp.
CF&L Steel Corp.
Commercial Metals Company
Contran Corporation
Cooper Industries Inc.
CSC Industries Inc. , .
Emerson Electric Co.
First Mississippi Corporation
Ford Motor Company
Geneva Steel
Inland Steel Industries Inc.
J & L Specialty Steel Inc.
Kanthal Furnace Prods:
Katy Industries Inc.
Kerr-Mcgee Corporation
LTV Steel Co. Inc.
Lukens Inc.
Naco Inc.
National Steel Corporation
Olin Corporation
Oregon Steel Mills Inc.
Plymouth Tube Company
Renco Group Inc.
Republic Engineered Steels
Roanoke Electric Steel Corp,
City, State
Riverdale, IL
Pittsburgh, PA
Birmingham, AL
Pasadena, CA
Chicago;. IL
Pittsburgh, PA
Middletown, OH
New Castle, IN
La Place, LA
Bethlehem, PA
Clawson, MI
Reading, PA
Pueblo, CO
Dallas, TX
Dallas, TX
Houston, TX
Warren, OH
Saint Louis, MO
Jackson; MS'
Dearborn, MI
Orem, UT
Chicago, IL
Pittsburgh, PA
Bethel, CT
Englewood, CO
Oklahoma City, OK
Cleveland, OH
Coatesville, PA
Lisle, IL
Mishawaka, IN
.Stamford, CT
Portland, OR
Warrenville, IL
New York, NY
Massillon, OH
Roanoke, VA
f
SIC, Codes
Reported
331,2, 3499,3479
331
2
33^2, 33 17, 3325
327,2,3317,3443
33
5,3496,3471
33i2
33J2
33
33
33
2 • : ... - -
2
2 ,
33^2
33J2
33J2 ' ,
33J2
33
34(
2, 3315
12,3317.
33J2.
346,9,3315
33
33
2
2
33J2, 3317, 3325
33 J2, 3274
33
33
33
2
5,3316,3357
6, 3351, 3353
28J9, 3313
3'3i 2
33
33
33
33;
2
3
2
11,3316,3356
33 J2, 3295
34!
33
33
33
•9,3317 •
2
2
2
Number of
Participating
Facilities
, 3 •
8
1 r
i' .;'V
i .
11
:.'.•• 2 ,'•
' •' 1 '•'"-.
1 ',
9
8"
1- ,
1
3 ' '•
1 : '• '
1
- , .- 1
1.
1 '
1
1
1 .
2 ' .
1
1
1
7 .
4
1
2
1
1
1
2
4
1
1993 Releases
and Transfers
(Ibs)
. 157,232
1,031,164
315,184
184,882
1,834,493
; 1,849,709
.>'> 159,944
; • 27,025
1,892
792,550
717,558
57,155
308,892
36,457
735,655
1,048,465
8,808
2,140,497
200,977
15,368,032
12,448
733,7.86
669,309
21,581
82,256
374,098
612,924
312,442
71,800
682^86
574,673
14,533
76,694
204,629
193;662
476
% Reduction
1988 to 1993
38
*
25 '
**
66
4
*
99
98
50
31
86
50
47
50 .
75
50
, 50
***
15
***
48
100
41
52
35
60
14
***
50
70
12
*
1 7
3
***
September 1995
91
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
Exhibit 20: SIC 331 Facilities Participating in the EPA's 33/50 Program
Parent Company
SKW Alloys Inc.
Slater Steels Corporation
Svwa Inc.
Talley Industries Inc.
Texas Industries Inc.
Thomas Steel Strip Corp.
Timken Co.
Toledo Coke Corporation
USS Posco Industries
USX Corporation
Walter Industries Inc.
Weirton Steel Corporation
Wheeling-Pittsburgh Corp.
City, State
Niagara Falls, NY
Fort Wayne, IN
Huntington, WV
Phoenix, AZ
Dallas, TX
Warren, OH
Canton, OH
Toledo, OH
Pittsburg, CA
Pittsburgh, PA
Tampa, FL
Weirton, WV
Wheeling, WV
SIC Codes
Reported
3313
3312
3312
3312
3312
3471,3316
3312
3312
33}2
33J2
3312
3312
3312
Total
Number of
Participating
Facilities
1
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
1
6
1
1
6
115
1993 Releases
and Transfers
(Ibs)
7,777
22,205
43,405
3,804
20,964
6,839
278,695
18
182,431
1,510,772
859,751
183,497
560,055
% Reduction
1988 to 1993
*
50
27
***
*
50
30
90
56
25
***
**
66
*•« not quantifiable against 1988 data. ,
** = use reduction goal only.
*** = no numerical goal.
Source: U.S. EPA, Toxics Release Inventory, 1993.
Environmental Leadership Program
The Environmental Leadership Program (ELP) is a national initiative piloted
by EPA and state agencies in which facilities have volunteered to
demonstrate innovative approaches to environmental management and
compliance. EPA has selected 12 pilot projects at industrial facilities and
federal installations which will demonstrate the principles of the ELP
program. These principles include: environmental management systems,
multimedia compliance assurance, third-party verification of compliance,
public measures of accountability, community involvement, and mentor
programs. In return for participating, pilot participants receive public
recognition and are given a period of time to correct any violations
discovered during these experimental projects. In the iron and steel industry,
one company (California Steel of Fontana, California) submitted a proposal.
(Contact: Tai-ming Chang, ELP Director, 202-564-5081 or Robert Fentress,
202-564-7023.)
September 1995
92
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
Project XL
Project XL was initiated
in March 1995 as a part of President Clinton's
Reinventing Environmental Regulation initiative. The'projects seek to
achieve cost effective environmental benefits by allowing participants to
replace or modify existing ^regulatory requirements on the condition that they
produce greater envrronmental benefits. EPA and program participants will
negotiate and sign a Final Project Agreement, detailing specific objectives
that the-regulated entity shall satisfy. In exchange, EPA will allow the
participant a certain degree of regulatory flexibility and may seek changes
in underlying regulations or statutes. Participants are encouraged to seek
stakeholder support from local governments, businesses, and environmental
groups. EPA hopes to,implement fifty pilot projects in four categories,
including facilities, sectors,, communities, and government agencies regulated
by EPA. Applications will be accepted on a rolling basis and'projects will
move to implementation within six months of their selection. For additional
information regarding XL projects, including application procedures and
criteria, see the May 23,1995 Federal Register Notice, or contact Jon Kessler
at EPA's Office of Policy Analysis (202) 260-4034.
Green Lights Program
EPA's Green Lights pro jram was initiated in 1991 and has the goal of
preventing pollution by enjcouraging U.S. institutions to use energy-efficient
lighting technologies. The program has over 1,500 participants which
, include major corporations; small and medium sized businesses; federal,
state and local governments; non-profit groups; schools; universities; and
health care facilities^ Each participant is required to survey their facilities
and upgrade lighting wherever it is profitable. EPA provides technical
assistance to the participants through a decision support software package,
workshops and manuals, and a financing registry. EPA's Office of Air and
Radiation is responsible for operating the Green Lights Program. (Contact:
Susan Bullard at 202-233-9065 or the Green Light/Energy Star Hotline at
202-775-6650)
WasteWi$e Program
The WasteWi$e Progranji was started in 1994 by EPA's Office of Solid
Waste and Emergency Response. The program is aimed at reducing
municipal solid wastes by promoting waste minimization, recycling
collection and the manufacturing andxpurchase of recycled products. As of
1994, the program had about 300 companies as members, including a number
of major corporations. Members agree to identify and implement actions to
reduce their solid wastes and must provide EPA with their waste reduction
goals along with yearly progress reports., EPA in turn provides technical
assistance to member companies and allows the use of the WasteWi$e logo
for promotional purposes. (Contact: Lynda Wynn, 202-260-0700 or the
September 1995
93
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
WasteWi$e Hotline at 1-800-372-9473)
Climate Wise Recognition Program
NICE3
The Climate Change Action Plan was initiated in response to the U.S.
commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in accordance with the
Climate Change Convention of the 1990 Earth Summit. As part of the
Climate Change Action Plan, .the Climate Wise Recognition Program is a
partnership initiative run jointly by EPA and the Department of Energy. The
program is designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by encouraging
reductions across all sectors of the economy, encouraging participation in the
full range of Climate Change Action Plan initiatives, and fostering
innovation. Participants in the program are required to identify and commit
to actions that reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The program, in turn, gives
organizations early recognition for their reduction commitments; provides
technical assistance through consulting services, workshops, and guides; and
provides access to the program's centralized information system. At EPA,
the program is operated by the Air and Energy Policy Division within the
Office of Policy Planning and Evaluation. (Contact: Pamela Herman, 202-
260-440?)
The U.S. Department of Energy and EPA's Office of Pollution Prevention
are jointly administering a grant program called The National Industrial
Competitiveness through Energy, Environment, and Economics (NICE3). By
providing grants of up to 50 percent of the total project cost, the program
encourages industry to reduce industrial waste at its source and become more
energy-efficient and cost-competitive through waste minimization efforts.
Grants are used by industry to design, test, demonstrate, and assess the
feasibility of new processes and/or equipment with the potential to reduce
pollution and increase energy efficiency. The program is open to all
industries; however, priority is given to proposals from participants in the
pulp and paper, chemicals, primary metals, and petroleum and coal products
sectors. The program has worked with the iron and steel industry to evaluate
the feasibility of an on-site hydrochloric acid recovery system for galvanizers
and small- to medium-sized steel manufacturers. (Contact: Bill Ives at
DOE's Golden Field Office, 303-275-4755)
VII.B. EPA Voluntary Programs
Strategies for Pulp & Paper and Steel Industries
The U.S. Department of Energy is examining the relationships between
productivity, energy efficiency and environmental compliance in the pulp &
paper and steel industries. Productivity and energy efficiency investments
often complement each other, but can conflict with end-of-pipe emission
September 1995
94
SIC 331
-------
Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
control projects designed 1
project, the DOE seeks :
o reduce regulated pollutants. By sponsoring this
better understand such conflicts and use this
information to help identify ways,DOE and other federal agencies can help
industry meet mutual goal 3 in these important areas. The project consists of
two phases: 1) industry field consultations will be conducted to discuss and
clarify the issues; and 2)
between productivity,
quantitative analysis will evaluate the interplay
;nergy efficiency, and pollution abatement
investments. (Contact: Jeff Dowd at 202-586-7258)
VIII.C. Trade Association/Industry Sponsored Activity
VHI.C..1. Industry Research Program s
Without technological cianges, the requirements of the Clean Air Act
affecting coke ovens ma> force the shutdown of many facilities. To avoid
possible facility closings] the industry is actively investigating alternatives
to the conventional cokejoven/blast furnace method of making iron. One
promising technology, the direct steelmaking project which was jointly
funded by the Americai Iron and Steel Institute (AISI) and the U.S.
Department of Energy (DOE), concluded on March 31, 1994. This
• technology reduces, mells, and refines iron in a'single reactor. An opt-in,
DOE cost-sharing program for the smelting of steel plant waste oxides began
on April 1, 1994. Based on the success of recent trials, and the further
knowledge that was gained from this follow-on program, the technology is
now well understood and fully developed. A feasibility study for a
demonstration plan is beiijtg developed. Under a related project, the AISI and
member companies are working with the U.S. Bureau of Mines on a jointly
funded research proj ect to improve the dewatering of a variety of steel plant
sludges. Currently, thej sludges contain too much moisture to permit
.economic recycling to re
4130).
;over metal values. (Contact: Dave Rice 801-584-
Another cokeless ironmaking technology, called the Cipcor or Corex
process, eliminates the nejecl for a coke plant, has integral coal desulfurizing,
is amenable to a variety of coal types, and produces a gas that can be used to
fire a cogeneration plant. [This project will begin in 1995; capital outlays are
expected to reach $800 niillion. Under the DOE Clean Coal Technology
Demonstration Program, the Corex construction project may receive a $150
information on the DOE project, contact J. Lee
million grant. For more
Bailey (216) 447-3235.
Instead of eliminating coke production, two research projects run by
Bethlehem Steel are focused on reducing coke process emissions. The
Sparrows Point facility on Chesapeake Bay was the proposed site for one
project. At this facility!, the Davy Still Autoprocess for pre-combustion
cleaning of coke ovens was to be demonstrated. This process utilizes coke
oven battery process water to strip ammonia and hydrogen sulfide from coke
September 1995
95
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
oven emissions. The facility was constructed but is not in operation due to
a suspension of coke-making operations by Bethlehem Steel at that facility.
Discussions are ongoing over re-establishment of coke production at
Sparrows Point. The other Bethlehem Steel project is a demonstration plant
of the British Steel blast furnace granulated coal injection process. In this
process, granulated coal is used instead of oil and natural gas in the blast
furnace. Unlike natural gas, granulated coal does not cause furnace
temperature reductions when it is introduced and thus improves process
efficiency. Pollutant outputs are reduced as coal sulphur is removed by flux
and bound in the slag. The process replaces natural gas usage and reduces
40 percent of the coke requirement. The project facility, located in Burns
Harbor, Indiana, is expected to be complete in January of 1995. The EPA
project manager for the Bethlehem Steel projects is Jeff Summers (301) 903-
4412.
Another project focussing on reduced emissions from cokemaking is a
process under development by Calderon Energy. A small scale oven was
constructed and operated in Alliance, Ohio and a full scale oven is under
consideration for funding by the Department of Energy (DOE). For further
DOE information, contact John Augustine (412) 892-4524.
September 1995
96
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
VIII.C.2. Summary of Trade Associations
American Iron and Steel Institute
1101 17th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20036-4700
Phone: (202) 452-7100
Fax: (202) 463-6573
Members: 50 companies
Staff: 44
Budget:
Contact: Bruce Steiner,.
VP-Environment and Energy
The American Iron and Steel Institute (AISI), founded in 1908, mainly represents
integrated iron and steel manufacturers. Based on tonnage of production, AISI
represents the companies responsible for 70 percent of U.S. steel manufacture. As
the major trade group for the industry, AISI has a diverse agenda. The AISI
conducts market development by working with major customer groups (e.g.,
automotive, machinery) to maintain and promote steel as the material of choice. The
AISI is also involved in legislative and regulatory activities; AISI members rely on
the organization to keep them abreast of legislative and regulatory developments.
The AISI conducts research on manufacturing technology, basic materials,
environmental quality control, energy, and fuel consumption. The AISI also
compiles industry (including non-members) statistics through surveys. AISI
publications are the American /ro/jz and Steel Institute-Annual Statistical Report, as
well'as technical manuals and pamphlets oh steel. The AISI holds several meetings
and other workshops and seminars for member company representatives.
Specialty Steel Industry North America Members: 21 companies
3050 K Street, NW
Suite 400
Washington, DC 20007
Phone:202-342-8630
Fax:202-338-5534
The Specialty Steel Industry of North America (SSINA) is a national trade
organization comprised of 21 producers of specialty steel products, including
stainless, electric, tool, magnetic, and other alloys. SSINA represents over 90
percent of the North American specialty steel industry. The primary purpose of
SSINA is to promote and encourage a better understanding between members of the
North American specialty steel I industry and federal and state officials, and to
provide and encourage governmental action in support of the continued growth of
a strong North American specialty steel industry. SSINA is comprised of a number
of task forces and committees which pursue issues of interest to the North American
specialty steel industry, including domestic and international trade, environmental,
critical materials matters, manufacturing and standards issues, and other
government-related matters. The SSINA committees meet quarterly, normally
alternating between Washington,
D.C. and Pittsburgh.
September 1995
97
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
Steel Manufacturers Association (SMA)
1730 Rhode Island Avenue, NW
Suite 907
Washington, DC 20036-3101
Phone: 202-296-1515
Fax: 202-296-2506
email: steelnet@aol.com
World Wide Web home page:
http ://www. steelnet.org
Members: 55
The SMA is the primary trade association of electric arc furnace steelmakers. Last
year, EAF steelmakers recycled 38.2 million metric tons of iron and steel scrap.
Purchased scrap accounts for almost 100% of the feedstocks used in an EAF to make
new steel. ' Other SMA companies are reconstituted integrated (ore-based)
steelmakers, with management practices similar to those of the EAF companies. The
SMA Environment Committee meets frequently to address issues affecting the steel
industry and works with the EPA and other government agencies to implement
effective environmental programs. The SMA also has technical and human
resources committees which meet to exchange information and develop public
policy positions, as well as ad-hpc task forces to handle specific matters such as
radioactive scrap detection, development of emission monitoring protocols, and the
EPA's Common Sense Initiative. With 44 U.S., 8 Canadian, and 3 Mexican member
companies geographically dispersed across the continent, the SMA is the largest
steel trade association in North America in. terms of membership, hi 1994, the SMA
membership accounted for approximately 40% of all steel shipments in the U.S., and
as a growing segment of the industry, the-SMA share of total U.S. steel production
is expected to account for 50% within one decade.
International Iron and Steel Institute
Institut International du Fer et de 1'Acier
120, rue Colonel Bourg, B-l 140
Brussels, Belgium 32 2 726 50 95
Members: 165
Staff: 20
Budget:
Contact: Ian Christmas, Deputy
Secretary General
The International Iron and Steel Institute (IISI) is comprised of steel-producing
companies, affiliated federations, and technical societies in 48 countries. The IISI
seeks to contribute to the steel industry worldwide. Major functions are: to provide
a forum for free and open discussions of the industry's problems and opportunities;
to undertake research in scientific, technological, economic, financial, governmental,
sociological, legal, environmental, and other aspects of the industry; to collect,
evaluate, and disseminate statistics and information concerning matters affecting the
steel industry; to establish and maintain liaisons with other organizations related to
steel; to promote the use of steel. Some IISI committees include Economic Studies,
Environmental Affairs, and Industrial Relations. The IISI publishes the monthly
Iron and Crude Steel Production (in English) and the annuals Steel Statistical
Yearbook (in English) and World Steel in Figures (in English). IISI also publishes
conference proceedings and reports on the following issues: environment,
economics, raw materials, technology, market promotion, and public relations. The
IISI holds an annual world conference.
September 1995
98
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
Association of Iron and Steel Engineers
3 Gateway Center, Suite 2350
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
Phone:(412)281-6323
Fax: (412) 281-4657
Members: 10,000
Staff: 19
Budget: $2,500,000
The Association of Iron and Steel Engineers (AISE) consists of engineers, operators,
and suppliers in the steel industry. Founded in 1907, this association works to
improve the technical phases of the production and processing of iron and steel .via
technical reports and industry ~
Engineering, Steel Producing, and
awards. Divisions include Environmental
Continuous Casting AI$E publications include
a monthly, Iron and Steel Engineer and a Directory of Iron and Steel Plants.
Conferences are semi-annual.
Additional Related Associations
ASM International
9639 Kinsman Rd.
Materials Park, OH 44073-0002
Phone:(216)338-5151
Society for Mining, Metallurgy, and Exploration, Inc. (SME, Inc.)
P.O. Box 625002
Littleton, CO 80162-5002
Phone: (303) 973-9550
The Mining Metals and Materials
420 Commonwealth Drive
Warrendale, PA 15086 .
(412)776-9000
Society (TMS)
September 1995
99
SIC 331
-------
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
I/RES
IX. CONTACTS/ACKNOWLEDGMENTS/RESOURCE MATERIALS
• .... ' - V I • . • • . •-...-
For further information on selected topics within the iron and steel industry a list of contacts and
publications are provided below.
Contacts6
,
Name
Maria Malave
Steve Sisk
James Maysilles
Bernard Caton
Gobind Jagtiani
JeffDowd
Bruce Steiner
Javier Garcia
Ed Wojciechowski
Gerald Houck
- '•
Organization
EPA/OECA (Office of Enf<
and Compliance Assurance
NEIC (National Enforceme
Investigations Center),
EPA/OAR (Office of Air ai
Radiation)
EPA/OW (Office of Water
DOE (Department of Energ
_,
AISI (American Iron and S
Institute)
EPA/Region IV
EPA/Region V
U.S. Bureau of Mines
• .•
rcement
it
.d
y> .
:eel
«
1 .
U.S. Bureau of Mines: Center for
Health and Safety . |
Telephone >
202-564-7027
303-236-3636
ext. 540
919-541-3265
202-260-7849
202-586-1826
202-586-7258
202-452-7100
404-347-3555
312-886-6785
202-501-9439
412-892-6602
Subject
JRegulatory requirements
and compliance
assistance
Regulatory requirements
and industrial processes
Regulatory requirements
(air)
Regulatory requirements
(water)
Energy efficiency and
environmental
compliance
Environment and energy
Inspections, regulatory
requirements (RCRA)
Inspections, regulatory
requirements (air) ,
Industrial processes
Health and safety issues
e Many of the contacts listed above have provided valuabl
this document. EPA appreciates this support and acknowl
all' statements made within this notebook.
Ip information and comments during the development of
edges that the individuals listed do not necessarily endorse
September 1995
101
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
General Profile
U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Industrial Outlook 1994.
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1987 Census of Manufactures Industry Series: Blast Furnaces, Steel
Works, and Rolling and Finishing Mills, 1990: ;
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1992 Census of Manufactures Preliminary Report Industry Series:
Blast Furnaces, Steel Works, and Rolling and Finishing Mills, MC92-I-33A(P), May 1994.
American Iron and Steel Institute, Annual Statistical Report, Washington, D.C., 1993.
Barnett, Donald F. and Robert W. Crandall, Up From the Ashes, The Brookings Institution,
Washington D.C., 1986.
Process Descriptions and Chemical Use Profiles
American Iron and Steel Institute, Report on Steel Industry Waste Generation, Disposal Practices,
and Potential Environmental Impact, Washington, D.C., February, 1992.
Lankford, William T., et. al., The Making, Shaping, and Treating of Steel, Tenth Edition, United
States Steel Corporation, Pittsburgh, PA, 1985. (Available from the Association of Iron and Steel
Engineers, Pittsburgh, PA).
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, The Role of Technology in Iron and
Steel Developments, 1989.
Russell, Clifford S. and William J. Vaughan, Steel Production: Processes, Products, and Residuals,
John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, 1976.
Regulatory Profile
Sustainable Environmental Law, Environmental Law Institute, West Publishing Co., St. Paul Minn
1993.
U.S. EPA, Office of Solid Waste, Hazardous Waste Generation: 2. Iron and Steel Manufacturing,
February, 1994.
U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Toxics Release Inventory, Public Data
Release, 1992, April, 1994. (EPA 745-R-94-001).
U.S. EPA, Solid Waste and Emergency Response, Report to Congress on Metal Recovery,
Environmental Regulation & Hazardous Waste, February 1994. (EPA 530-R-93-018).
September 1995
102
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
U.S. EPA, Office of Solid Waste, Report to Confess on Special Wastes from Mineral Processing,
February 1990.
U.S: EPA, Office of Air and Radiation, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Compilation
of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, Volume I: Stationary Point and Area Sources, Metallurgical
Industry, Research Triangle Park, NC, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington/ D.C.,
September 1985. , • ; , , '
U.S. EPA, Development Document for Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Iron
and Steel Manufacturing Point Source Category^ Washington, B.C., May 1982 (EPA 4407
1-82-024).
Pollution Prevention
Grieshaber, K. W., C. T. Philipp, and G.F:-Bennett,' "Process for Recycling Spent Potliner and
-Electric Arc Furnace Dust into Commercial Products using Oxygen Enrichment," Priorities in
Pollution Prevention. Annual Gulf Coast Environmental Conference Proceedings, pp. 84-95, March,
1994. j "V
Freeman, Harry, Pollution Prevention Research at EPA's Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory:
Cleaner Production Processes and Cleaner Products for a Cleaner Environment, Priorities in
Pollution Prevention. Annual Gulf Coast Envircininental Conference Proceedings, pp. 1-9, March,
1994. I
U.S. EPAj Office of Research and Development,\IndustriatPollution Prevention Opportunities for
the 1990s, EPA/600/8-91/052, August, 1991. .
Drabkin, Marvin and Edwin Rissmann, Wash
Minimization Opportunities at an Electric Arc
Furnace Steel Plant Producing Specialty Steels, Environmental Progress, vol.8, no.2, pp. 88-97,
May, 1989. _. :
U.S. EPA, Region HI, Pollution Prevention Progr un, Pollution Prevention Opportunities in the Steel
Industry, October 1990.
Center for Hazardous Materials Research, Polhtion Prevention: Strategies for the Steel Industry,
CHMR Fact Sheet, University of Pittsburgh.
Rimer, A.E. and L.A. Reinders, A Practical Guide to Pollution Prevention Planning for the Iron and
Steel Industries, Blasland, Bouck & Lee, Chapel Hill, N.C., 1992.
Air & Waste Management Association, Hazardous Waste Minimization Industrial Overviews, 1989'.
September 1995
03
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
Trade Journals
New Steel (formerly Iron Age)
Iron and Steelmaker
Iron and Steel Engineer
Metal Bulletin, (212) 213-6202
World Steel Dynamics, (212) 713-2498
Iron Age Manufacturing Management, (215) 741-4000
Steel: Semiannual Monitoring Report, (202) 205-2000
September 1995
104
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
J,
Endnotes
1. Variation in facility counts occur across data sources due to many factors including, reporting
and definitional differences. This notebook does not attempt to reconcile these differences, but
rather reports the data as they are maintained by each source. Only preliminary data is available
from the 1992 Census of Manufactures. The final version which includes all data will not be
available until mid-1995. Census of Manufactures, U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of
the Census, Preliminary Report Industry Series, MC92-I-33A(P) (Industries 3312,3313, 3315,
3316, and 3317), 1994.
2. Annual Statistical Report, American Iron and
Steel Institute, Washington, D.C., 1993.
3. Net Shipments of Steel Mill Products, table,. American Iron and Steel Institute, Washington,
D.C., 1994.
4. Report on Steel Industry Waste Generation, Disposal Practices, and Potential Environmental
Impact, American Iron and Steel Institute, Washington, D.C., February, 1992. ,
5. Census of Manufactures, U.S: Department ofj Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Industry
Series, MC87-I-33A (Industries 3312, 3313, 33 5, 3316, and 331?X 1987.
6. U.S. Industrial Outlook, U.S. Department of Commerce. Washington, D.C., 1994, p. 13-1.
7.1bid,p.l3-l.
8.,Ibid, 13-3.
9. Ibid, p. 13-5.
10. Annual Statistical Report, American Iron and Steel Institute, Washington D.C., 1993. p.73.
11 .Compilation of A ir Pollutant Emission Factors, Volume I: Stationary Point and Area
Sources, Metallurgical Industry, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air and
Radiation, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC, U.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., September 1985.
Disposal Practices, and Potential Environmental
lington, D.C., 1992, p.8.
12. Report on Steel Industry Waste Generation,
Impact, American Iron and Steel Institute, Wa&
13. The Making, Shaping, and Treating of Steel, Tenth Edition, McGannon, Harold E., ed.,
United States Steel Corporation, Pittsburgh, PA, 1971.
14. Report on Steel Industry Waste Generation,
Impact, American Iron and Steel Institute, Was'
Disposal Practices, and Potential Environmental
tiington, D.C., 1992, p.14.
15. The Making, Shaping, and Treating of Steel, Tenth Edition, McGannon, Harold E., ed.,
United States Steel Corporation, Pittsburgh, PA, 1971, p.189.
September 1995
05
SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
16. Development Document for Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Iron and
Steel Manufacturing Point Source Category, U.S. EPA, Washington, D.C., May 1982 (EPA
440/1-82-024).
17. Report on Steel Industry Waste Generation, Disposal Practices, and Potential Environmental
Impact, American Iron and Steel Institute, Washington, D.C., 1992, p. 17.
l&.Reportto Congress, on Metal Recovery, Environmental Regulation and Hazardous Waste,
U.S. EPA, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, 1994, p. 3 (EPA 530-R-93-018).
19.Comment from Bruce Steiner, American Iron and Steel Institute, Washington, D.C., May 5,
20.U.S. Steel Industry at a Glance, American Iron and Steel Institute, Washington, D.C., 1992.
21. Report on Steel Industry Waste Generation, Disposal Practices, and Potential Environmental
Impact, American Iron and Steel Institute, Washington, D.C., 1992, p.21.
22. The Making, Shaping, and Treating of Steel, Tenth Edition, McGannon, Harold E., ed.,
United States Steel Corporation, Pittsburgh, PA, 1971, p.565.
23. Ibid, p. 121.
24. Ibid.
25. Ibid.
26. Ibid.
27. Amoco - U.S. EPA Pollution Prevention Project, Yorktown, Virginia, Project Summary
January 1992.
28. Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, Volume I: Stationary Point and Area
Sources, Chapter 9, Petroleum Industry. U.S. EPA, Office of Air and Radiation, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, U.S. Government
Printing Office, Washington, D.C., September 1985.
27. Report to Congress on Metal Recovery, Environmental Regulation and Hazardous Waste.
U.S. EPA, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, 1994, p.20 (EPA 530-R-93-018).
28. Hydrochloric Acid Recovery System for Galvanizers and Steel Manufacture, U.S.
Department of Energy, NICE3 (National Industrial Competitiveness through Energy,
Environment, Economics), DOE/CHI0093-233, October 1993.
29.Sustainable Environmental Law, Environmental Law Institute, West Publishing Co., St. Paul,
Minn., 1993.
September 1995
106
. SIC 331
-------
Sector Notebook Project
Iron and Steel Industry
29.Report to Congress on Metal Recovery, Environmental Regulation and Hazardous Waste.
U.S. EPA, Office of Solid Waste and Emergenc^ Response, 1994, p.20 (EPA 530-R-93-018)
30. Ibid.
31. Sustainable Environmental Law, Environmental Law Institute, West Publishing Co., St. Paul,
MN, 1993, p.1238.
32.Report to Congress on Metal Recovery, Envii
'onmental Regulation and Hazardous Waste.
»J ,f-i*Ji\K>L/\JI I tr\J ' \w^t//*jC/ &OO \JIIf .ir.f.C'H^f *• i\^f\s\J Ft*/ Vj •*—•' * V lil\\JI *•/*lr**'l l,li\r*tf -itw-^t k«(-k*l-»>i_'/ * fc*f »•*»»• J. *-*~+±Ji*+i \si,is wtj r r isuji-^ •
U.S. EPA, Office of Solid Waste and Emergeric} Response, 1994, p.20 (EPA 530-R-93-018).
33. Ibid, p. 23.
34. Ibid, p. 44.
September 1995
107
SIC 331
-------
-------
APPENDIX A - INSTRUCTIONS FOR DOWNLOADING NOTEBOOKS
Electronic Access to the Sector Notebooks via
the Enviro$en$e World Wide Web (E$WWW) and
the Enviro$en$e Bulletin Board System (E$BBS)
The Sector Notebooks are available throu; jh two electronic systems, the Enyiro$en$e
Bulletin Board System (via modem connection), and the Enviro$en$e World Wide Web (via
Internet). The Enviro$en$e Communications Network is a free, public, interagency^supported
system operated by EPA's Office of Enforcementjand Compliance Assurance and the Office of
Research and Development. The-Network allows regulators, the regulated community, technical
experts, and the general public to share information regarding: pollution prevention and innovative
technology; environmental enforcement and compliance assistance; laws, executive orders,
regulations and policies; points of contact for services and equipment; and other related topics. The
Network welcomes receipt of environmental messages, information and data from any public or
private person or organization. This document first provides summary information on E$WWW
access, then provides information on downloading protocols from within the E$BBS.
A.
B.
ACCESS THROUGH ENVIRO$EN$E WORLD WIDE WEB
To access the Sector Notebooks through the Enviro$en$e World Wide Web, set
your World Wide Web Browser to the following address: ' .
- r . •• • • • - • '•-••• '':
WWW/INTERNET ADDRESS: http://wastenot.inel.gov/envirosense/
HOTLINE NUMBER FOR E$WWW ONLY: 208-526-6956
EPAE$WWWMANAGER: Myles Morse, 202-260-3161
From the Enviro$en$e home page] click on "Compliance and Enforcement" to
obtain instructions on how .to access the Sector Notebooks and how to provide comments.
Names, e-mail addresses, and telephone numbers will also be provided should you require
assistance. The same documents listed bdlow under the E$BBS instructions are available
ontheE$WWW.
ACCESS THROUGH THE
Instructions for Connecting, Regis
ENVIRO$EN$E BULLETIN BOARD SYSTEM
ering and Downloading Notebooks
E$BBS MODEM CONNECTION NUMBER:
HOTLINE FOR E$BBS ONLY: 703-908-2007
703-908-2092
MANAGER: BBS Platform: Louis Paley, 202-260-4640
Jc
The following instructions are condensed from longer documents that provide
information on the full features of the Envjiro$en$e Bulletin Board. Further documentation
is available on-line in the.files that are listed at the end of this Appendix.
-------
STEP 1. ESTABLISHING MODEM SETTINGS
Connecting to the ENVIRO$EN$E BBS is done using a modem and
communications software. The modem can be either an internal or external model
connected directly to your computer or part of a modem pool that is accessible through your
Local Area Network (LAN) system. The communications software (e.g.. CrossTalk,
ProComm, QModem, Microphone, etc.) is what allows you to access and control your
modem. Your software needs to be set to the values noted below (many of these settings
are the standard defaults used):
• Telephone number - 703-908-2092 (Tip: Be sure you have entered
the appropriate dialing prefix; e.g., 9 for an outside line, 1 for long
distance...)
• Baud rate - up to 14,400 EPS is supported (always select the highest
speed which YOUR modem will support).
Terminal Emulation - BBS, ANSI, VT-100, VT-102 etc. (Tips:
Do not use TTY. After you log in, if you see screen characters appear on
the lines where you need to enter information, chances are that you need to
properly set your terminal emulation. The emulation can normally be reset
before or during communication with Enviro$en$e).
• Data Bits - 8 (Eight).
Stop Bits - 1 (One).
• Parity - None.
Transfer Protocols - ZModem, YModem, XModem, HS/Link,
BiModem, ASCII (text files only). If your communications software
must select me same proiocoi inai cu in your communications som
and the BBS support so that they can "talk the same language" when
sending and receiving files. '
• Error correction/data compression protocols - v.32, v.42, and
other older, hardware-dependent ones are supported.
Refer to your communications software manual on how to set and save the
communication parameters noted above (these will generally be the default). Also check to
make sure you know where the communications software will send the files you
download. Due to document sizes it is best not to download Sector Notebooks to floppy
disks. . ',
A-2
-------
STEP 2.
CONNECTING AND REGISTERING
Connect to E$BBS via a modem,
above settings by dialing:
ising communications software set to the
(703) 908-2092.
NOTE: EPA Employees can access E$ directly via LAN from the Agency Lan
- Services Menu or Icon and then follow the instructions below. The end of this
document lists additional resources for accessing E$BBS through the LAN.
Once you are in the BBS, hit the'.
the default values for the screen.
iR/RETURN key twice (2) to accept -
on successive pages, type your first name and hit
ENTER/RETURN; type your last name and hit.ENTER/RETURN;
and,type your password (if you have NOT registered yet,
make one up, and remember it for subsequent logons to
E$) and hit ENTER/RETURN; and
Register (first time only) and imm
for 120 minutes per day;
sdiately receive access to the BBS
Type responses to the Registration questions, and hit
ENTER/RETURN to begin using ENVIRO$EN$E. (Tip: the last '
registration question is Country? )
You may need to hit ENTER/RETURN several times to move past System
News and Alert messages , ,
STEP 3.
DOWNLOADING SECTOR
NOTEBOOKS
The files that appear on the follow ing table can be downloaded from E$. Most files
.cannot be viewed on-screen within the ESjBBS. As indicated on the following table, each
document appears in several formats - WordPerfect 5.1 (PC), WordPerfect 6.1 (PC),
Microsoft Word 5. la (Mac) or WordPerfect 2.0 (Mac). Please note that the quality of
formatting and graphics is highest in the file version in which the notebook was originally
created. The high quality versions are underlined on the following list of filenames.
Information on Macintosh/Microsoft Word Files
Available Macintosh files are not compressed. The files are easily identified by th<3 seventh
and eighth position in the filename - which is "MA." The extension They can be directly
downloaded and read using Microsoft WJ)rd 5.la, or within other word processing
software that supports conversion of Microsoft Word 5. la documents. Conversion to
other programs may alter formatting and graphics quality.
Information on PC/WordPerfect Files
The WordPerfect files are all compressed ("zipped" files ending with the .ZIP extension)
files that need to be decompressed ("unzipped") after they are downloaded. The notebooks
that are available in WP 5.1 and WP 6.0 are zipped together (this is why the filenames on
the following table are the same). When |these files are downloaded and "unzipped," you
will have a version with the extension ".WP5" and one with ".WP6".
A
-------
Available Notebooks, Filenames and File Formats
Profile of the Industry PC WP 5.1
Dry Cleaning DRYCLNSN.Z-IP
Electronics and Computer ELECMPSN.ZIP
Wood Furniture and Fixtures WDFURNSN.ZIP
Inorganic Chemical INRGCHSN.ZIP
Iron and Steel IRONSTSN.ZIP
Lumber and Wood Products, LMBRWDSN.ZIP
Fabricated Metal Products FABMETSN.ZIP
Metal Mining METMINSN.ZIP
Motor Vehicle Assembly MOTVEHSN.ZIP
Nonferrous Metals NFMETLSN.ZIP
Non-Fuel, Non-Metal Mining NOMTMISN.ZIP
Organic Chemical ORGCHMSN.ZIP
Petroleum Refining PETREFSN.ZIP
Printing PRINTGSN.ZIP
Pulp and Paper . •• PULPPASN.ZIP
Rubber and Plastic RUBPLASN.ZIP
Stone, Clay, Glass and Concrete STCLGLSN.ZIP
Transportation Equipment Cleaning TRNSEQSN.ZIP
PC WP 6.1
Macintosh
Word 5.1a/WP2.0
DRYCLNSN.ZIP
INRGCHSN.ZIP
IRONSTSN.ZIP
DRYCLNMA,
ELECMPMA,
WP2
WD5
WDFURNMA.WD5
INRGCHMA
IRONSTMA
LMBRWDMA
.WP2
.WP2
.WD5
ORGCHMSN.ZIP
PETREFSN.ZIP
PRINTGSN.ZIP
PULPPASN.ZIP
FABMETMA.WD5
METMINMA.WD5
MOTVEHMA.WD5
NFMETLMA. WD5
NOMTMIMA.WD5
,WP2
.WP2
,WP2
.WP2
.WD5
ORGCHMMA
PETREFMA
PRINTGMA
PULPPAMA
RUBPLAMA
STCLGLMA.WD5
TRNSEOSN.ZIP TRNSEQMAiWP2
Note: Underlined files contain the highest quality format/graphics
STEP 3 CONTINUED - PROCEDURES FOR DOWNLOADING
• From the E$ Main Menu, select "D" to Download then hit ENTER/RETURN.
• Type in the Sector Notebook filename from above that you would like to select for
downloading and hit ENTER/RETURN.
• The system will ask you to select a file transfer protocol. Select the file transfer
protocol that matches what you have selected within your PC communications
software (ZModem is recommended) and hit ENTER/RETURN. (Tip: ZModem
users may also be allowed to enter more than one filename to download more than
one document at a time. Simply continue to enter a new filename each time a new
filename prompt appears on the screen. This option is disabled for other users.)
• At this point, you may .
begin downloading by hitting ENTER/RETURN. This should begin the
download if you are using the ZModem transfer protocol. If you don't see
information on the screen showing the progress of the download, follow the
next step.
• If the download does not begin after following the last step, you need to tell your
communications software to start receiving the file. To do this, look for a
"RECEIVE" icon or command on your communications software menu and activate
it This tells your software to begin the download.
A-4
-------
When the download is complete^, a message will appear on the screen to confirm
transmission.
The downloaded file will appear in the folder or directory that you defined in your
communications software.
Repeat the above procedure to download other notebooks.
Macintosh users can logoff using the [G]oodbye command from the main menu
THE FOLLOWING STEP MUST BE TAKEN BY ALL USERS THAT
HAVE DOWNLOADED ZIPPED FILES (files with a ".ZIP" filename
extension) FROM E$. MACINTOSH USERS CAN SKIP THIS
STEP.
In order to read the zipped file(s) you have downloaded, you
must download the decompression software required to
"unzip" your files. To I download the decompression software, follow
. the same download instructions given above. Type in the filename
"PKZ204G.EXE" and hit ENTER/RETURN. You only need to download
this file to your hard drive once.
Logoff using the [G]oodbye command from the main menu.
To end the phone connection, the user should use the "hang up" or "terminate call"
option provided with your communications software.
STEP 4 DECOMPRESSING ".ZIP'E
Macintosh files do not need
' DOWNLOADED FILES (PC Only
to be decompressed)
After you have downloaded a co mpressed (".ZIP") file to your PC, you must
decompress it to its original format and s|ize by using the "PKUnzip" file which you
downloaded at the beginning of Step 3. jThe file which you downloaded;
"PKZ204G.EXE", contains PKZip.EXE and PKUnzip.EXE files. PKUNZIP will
decompress the file, returning it to its original size and format as if it had never been
compressed or transmitted over the BBSL To use the PK commands (pkunzip.exe &
pkzip.exe), you must be at the DOS prompt (third-party software interfaces exist for
Windows). For details on how to use either command, simply type the command at the
DOS prompt (without any parameters, i.e., just type "PKUNZIP") and hit
ENTER/RETURN.. Since parameters are required for the PKs to work they will
automatically go into help mode and give you a brief explanation of how they work. If a
user needs more direction, there is full documentation included in the PKZ204G.EXE in
the "Hints" file.
To decompress any file, use PKUNZIP.
iXE by taking the following steps:
Go to the DOS C: prompt and type PKUNZIP.EXE; then,
Type "PKUNZIP [Filename]" (eg., the filename and the path of the
compressed file you wish to decompress).
NOTE: after the paired files are
extension ".WP5" and one with the extension ".WP6.
A-5
unzipped, two files will exist, one with the
-------
C. COMMENTING OR PROVIDING ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON THE
SECTOR NOTEBOOKS VIA E$BBS
Comments on the Sector Notebooks, or supplemental documents of interest can be
uploaded to the Enviro$en$e BBS. Follow upload instructions that appear on the screen,
or look at the instructions for compressing and uploading documents. The instructional
documents are listed below under Section D of this Appendix. All documents that you
upload will be publicly accessible, and should contain a short abstract (less than 50 words)
that describes the document. It is recommended that this abstract contain the words "Sector
Notebook Comments," the title of the Notebook that the comments are directed toward,
and the words "SIC «Insert applicable 2-digit SIC code»".
NOTE: To help the system operator know what you've uploaded and where it
should be put within the BBS, it is helpful to send a message to the system
operator. Before logging out of E$, you will be given the option to comment to the
system operator (Sysop). Please indicate what files you have sent, and that tide
comments or supplemental documents should be placed in Directory 51 - "Sector
Compliance Information and Notebooks." Messages can also be.sent to the Sysop
from the main menu using the Message option.
D. ADDITIONAL RESOURCE DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE ON E$BBS
The following files can be viewed from the "Bulletins" section of E$BBS main
menu. To receive these documents electronically, the files can be downloaded (and
viewed") from Directory #160 (utilities). If you would like to download these files, follow
the same procedures that are outlined (Section C). The directions for direct dial modem
users are different than the directions for EPA LAN users. How you have accessed the
E$BBS determines which of the paired files below that you should follow.
Entered E$
via Modem
CONREGWP.TXT
FINDVIEW.TXT
CONVCOMP.TXT
DNLDTXWP.TXT
DNLDZPWP.TXT
UPLOADWP.TXT
SNHOWTO.TXT
Entered E$
EPA LMT
CNREGLAN.TXT
FNDVWLAN.TXT
CVCMPLAN.TXT
DNLTXLAN.TXT
DNZPLAN.TXT
UPLDLAN.TXT
SNHOWLAN.TXT
Description of File
How to Connect and Register on the E$BBS
via Modem
Finding and Viewing Files from E$BBS via
Modem
Converting, Compressing & Uncompressing
Fil.es. via Modem
Flagging and Downloading "Uncompressed"
Files from E$BBS
Flagging and Downloading "Compressed"'
Files from E$BBS
Directions for Uploading Files via Modem
to :the E$BBS
Contains this document "Appendix A -
Downloading Instructions"
A-6
_
•it U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1995-399-230E
-------
To order other EPA Sector Notebooks
use the form below
United States Government
INFORMATION
Order Processing Code:
*3212
Charge your order.
It's easy!
Fax your orders (202) 512-2250
Phone your orders (202) 512-1800
Qty.
Stock Number
..'. Title'. .
Price
Each
Total
Price
055-000-00512-5
Dry Cleaning Industry, 104 pages
6.50
055-000-00513-3
Electronics and Computer Industry, 160 pages
*11.00
055-000-00518-4
fabricated Metal Products Industry, 164 pages
*11.00
055-000-00515-0
Inorganic Chemical Industry, 136; pages
9.00
055-000-00516-8
Iron and Steel Industry, 128
8.00
055-000-00517-6
Lumber and Wood Products Industry, 136 pages
9.00
055-000-00519-2
Metal Mining Industry, 148 pages
* 10.00
055-000-00520-6
Motor Vehicle Assembly Industry] 156 pages
* 1.1.00
055-000-00521-4
Nonferrous Metals Industry, 140fcages
* 9.00
055-000-00522-2
Non-Fuel, Non-Metal Mining Industry, 108 pages
* 6.50
055-000-00523-1
Organic Chemical Industry, 152 pages
$11.00
055-000-00524-9
Petroleum Refining Industry, 160| pages
055-000-00525-7
Printing Industry, 124 pages
7.50
055-000-00526-5
Pulp and Paper Industry, 156 pages
*11.00
055-000-00527-3
Rubber and Plastic Industry, 152 pages
Stone, Clay, Glass and Concrete (ndustry, 124 pages
$11.00
055-000-00528-1
7.50
055-000-00529-0
Transportation Equipment Cleaning Industry. 84 pages
5.50
055-000-00514-1
Wood Furniture and Fixtures Industry, 132 pages
8.00
The total cost of my order is $_
Price includes
Company or personal name
(Please type or print)
Additional address/attention line
Street address
City, State, Zip code
Daytime phone including area code
Purchase order number (optional)
' Important: Please include this cpmp:
Total for Publications
regular'shipping and handling and is subject to change.
Check method of payment:
Q Check payable to Superintendent of Documents
Q GPO Deposit Account ~~
Q VISA a MasterCard
I (expiration date) Thank you for your order!
Authorizing signature 9/95
Mail to: Superintendent of Documents
P.O. Box 371954, Pittsburgh, PA 15250-7954
ieted prefer form-with your remittance.
------- |