United States Solid Waste and EPA530-R-97-033
Environmental Protection Emergency Response NTIS: P097>176 888
Agency (5305W) July 19>5
-------
PROPOSED
BEST DEMONSTRATED AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGY (BOAT)
BACKGROUND DOCUMENT FOR TOXICTTY CHARACTERISTIC
METAL WASTES
D004-D011
Anitft Cummiiio
PlOJOCt
Chief, Wife Treatment
U.S. Environmentii ProtectioQ Ageaqr
Office of SoHdWisl*
2800 Cryittl Drive .,
July 26,1995
-------
The technical and analytical findmfs and i
of the authors) and should not be cumUiied as aa official U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency position, policy, or decision. ThiidiidaiinerpafBinayonly be removed by EPA.
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1-1
1.1 Regulatory Background 1-2
1.1.1 Tooticity rhsrartrrittic Regulatory Levds 1-2
1.1.2 Treatment Standards for Toodcity PIM****^ Metal Wastes ... 1-5
1.2 Summary of BDAT Treatment Standards and Rationale for Applying UTS
to TC Metals 1-6
1.3 Treatment Standard! for Previously Stabilized Mind Radioactive and
Chanrfffrisrir Metal/Waste i-g
1.4 Pi«rnt«inii nf tha IMM of Onh Samplmy VBMM fmiipiffr* gampKtig 1-9
1.5 Revision of the Bervfflmn Nonwastewater Standard in UTS 1-11
1.6 RGRASubtittoCChrarriewaodAppIkabilityof tfaeTCRiifeari
for TC Metal Wastea to Various Wastestreama 1-11
1.7 Contents of TWi Document 1-12
2.0 INDUSTRIES AFFECTED AND WASTE CHARACTERIZATION 2-1
2.1 Arsenic (D004) J .....: 2-6
2.1.1 Industries Generating Arsenic Waste 2-6
2.1.2 Waste Characterization (D004) 2-8
2.2 Barium (D005) 2-9
2.2.1 TnduHiiei Generating Barium Waste » 2-10
2,2.2 Waste ^**irff 1***^ fmt**n (DOQ5) 2-10
2.3 Cadmium (D006) * 2-11
2.3.1. Tnrtnstriet "^"^"g f*imim» Waste .-.--.r.- 2-11
2.3.2 Waste.Characterizatioo (D006) 2-13
2.4- Q^aa^iif^r^^^::^.".. ?. rr. rr .7.^.. .J.. i.' 2-u
2.4.2 Waste Characteriiation (D007) 2-17
2.5 Lead (D00e> 2-17
^ C t Tfl»«eW^ae^^« ^l^^k^^M*tM^ T ^^^1 *«ft—^— . ^ 10
••••• •flBeeBBXHav ^JHaweWDDX ^MEaalaav vvvUelap ••••••••••• A^XB
2^.2 Wa^ Characterization (D008) 2-19
2.6 -M«uTy(D009) 2-19
^2&1 Industries Generating Mercury Waste 2-19
£6\1 Waste Characterization (D009) 2-21'
2.7 Tiiliiiiiiiii (D01Q) 2-21
2.7.1 Industries Generating Selenium Waste 2-22
2.7.2 Waste Characterization (D010) 2-23
2.8 Silver (D011) 2-23
2.8.1 Industries Generating Silver Waste 2-23
2.8.2 Waste Characterization (D011) 2-25
i
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
3.0 BDAT TREATMENT STANDARDS FOR. NONWASTEWATER FORMS OF
D004-D011 WASTES 3-1
3.1 Identification of BDAT 3-1
3.2 Applicable and Demonstrated TechnoJofiei to Metals 3-2
3.2.1 Identifying BDAT for D004-D011 3-4
3.3 Identification of BDAT Treatment Standards 3-7
4.0 BDAT TREATMENT STANDARDS FOR WASTBWATER FORMS OF D004-
D011 WASTES 4-1
4.1 Identification of BDAT 4-1
4.1.1 Apptabto Treatment Technology to 4-3
4.1.2 T^********™***! Treatment TfchnolofiiM .......... 4-5
4.2 Identification of BDAT Treatment Standards . . .• 4-5
3.0 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 5-1
6.0
APPENDICES:
Appendix A; TV»«*««ii> P»fa»MiiMi r*t. «••• «tvl M^horlnlou fer M^Hifyiin TTnlv^l
Standards to Consdtoeata in Nuuwailewaier Perms of D004-D011 Wastes
* % f ^h g» ilolgB^i^ A^» TJ|^HBA£AH«I^
JBIA JuPKDOQDaiDKv aDai JflBDOIYlIlK
Standards to Coudtoenta la Wartewater Forms of D004-D011 W
ii
-------
JUST OF TABLES
Table 1-1
Table 1-2
Table 2-1
Table 3-1
Table 4-1
Table A-l
Table A-2
Table A-3
Pjgfi
Universal Treatment Standards and Tenacity Characteristic Levels
for Metal-Bearing Wastes .' 1-13
Federal Rattitter Notices Discussing Toodcity Charscteristic Regulations 1-14
Industries Affected for Each TC Metal 2-2
Determination of BOAT Treatment Standards for Nbnwastewater Forma
of D004-D011 Wastes Baaed on Universal Standards 3-8
Wastewater Forms of D004-D011 Wastes Based on Unrvenal Standards . 4-7
XjPCsttBftCQ* *^BnOJBMOOC ^JUft ^SiUB IQs? 'jV^^ AuBOu ^^OOStllDCDlB
(Nonwastewaten) A-7
Treatment Perfannance Data Base fbrChrominm (Nonwastewmters) . . . A-12
eharacteriiftioB Data and Treatment Pcifomuuce Baa far HTMR for
.A-13
TabkA-4 Ch
Data for Stabilization
Wi
.A-18
BAD Varfabffirr Factors for Metal Con
in Wasfeewaters
B-4
B-6
B-ll
Peribfinance Daa for Barium in Wastewaters B-12
Table B-6 Treatment Performance Data for Cadnrinm in Wi
B-14
iil
-------
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
Table B-7 Treatment Performance Data for Chromium (Total) in Wastewaten .... B-16
Table B-8 Treatment Performance Data for Lead in Watiewaten B-19
Table B-9 Treatment Performance Data for Mercury in Wanewaten B-21
Table B-10 Treatment Performance Data for Sdnrimn in Wsssswaten B-23
Table B-ll Treatment Perfonnance Data for Silver in WastewafteEB B-24
xv
-------
1.0 INTRODUCTION
In accordance with the amendments to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA) enacted in the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) of November 8,1984,
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or the Agency) u proposing Best Demonstrated
Available Technology (BD AT) treatment standards for Toxicity Characteristic (TQ metal wastes
identified in Title 40, ro*» »f Pmterrf geyniatinna. Section 261.24 (40 CFR 261.24) as D004-
T^e^l 1 ^^4^fl^^flfel2^^B^^A Bu^Ata eflt^^^^M e^^^MA^Bft^MBA •AM^B^B^K^MB'A 4^^&j^^ ^^^M»^^»«*l4^A^^K^ j^ ^ ,^^^_______* IA j» • •
J^*^/AA« v^UvUlH^fijUiVw vvUU 1UB983 UwWBUEkiU 84JUIUssUUva UUww DKWUUUKHBDO* U esV BKdBOUa^BUB XOaT lAft^fl
disposal of restricted wastes, as defined in 40 CFR Part 268. EPA may grant a variance from
the applicable treatment standards under 40 CFR 268.44 and under 40 CFR 268.6. EPA may
grant waste- and site-specific waivers from die applicable treatment standards in 268.40.
On May 19, 1980, under RCRA, the Agency instituted a framework for identifying
hazardous waste (45 FR 33084). Under mis framework, die Agency defines which solid wastes
hazardous wastes. EPA't •ppiuerh for defining hazardous waste rhiraftrritfin was to
0610001110 ^VtuCu DlOPSuBS Ov ft WltB WOUlu IdQtt IO uatfflB tO flfllllaVk OCeUflft Off tO
for each v'lumtctpntfic property. The Extraction Procedure (EP) Toxicity «T**rmi>tmr\«M^ was one
of four hamrdcmi waste characteristics that EPA identified and promulgated in May 1980 (40
CFR 261.24). A y**^*yitT*'*frfilTf™'f"fy*">l*''1^i*>lr*''t*^ft>BI* (ppy*»«»fc >yflj*HqttMi«M>y
equal to or greater than lh> cor responding regulatory leveL These conititiifnts consisted of eight
^_ _^_*M ^^^^^CntS^^^^gA^X^B^i^. «M£^- ^^k^^ 9«^^^^M^M^^h^ HPk^ ^M^klkA ^^k^^^t^ mm^^^^ ••^^J^i^B^k^ 4$A^ L^k^^B^Ml^^**^
IDBCaiU* IDVlB^B^liBBiBVivaiDBBft es^uH W^r OBKOuE3fliMiM XOB ClBlK IDBBW *WK^r WH^DlBB HOB UaiaHeUUUW
waste codewKHf'DOll. Treatment standards for the four iniccticirtrt and two herbicides
(DOU-MrVwintpromiu^^ 1990 (55 FR 22520).
The nottwastewater standards were revised in die Phase U rale on September 19, 1994
(50 FR 47982).
ZU1UUVM
1-1
-------
Document for Organic ToTJcitv Characteristic Waatea (D018-D0431 and
of Pesticide Toricitv Characteristic Waatea flDQ12-DQ17) (Reference 25).
On March 29, 1990, EPA promulgated the Tenacity Characteristic (TC) rule, which
replaced the EP with the Toodcity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) (55 PR 11798).
The list of the conttifiiriiti regulated in the final TC rule and their «"-"»*p""*««g regulatory
levels are presented in Table 1-1. Treatment standards based on BDAT for D004-D011 wastes
were promulgated in the Land Disposal Restrictions (LDR) far the TMrATm^ scheduled wast^
on June 1, 1990 (55 PR 22520).
This Background Donimfnr provides the Agency's rationale and technical support for
developing BDAT treatment standards far both nonwastewater and wastewater farms of the eight
TC metal wastes (D004-D011). EPA's rationale to develop treatment standards and to issue
variances finom the treatment standards is sunn marl urt m EPA s QnaJ
(Methodology Background DocnmentX3).
1.1
This
wastes (D004-D011).
the regulatory background for the Tootidty Characteristic metal
ThtTC regulatory levels and kachate pwceduie, as well as the BDAT
to the
.- _ _ -•• a i *-«-«— A^^^I^^ A U^* — * «lm^
WIBMvi UB QuCDflBO ID 11118IBCOOD* n J1K OT IDC
of the Toddty rhararlrriilic regulations is piesented in
Table 1-2.
1.1.1
On May 19, 1980 (45 PR 33084), the Agency instituted the Extraction Procedure (EP)
leaching procedure to identify wastes that pose m hazard to hunian healm and the environment
1-2
-------
due to tHgJT TKrtf*1**^! to Vic-h fif^cant convy|lNt^oflf of a h«*Mdfflni constituent. The Aeencv
identified eight metal (D004-D011) and six pesticide constituent! (D012-D017) that, if present
in the EP waste extract in excess of specified concentrations, caused the waste to be ^tifirri
as ha»yfrwf The regulatory wi*'Tfitntf*fl'1 levels wens determined by the multiplication of
constituent-specific chronic toxicity levels (the National Interim Primary Drinking Water
Standards (DWS)) by a generic dilution/attenuation actor of 100, to reflect both the
the *ln">T*^w>t is harmful to human kf^**T and the environment ««4 the
On January 14,1986, the Agency proposed a framework for a regulatory piogiaui to
implement the * *"'•• •••'' i»*nj-~~***^ Land Disposal Restrictions (51 FR 1602). This
framework required a leaching tot, known as the Toxicity Characteristic **•**»•£ Procedure
(TCLP), for use in the LDR program in developing hazardous waste treatment standards and
determining whether these standard! have been achieved. TCLP waa intended to serve ss an
imoroved leactoflsi method ina* would be suttsftie rnr use isi evaluanflsi wastes contsininsi
On June 13,1986 (51 PR 21648), the Agency proposed to revise the existing hazardous
waste irtrntififfatton rrgnlafinnt by (1) expanding the list of TC constituents, (2) leptadng the
EP If aching mrthod with the TCLP/, and (3) applying constnneof-speciiic diliilion/altHinstion.
rinctodedontheTChXwhilen
DAP for the metal andpesticid^constirnenta(D004-D017). The proposal spedtkalry identified
' levels; tot 52 TC nrtittitiiffitt; >""t|MMi*g the ***•>*•• 14 metal
and tianspeBtiBDeei to develui^ the consntnent'Specific DAFa BOS* the organic TC constituents.
The surjsniftDifttBand transport model, namedEPASKK^, was a modification of the model
used to develop tteies^laiory leveb te
rule. This model was based on a mismanagement scenario of co-disposal of TC wastes with
mumdpal wastes fat a Subtitte D ssxdtary landfilL The Agency also identified chronic toxicity
11TT
1-3
-------
reference levdi for these 38 ad^**"1 compounds, which, when multiplied by the DAF,
determined the regulatory concentration level. EPA promulgated the TCLP for use in
BOAT treatment standards and monitoring BDAT compliance for certain spent
solvent wastes and dioxm-cootaminated wastes (51 FR 40572, November 7, 1986).
Three ««MI«I«IMI notices r"»»"«fc~« cwcerning this uiupused rule axe described below.
On May 18,1987, the Agency published a Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemakint (52
FR 18583) in response to immtrmt commmfs on the June 1986 proposal onncrrning the
appficatioi^ the revise* Tooricty The main concern of the
^flmififiii«pf was that it may be limyr****^ to sppty the TC |>>i*iitai"grji|*i|> ions no (co»
disposal of hazardous •sUci with miinlripal wastes m an unmwd landfill) to wastewaters
the appUcatfon of the TC to wastewaters mat would resnttmasepaxattsecof regulatory levels
for these wastes. The slternatrve scenario for waslewateasssuniedtnat the
be managed in an untoed impoundmeat instetdof being co-disposed ma trninidpal landfln.
on
May 19, 1988 (53 FR 18024), as a result of
-------
Agency also updated the chronic toxitity reference levels for a number of constituents hagfd on
newly available information.
On August 1, 1988, the Agency published a Supplement to the Proposed Rule (53 FR
28892), introducing potential modifications to the subsurface nte and transport model used to
calnilafr the constituent-specific DAFs. In addition, the Agency presented currently available
hydrogeological dam on municipal waste landfills and proposed to modify the subsur&ce fiue
and transport model to more accurately reflect conditions hi municipal waste i«iMi«iii«
The Agency promulgated the revisions to the Tooochy Characteristic rule on
March 29,1990 (55 FR 11798). The final rote retained many of the features of the
June 13,1986, proposal. The Agency replaced the EP leaching test with the TCLP, added 26
organic uimpouiids to the Ust of TC contrimniti {«••«««••• as D018-D043 wastes), and
MMAflftljB 4M*MA*X4M^^»AM * •
«V^DMSIM s^^^KM^uuflJi^XMs^Bl E^H^B^D C^sn
JJJB^B^^F ^M^VM^VBMV^VMMVV •^^••VMM MA
coocentration thresholds and a generic DAF that was developed using a subsurface fate and
the final rule incorporated a number of modifications to the kerning procedure, the Ust of TC
constituent!, the chronic tooddty reference levels, and the fete and transport modeL
The Agency first proposed treatment standards for the Tooddty Characteristic wastes
undo tteU)R program m the Tm^Tm^ rule o The
as methods of treatment and **j"»"*"*""*fa"« levels
jSSSBfc""-.-
fbr
The Agency nVnvmtnrrt that BOAT for nonwastewater forms of the metal TC wistes
(D004-D011) was vitrification or Mhfflntion, and promulgated treatment standards as
citations equivaknt to the characteriitic level except for selenium wastes (D010). The
con
2121
1-5
-------
Agency promulgated the treatment standard for D010 wastes, based on the performance of
•fakiiiratirMi, at a concentration greater than the characteristic leveL
1*2 SmiimayT of BPAT TuMlmgiii Standard* ami Rationale for Applying UTS to TC
Mttak
The Agency is proposing revised BOAT treatment standards for nonwastewater and
wastewater forms of TC metal wastes (D004-D011). This section discusses the BDAT treatment
standards
As discussed above, in the final rote for the Third Thirds wastes (55 PR 22520), the
Agency promulgated treatment standards for those D004-D011 wastes faknrififri as hazardous
using both the TCLP and EP leaching procedures.
The Agency is proposing treatment standards for both wastewater and
forms of D004-D011 wastes as mrnirricany equivalent ton^ani>eisfltBBatnientstanAttds(UTS)
(Le,, universal standards). A universal standard is a single treatment standard ntahtiihrd for
:ini
«»n««ri«nMi«« t^nlaftM hi ittmmmttAmmtfr
-------
did not achieve the UTS, further optimization of the treatment process may improve the
technology performance. Hence, in consideration of the above, the Agency believes it is
to transfer the BDAT for UTS tfv*Vf to TC ™**JT A more <****«>««* ^'•r"tiion of
suDoort xor estabushinsj universal standards tor
the Agency's
Teghnnlo
nf IJrtri HkanJona Wutei (1).
pnfur
universal standards for wastewater forms of wastes are based on treatment
s data from several sources, mdnding die BOAT dam base, the National Pollutant
System (NPDES) data base, die Water Engineering Research Laboratory
(WERL) data base, EPA-coflected Wet Air Oxidate/Powdered Activated Carbon Addition to
Activated Stodge Treatment (WAP/PACT*) data, the PngmMring and Analysis Division (HAD)
California Toxic Substances Control Division, data m ift^ftmf that were already not part of the
WERL data base, and data in literature submitted by industry on tf» WAO and PACT*. These
- A - _ J» — J» ••^B • ^A t^^^*. ^K^^^^^M^^^K^A^K^^^ ^^^f ^^B*^^B^^^^^M^A 2^ak^lBfl^^^J^I ^a^BM^^B^B^feft^B^V A^l^^ftA^B^^l^BA Aftlfle^ltfHkA A
sianoaros renecc tne penormance ox numenina innimnai WISKWIHK utaiiiBm •jmEnu. A
*ffta8T^f ititniisiffli of the Agency's CBnooale and technical support for MtaHHihiiig universal
standards for
(2).
A snmmaiy of me deveiopment of onrvcnal staikdards for the constinjents regulated in
iiiiliiiiaigjaiia itfTttmi mil irmii !• pfrimtrrt hi nnrmHn ' ^""- J ' A
more IriiflfiSliriiiBinn of the Agency's ratteoalo and technical support for citihKihing
aggrj.
universal stHtfafdsv fbr nonwastewater forms of wastes.it provided in its EnaLJteJt
mA«n TUi^.n...^ TVvmm^it far nmveml Standrnfa.
UEL
w»
(1).
1-7
-------
EPA his investigated the impact of revising the BDAT treatment standards for TC metal
wastes. The results of this investigation, presented in the Capacity Analysis for this proposed
nilemaking, show that revising the treatment standards irom die TC levels to the UTS may cause
volumes of material to be covered by these treatment <*wt*rA* (28).
1.3
radioactive metal wastes. Some radioactive wastes that exhibit a hazardous charartrrlstir far a
not be land
until after Phase IV is finalized. Such dfcnrnsttnces could result in treated wastes not meeting
the revised standards based on UTS. For rramplr, as pan of the West Valley Demonstration
« _____ • ____ ^ -*^ ••• ___ a
•Uvc Deal nDtuZBO
West Valley site am being stand aw
«
technical background
A*
H
development of disposal capacity. Additional
ing die West Valley Deiiiuiuii «!•»•• project may be
toe
for this proposed rule (26).
it is expected to take more than 3 yean to develop disposal capacity.
the Phase IV final rule
wmbemefleet,SAdthenieMportiasiwinbesiibJett If mis is the case, the
wastes might rardnaddfetaaltn^ Opening me drums
ami gdndmi^ tap already treated mass of •**hnfa** waste to prepare the waste for further
-fZ- _e» t
worJoarSt and possibly otheis» to unaoofptablft levels of metal
die Agency is proposing to allow characteristic metal mixed
fog f flfr'^u^ fagf qt ftig pt*M? TV finnt ml^
to comply with the LDR metal standards taat wen. in effect at the time the
Mixed radioecttve/chaacteistic metal wastes mat an stabilized after the effective date of
Phase IV would be subject to the metal treatment standards in the Phase IV rule.
1-8
-------
1.4
The Agency knows that many commenten are concerned about die variability inherent
in grab sampling. As such, the EPA incorporated a variability factor that reflects die grab
ig approach hi its determination of LDR treatment levels.
Several
ten on the Third Thirds role and snbsequeot rules have raised conoenu
*egM»«ng die Agency's preference to die use of grab sampling to dfiiMiiliiie compliance with
«M tMilUjMH that jtah fympHqg jg pfefcflMe fff ff^npflfite yampling fof
Treatment of hazardous wastes is rarely performed on a continuous basis for a
at period of time for any given waste code; even if the system is itself a continuous
any given waste) iSf in general) treated for a short tune and dien collected and stored
in preparation for disposal. If die standards were based on compotilr sampling (Le., taking
multiple samples of treated and stored wastes), this would add another layer of compterity to
ifgnlatory compliance drtfj urinations. For example, in diese sitnatinns, slandanls would have
been developed by taking several samples over discrete time intervals; however, enforcement
personnel would be faced widi having to peifmiii composite sampHnsj from a group of drums
that may or may not have any conflation widi die composrte sample technique used when
treatment standards were developed. On o^ other hano% enforcement msoca a situation wo
*. a_
flfm ii
••V^V 9^
enforcement personnel could simply take a grab sample front any drum and, diereby, make a
compliance
facility's
268.
individual facility's waste analysis plan win provide die basis for that
mooiBxing. TUa plan must be adequate to assure compliance with Part
iatto
TTayarrfrMj Wastej, j fluJdjlMB MilHBli Afff^ 1O^ ^^- HOT"**, a'adttty remains strictly
liable for meeting die treatment standards; if it disposes of a waste mat does not meet a
1-9
-------
treatment standard, it is in violation of the land disposal restrictions. In other words, a waste
analytic plan £E""5fl immunize land disposal of prohibited wastes, although roch plans may be
written to authorize types of sampling and monitoring different from those used to develop the
treatment standards).
If a waste analysis plan authoring a different mode of «««p»"t or monitoring, the
generator or treater needs to ilrn^tirHf that die plan (and the ipt^^V* deviation feature) is
adequatt to assure compliance wim Pan 26^ (See 40 0^264.13(8).) This might require, for
crumple, si dcinon»lialL»i of statistical equivalence between a composite sampling protocol and
one based on grab sampling, or a (iHimniiialtnn of why monitoring for a subset of pottntants
compliance
However, the Agency notes that, in some cases, EPA's data base contains a few data
D^BMBBBB ^JBBI ^V^]BBBBBI^S|BBBV B^LLUnHIlllY UDOBBl vOFDlfiBBi BBBBF •• BK m_lI_aMC^Hl^_^^ft'> _OB_Vj__^__iQ_C flflB DHtflDfla
However, the Agency has used the best data available from the choatin technology and believes
base. In fsct, me Agency points out that ttodevelopma^
»--• A - ^M^^A *»^^»_ <* _^ A^^.* ' »f«Lg— BBBif. • ••! • , yl ^ —*
30 (OB IDDBK UAflAJwUlft HU UCHK vlf^aBwBvftZwBBBDlW AflU DflCOIDDQBDKV U«w»« UvBDX
•MK^^kM^^ 2^ ^fl^^^^kl^^BM^k^ ^^^h^k^BA^^AW\ ^Hd^BB^B ^HaM^BkBMtta* «B|,^HB>2W2UAB* ••••••W ^^k^HH^b^H% B^B, ^Bk^h^^2^h^ ••ft^
XflmUK lu Q6VUODDIK •BaufltUQeU •U0WI •UvsOBB UCJUOUIiy vifUD IveiDBCC iD ulBBDlIB VD0
steUtdudi. tins tiw isns of fnb vcuu oomponte Binnki 00
vftDi IBW COGOCDQOOB* DUBQ 011 •B&iyiBi 01 aMtiuoDi0 KCBD
BIBW fl^b^BMBkl^k«l 2^ ••LMHBk ••••••••••U^^Bl •••• •» •WdBlMMAft ^aHM^MMaBMB*! Wk «l«t
•flHuDUBv «V IDBD IllUBDDOBh* W • flhWDK IXdBZW W •••
that accounts for treatment process variations and analytical variations.
•VCftUn flftflQAIAA mil AOAfllflBBHK Vnlu KuB flBflflDflK ID wfDlGD
gMB>VW •••••MB^B^BW BBP B^B^i^B^BB^WBB^Bt vv^^B^ ^M^^ ^^^^^^^B^^^v ^^^ n ^^^^^^B
standards were developed. EPA's enfbreement position that the sample be rrprrir niarive rerers
to the waste 'representing" the specific waste of interest, not to the sample rrprr irnting the full
range of treatment levels of that waste. Accordingly, EPA does not recogruxe any
212V
1-10
-------
inconsistencies between this requirement and the requirement to comply with any single grab
sample.
1.5 RgTJrion of the BgrvUhnn Nonwaatewater Standard in TITS
In addition to the proposed revision of the TC metals standards, EPA is proposing to
change the UTS for beryllium from 0.014 to 0.04 mg/L (TCLP). After UTS were promulgated,
additional data on TC metals were tubmittrd to the Agency. These grab sample data were from
a High Temperature Metals Recovery (HTMR) facility and were comprised of 480 data points
of •Confidential Business Information.* White UTS nonwastewater limits tar metals specify a
grab sample, the data used to develop the standards included both gnb and composite samples.
These data demonstrated HTMR could not necessarily achieve the limits using grab samples.
Out of the 40 data points for beryflium, 5 exhibited levels rrrrcding the UTS level of 0.014
mg/L (TCLP). A tog-normal ttsHttiral analysis, .based on Quality Assurance/Quality Control
(QA/QQ Methodology, was performed on these beryllium data points. Based on this analysis,
the Agency is proposing to modify the berylliiim UTS level to 0.04 mgA (TCLP). The Agency
believes mat mis proposed- level provides smiiance that metal nonwastewater standards can
comply with UTS using gnb samples.
« ^
• BA
C of RCRAt wastes tint are determined to fflrtrihtt the Tooticiry
irnrft luiiiilimi nnilri H« JOfTirTfil TO These TC wastes
ill Jiilijiil JsiliMiij inllMiUml iliiimiil rritrlftinni inulii 10fTff Tfifl. fmt irr ilm mihjrrttn
tte provisions of 40 CTRiathroigh 270, as weUu other spp^ The Subtitle
C requirements cover the generation through ultimate disposal of a waste (Le., 'cradle to
grave11). Wastes that exhibit the toxic characteristic for metals are referred to as TC metal
-------
wastes. These wasts axe identified as EPA Hazardous Wastes Nos. D004 through D011. Once
the BOAT treatment standard* for TC metal wastes are promulgated, these standards will apply
to all wastes **MM»**g the tooridty characteristic for metals (except for wastes that are
) r^jm rHl»^ «f HM pt^MM nr inrftntry that janarrte. the »Mte. Example*
of <««*t"«H4«i operations that could generate wastes that could qualify as TC hirarrioni include
electroplatinf , mineral prftmt^g. automotive manufacnirinf t painrhig, wastewater treatment,
and battery niaMfacturing. Additinnal inrbrmation on the indimries and processg that may
TC metal wastes are discussed in Section 2 of this backxroood document.
1.7
The organization of this document is as follows:
• Section 2.0-Indnstries affected by the land disposal restrictions for D004-D011
• Section 3.0-BDAT treatiriem standards for nonwastewaierfbnns of D004-D01
UfBflBAA RAzlBfl HDQB DBtWaTalBU KBEflKflBBaDBl fllaBufllBnOiL
^V^B^PW^P •^^•^••^^B VIVl^VP^Bl ^IB^B* » ^•^^•^•^ ^•^^^•^•^•••^B^^^V ^^^B^^^B^^^^^^^
• Section 4.0-HDAT •—*•—•» standards for wastewater forms of D004-D011.
base and Methodology for Identifying
Standards for ronrtiiirfiHf in nonwaatewater Forma of D004-D011
1 Methodology for Identifying
Universal Standards for Constituents m Wastewater Forms of D004-D011 Wastes.
1-12
-------
Table 1-1
Universal Treatment Standards ind Tooddty
~ racterlstk Levels for MetaJ-Bearinf Waste*
WM»
Cods
0004
DOOS
D006
D007
DOM
D009
D010
D011
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
fcfefel
AIM*
Bufe.
- fBtlllli
- r n
u*
fttawy
S*riM
saw
nafamj
Itaryffla.
Nietal
TUB,.
VMMft.
Ztao
Chmcttrad0 L*wl
N diiMlu (BH/L)
(TCLPOBM4
S.O
100
1.0
S.O
5.0
04
1.0
S.O
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Wimmw ftm/L)
AM^M! ^WMiHM^Btek^B\
S.O
100
1.0
5.0
S.O
04
1.0
5.0
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
IhftfMB^M^^^^Mft^V /^tf J| %
l^wQwHmraHv (Hay 1V|
(TCLPflttMQ
5.0
7.6
0.1*
0.14
OJ7
jb J^JK> JK ^M^^sa~
n -jnvMB BW^^
0.1C
•' OJO
2.1
0.014
5.0
O.OfTt
043
5J
WiiiinaiKmi/L)
(totil oonpocUoB)
1.4
14
0.0
2.77
0.0
0.15
O.O
0.43
1^
042
3.M
1.4
44
161
N/R-
N/A-
3121'
1-13
-------
Table 1-2. Federal Register NnlUre
19,1980.45 ft 33084
laouuy 14,1986,51 £& 1602
luly 9.1916,51 £R248S6
NotiM of Av^fc»Ul7 dT Rep** UN! Sapport dw
TOP
Iwo 13,1916. SICE 21641
7,1916, $1 £E 4W2
May II. 19S7,52 £E 11*83
Wi
TC
May 19,1988,53 £E 18024
Notic* of Dtti Av^bOity tad R«|u«l far
May 24.19M, 53 £E 18792
PiopoMd ftwuttu to TCLP to
Radiirtinn Step
Puticto
Aiuuttl. 1988. 53 EB 2««92
i^^^^^^i^
1989.54 EE 48372
Proposed Uod DiipiMl KMtridiaM for TfcW Ttod
SdwhilodW;
Much 29, 1990. 55 £E H798
Jmel.
Luting of Huudout
Toxkity ChOTcteMtic Revuioot, Find Rule
J
Final Rub for Lw* Diipottl RiirtiK*^" for Third
Thud jfdir»'lr« WM(M •
-------
Table 1-2 (continued)
JMM29, 1990. S3 £g 269*
29. WOToikatj
BDAT
Odobcr 24. 1991. S* ffi S3160
ANPRM tad Kay!* far
fcrlfao
far fnrt
-------
2.0 INDUSTRIES AFFECTED AND WASTE CHARACTERIZATION
This section describes the industries potentially affected by the BOAT treatment standards
for D004-D011 wastes and then presents available characterization data for TC metal wastes.
Each tCTJc metal is presented in a ifpinmi* subsection. The *^tuition »ifo im*lwfct eiiffgut
waste management and treatment practices and infbnnaiionoa the emiroomental releases of tfae
comrirnmti of concera from these wastes. EPA notes that the proposed change in the TC metal
treatment standards to the UTS levels may cause increases in the volume of TC metal waste
Note that most of the information presented in drfs section is derived from work done in
the Third Third rulemakmg. (Hie lefeieike numbers (as shown in the reference section)
corresponding to the background document for each TC metal are the following: 23-cadmmm,
24-anenfe and selenium, 29-oarinm, 30-chromium, 31-tead, 32-mercury, and 33-sttver).
TC meal wastes cm be generated in many different forms by many different industrial
DIO06M68* ^^H0 DKO0688B8 DV ^VOBCft "A"^»» DlCftU ^VUBBS eO0 flflOBUBBQ 4VD0 ttOUUaT XCkT DUttV OC t&O
various mrtilii Desci ipttoni of proccsati for manufacturing some of the metai compounds of
interest are detailed further in the subsection* for each type of metaL Metals may enter a
A^^K.
DIB
••••P
rhrmiral iiianufacJiiiinf and various.
iiKiustrieaits|%me specific metals to manufKturep Table 2-1 lists the compounds used
in manufMDJAsj^ and mdnffrim aflected for each TC metal. The electronics, electroplating,
and battery manufactnrmf inrfmtrirs are users of several different metals and generators of
2-1
-------
Table 2-1
Industries Affected for Each TC Metal
Aneak
Copper «nd |»d •»«»« a«| M "N»
AiMuo oxidt (lifanhlo), Anouiu Mid
• (On.)
CModyfio Mid ptid Mis.
Ue.
AIM^I tiiiuMii
Lvd-udi
(UN*)
Hi*
Vdainiy
BadMB tulfide. Buaun nrixwiilr, Biriu
Bttiun duondo
Bikk> ud C«mnm (UMr)
Oi Online
Barium
wlfrto. MM!
npoundt. iacJudinf M!U (rxlmium chloride.
rtdmJum PiyneoU (User)
idmiun PicncoU (Mwuifcrturet)
C«dmliim «iilfi(ki hatort pigcncnU
-------
Table 2-1 (continued)
CM*-;
' , :-#.T>-:>?5'v;
<'*r;^-"&$-
*$ii3a!&:
(Urn)
lofcnle
hydroxide
oxide
Don
Chraoduni Hath* (Uaer)
Metal l%Wup«(UaM)
(UM)
McUh SoMiia» (Utcc)
Ccnink* Production (U«er)
en, CkranuD oxide. Calciua
Sodkaa cknoMto. SodiiHa dktuaaule. Sodium duoaute,
Chroaiio Mid, FoUuium chroawte.
Baric chmmiB Milfirtc. Cbmniun
i. Qrario «iilh>B. CalriiMn chmoMle
dkkrai
Chraoue Milfci«
Chmnila ora
dui
DOM
Lead
c (U«er)
Meullie Inul. Lead moooxide. Lead acetate. Lead caifconate
-------
Table 2-1 (continued)
(IIM)
l&adtaad«uMM». BMieleUcalfcl*. TcbMlbyl Ind
Lead compooadi
Iteame ooude. Metaffie mtetouj.
Chrniimli (Itocc)
Mcrourom«fch>odo. Menaaio cfcknide
VarioM o*xu>k tad Inorganic mcrcuiy oooopounda
-------
Tabk 1-1
0010
EfeotnaiM (UM)
Mil
saw
l(UMf)
Mimn(UMf)
Source: B«fcmieM 23.14, 2». 30.31.32. Md 33.
. Silver nftme
SOwcr M*»: Sivw eUaride. Silver bromide. Silver iodide. Silver
aride. Silver CMbamto. Silver swl5de. Silver aMnte. Silver
Silver Mknte
SOver aUaride. Silver bramide. Silver iodide
SOvcreUartte
SOver
SOver evaaide and uk«
-------
several types of waste. The subsections below provide a further description of users of the
various TC metals and industries generating specific TC wastes.
The majority of the waste characterization data available is from EPA's 1986 National
Survey of Hazardous Waste Generators. A summary of the available data is presented in the
2.1
The primary *****-*»*** Bource of arsenic is arsenic oxide (arsenic trioxide), which is
ffeoerally recovered frfffii floe dusts geoerated oy copper and lead smelters
arsenopyridc ores. Currently, no smelters in the United States produce arsenic oxide, so the
supply is «U|iMMiMH on imported arsenic oxide. Approximately 30,000 metric tons of arsenic
oxide, 600 metric tons of arsenic metal, and 1,100 tons of arsenic umipouuds (e.g., arsenic
sulfide, arsenic add, sodium arsenate, and lead arsenate) wen OMismned in the United States
in 1988.
The -•*•••••»'• end-use distribution of arsenic in 1988 was 69 percent in wood
preservatives, 23 percent in agrtenhmal chemicals, 4 percent in glass, 2 percent in
alloys, and 2 percent in other
2.1.1
qs! the tttvrrsp nttnrft and rr $**** «* itwtn«iri«« p^t^tfay Mante-cnm
wastestreamtv (tXXM), the Asjeacy has not attempted to describe every industry that could
generate these wastes. Instead, the most iinportant HKtastries and USOT of arscnteije described
below, including imhuttfrr wr**^ with the procen-spedfic listed wastes (KD31, K084,
K101, and K102).
2-6
-------
The largest consumption of arsenic (as arsenic oxide) U for the production of inorganic
anenates for use as wood preservatives. Chromated copper arsenate, the most irnportant of the
arsenical wood preservatives, is a waterborne, lesch-resisaiit wood preservative prepared by
mi-ring irtffflc *CMJ with coppg gride or fulftite v*4 chromic add. (The general process for the
production of inorganic anenates involves oirirtatinn of arsenic trioride to arsenic acid and then
reaction of the arsenic acid with an oxide or carbonate metal salt) Subsequent treatment of
wastewaters front these processes generates nonwaslewafen containing mftai anenates.
Furthermore, USB of arscnatB salts for wood linpffffgiistnosi results in process sludges and
0fcaiw ^tfia^ffaMiM HQflKBW •VSjSliAvvaiaii ADfiHft MtffJUMlft^'^flBn'BlfJttff^ WQDu
••••• ^^•^••V^lBMV ••^^^•^^M VIA WB^BHBiW • •••••P VAOTBBHV^^M^BAVMMBMMBMaB) ^v^^V^W
proerving wutes are listed uF0359 md EPA ii in the precen of prapodof LDRs tetfaoe
agncultnnl "^fl'^f* for artf>>tra^ hts been in coctoo jiuwio^ wfaere incnic icid is used is ft
. *— — • ^« »^ ^.^t^^M^kl^^t ^A^^^A^^ k^^H^^M*!^^ **t *t*^^^m A^S)^^^ A«^^M»1^
ID awlfl MMI wjisiag^*^™**^^* •sfrrw^i^P^r ••^•irvi^^Bniir nsr CZU^H^ ^JUB^BK MaT^B^Ualn
W ViBVP ••• ••••^•••^iBBBMiB ^MBMH^IJ^MB •^•IV T^^^^^iMB||^ ^^B ^^V^^^H^^^^ ^^f^M^^^» ^^B ^^^^l^^^
/f^ywfhitn ni^ti..^rmnM«*. h*u* h*^t MM! •• JM^rfeMaa fer
these producta. Aflofthe
onpoondi
formoJstioni
j artwfe iffftf an? utri in the glut imhmry f^ firing iptiti tn
linji. iliiiiiSBsmtsllfa^iliis siiilsi iliiiiiliiiiifni iinili Use in recem yean has been limited to
the pressed aaiiblBWBglfjaserton for product
glass ceruniCK'
2131'
2-7
-------
The bulk of metallic arsenic is used in lead- and copper-based alloys by the battery
manufacturing industry as a minor additive (about 0.01 to 0.5 percent) to increase strength in
the posts and grids of lead-acid storage batteries and to improve corrosion "^fttmr- and tensile
strength in copper alloys.
High-purity arsenic metal is used in the electronics industry. Gallium arsenide and its
alloys have been used in such products as light-emitting diodes and displays, room-temperature
IMM, mtemaiavft dgideea, anlar rri1«, Mid phnfrn.mlMtii* «t«^ff| Became Of their Superior
qualities, gallium arsenide Inrrgrttrd circuits an expected to have extensive military and
compounds are produced by two
racOinca by proprietary processes. Wastes from these fadBna are classified as K084, K101,
and K1Q2, and may contain Inorganic and organic arsenic
Although arsenic is not used in me process, production of chemicals from
phosphorus is a rigniflrant source of arsenic-bearing wattes. Hemftrtil phosphorus is produced
from phosphate rock, and arsenic impurities become incorporated at elemental arsenic in the
product, One metric ton of phosphorus typkaUy contains about 0.3 kilogram of arsenic.
Conversion of the phoaphons to other prodiicts such aiphospbark add, phos^
or phosphorus nrntainlfMe generates soiida^
Ou tufi lOOaTUBIC
product f^^pflfiH «h><*g|pf and distillation h"M»*«T
-------
reports, and literature sources regarding those faHiiHea that generate and manage wastes
containing arsenic. Data from the Generator Survey show D004 wastes are divided into eight
categories: aqueous organic liquids, contaminated soil, inorganic liquids, inorganic sludges,
inorganic solids, lab packs, organic liquids, and organic solids. Of the D004 wastes generated
in 1986, inorganic liquids account for approximately 85 percent, organic liquids account for
approximately 12 percent, inorganic solids account for 2 permit, and the "^mining categ«"ef
account for 1 percent.
Hie arsenic concentration in D004 wastewaten ranges from 1 ppb to 1,000 ppm. For
D004 arsenic nonwastewaten, the highest concentrations of arsenic are 75 to 90 percent
generated from the 'discarding of out-of-date products or d^mi^f" and greater than 90 percent
for •laboratory wastes." Both of these types of wastes are generated in small volumes
(approximately 30 tons per year). The wood preserving industry generates an inorganic solid
from a filtration/centrifuging process that ?i*o «nntaitif greater tfmi 90 pfwnt arsenic. The
volume of this wastestream is unknown. The semiconductor industry generates inorganic
nonwastewaten with a total concentration of 10 to 23 percent arsenic, and trie chemical products
industry generates an organic solid nonwastewater tu*
2121UU\MI 2-9
-------
2.2.1 Industries Generating Barh™" Waste
Barium carbonate is die most widely used barium compound. It is used in the
manufacture of bricks and renmvfft, in oil drilling fluids such as "muds" and lubricating
precursors, in me precipitation of "synthetic" barium mlfate for photographic mnA
uses, and in the manufacture of glass. Barium chloride is used in production of pigmgqtt and
colors. Barium nitrate is widely used in the pyrotechnics industry for the production of tracer
buDets, flares, and detonators. Odier barium compounds are used as lubricating oils and greases
and as t*M**n^ soaps. Black ash can be processed to provide barium metal, which is highly
reactive and is used as a "getter* hi electronics equipment and vacuum tubes.
2.2.2 Waste Cbancterfaation (DOOS)
Tha Agency hM infhrmarinn fmm ft fariliri^ janararitij nOQ< «fim»t These facilities
repotted generating 67 DOGS wastestreams hi 1985. Forty-eight of the wastestreams generated
were nonwastewater forms of DOOS, 10 were wastewaten, and 9 wastestreams were
hi DOOS wastes were as follows:
50-73% 1 Facility
25-50% 5 Facilities
10-25% 3 Facilities
1-10% 2 Facilities
0.1 - 1% 8 Facilities
500ppm-0.1% 2 Facilities
100 - 500 pom 13 Facilities
^15-lOOppm 5 Facilities
Unknown 18 Facilities
Most DOOS wastes are inorganic matrim However, Generator Survey data indicated
that DOOS wastes are sometimes present hi a matrix containing significant quantities of organic
2-10
-------
constituents such as F001 - F005 spent solvents or waste oils. The levels of organics reported
in D005 wastestreuns by two facilities were 98 and 25 percent
2.3 rmhnhmi mnn£ zinc or by recovery from electrolytic ™u^ r>rrvfning
rarftniiitn Hint fmm matting Tttv may alan he mlWtPiH in MI t*me*wnat**i* pr»mpt»t>w
by JMrfMHg^ precipitation, and ^fHiiarira (Ref. 34).
The major manu&ctured cadmium compounds may be rf«««ifi*«i into three groups: (1)
pigments, (2) soluble cadmium f»i*r used in the electroplating and battery industries,
and (3) high-purity radnrfnm sulfide and radmimn oxide used in the semiconductor and
The largest «j»gi* use of rwf"^1*** is by electrof|^***ng in tf*^ fpnp of nolublc
salts. Soluble cadmium salts inffhirtft dditwim chloride, Biifi^^g, and nitrate,' which are all
produced by dissolving cadmium metal in the appropriate mineral acids, and then evaporating
the *fni1ting sohrtfoft to recover the desired products. Use of ff^fm
-------
The second largest use of cadmium compounds is the use of cadmium pigments for
colonization of pifitJn and py*1** Cadmium pigments are a group of cadmium, sulfide-based
pigments tanging in color from light yellow to deep red. ^^""mn pigments are produced by
digestion of CTKfminTn metal in sulfuric acid to form a cadmium sulfate solution. Variations in
color are achieved by adding zinc, selenium, and barium salts to the process. After addition of
a «"ifi4fH*in«|>ai*"tlg solution i the pigment p'^'p'+itt* is recovered and p^^gcd for ***? Use
of «aHtirfmii pjgntfflti involves mechanical formulation opgratropt of p**nt, infc, and plastic
products. The processes used to manufacture these products generate
wastes tnrfiuthig xinse waics •"^ ipillftf and off-specification products ***** contain cadmium.
Treatment of wastewaten from the manufacture of cadmium pjgm*«*f generates wastewater
treatment sludges mat contain high levels of *y*m«ufii> compounds.
The third largest use of cadnrinm compounds is in the battery manufecturing industry.
Cadminm salts such as cadmhim hydroxide are used by the battery manuiactnring industry as
the acti1^ anode "Mrtfr*** ^** **^vw<;<>dT*1^"iir| ai*d "^cfcri^adin^"11 ^itt**^*^ Miffnify*"*1^ of tfaftg
anodes nay grnfutn spilled malrrials containing cadnrimn Incorporation of the anodes into
frattwicf may gfnrratf y^^^^nl wastes of
pmrfnrrinn mrfmm frnfrmtm* *tm*tfaimt*fi containing
of the wastewaten grnrjasna «rfm
-------
2.3.2 Waste Characterization (D006)
The Agency has information on rarimiiim wastes from manufacturers of
pigments and from facilities generating *gdmfyin wastes. Waste composition information was
obtained from 3007 Questionnaire responses from the three manufacturers of cadmium pigments.
The wastewater treatment sludges generated by these faHiin^f contain approximately 50 percent
cadmium i"i*ufy, with «maiigr amounts of <^^»nfmn T**fniflf a*Kf «»c mifi^, FPA office of
Water also has detailed composition information on the wastewaten from which the sludge* were
generated.
The Agency has information from 145 facilities generating D006 wastes. Sixty-three of
these facilities generated nonwastewater forms of D006, 76 generated wastewaten, and the
remainder generated bom (or the form could not be determined). Data for these facilities
obtained from the Generator Survey are insufficient to present a comprehensive picture of
current waste generated by process and region. Cadmium concfnttations in die wastes were as
follows:
10% to 25%
25% to 50%
Over 50%
Below 1 ppm
1-10 ppm
10-100 ppm
100-500 ppm
500-1,00 ppm
1,000-10,000 ppm
2 Facilities
2 Facilities
2 Facilities
24 Facilities
46 Facilities
37 Facilities
11 Facilities
6 Facilities
6 Facilities
ted
wastes that
Levels of organics present in these wastes were as follows:
2-13
-------
Organic CotiMntration in Wastes No. of Facilities
Less than 10% 16 Facilities
10% to 50% 8 Faculties
Over 50% 1 Facility
The organic* present were those usually •fyrifl*H with paint, paint removal, or plastics
manufacturing (e.g., methyl ethyl ketone, methyl isobutyl ketone, toluene, acetone, methylene
phfh^ljtf* fftfTt).
Several fc**ii*«*« fhpwgd cyanide to be present, resulting from fif^fHoiMriny operations
in thauia^
metals most frequently kirntififid were lead, zinc, and chromium. Some of these facilities were
foundries or other metalworkmg operations.
2.4
All chromium metal and chromium compounds produced in the United States are derived
from various grades of chromite ore, Chromite ores ate generally classified according to the
type of production process in which the chronrite ore is eventually used. Metallurgical chromite
refers to high chromium content chromite ore; chemical chromite refers to high iron content
chromite ore; and refractory chromHe refers to high aluminum/low chromium content chromite
ore.
2.4*1 IndoBtnBi Genentftnc Chranfamt Waste
Chromium is used in industry as the metal and as various inorganic and organic
chromium compounds. The major products containing chromiuni are chromium ore, alloys,
^cfllf; and -the *"****! itself. The major industries affected by die !««<* 5fitPOffli restrictions
for D007 wastes are (1) the metallurgical industry, which produces chromium ferroalloys; (2)
2-14
-------
il industry, which produces chromates, chromic acid, chromium pigments, and a wide
range of chromium chemicals; and (3) the refractory industry, which produces chromite to make
refractory bricks for metallurgical furnaces. Chromium consumption can also be attributed to
these three groups or industries. The metallurgical industry uses approximately 71.4 percent of
all chromium in the United States, the chemical industry uses 15.1 percent, and the refractory
industry uses 13.5 percent.
Uses of chromium by the metallurgical industry include the production of stainless steeh
steels, carbon steels, alloy steels, and other metallurgical products, including cast iron and
nonferrous alloys. These chromium products are used primarily in the manufacture of
transportation, electrical, and construction equipment; heavy machinery; and fehri^^ metal
products. Specific ctoomium-containing listed wastes fl**vpfltrd by the metallurgical industry
include K061, K062, and F006 and are discussed in the BDAT background documents for these
waste codes.
Chromium is used in the refractory industry to produce chrome brick, chrome-magnesite
brick, and other refractory materials to line furnaces, kilns, incinerators, and other high-
temperature industrial equipment Other industrial sectors consuming chromium include glass
nonferrous «"**"if proifwtiffi, primary t>u>*Tiit «ttuJHfi£t and etf^***d production.
Chrominm is used in the chemical industry to manufacture a wide variety of chromium
chemicals; sodium chromate ««d sodium dichromate are the nrost commercially jignifjfapt and
are produced in the largest volume. Almost all chromium compounds are produced using either
sodium chroipBBfi or sodium dicromate as the primary feedstock mg>*"aV The more important
secondary oHpiBJoni flhrniic^T inclwte- chromic arid potuff*11*** cfrro1*1**? »nH dichromate basic
chromic suifHBjind chromiuin pigments.
Potassium chromate *nd dichromate are used in tapmng^ dyeing, pigment applications,
and metal finishing. Listed wastes associated with the production of chromium pigments are
2-15
-------
K002, K003, K004, K005, K006, K007, and K008. Potassium dichromatc is also used as an
analytical standard. Potassium dtehromate is made by reacting sodium dichromate with an
equivalent amount of potassium chloride in a crystallization process. Potassium chromate is
prepared by the reaction of potassium dichromate and potassium hydroxide.
*omic «c«d if used in chwniwT* pifltipg ««d for the production of ***mica1 conversion
coatings. Chromium is plated from anliitinni in which it ii preieni mm mn anion ontn varifflif
«"h*!ratipi such as rtpri, brass, aluminum, pi^f**ft, and rinc die ***i*fi The deposition of
chromium from chromic acid solutions provides the substrate with a decorative and corrosion-
rrmttanf surface. In chemical, conversion coaling, chromate conversion of chromium metal and ahuninum-chromium
master aJlojajMiJ in pigments that are used where chemical and heat resistance are required.
Chromic suliato is used in leather tanning liquors and m textife mordants and dyes. It
is manufactured by the sulfur dioxide reduction of sodium dichromate in an acid-resistant tank.
After reduction is complete, steam is bubbled through the solution to decompose any impurities
and remove excess sulfur dioxide.
2-16
-------
Other uses of chromium compounds include the manufacture of metal corrosion inhibitors
for circulating water systems and for wood preservation. The use of chromium compounds in
wood preservation has been largely attributable to the success of chromated copper anenate as
a wood treatment. Wood preserving wastes containing chromium are listed as F035, and EPA
is currently proposing LDRs for these wastes.
i chromate is used as an oxidizing agent in the production of ferrochromium and
is used in the production of pigments fl"4 metal finishing oonuKHinds. Calcium chromate is
manufactured by a proprietary process as a specialty chemical product.
The above uses of chromium generate a variety of chromium-containing nonwastewaters
and wastewaten. Treatment of the wastewaten usually generates chromium-bearing
nonwastewater residues.
2.4.2 Waste Characterization (D007)
Data on the approximate composition of various types of D007 wastes were obtained
from the Generator Survey. The nonwastewater forms of D007 contain from S.O to 700,000
ppm chromium. Other BOAT list metals may also be present at concentrations as high as the
percent level. Most wastewaten contain very low levels of organks.
The wastewater forms of D007 e«nt«f« from 5.0 to 10,000 ppm chromium. Other metals
are also frequently present. la & few cases, organks may be present at concentrations up to 1
2.5
is used in industry in its eleir^tal form and as various inorganic and organic lead
compounds. Lead monoxide is produced by the reaction of molten lead with air or oxygen in
2121UUVMB
2-17
-------
•.furnace. Lead acetate, often used for the preparation of other lead salts, is made by dissolving
lead monoxide or ifad carbonate in strong acetic acid. Lead carbonate is made by passing
carbon dioxide into a cold dilute solution of lead acetate, or by mixing a suspension of a lead
j^ijt ]ggg soluble fhfl*1 the carbonate win ammonium carbonate at a low temperature. Lead
tetroxide, or red lead, is manufactured by heating lead monoxide in a reverbatory furnace in the
presence of air until the desired composition is obtained. Lead sulfate is prepared by treating
lead oxide, hydroxide, or carbonate with warm sulfuric acid, or by treating a soluble lead salt
with sulfuric acid, and filtering and drying the resulting precipitate. Basic lead sulfate and
trih»«fc. if^j «nifcte «m pMgaiad by hjgh^emncntnre fusing of lead oxide and lead sulfrte or
fry hailing iqny«« mifr*««fc"« «* **•« *•» compounds.
2 J.I liMiurtiies Generating Lead Wi
The industries affected by the land disposal restrictions lor D008 wastes are (!) the
inorganic chemicals industry, which produces various inorganic lead compounds; (2)
manufacturers of organokad compounds; (3) manufacturers and recyctos of lead-acid batteries;
and (4) several industries that use lead compounds to iniiiiirmnre various products. Specific
uKhistries using lead cfaemicab and o
battery manufacturers, priniary art secoi^
metal fabricators producing parts containing such alloys (e.g., castings, sleeve bearings,
bushings), the muring and construction industries, producers of lead sheathing for cable
insulation, and producers of lead pigments.
tseof ksdUmtheinanufactureofiiitoniobiteb^ Over 50percent
of the I*** iim-"*~< in the United Stales are used in the mantiftfttire of plates and terminals
for automotive lead-add batteries. Other uses include the msmifartrire of pigments for use in
paints and inks, the marofactuw of additive
imic industry far electrical insulators and capacitors. AE of these processes generate a
2-18
-------
variety of lead-containing nonwastewaten and wastewaten. Treatment of the wastewaten
generates lead-bearing nonwastewaier residues.
2.5.2 Waste ChflraTtfigMtfl1" (D008)
Although the Agency has data from die National Survey of Hazardous Waste Generators
on the facilities generating D008 wastes, these waste characterization data show a wide range
of component fiyj>VTjilii**'nnfnt ***** be ""df with respect to
of these wastes, ctcflpt **mt they are extremely divfrtB.
Mercury occurs naturally in combination with sulfur to form more th^n a rfn mi
the most important commercial mineral is red sulfide or Hnnaiw Mercury is produced by
mining and "Hairing of ores containing mercury. It is recovered as a by-product in die mining
and processing of other metals and may also be recovered from wajte products, scrap material,
tailings piles, municipal sludge, etc. (Ref. 35).
2.6.1 Industries Generating Mercury Waste
D009 can be generated in many different forms by many different industrial processes.
Metallic mffcnry snA tnnrpnM* tn+rrnry oompmtml* »im nori in
The largest use of mercury, amounting to 48 percent of all mercury used in 1983 (the
year- for wfaftfLdala are available), is in the manufacture of mciTMric g«i4g batteries, primarily
the mercuric oodde/zinc dry cell. Mercuric oxide is used as the cathode material in these
batteries. Metallic mercury is often amalgamated with other metals (e.g.y silver and zinc) and
used as the anode material in batttriM. Bom nonwastewaten and wastewaten containing
mercury can be generated from frittfiy msniifiirti[iTMigT Wastewaten «**F*»ining mercury can be
2-19
-------
ited from cleanup of spills of mercuric oxide, spilled mercury, or wastewater treatment
sludges generated bum the treatment of mercury-containing wastewaters.
The second largest use of mercury, amounting to 16 percent of the total mercury
consumed in 1983, is in the manufacture of chlorine by the mercury cell process. Note that this
process may not be aa widely used as it has been in the past Metallic mercury is used in this
process as the cathode material in electrolytic cells that decompose a sodium chloride brine
solution into sodium hydroxide and chlorine. All caustic soda and potassium hydroxide and over
90 percent of the chlorine produced in the United States are made by tins process. Treatment
of plant process wastewaters by chemical precipitation generates a wastewater treatment sludge
as the listed waste K106 and is usually generated by snlfide precipitation.
The neat largest use of mercury is as a fungicide and bacteridde in latex paints. The
primary compound used in this application is phenylmercuric acetate (P092). Phenylmercuric
oleate and other organic mercury compounds are also reportedly used. Phenylmercuric acetate
is made Ctvuu mercuric acetate. In paint formulation operations, pg1**?*1*! are m"*d with
solvents, carriers, and other additives. Pnenylmercury «nmpmnid« are added in very small
quantities (less than 1 percent) as preservatives for latex paints. Washing of equipment used in
paint formulation may result in the generation of wastes containing organomercury compounds
such aa phenylmercuric acetate, and irnnetimes contain other organic compounds as well.
instruments, is mercury vapor lamps, in wiring and switching devices as an electrical
Mercury compounds are also used as initiating
* ^^
(B|BiDOfT fulminate), as honKMffiffHit catalysts (mercuric c^^fH^ff) as
of agricultural fangfeMfft (meicurous chloride and mercuric chloride), and as antiseptic
Pharmaceuticals (various organic and inorganic mercury compounds).
2-20
-------
2.6.2 Waste Characterization (D009)
EPA data from the National Survey of Hazardous Waste Generators provide the
composition of D009 wastes. These data show that D009 wastes may contain organic
compounds (usually when mixed with solvent wastes). Also, some wastes generated in the
production of organomercury compounds for fungitide/bactericideand pharmaceutical uses and
generated in organic fh«>MM««i« and polymers maf*nf«r*ll*iflg where mercuric chloride catalyst
is used may cmtnfr* mercury in an organic waste "mtr*. Overall, the mercury concentrations
of D009 wastes (organic and inorganic) range from less man 1 ppm to greater than 75 percent
AffrcAiry ****i»ptii. •
2.7 SfitoiamJQQlffl
vummf^f «denimn i« recovered ftom anode slime as a byproduct of electrolytic copper
refining at fiv^ copper refineries. In 1988, approximately 280 metric tons of selenium were
produced, v&Mm^twvtKO(BBU^tatolJiu& State*. The estimated consumption
of selenium by end use in 1988 is as follows: electronic and photocopier components (43
percent), glass manufacturing (20 percent), chemicals and pigments (20 percent), and other,
2-21
-------
mcluding metallurgy and agriculture (17 percent). Selenic acid is the major selenium compound
it |j produced via A uglfftiiuin ^i^Tif
2.7.1 Industries Genenttag Selenhim Waste
Almost half of the seknhiin produced is used by the electronics industry, where it is
incorporated into individual electronic components. The major electronic use of elemental
•^•ufam is as a photoreceptor in plain paper electrophotographic copiers. During
irtanuxactuxing, the srimftnn is melted and cast into desired shapes, mactrinrd, and further
rt^TMrtf Wastes from these operations consist of fines, scrap, and off-specification materials
that haw a high selenium content Mb* of these wastes are reprocessed either onsite or orTsite.
The U.S. automobile and construction industries contribute to the demand tor seleniu
These pigments, ranging hi color from light oimnge to maroon, are used
as colorants for plastics, glass, and ceramics. The chief pigment produced is csdminm red, a
i salt of
-------
Other selenium compounds (selenic acid, etc.) are produced only in small quantities at
three farilitiM. EPA does not have process-specific information on these operations. The
amounts of selenium-bearing wastes produced by these processes are likely to be
According to the Biennial Report of 1985, only 765 tons of D010 were generated. No
bearing wastes were reported from the three facilities "^"frrflirjng selenic acid and its
derivatives.
Research amounts of organmrlrnium compounds are produced using selenic acid as a
t**»tf>rimi. StJenip™ dJCTCMVrt the t "tertni*^ *** in ff^fnic wvf production is n>ld only
in research quantities.
2.73 Waste Characterization (D010)
Data available from EPA show D010 in wastewater and nonwastewater forma. The
wastewaten contain up to 500 ppm of tfilminm. and the nonwastewaten contain up to 25
percent selcnnim. Approximately 99 percent of the D010 waste generated in 1986 contain 98
percent water and up to 10 ppm srirniiim and are generated by one gntnratnr from the petroleum
refining industry.
2.8 SflTer mom
Silver is used in industry as the metal and as various silver compounds. Eight silver
compounds are produced in commercial quantities: silver nitrate, silver salts (silver chloride,
silver bronndev sflver iodide, silver oxide, silver carbonate, silver sulfide), and silver cyanide.
2.8.1 Lidutrto Generating Surer Waste
Silver nitrate represents the largest volume of silver-containing chemicals manufactured.
Silver nitrate 'is used in the production of mirrors, where two separate solutions, one of
ant
2-23
-------
ammcffliarcomplexed silver nitrate and the other containing an organic compound such as
formaldehyde, are reacted on the glass surface to be coated. A coating of silver forms on the
glass surface. ThgpmoeM g«wMt»« waterhome «ni«t»g annfaiininy nlvrT Subsequent treatment
of the wastewaters generates silver-bearing residues. Hie producdon of silver nitrate involves
digestion of silver in nitric acid to form a silver nitrate solution that is partially evaporated and
fed to crystallizers to recover silver nitrate crystals. Wastes from this production process are
in the form of wastewaters. Treatment of these wastewaters generate! giver-containing i^riduM
that are reclaimed when the silver content is high enough.
Other silver salts are produced from the silver nitrate. Silver chloride, silver bromide,
and silver iodide are produced by reaction of silver nitrate in solution with sodium
* »
sodium bromide, or sodium iodide. Hie insoluble product is cpBfFtPd as a precipitate.
Wastewaters are generated by these processes, resulting in stiver-bearing residues after
treatment Silver oxide, silver carbonate, and silver sulfide are made by similar processes
involving reaction in aqueous solution of silver nitrate with sodliim hydroxide, sodium carbonate,
OT sodmm sulfide, respectively. In aQ cases, the products precipitate from solution and are then
collected by filtration and dried. '
The largest use of silver compounds is in the photographic industry, where stiver
chloride, silver bromide, and silver iodide are used in the manufacture of photographic films.
Both the manufacturing and developing of films generate a variety of stiver-containing
nonwastewaten and wastewaters. Wastewater treatments generate stiver-bearing sludges, which
are usually reclaimed for silver value.
cMoridg at 1 flff^" 'ff . The
and use of these products generate wastes containing silver chloride The production of stiver
oxide-zinc batteries gives rise to wastewaters and nonwastewaten containing silver. The same
is true for the production and reclamation of silver oxide catalysts.
2-24
-------
Electroplating operations consume considerable quantities of silver cyanide and complex
silver cyanide salts, such as potassium silver cyanide. The listed wastes generated by these
operations (F006, FOOT, F008, and F009) are discussed in EPA's BDAT Background Document
for F006 and BDAT Background Document for Cyanide Wastes. Silver cyanide is produced by
reaction of sodium cyanide and silver nitrate in solution under carefully controlled conditions.
Again, the insoluble product precipitates from solution and is collected for packaging.
Treatment of the wastewaten generated by this production process yields silver-bearing residues.
2.8.2 Waste Charmcterixation (D011)
EPA has data from the National Survey of Hazardous Waste Generators on the
approximate composition of the types of D011 wastes being generated. These wastes may be
in the form of wastewaten or nonwastewaters.
The nonwastewater forms of DO 11 contain from 0.1 to 100,000 pom of silver. Other
metals are typically present at comparable concentrations. Moot nonwastewaters contain very
low levels of organic*.
The wastewaler forms of DO 11 contain from 0.1 to 10,000 ppm of silver. Frequently,
other metals are also present. In a few cases, organics may be present at concentrations up to
1 percent. Most of the companies reporting D011 wastes in the Generator Survey were plants
producing photographic chemicals, electronics equipment, or aerospace-related products. The
nature of the individual processes generating the wastestreams is quite varied and includes most
of the "jrriinii identified as «**rififfq"t consumers of silver salts.
2121\2SVM 2-25
-------
3.0 BDAT TREATMENT STANDARDS FOR NONWASTEWATER FORMS OF D004-
D011 WASTES
This section discusses the identification of the Best Demonstrated Available Technology
for treatment of nonwastewater forms of D004-D011 wastes and presents development of the
BDAT treatment standards for the regulated
3.1
This urttn*1 *1*Trtittff the Agency's determination of applicable and demonstrated
technologies and BDAT for treatment of nonwastewater forms of D004-D011 wastes.
In oxder to establish BDAT, the Agency first identifies which ^^ft^'rycf are applicable
for treatment of the waste of interest To be applicable, a technology must be usable to treat
the waste in question or a waste that is judged to be similar in terms of parameters that affect
treatment fbrtion Detailed itftrripUons of tcchnoliogfct that are applicable for the treatment
of listed hazardous wastes am provided in EPA'a Treatment TTfihnnlflgy BlnliTnTinM* Document
(Reference 4). The identification of treatment technologies as applicable for treating listed
ha»yniom wastes is fruftd on ntrrcflt waste «**flM£qm^it practices, vwBrt literature sources
field testing, data submitted by equipment manufactnrerSt industrial concerns, plus the
fnginrmng judgement of EPA technical staff personneL
The Agency next dctmnlnrs which applicable technologies are demonstrated for
treatment of the-wastes. To be demonstrated, a technology must oe used ma full-scale operation
for treatmentofme waste of interest or a similar waste. Technologies that are available only
at pilot- or beach sr ilci operations are not considered in identifying demonstrated technologies.
The Agency iVrlTtniipfT which demonstrated technologies are "best" based on treatment
performance ^?tn for the constituents of interest and determines whether thfa "best" demonstrated
3-1
-------
.technology is also commercially "available." If the "best" demonstrated technology is
considered to be "available," then that technology is determined to represent BDAT.
3*2 AppUcBhiti ind
This section describes the technologies that are both applicable and demonstrated for
treatment of nonwastewater forms of D004-D011 for which EPA is proposing UTS as the
standard.
Applicable treatment technologies for metals include mcie that immobilize or reduce the
total amount of metal contfitnenti in a waste. The technologies listed below are applicable and
have been demonstrated to treat metal constituents in nonwastewater forms of TC metal wastes.'
Acid leaching is used to treat metal bearing wastes in solid or slurry form. The metal
constituent! are soluble in strong add solutions or can be convened by reaction with a strong
acid to a soluble form* The process wm^HHiUft the metal ^'"F^flffMi i*tyh*^ by the arid
solutions. The metal constituents can men be filtered to remove residual y^Vft MMJ neutralized
to precipitate solids gnatainitig high concentrations of the constituents of interest.
Stabffization
Stabfttaatioa is a broad class of treatment technotogies that reduce tb* nwbility of metal
constituents iatSL waste; tf^ im^aiy STB chemically bfflitvd into a toHd «nt"^ that resists i«a**-h«««£
1 -2r —
when water or a mOd acid solution comes into contact with the waste material. Organic
ls usually are not stabilized effectively and may, in ftct, inhibit the
metals. Hrnre, «t«hiHMtiMi is applicable to nonwastewaten only after the organics have been
removed by other treatment.
312HT11MM 3-2
-------
PyromeUllnrgkal Recovery Processes (High Temperature Metals Recovery)
Pyromrtallnrgicil recovery processes are those treatment technologies that use physical
and chrmiral reactions at elevated temperatures for extraction/separation of metals, ores, salts,
and other tMtariyif. For the purposes of the LDR Pnggrafn, pyrometallurgical processes are
referred to as High Temperature Metals Recovery (HTMR). Some examples of HTMR systems
include rotary loins, flame reactors, electric furnaces, plasma are furnaces, slag reactors, and
rotary hfir^Hfrfrir furnaces. Tliese tncp"*! reduction processes yfg carbon,
silica (sand) as raw materials. The carbon acts as a reducing agent and reacts wi± mead oxides
•
in a high trmprunire processing unit (e.g., kiln, furnace) to produce carbon dioxide and a free
metal. This process yields a metal product for reuse and reduces the concentration of metals in
tfn» residuals.
orting
Retorting is a tprriaHmi form of BTTMR that is performed primarily to recover mercury
from wastes. Retorting operates at much lower temperatures man conventional HTMR because
mercury is an extremely volatile metal. However, like HTMR, essentially two streams are
produced within the retort: the conrtrnutr stream, ^**d«»»"g of confirmed mercury liquid in a
relatively pure state; and the residual stream that is left in the retort, which may also be
recyclable (e.g., if the waste is crushed fluorescent light bulbs, mercury is volatilized into the
condensate •>»»««\ while tftg glass portion of the bulbs, may be recycled back into the
Hydrometallurgical recovery processes extract and recover mitrriali by using acidic
solutions. These processes are most effective with wastes containing high concentrations of
metals that are soluble in a strong acid solution or that can be converted by reaction with a
3-3
-------
strong acid to a soluble form. Some hydrometallurgical prpogMCT "iclwfc chemical precipitation,
j ion tr*t>h»f\gm solvent extraction, and
Hie Agency is awaxe that some facilities are using a series of technologies, i
IQQ exchange, ^™j qieetn>u/inningt to recover *"**a1t from various metal-
bearing wastestreams. Some of these facilities claim that these hydfometallnigical processes,
QlulJOB QVDflaT WDG6SSU* fiCOBtttB flO XCSlflUaUA rOf
For some metal-bearing wastes, recycling may bean applicable technology. An example
is nonwastewater forma of K061 wastes, electric arc furnace dust, which may be recycled
directly back into the electric furnaces from which it was origmalry produced. Such practices
faHiitaty tte recovery of metals in Tt*^»*»*vi«j while Tf^King or eliminating the «»*a**<"*i to be
landd
Idcuilf yiug BOAT for D004-D011
The Agency has ^^m!!"*^ HTMR md stabilization as BOAT for metal constituents in
nonwastewater forma of D004-D011 wastes, with the exception of arsenic, and mercury in low-
mercury fubcategory wastes (Le., wastes containing kss than 260 mg/kg mercory). HTMR
processes include rotary kDnt, flame reactors, electric furnaces, plasma arc furnaces, slag
reactors, and rotary hearth/electric furnaces.
BDAaNhr arsenic is slag vitrification, rather than stabilization and HTMR, because mis
"*7"~~ 9
technology is demonstrated, commercially available, and achieves mbtfantial treatment of
arsenic. The vitrification process is capable of managing a wide variety of arsenic-bearing
wastes. At the temperatures at which the vitrification process Is normally operable (1,100 to
1,400*C), organoarsenic compounds will be combusted to arsenic oxide, carbon dioxide, and
2121'
3-4
-------
water. The arsenic pride farmad will react with the nther glaaufamiing
immobilized in the glass formed. Hie Agency has data indicating that arsenic can be vitrified
into slag at concentrations of up to 24 percent arsenic, and that this slag will pass the EP-toticity
test for arsenic. Treatment performance data for arsenic are shown in Appendix A, Table A-l.
BDAT for mercury in low-mercury subcategory wastes is acid i*^»ti{"g rather than
tiiFi and HTMR, hfrnvtf ft"* technology is dwiMfustimpu1, commercially available, and
achieves TMH«*M»*MI treatment of mercury in low-mercury ffifrmtpigory wastes. The acid leaching
treatment performance data presented in Appendix A, Table A-l of this document represent the
"best* available treatment performance data for mercury in low-mercury subcategory wastes.
Because the acid leaching performance data presented in Appendix A, Table A-l represent
BDAT for wastes included in previous rulemakings, acid leaching has been judged previously
to meet the criteria for "best" treatment technology.
flnr M^itiiyiiij TTTMP ewt yt^
for most inetal constituents in nonwastewater forms of listed hazardous wastes. Because metals
cannot be destroyed, treatment options for metal-bearing wastes are limited. Typically, these
options include technologies that either can recover the metal or incorporate the metal into a
stable matrix resistant to leaching. The Agency believes that the "best* treatment for metal
constituents- is recovery, especially in cases- of high waste metal ^?>vrr>*n*if Of the
applicable technologies, HTMR appears to be the most matrix-independent (Le., it consistently
achieves die same levels of treatment performance regardless of infliifHt mains composition).
HTMR also generally **-"••••*» the amount of material sent for land disposal, recovers valuable
resources. mn^ ^^^nfpuratci m**^if fo^t axe not recoverable into A stable slag
_
Hie Agency's review of the HTMR performance data imHcitnd that the slag residues for
land disposal leach concrntririont of metals mat are comparable to (and, for most metals, less
than) residues from «**>»in»grirm of d™i«y wastes. Furthermore, die use of HTMR is
with the national policy, identified in HSWA, to reduce the quantity of haTinkms constitnents
3-5
-------
i««
-------
3.3 Ttlf nt*nrartnll flf BPAT Tlpfff*"*1'^ Standards
The Agency is transferring universal at?*1*
-------
Table 3-1. Determination of BDAT Treatment Standards for Nonwastewater Forms of D004-D011 Based on Universal Standards
•H>^_^^^g^ •**••• a^Ma^ai
D004- Aneok •
D005 - Barium
D006 - Cadmium
D007 -Chromium
D008-Lead
D009 - Mercuiy
D010 - Selenium
DOH -Silver
< - lodiceica • ifHfffti'fi
'- No matrix apikA data i
•Perfanoaaoe data oonist
"S^Sl^ft
D005
D006
D007
DOOB
D009
D010
D011
limit vabie.
m» available for (heae da
*><• «MMM'<«ltl^lO«l Ml 1 1 II I1 * ' '
i comtitntirt-epedfic matri
_ ~A»~_ • •• •• ll^l
K061: SKF, IMS
K061:HRD
D007: CyaooKBM
K061:HRD
K061. U151. F065, F092: Low
nwcury-. RMBRC1 raodoe*
K071. F039, KI06, UIS1: Low
aetcury, ooo-flMBRC* ceaJduea
P065, P092: Lowmenwy'
mctnerator naiduea
K061: INMBTCO
K061:HRD
I wMta, accuracy oomctian ndor. an
lapikA.
iX^H
.
2.51
<0.060
0.16
<0.10
-
0.0043
<0.05
<0.080
.
1.08
1.15(87)*
1.0 (105)*
1.32 (76)*
-
1.05(95)
1.11 (90)*
1.32 (76f
*.«.*,
-
2.8
2.8
5.4
2.8
-
5.47
2.8
2.8
•DAT
5.0
7.6
0.19
0.86
0.37
0.20
0.025
0.16
0.30
fnmtfae IMS (eat
t variability tactor.
• 260mK/kc
'RMERC - memtty fwoveiy
HRD - HonBhMd RMouice DevdopoMat Co. HTMRdaU.
SKF - SKF PLuma Tocfanoiogie. HTMR data.
IMS - Intenutknal Mill Service HTMR data.
INMETCO - mfmi-^Ml Metala P^-l—Mtirt" Conpny HTMR data.
Souioe: Referaoc* 1
-------
4.0 BDAT TREATMENT STANDARDS FOR WASTEWATER FORMS OF D004-D011
WASTES
This section discusses the identification of Best Demonstrated Available Technology for
treatment of wastewater forms of D004-D01 1 wastes and presents the development of the BDAT
treatment standards for the regulated constituents.
4.1 MMirifiMti
This section m'mmes the Agency's determination of applicable and demonstrated
technologies and BDAT for treatment of wastewater forma of D004-D011 wastes. However,
any trMtmgnf t^rhnrtlngy that rfdnrmu dig mnr»nfratirMi nf «y il«*M ^n^^i^p^tl tff ttlf IfUfl Of
the treatment «*«"^y*^ds an^ is not considered *i"p*f miffiKi* d^vtHMi is altff acceptable.
In order to establish BDAT, the Agency first identifies that technologies are "applicable"
for treatment of the constituents of interest. An «rpifo«M^ technology is f*1^ which, in theory,
can treat the waste in Question or a waste ««"™ifl* to the waste in Question in trrnni of parameters
that affect treatment selection. TvtMiad H^^iptino. nf *** t^t^^i^^ \A~M*^ ••
for the treatment of fisted hazardous wastes are provided in EPA*s Treaiment T***hnology
Document (Refeicnce 4). The basis for identifying treatment technologies as
applicable for treating BDAT. TJ«» 4?fl"ititwnti is evahiation of fWfn\ waste management
practices, current literature sources, field testing, data submitted by equipment manufacturers,
indnttrial <"o«ir*>n«> pfaf jhg JMBiii«*ifi|ig jl?
-------
The procedure used to identify BDAT for the wastewater forms of D004-D011 wastes
follows the methodology described in EPA's Methodology Background Document All
applicable and demonstrated treatment technologies are 'dfttrfifd for the wastes of interest, and
performance data are examined to identify the technologies that perform "best11 The treatment
data 9tt evaluated to
• Whether the data represent operation of a weUHJeayied and well-operated treatment
system;
• Whether snfflrirm analytical quality assurance/quality control measures were used
to ensure the accuracy of the data* and
• Whether the appiouiiate measure of performance was mad in aa^n the pgrfhrmaiu^.
of the particular treatment technology.
Tlie Agency then determines whether the best demonstrtttd technology is "available.' To be
•available," a technology (1) must provide substantial treatment and (2) must be commercially
available.
for regulation in D004-D011 wastes based on a thorough review of an treatment perfor
data available for each coniiiuirm Appendix B presents the treatment performance data
evaluated by EPA for these <
are all cuniiunniany available. In addition, treatment perfoimaucc data included in Appendix
B show iiilisajpjril luilimnl of each constituent by the corresponding technology identified as
best TherdEoi*ttetedi^
considered to be available, and as such, BDAT for that constituent BDATs for the constituents
regulated in the wastewater forms of D004-D011 wastes are shown in Table 4-1 at the end of
this
4-2
-------
4.1.1 Applicable Treatment Technologies for Metal Constituents
Because wastewater forms of listed hazardous wastes may contain metal constituents at
treatable concentrations, applicable technologies include those that reduce the total amount of
metal compounds in the wastewater. Therefore, the technologies listed below are applicable and
have been demonstrated to treat metal constituents in wastewater forms of TC "M**aif wastes.
Biological Treatment
Biological treatment is a dfatroction technology *Mt biodegrades hazardous
in wastewaters. Thi« trrtmninyy jtmeratea twn tnflftmffnt rfnitn»ir •, treated e£Quent and a
waste triosludge. Waste bioatudge may be land disposed without farmer treatment if it meets
the applicable BDAT treatment T**"^**1^ for **»g^«iaffd <*onf^i^iy^f^ The Agency notes *****
biotreatment is a technology that is noj dftiignrd to treat hazardous metals, but results in
removaL
Oiemkalrjr- Assisted Clarificatio
clarification, including chemical precipitation, is a separation
technology mat removes organic and inorganic constituents from wastewater by the addition of
chemicals mat cause precipitates to form. The solids funned are men •T****^! from the
waateumter hy aattluifj, riariffartuMi, an/J/n* poli«hing fiUg»ri«n ThJS fffrtinotagy generates tWO
treatment miftniili' treated wastewater effluent and separated solid prcripititr The solid
dOdOltatBft flIHIErDO Ittliw Q1SD096Q ^VlluOUt ItHulCf tldufllCflK IX It IDOCtl tDfi 8DDUC8Olfi JSa^^V'X'
treatment slasajitUii for the regulated constituents in nonwastewaler forms of waste.
2121UUVM
4-3
-------
Chemical Oxidation
Chemical oxidation is a destruction technology that oxidizes inorganic cyanide, some
dissolved organic compounds, and sulfides to yield carbon dioxide, water, salts, simple organic
acids, and suliates. This technology generates one treatment residual: treated effluent
Chemical Reduction Treatment
Chemical reduction treatment, consisting of diemicil redaction followed by precipitation,
sedimentation, and fifrntinn, is a sfpantton technology mat chemically reduces metal
rrmatiftmnft from a Mfhfr w*^*fa* •<••« tn m inm»«- mriHy^fl ttftp The reduced metal is men
inaformama
CA
mptff, hexavalent chromium (Cr*4) can he reduced to the lest soluble trivaknt (Cr*3)
chromium ion. This technology generates two treatment mkhiabc a Uealed f^w^ and a
settled or filtered solid containing the pfrrijilstnd metaL The solid residual may require
additional treatment, prior to land dinpTTSil, to meet applicable BDAT treatment **at*^*rdf in
nonwastewater forms of waste for regulated constituentt t*"*^ri«*g in die residual.
isnting of decUuclif iiiical treatment followed by chemically
•MM^M^A^B^f ^•Vtfb^M^B^^^bA^^^^B A^^^^KA^^K^^^RA 2^ ^ M^^BA^^MAS^^^K ^^k^^^^^k^^fl^K^BM* 2^M «B^^2^^k ^I2^^^^^k ^^B^^^^^^MA —— ^B^^^Atf^k^l * —
assisiBQ ciannGaoon ucaflncnK. is a scpaiaDon uscnnoiOKy ID wmcn oirect currem is appueo to
l^^^BA ^^f^^^t 4M^^B^6iA..^^MAA ^k^^K ^^^^^B^^B^Adfl ^^.B ^^I^M^^^^M^B^k M^Rdl
1OD8. Atteou GouDmcDiDi aiw lemoiwo Djp aQSuCumK ano
msoinble ferrous ion iiiatilces formed by die iron electrodes. These
Pagmedoutof solutioniismgcheniicaUy-tssisteddarificatkn^ TUstechnology
generates two- treatment «*rf***1«* a treated effluent and a settled solid containing the
precipitated metaL The solid residual may require additional treatment, prior to land disposal,
to meet applicable BDAT treatment standards in nonwastewater forms of waste for regulated
constituents remaining in the residual.
-------
Lime, sedimentation, and filtration is a separation technology in which wastewaten are
mixed with lime, gaming metal constituents in the wastewater to produce an insoluble metal
hydroxide material that settles out of solution. The metal hydroxide precipitate is then filtered
out of the wastewater solution. This technology generates two treatment residuals: a treated
1 filter cake en««gining time and metal 5**v1fit The filter cake may require additional
treatment, prior to land disposal, to meet applicable BDAT treatmem standards in nonwastewater
forms of waste for »*gyi«*^d rr>>iti'*TfTitf remaining in the filter ^•fa*
4.1.2 Demonstrated Treatment Technologies
Demonstrated treatment technologies are those which have been demonstrated in full-
scale operation for treatment of the wastes of interest or a similar waste. The Agency has
identified all of the applicable treatment technologies for wastewater forms of D004-D011 wastes
as shown in Table 4-1 to be demonstrated technologies, from an analysis of the available
treatment performance data presented in Appendix B. Treatment performance data for the
constituents regulated in wastewater forms of D004-D011 wastes, presented in Appendix B,
include data from bench-, pilot-, H"4 full-scale treatment "«**£ ttntf
4.2
The Agency is proposing to transfer universal standards to the constituents regulated in
wastewater Jsj&of D004-D011 wastes. A universal standard is a concentration limit
established for ft ipffific Pfm^^nnt Tgnyxllffi!! of the waste »«•*"» in which it is present.
Appendix B Dvesents oie specific treatment perrorniance datsi useo as pie DasiSj or tne universal
for tjyp CTntfittifnti "^T'^itfff in thftft wastes. Table 4-1 pifstnti the treatment
for TC
2121\23Sta« 4-5
-------
Univeral standards in wastewater forms of wastes are baaed on treatment performance
data from several sources including the BDAT data base, the NPDES data base, the WERL data
base, EPA-collected WAO/PACI* data, the HAD data base, industry-submitted leachate
treatment performance data, data submitted by die CThfmigd ^atiy%cturpi'i Associatioo's Carbon
Disulfide Task Force, data submitted by the California Toxic Substances Control Division, data
in literature that were not already part of the WERL data base, and data in literature submitted
by industry on the WAO and PACT* treatment processes. Because these standards reflect the
p^-^iynaiXT of numerous iftuu»liu» wastewater treatment systems on the most difficult to treat
wastes, the Agency believes it is appropriate to transfer the universal standard for wastewaten
to the mnarttnents regulated in wastewater forms of D004-D011
erformance data base and methodology for identifying universal standards
nt in wastewater forms of tooddty characteristic wastes are presented in Appendix
B of this document. A m™» A*™WI
-------
Table 4-1. Determination of BOAT Treatment Standards for Constituents.In Wastewater
Forms of D004-D011 Wastes Based on Universal Standards
Waste
Code
D004
DOOS
D006
D007
DOOS
D009
D010
D011
-.''•'
' . fceiulatod - '*%
' Conatitnent ^-fe
Araenic
Barium
Cadnriiun
Chromium (total)
Lead
Mercury
Selenium
Silver
L + Sed + Fil
L + Sad ••'+ FU
L •»• Sed
L-f Sod
L -f Sed
L + Sed + FU
L + Sed + FU
L -f Sed
..; :- Data Bate ••-
•* '' VPaf^^V^MaMb '!• " '
BAD-CMDB
BAD - CMDB
BAD-MP
BAD-MF
BAD-MF
BAD -CMDB
BAD-CMDB
EAD-MF
, - Avcnce . ,
; Eflkw* ,
fVMimrtrBlfen
.:-'-"IW«*^^:
0.34
0.21
0.13
O.S7
0.20
0.036
0.20
0.096
, Acfiioacy '>
f!anw^M'
;v:fi»cWt;.
-
^«
-
-
-
- -
-
-
•- .'-f ;'•*"
VwUbffitT
5i;f|Slt4^' ~
4.1
4.1
5.3
4.9
3.5
4.1
4.1
4.5
BOAT
• TrMtoMMl'
' . Standard
(m«^>
1.4
1.2
0.69
2.T7
0.68
0.15
0.82
0.43
L -I- Sed + FU - lime conditioning followed by
L + Sed - lima coodittooiac followed by
BAD - Eafiaeeriaf and Aiudyas Dtviaiaa.
CMDB - Combined MflUU D*t« B«*D.
MP - Meal Fmubiag Data Baae.
aoduneatatkn and bltradon.
Source: Reference 2
-------
5.0 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Radian Corporation provided technical support for the development of this document to
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste under Contract Number 68-
W3-0001. This fteruT"*"! was prepared under the direction of Richard Kinch, Chief, Waste
Treatment Branch; Larry Rosengnnt, Section Chief, Treatment Technology Section; and
Carolyn Cunningham and David Levy, Project Officers. Anita Cummings served as the Project
Manager for mis document Steve SUverman served as EPA legal advisor.
The following peno"ne» from Radian Corporation suppoited the development of this
Gayle Kline, Program Manager; Richard Weisman, Project Director; and the Veraar
Team: Jerome Strauss, Versar Associate Program Manager; Stan Moore, Principal Investigator;
and Suzanne Wade and KeUy O'Rourfce, Engiheering Team.
2121V2UMM
5-1
-------
6.0
1. USEPA. July 1994.
Background Document for Universal Standards. Volume Ai Universal Standards for
Nonwastewater Forma of Wastes. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Solid Waste. Washington, D.C.
2. USEPA. July 1994. Final Bfltt Demonstrated Available Technology (BOATl
Document for Universal Standards. Volume B; TTnfvqrtal Standards far
Forma of Wastes. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid
Waste. Washington, D.C.
3. USEPA. October 23, 1991. Wn«l p^ TVmonatrated Avil.hW.
Background Document for Quality Assurance/Quality Control
Methodology. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste.
Washington, D.C.
4. USEPA. January 1991. Treatment TflChnnlflgy Packaraiind Document. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste. Washington, D.C.
5. USEPA. July 1992. Filial Bfiiif Demonatut^ A^ilahUf Technolofy (BDA'H
Background Document (Addendum^ for all NbnwMtewater Forms of KQ61 and
Alternative BPAT Treatment Standatda fiar FOOfi and 1CGK2 Nonwaatewmtera. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste. Washington, D.C.
6. USEPA. March 1987. Generic Quality Aaauraiv* ^TPJect Plan ffff TfllMl
RCjHTJCtiim* Pmgi«n /^BDAT*^. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Solid Waste. Washington, D.C.
7. USEPA. July 1994. Final Data Document for Characterization and Peifoiinance of
High *11* *f>d Stabilization for Metal-Bearing
Washington, D.C.
__
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste.
8. USEflMb. Office of Solid Waste. Hazardous Waste Management System; Identification
and Usting of Hazardous Waste; Final Rule, Interim Final Rule, and Request for
Comment*. Federal Reffirter. {45 FR 33084). May 19, 1980.
9. USEPA. Office of Solid Waste. Hazardous Waste Management System; Identification
and Listing of Hazardous Waste; Toxicity Characteristics Revisions; Final Rule. Federal
Register. (55 FR 11798). March 29, 1990.
2131\2U\M«
6-1
-------
10. USEPA. Office of Solid Waste. Land Disposal Restrictions far Tnixd Third Scheduled
Wastes; Final Rule. Federal Register. (55 FR 22520). June 1, 1990.
11. USEPA. Office of Solid Waste. Hazardous Waste Management System; Land Disposal
Restrictions; Proposed Rule. fetaaLRggistci. (31 FR 1602). January 14, 1986.
12. USEPA. Office of Solid Waste. Hazardous Waste Management System; Land Disposal
Restrictions; Final Rule. Federal Register! (51 FR 40572). November 7, 1986.
13. USEPA. Office of Solid Waste. Land Disposal Restrictions for Third Third Scheduled
Wastes; Proposed Role, Fed«l Register. (54 FR 43372). November 22,1989.
14. USEPA. Office of Solid Waste. Land Disposal Restrictions; Potential Treatment
Standards lor Newly Identified and Listed Wastes and Contaminated Soil; Proposed
Rule. £atanLBateB. (56 FR 55160). October 24,1991.
15. USEPA. Office of Solid Waste. Hazardous Waste Management System; Identification
and Listing of Hazardous Waste; Land Disposal Restrictions; Notice Of Availability of
Reports. EotaBLBOUBX. (51 FR 24856). July 9, 1986.
16. USEPA. Office of Solid Waste. Land Disposal Restrictions; Proposed Rule. Federal
Bejjsjcr, (53 FR 18792). May 24,1988.
17. USEPA. Office of Solid Waste. Hazardous Waste Management System; Identification
and Listing of Hazardous Waste; Toodcity Characteristics Revisions; Final Rule;
Collections. £fidfiOL£aifiB> (55 FR 26986). June 29, 1990.
18. USEPA. November 28, 1994. Draft Com|iii«rin« «n/i P^mtMtion «f
Information U.S. Eiivironmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste,
Washington, D.C.
19. USEPA. Office of SoUd Waste. Hazardous Waste Management System; Identification
and Listing of Haiardous Waste: Notification Requirements; Reportable Quantity
Adjustments; Piofmsed Rule. EoknLRfigifiB. (51 FR 21648). June 13,1986.
20. US^Bpfe Office of SoUd Waste. Hazardous Waste Management System; Identification
I of Hazardous Waste; Snpptrmfntal Nffrirg of Prnpoifld p«ii**MiMti£ Federal
(52 FR 18583). May 18,1987.
21. USEPA. Office of SoUd Waste. Hazardous Waste Management System; Identification
and TJytinj of Hazardous Waste; Notice of Data Availability and Request for Comments;
Supplement to Proposed Rule. Federal Register. (53 FR 18024). May 19, 1988.
6-2
-------
22. USEPA. Office of Solid Waste. Hazardous Waste Management System; Identification
and Listing of Hazardous Waste; New Data and Use of These Data Regarding the
Establishment of Regulatory Levels for the Toxicity Characteristic and Use of the Model
for the Delisting Program; Notice of Data Availability and Request for Comments;
Supplement to Proposed Rule. Federal Register. (53 FR 28892). August 1, 1988.
23. USEPA. May 1990. Final Bert Demonstrated Availahl*- Technology fBDAT> Document
for DOQ6 QKllfliun1 Wastea. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid
Waste, Washington, D.C.
24. USEPA. May 1990. Wnal P^t nemonatrated Availahte Technology fBDATl Document
for K031. K084. K1Q1. Kjjfl2- Characteristic Arsenic Wastes; (DOQ4V Characteristic
Selenium Waatea fPQIQV and P and TT Wajrtg«Cnntpinm» Ar^nic and Selenium T.iitinp
rnn«titii«i»«- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste,
Washington, D.C.
25. USEPA. July 1994. Pittal P^ Demonstrate Av«fl»frle Technology ffiDATl
Background Document for Organic Toricitv Characteristic Wa.ttea fTV)1g-D043^ and
Addendum to HflnWMtCffltBf FCTIM'°f P^MridC Tff^^tv Characteristic Wa*<*« al Processing
Waste*. Tone Charaetea1 iatM* M«nal WasteT Newly T Jjtf^J Wflltd ffom Wood Preserving;
Agency, Office of Solid Waste, Washington, D.C.
29. USERfc May 1990. Wtial P^t rymonrtnh^ AYaJlahlfiTe^"010^ ^BPA*n Document
fnr Ptertnm U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste,
Washington, D.C.
30. USEPA. May 1990. Final Best Demonstrated Available Technology fBDAT) Document
for Chromium. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste,
Washington, D.C.
U2U2UMHB 6-3
-------
31. USEPA. May 1990.
32.
34.
35.
36.
D.C.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste, Washington,
USEPA. May 1990. Final Beat Demonatr"*^ Ayaj]abjc Technology fBDATt Document
for Mercury Containing Wantea. TT.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid
Waste, Washington, D,C.
33. USEPA. May 1990.
for Silver Containing Wi
Waste, Washington, D.C
TVmomtrated Av»»»hto Technology fBDATl Document
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid
Hawley, O.O.
RJ. Lewis, eds. 1987. pp. 195-196.
NX Sax and
Kirk, R.E. and D J». Othmer, Bneyelopedia of Chenrieri Taehnnlnyy FbUXth Edition.
J J. Kroschwitz, ed. 1991. pp 143-144 and 148.
USEPA. OfiBce of Solid Waste. Land Disposal Bfttrictioni Phase H - Universal
Treatment Standards and Treatment Standards for Organic Toxicity Characteristic Wastes
and Newly Listed Wastes; Final Rule. EdkaL_B«isM. (5QFR 47982).
September 19, 1994.
6-4
-------
Methodology for Identtfyinf Untranl S
for r
-------
This appendix presents the development of the universal treatment standards (i.e.,
universal standards) for the constituents regulated in nonwastewater forms of D004-D011 wastes.
Section A. 1 presents the methodology for determining nonwastewater universal standards and
introduces the universal standards data base. Section A.I below presents a constituent-by-
COMtitUfnt 'Fff"**"1" «?f tftf dttP""8"*****1 **th* mmie*«l rtandanh toe each cmstitumnt
for
A.1 Methodology ftp- TW^m^jpy rcflffw««towater Unlrernl Standards for TC Metah
The performance data presented in Table A-l represent the universal standards for D004-
D011 wastes. These data consist of the treatment pwfannance data used to develop
nonwastewater treatment standards in the First, Second, and Third Third, and Phase I Land
Disposal Prftrfrt'^n Restrictions Program rulemaking efforts. In order to determine the
universal standards, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (Agency) nraminrd the treatment
far mgtal «n«ttitnPiit« in v«rin.im
codes.
The Agency determined universal standards for metal constituents using the following
(1) Tlie Agency selected metal constituents for regulation from n^ Best Demonsttated
Available Technology (BOAT) list of hazardous conttitimn.
(2) For each metal rtmttifrmn selected, the .Agency listed BOAT treatment
performance data according to waste code shown m Ttble A-l; data included the
in the ttnririty fMractfriitic l*^**"g p»vs ^TCLP) ^^lc^i** or
the detection limit of the constituent in the treated waste, the accuracy correcti
(and mv basis), and the variability actor.
(3) Tlie Agency evaluated the **flf* on a CCTUtifBfnt-^ry-ronitifttfnt basis to determine
^-— -- ^ t^«* ^ft_
fira JeitMytiijiJi •
^w ^w^*B^ip««i^»" ^»
Universal standards for metal flontriiw?*1!!, except chromium, were determined utilizing
treatment pastemance data that had been used to develop nonwstftEwsder treatmem standards in
the Pint, Se
-------
waste code. Tte data mrf to compute the treatment standard jndmte the
lion of the
in the treated waste, an accuracy correction factor, and a variability factor.
Table 3*1 piriffnti die determination of the universal standards for metal
in
oonwastewater forms of listed wastes. These universal standards were chosen on a comtituent-
by-constituent basis. Toe following five factors were considered in selectinf a treatment
standard value for m***i
CD
Where possible, the Agency preferred to use treatment perfc
technology believed to be "best* for treatment of metal cot
i data from tbe
is in universal
Metsls Recovery (HTMR) sad stabil
were generally tte BDAT basis except for arsenic and men
arsenic was vitrification, and add kching was BDAT for
•iihtairgnryv
BDAT for
(2)
(3)
Where possiblo, the Agency pieierred to use treatment perfor
in the TCLP extract of the tneted
data (Le., the
data, and variability factor (shown in Table 3-1)) for the constituent of <
The Agency- evaluated the, matrix spike recovery data to determine whether the
within the acceptable rtnfe of values as klrntififd in EPA's
(4)
(5)
of the treated waste
met by imluatty*
me
m tte TCLP extracts of tte treated waste obtained for other
codfjB* to 5Jf*T""j"^ if tte constituent could be treated to similar levels in
limited i
metals in a
for metal
to use data from tte performance of tfihitiTition and HTMR
ajDar flnaosTHM. CDsu^a^BaUBauH lav
^^^^ ••^^^^•^^ ^r^^m^^^^m^^^^^mm^^m ^^M
tte applicable
technologies that can either, recover tte metal(s) or incorporate the
to leaching. Tte Agency beUeves that tte •beat* treatment
(except anenk and mercury) is recovery and ttahitiiatinn, especially in
ital yiHiTi^m^f. HTMR appears to be tte most matrix-independent of
(Leu, it cnmittrnrty achieves tte same levels of treatment
HTMR also feneraDy decreases tte
into
a stable slag
A-2
-------
The use of HTMR is consistent with the national policy, identified m the Hazardous and
Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) to Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), to
reduce the quantity of hazardous constituents disposed (this is in contrast to non-recovery
technologies, such as stabilization, which are not intended to reduce die total metal concentration
or metal volume in the waste and in fact, can increase volumes being sent to landfills). In
addition, because metals are recovered instead of land disposed, ore processing is reduced, thus
saving energy and pollution of another source.
The Agency reviewed characterization and treatment performance data for HTMR and
rtahiliTation of certain metal-bearing wastes to determine if universal standards for metals based
on HTMR would be technology forcing. These data, shown in Tables A-3 and A-4, indicate
thaf universal standards for moat m***1* could be achieved by •••MH***^"* fof a wide variety of
nonwastewater mafrim, and therefore, EPA believes that universal standards for metals that are
based on HTMR would not be technology forcing. Additional characterization and performance
data for metal constituenti selected for regulation in universal standards may be found in the
rfanMima
Final r*t* TVv^«n~* far Ot^^f^^ttnn mmt PerfanMima af TByh Temperature Meta
Table A-l mmtnariTri die determination of the universal standards for the metal
constituents selected for regulation in nonwastewater forms of listed hazardous wastes, except
chromium (the table summarizing air determination of the universal standard for chromium is
in Table A-2). This table includes the waste code, treatment pa romance data, and
technology from which the universal standard was transferred, A consfirncnt-by-constituent
discussion of the deteiiiiinafinn of the universal standards is presented below.
D004- Arsenic
The universal standard for arsenic was determined to be S.O rag/L in the TCLP extract
based upon the F039 treatment standard. The F039 treaUneni standard was established as
equivalent to the toxicity fnararrrriific (TC) regulatory level for arsenic (D004).
The Agency nrahHthfd BOAT for arsenic as slag vitrification. The universal standard
was not based upon KD61-RTMR data because die Agency believes oat mis technology is not
"best* for uemtmeul of arsenic in universal standards wastes. The available slag vitrification
treatment standard data (KD31,K84, K101, K102, P010, P011.P036, P038, and U136) show
0V A«O fllCv^w CttSUlff 106
test). The oafiMrsal standard based on this value would yieklastandardof 5.6 mg/L using the
EP toxicity test. Because the characteristic level for anenk of 5.0 mg/L in me TCLP extract
is fimfltr in fnfnil^Hte to die standard 1*1 ki1'^**1^ from slag vitrification, the Agency believed
that it was valid to defimlt to the characteristic level for the universal standard for arsenic.
A-3
-------
The univenal standard for barium was determined to be 7.6 mg/L in the TCLP extract
baaed upon the K061-HTMR treatment standard data. The Agency chose to use these data
because they represent the treatment performance of a HTMR process. The Agency believes
that an universal standard based upon KQ61-HTMR treatment standard data could be routinely
met by industry using HTMR because the applicability of the HTMR process is matrix-
independent (Le., the technology consistently achieves the saine levels of treatment performance
rrgmflm of influent matrix compnshkins). Additionally, the Agency reviewed stabilization data
aiyj determined mat ft*^ universal standard for barium could be *rKtfvffd by ******1*'*itfffli fot a
wide variety of waste matrices. Tne Agency, therefore) does not believe mat the universal
The uuiveisal standard for cadmium was <1rlrrmlnr>1 to be 0.19 mg/L in the TCLP
extract based upon the K061-HTMR treatment standard data. The Agency chose to use these
data because they if present the treatment peiforinanflB of a arMR process. The Agency
believes that a universal standard based upon K061-HTMR tieauueui standard data could be
mntitirfy me* hy JnHnatry haeMMB tha applterfrimy «f tha HTMB jgnt*** ta m*tTrr-in^prw4fr^
(i.e*v the l^flflimlogy ^flniistently achieves the aame_levels of, treatment pBrfimnam?B regardless
'
standard data for cadmium and determined that the umvenal standard could be achieved by
stabilization flora wide variety of waste matrkes. Hie Agency, therefore, does not believe that
the universal standard would be technology forcing.
Hie univenal standard fir lead waa tHrtniiiM^I to be 0.37 mg/L in the TCLP extract
because they lepceaent the treatment peifoiinauce of a EFAfflt profess The Agency believes
that an uuiveisii iiinrtmi based upon K061-HTMR UBIIIIIMU iimdiid data could be routinely
met by mduatKy becanae the applicability of the uiAflt proceai is matrix^ndependent C^*e>v the
could b< achkfved by MhiliTitinn for
«•«-— -k - 4^___^^^_ -« --- -- ». «- -«« «kA* «^_ - - - • --- - - •
Tne Agency, uefuore, ooea not Deneve mat me umversai
The Agency pcomulgated two univenal standards for mercury, 0.20 mg/L in the TCLP
extract for low-mercury subcategory Mercury Recovery by Roasting/Retorting (RMERC)
A-4
-------
residues and 0.025 mg/L in the TCLP extract for low-mercury subcategory non-RMERC
residues. Low-mercury subcategory wastes are mercury wastes containing concentrations of
mercury less man 260 mg/kg. RMERC is the recovery of mercury by roasting/retorting.
Hie universal standard for mercury in low-mercury subcategory RMERC residua was
determined to be 0.20 mg/L in the TCLP extract. This determination was based upon the K106,
U151, P065, and P092 treatment standards for low-mercury subcategory RMERC residues,
which were ftitahlishflri as equivalent to the TC regulatory level for mercury (D009).
The universal standard for nvctwy in low-mercury fufrcatfgofy non-RMERC residues
was determined to be 0.025 mg/L in the 'if'i 9 fMiit'i This ttftmamittmtt^^ was hajcd upon the
K071, F039, K106, andU151 treatment standard data for low-mercury subcategory non-RMERC
of the technology selected aa BOAT for mercury in low-mercury subcategory wastes, acid
leaching.
D010-Selenium
Hie universal standard for selenium was determined to be 0.16 mg/L in the TCLP extract
based upon the K061-HTMR treatment standard dan. The Agency chose to use these data
because they represent the treatment performance of a HTMR process. The Agency believes
that a universal standard based upon K061-HTMR treatment standard data could be routinely met
by industry because the applicability of the HTMR process is matrix-independent (i.e., the
technology consistently achieves the same levels of treatment performance regardless of influent
matrix compositions). *MJ****HJ_ *w» *j*~~y ~**~* «*«KiK««t4«i* **»• «•«• ,w~™;».~4 th.»
the universal standard for selenium could be achieved by stabilization for a wide variety of waste
mafTim Hie Agency, therefore, does not believe that the universal standard would be
technology forcing.
DOll-SOfcr
The universal standard for silver was drtrrnrinfri to be 0.30 mg/L in the TCLP extract
based upon the K061-HTMR treatment standard data. The Agency chose to use these data
because they mmauit the treatment performance of a HTMR process. The Agency believes
mat an inii neiaal standard based upon K061-HTMR treatment standard data could be routinely
met by mdulJ&becaase the applicability of the HTMR process is matrix-independent (i.e., the
technology oflMialBndv yfrif'TS the HI?**** levels of treatment performance fttf^r^^w of influent
matrix compoaiUoni). Additionally, the Agency reviewed stabilization, treatment standard data
for silver and determined that the universal standard could be achieved by itahiHiafinn for a
wide variety of waste matrices. Hie Agency, therefore, does not betieve that the universal
standard would be technology forcing.
2121\2SS*« A-5
-------
The Agency developed a universal standard for chromium based on the
performance data presented in Table A-2. EPA evaluated waste chanrfrrinfion and
dan for chromium from seven! sources, including data on the
fff HTMB «ME itsMliitt*0" *«*••••«§» *• *** ««*•**«§ rkmmnm. EPA selected the
L dan presented in Tabk A-2 to develop the universal standiJdfbr chromium because
these dm n JIIIIM nl Uritmrinr of rhrnmnmi in difficult to treat wastes, including stripping
' nmy cleanout wastes £rom p^***1^ tanks. The
Agency bdievee mat these dan njjuistnl effluent values thai can be routinely achieved by
Table A-2
fonts of
for chromium in
TUs table mctodei the
chrominm was dem miaul to be 0.86 mg/L in the TCLP
standard developed fkcfDitbe r^*"**^**1* treatment pcifbtmance
The universal standard for
^ m m m J _^^—_^fc^» AlW^ ^^^^^^A^Hh^^^kA
DHflDB UDQiv iDB fXCHOuEOi*
in Tabk A-2.
A-6
-------
Table A 1
Treatment Performance Data Base for TC Metal Constituents (Nonwastewaters)
§'i|";-|H
t iy-^,f^.\
Ancme
QMS
5.0
EMI
0.013
K06I-OIS
1.14 (M)
IOJI, MM.
KtOI. K103.
POIO. VOII.
TC96, MM.
1.19
1.11 (90)
P039
Levrf
for Annie (D004)
3.9
7.6
K061
2.S1
K061-SKII
1.01(93)
52
P039. P013
12.1
DOOS
l.U(t5)
2.1
3.S
0.19
K061
< 0.060
K061-URD
1.15 (»7>
0.066
PM6, P007.
P90S. FOQ9,
F011. PB12.
P039.1100
0.017
P006
1.02 (97.9).
1.06 00)
2.1
3.72
0.14
0.052
K061
1.04(96)
2.41
Chnxniua (TotaQ
0.33
K061
-------
Table A-l (continued)
0.0M
1.7
0.073
nit. mi.
m». POM.
K100. EMM
IMS!
KMS.
KOO
0.093
1.14
KM2
POM
1.47 («•)
MS
-------
Table A-l (continued)
0.37
0.51
KBCI
KOOl.KOtT.
K100.F006.
P007. FOOI,
P013. POM.
U051. U144.
U145. U14*.
PI 10
<0.10
OJ5
K061-HRD
P006
1.32(16)
1.01(9X9)
2.t
1J7
0.37
K062.KIW
-------
Table A-l (continued)
0.023
0.20
K071.FOM.
K106. U1S1
(Uw
K10C.U1SI,
IMS. MR
(Lc^r
KD61-HKD
:K0J1
far Mveuqr (D009)
1.05 (M)
14$ (M)
2.S
.5.47
< -
'•- >CM (hut (be dctecCkM litoil. *
Mt of Ibe oooocotralioa ia uc«t«d wwUs. Aeeuracy oonwiion fcciar. *n4 vnh«bUity tutor.
1
-------
Table A-l (continued)
%z -s-ywim^s <
t£1*»ffi1*fltair:
(5)
0.16
K061
<«.05
S.7
POM. no.
PI 14. U304,
D010
1.11 (*>)
i.w (as)
2.1
7.15
Silver
0.30
K061
<0
K061-HRD
0.072
P006.P007.
POOI.P009.
P011. POI2.
F099. PI04
0.041
P006
1.32(76)
1.11(84.8)
2.1
1.29
<- Indicate* • value lea than the detection Kmit
•Performance data coaaiat of the coaotrtnlinn in Irealed wm*le, accuracy cormtioo Uctor. and variability ftOor.
Source: Reference 1
-------
Table A-2
Treatment Performance Data Base for Chromium (Nouwastewaten)
Thb oiunbcr (cprcaeNU •
fetor.
Some:
-------
Table A-3
Characterization Data and Treatment Performance Data for HTMR for Certain Metal-Bearing Wastes
<4-U
<0.«
0.04-1.41
S.MU
•.44-
1.17
1M-
S.IS
2.M-
4.n
O.OOO
I7.MO
17.1
<•-*.
174
0.1M
<1.1-15
<•-•*
I7I.BO»
3.17
I.HO
-------
Table A-3 (continued)
Characterization Data and Treatment Performance Data for HTMR for Certain Metil-Bearing Wastes
BOATI
loBPA
l» te KM1
BfA te *• fMfOMd ml* te MD6I
MqrtMO
-------
Table A-3 (continued)
Characterization Data and Treatment Performance Data for HTMR for Certain Metal-Bearing Wastes
UTIM:
IJM
tt-M
•.14-
•.II
3.7-14
CIS
X.I - 1.7
•.IS-
AM
M-U
II -41
-•.•M
IMM
2JJ-
4M
«.S - 7.2
I.X-SJ
- s.s
M: KM! BOAT I
I fa M0». KI06,1065. POO. «* UIS1
-------
Table A-3 (continued)
Ctmrarlfrifatlftii Data and Treatment PMf«»M|>^i>«'* Data for HTMR for Certain Metal-Bearing Wastes
-------
Table A-3 (continued)
Characterization Data and Treatment Performance Data for HTMR for Certain Metal-Bearing Wastes
rtt. IM40MOTOO.
r». MMOMMBIOO.
My II, 1MO.)
to ETA Ortotar IMI fa *• HIMR to* fee K06I (
fcrBMI. Dmftfeport.)
-------
Table A-4
Characterization Data and Treatment Performance Data for
for Certain Metal-Bearing Wastes
.
-------
Table A-4 (continued)
Characterization Data and Treatment Performance Data for Stabilization for Certain Metal-Bearing Wastes
• 1-1.$
2»
•.If
411
-------
Table A-4 (continued)
Characterization Data ami Treatment Performance Data for Stabilization for Certain Metal-Bearing Wastes
MlOATI
(••DATI
toBOATI
I lac DOM.
I fee MM.
IfcylMO
Hey WO
No:
N« 1004,
I fa DM* «4 UNI A*V
-------
Table A-4 (continued)
Characterization Data and Treatment Performance Data for Stabilization for Certain Metal-Bearing Wastes
At 144
• 'tour:
?•»«<*
rcir
**•«
TO* ,
OM
7.WO-
M.MO-
7M.MO
sis
u
•JM-
122
1J
•ill
S.M
1.4-14
•.IT
S.I
ND
ND
MD
ND
ND-
•.a
fat D007 umt Van (M«y IWO) -
by*
-------
Table A-4 (continued)
Characterization Data and Treatment Performance Data for Stanilhatlon for Certain Metal-Bearing Wastes
to, Hoai, BOM. Eioi.KMO, MM, DOIO. .M r •** u WMM a4*y
•
-------
Table A-4 (continued)
Characterization Data ami Treatment Performance Data for Stabilization for Certain Metal-Bearing Wastes
•.M-I.M
•JM
fcMiAMlnbrfl
i. 19M-WM.
1M7.
rMfMM kf EMT IM. fa Nnoo, ow. ifn
NDOO (*ff. |> CMMMI <
••••a** (A*. Q
12/9I4/92.
-------
Table A-4 (continued)
Puta mil Treatment Performance Data for Stabilization for Certain Metal-Bearing Wastes
1MI.
-------
Table A-4 (continued)
Characterization Data and Treatment Performance Data for Stabilization for Certain Metal-Bearinz Wastt
• No data.
ffSaute»: Draft Co«q»U*»o« «ad EMiriimlno of Meula
"Souic.: Draft Coa*ibb
-------
Table A-4 (continued)
Characterization Data and Treatment Performance Data for Stabilization for Certain Metal-Bearing Wastes
IWwC* ' .
•flM«--*••- "In)**
BDATU*
fa
V— **
-Tcur-5
<«.O
<0.
<0.01
•.SB
2^0-2.64
•••U-1.M
•.Z7-O.MI
».34->.c
•JO
<».«$-
0.01
•.OS-
•IMS
O.OS4.K
•.M
§.•14-
•.017
-------
Table A-4 (continued)
Characterization Data and Treatment Performance Data for Stabilization for Certain Metal-Bearing Wastes
•-•IS
•.lt-t.44
•.47-1.11
•.11-S.4Q
MM: Di»aCaavU«kM«adBnniMd<»«rM
tM, 1994 (RaJ BOAT B*ok«n
v2t. 1994 (HMl BOAT Back*
I far KD4t - K0» Watt*. ABTMI 19U).
, KD49. K050. K05I. and KO52, M.r 1P90>.
-------
Appendix B
Treatment Performance Data Base and
Methodology for Identifying Universal Standards
for Constituents in Wastewater
Forms of D004-D011 Wastes
-------
B.I Methodology fftr Pfff rm'ni1g WntffiffHtffr Universal Standards for TC Metok pflflf
D011
The Universal standards for regulated constituents in wastewater forms of D004-D011
wastes are based on the treatment performance data base from several sources, including the
Best Demonstrated Available Technology (BDAT) treatment performance data from several
sources, including the BDAT treatment data base, the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) data base, the Water Engineering Research Laboratory (WERL) data base,
(EPA-collected Wed Air Oxidation/Powered Activated Carbon Addition to Activated Sludge
Treatment (WAO/PACT*) data, the Engineering and Analysis Division (HAD) data base,
industry-submitted leachate treatment performance data, data submitted by the California Toxic
Substances Control Division, data in literature mat were not already part of the WERL data
base, and data in literature submitted by industry on WAO and PACT* treatment process. This
appendix presents the wastewater treatment performance data base and discusses use of the data
to determine BDAT and to calculate the universal treatment standards for the constituents
regulated in wastewater forms of D004-DO11 wastes.
Tables B-l and B-2 are data base and treatment technology keys, respectively, for the
data tables presented in this appendix. Tables B-3 through B-ll in this appendix present the
available wastewater treatment performance data for each constituent regulated in D004-D011
wastes. The data used to determine the universal standards are indicated with a footnote. A
discussion of the determination of me universal standards for each constituent regulated in D004-
D011 wastes is presented in Section B.2.
The calculation of BDAT treatment standards involves mice steps: (1) accuracy
correction of the treatment performance data to take into account any analytical interferences
associated with the chemical make-up of the samples; (2) determination of a variability factor
specific to each constituent in a treatment performance data set to correct for normal variations
in the performance of a particular technology over time; and (3) calculation of the treatment
standard, which is equal to the average effluent concentration multiplied by the accuracy
correction factor multiplied by the variability factor. For those cases where an accuracy
correction factor was not applicable (identified with a - on Tables B-4 through B-ll), the
universal standard was calculated as the product of the average effluent concentration and the
variability factor. The specific treatment performance data base used to determine the treatment
standards for TC metals regulated in wastewater forms of D004-D011 wastes are presented in
Tables B-4 through B-ll.
Universal standards were calculated using three values: the constituent concentration in
treated waste (Le., the average effluent concentration), an accuracy correction factor, and a
variability factor. A summary of the methodology used to determine the average effluent
concentrations, accuracy correction factors, and variability factors for each constituent selected
for regulation in universal standards wastewaters is presented below. The determination of the
accuracy correction factor and variability factor for each constituent is also presented below.
B-l
-------
The determination of the average effluent concentrations for each constituent selected for
regulation in universal standards wastewaters is presented in the constituent discussions in
Section B-2.
Effluent Concentration Averages
For each constituent, the average effluent concentration from the treatment performance
data identified as "best* was used in calculating the universal standard. For some constituents,
a detection limit represented the effluent concentration. That is, the constituent was treated to
a concentration less man that which could be detected using the appropriate analytical methods.
In these cases, the U.S. Environmental Agency (Agency) used the detection limit as the effluent
concentration. Similarly, in those cases where effluent concentrations were detected at
concentrations less man the detection levels routinely achievable using EPA-approved methods,
the Agency used the EPA method detection limit as the effluent concentration.
In some cases, the treatment effectiveness of one data set could not be distinguished from
other data sets, either because influent concentrations were not reported or the influent and
effluent concentrations of the data were similar. In these cases, more than one data set was
determined to be representative of BDAT. The Agency calculated an average effluent
concentration in these cases based on the average effluent values from these data sets.
In cases where appropriate treatment performance data were not available for a specific
constituent, the Agency transferred treatment performance data from a constituent judged to be
similar with respect to elemental composition and functional groups. EPA believes such
transfers are technically valid where the untested constituent has similar waste characteristics
affecting performance and treatment selection.
Accuracy Correction Factors
Accuracy correction actors account for analytical interferences associated with the
chemical matrices of the treated effluent samples. In those cases where an BAD variability
factor for Tenacity Characteristic CTC) metals regulated mUm\ersal Treatment Standards (UTS)
was used to ealgilata the treatment standard, the Agency chose not to use an accuracy correction
factor. Since BAD variability factors wen originally calculated to represent performance,
analytical, apd matrix variations, the use of an accuracy correction factor was not necessary for
these data. In cases where an BAD variability factor was not used, an accuracy correction factor
was determined and included in the calculation of the universal standard.
Accuracy correction factors are determined for each constituent by dividing 100 by the
lowest matrix spike recovery (expressed as a percent) value for that constituent Since matrix
spike data were not available for most of the data examined, analytical matrix spike data were
pooled from BDAT and leachate sources. Leachate matrix spike data were used to determine
2121\2Utoa B-2
-------
an accuracy correction factor in those cases where leachate treatment performance data were
used to establish a universal standard.
In cases where matrix spike data were not available for a specific constituent, but were
available for a similar class of constituents, matrix spike recovery data for the class of
constituents were transferred to the constituent of interest. All recovery values greater than 20
percent were averaged; an accuracy correction factor was determined based on the averaged
value. As stated in EPA's Methodology Background Document (3), matrix spike recovery
values less than 20 percent were considered unacceptable and were not used in developing
universal
In cases where matrix spike data were not available for the specific constituent and an
average accuracy correction factor could not be determined for a similar class of constituents,
a worst case accuracy correction factor was used. The worst ca« accuracy correction factor was
based on a matrix spike percent recovery of 20 percent (the lowest percent recovery that the
BDAT methodology considers acceptable). The calculated accuracy correction factor in this
worst case then equals 5 (100 divided by 20).
(For the TC metals, the corresponding UTS standards were derived from the HAD data.
As discussed above, accuracy correction factors were not used for the BAD data.)
Variability Factors
The variability factor accounts for the variability inherent in treatment performance,
treatment residual collection, and analysis of treated waste samples. A variability factor is an
estimate of the maximum variance of treated effluent values determined from a sample
population of daily data. Variability factors are calculate ** described in EPA's Methodology
Background Document^).
(For the TC metals, the variability factors were taken from the corresponding metals
regulated in UTS from the BAD data base. Additional information on variability factors used
in developing wastewater treatment standards in UTS are presented in the final BDAT
Background Document for Universal Standards, Volume B, Universal Standards for Wastewater
Forms of Listed Hazardous Wastes<2).
The variability factors calculated during the BAD regulatory effort were used for those
constituents for which a treatment standard was based on an BAD effluent limitation. The BAD
variability factors for metals are presented in Table B-l. For those metal constituents where the
universal standard was based on BAD data and an BAD variability factor was not calculated,
a pooled variability factor from the EAD-Combined Metals Data Base (CMDB) was used. This
pooled variability factor was derived from the variance estimates of seven metal constituents
(chromium, copper, iron, lead, manganese, nickel, and zinc).
2121\235MBfl
B-3
-------
For those constituents where a variability factor could not be calculated or an average
variability factor could not be determined, a variability factor of 2.8 was used. A variability
factor of 2.8 represents EPA's generic variability factor calculated assuming a lognorraal
distribution of effluent concentrations and an order of magnitude difference between the highest
and lowest effluent values.
Table B-l
EAD Variability Factors for Metal Constituents
^f^^^^^^^^^'^^ t
Cadmium
Chromium (total)
Lead
Nickel
Silver
Pooled Variability Factor
^^^m^iAamy^t^ >' -
5.3
4.85
3.51
4.22
4.5
4.100*
•His variability factor wu derived by pooling the variance
of ail
from tb0 Combined Mffrlt Data Bate (chromium, copper, iron, lead, •»••[•••••_ nickel, tod zinc).
Table B-2
Data Base Key for Wastewaten
:p||il|IC5fc|iIili
BDAT
WAO
EAD
OCPSF
CUDB
MF
NPDES
WERL
LEACHATB
EPA Wet Air Oxidatioo/PACI* T«t DaU
Eagmeenng *™^ Analysis Divisksn
Organic Owoiicais, Plutici, and Synthetic Fflwt (EAD)
OmMivfxJ Metals Data Bate (EAD)
^ '
MotilFmi*hin«(EAD)
Nitimil P^Ihitwit TMfrh*Tff* ^"tt"H*infl ^vstoni
Water Engineering Reeesrca Laboiatocy
\jpmf\tmfa Treatment p*ir<>ini»n«<» Data Submitted by TiyfiittrT
212l\2UMett
B-4
-------
Table B-2
Data Base Key for Wastewaters (continued)
Cbtlf ~f - '1 '':.""".•
CMA
TSCD
ART
WAOOII)
<-;%^^''C "^.vr.i-itotaie:"-. • • ' ill
Dili Submitted ir fv«Miwnt* to (fat Pn'Hhitftd Bui* KV MM ou»m^i
Mmifktnren AMociitka'i Cxrboo Dinlfida Tuk Foroe
Data Submitted by the Califormi TSG)
D^i fnm Pobluhed AiticlM
Wet Air Oridation/PACI* Date in Litentan Submitted by Indoitiy
Soofoe: Refenooe 2
B-5
-------
Table B-3
Key to Treatment Technologies
Code "•- ••••
AAS
AC
AFF
AL
API
AS
AirS
AnFF
AnL
BGAC
BT
CA
CAC
Chem/Cond
ChOx
ChOx/Pt
ChPt
Chied
CN/Ox
COAG
DAF
EC
Fil
FLOAT
GAC
'. •• • ' :\ •'••..:'•- (': Technology -..: . : .< ' -'.
Activated Alumina Sorption
Activated Carbon
Aerobic Fixed Film
Aerobic Lagoons
API Oil/Water Separator
Activated Sludge
Air Stripping
Anaerobic Fixed Film
Anaerobic Lagoons
Biological Granular Activated Carbon
Biological Treatment
Carbon Adsorption
Chemically Assisted Clarification
Chemical 'Conditioning
»
Chemical Oxidation [parentheses indicate the oxidation
chemical, Le., ChOx(ozone)]
Chemical Qxidation/PreciDitation
*
Chemical Precipitation
Chemical Reduction
Cyanide Oxidation
Coagulation
Dissolved Air Flotation
Electrochemical Treatment
Filtration
Flotation
Granular Activated Carbon
2121U3SMOB
B-6
-------
Table B-3 (continued)
::v^^l^®%V5r::
Qr/Rem
ffi
KPEG
L
LL
Neut
PACT*
RBC
RO
SBR
SCOx
Sed
SExt
SS
TF
UF
UV
WOx
^.::\. %v. ; .;< ^ xYxatontfa.*^ -' -^ .^":\,;/. ..
••. • • ^»
Grease/Oil Removal
Ion Exchange
Dechlorination Using Alkoxide
Lime
Liquid-Liquid Extraction
Neutralization
Powdered Activated Carbon Addition to Activated Sludge
Rotating Biological Contactor
Reverse Osmosis
Sequential Batch Reactor
Super Critical Oxidation
Sedimentation
Solvent Extraction
Steam Stripping
Triclding Filter
Ultrafiltration
Ultraviolet Radiation
Wet Air Oxidation
Additional code* included on TabksB-4 ttuough B-ll:
Activtted Sludge followed by Filtration.
"_w_" • IndkartM flat the two unite ire u»ed together, i.ft., UFwPAC • Ultnfiltnrion ming Powdered
Activated Ctrboo.
*_IB]* -
**"
of continnfflii flow.
Source: Reference 2
B-7
-------
eatment Stan a
A coostituent-by-constituent discussion of the determination of the universal standards for
wastewaters is presented below in Section B.2.
B.2 TV»tenninq%ji tf TreafrnMit Standards for WflStewater Forms nf D004-D011 Wastes
Wastewater treatment performance data for the Toritity Characteristic (TC) metals D004-
D011 are presented in Tables B-4 through B-ll. A constituent-by-constituent discussion of the
data used to calculate the universal standards for the constituents regulated in wastewater forms
of D004-D011 wastes is given below.
D004-Aisenk
BDAT for arsenic was identified as lime conditioning followed by sedimentation and
filtration (L+Sed+Kl). Lime conditioning followed by sedimentation and filtration was selected
as BDAT because this treatment train represents treatment performance data from the Engineer
and Analysis Division-Combined Metals Data Base (EAD-CMDB) that showed substantial
treatment of arsenic and a lower effluent concentration value than the other HAD data. The
Agency preferred the use of the EAD data base rather than other data sources because the BAD
data base represents a comprehensive source of wastewater treatment performance data with
longer-term sampling and a greater number of sample sets than otter wastewater treatment data
bases.
The universal stan^rd for awnfe yas falnila*^ "*«*£ *h» PAH mean long-term average
of 340 /ig/L and the EAD-CMDB variability factor. The determination of the resulting universal
standard for arsenic in wastewaters (1.4 mg/L) is shown in Table 4-1.
D005 - Barium
BDAT for barium was identified as lime conditioning followed by sedimentation and
filtration (L+Sed+Fil). Lime conditioning followed by sedimentation and filtration was selected
as BDAT because mis treatment train represents available treatment performance data from the
EAD-CMDB that showed substantial treatment of barium and a lower effluent concentration
value than the other EAD data. The Agency preferred the use of the EAD data base rather than
other data sources because the EAD database represents a comprehensive source of wastewater
treatment performance data with longer-term sampling and a greater number of sample sets than
other wastewater treatment data bases.
The universal standard for barium was calculated using the EAD mean long-term average
of 280 jxg/L and the EAD-CMDB variability factor. The determination of the resulting universal
standard for barium in wastewaters (1.2 mg/L) is shown in Table 4-1.
2121\2M\lnl
B-8
-------
D006 - Cadmium
BDAT for cadmium was identified as lime conditioning followed by sedimentation
(ChPt+Sed). Although lime conditioning followed by sedimentation and filtration (L+Sed+Fil)
and sedimentation followed by filtration (Sed+Fil) data were available from the EAD-CMDB,
the Agency believes that the lime conditioning followed by sedimentation data from the
(EAD-Metal Finishing (MF) data base are representative of effluent values that can be routinely
achieved by industry.
The universal standard for cadmium was calculated using the BAD mean long-term
average of 130 /tg/L and the EAD-MF variability factor. The determination of the resulting
universal standard for cadmium in wastewaten (0.69 mg/L) is shown in Table 4-1.
D007 - Qir*"11*"^ (Total)
BDAT for chromium (total) was identified as lime conditioning followed by sedimentation
(L+Sed). Although lime conditioning followed by sedimentation and filtration (L+Sed+Fil),
lime conditioning followed by sedimentation (L+Sed), and sedimentation followed by filtration
(Sed+Fil) data were available from the EAD-CMDB, the Agency believes that the lime
conditioning followed by sedimentation data from the EAD-MF data base are representative of
effluent values that can be routinely achieved by industry.
The universal standard for chromium (total) was calculated using (he BAD mean effluent
concentration of 572 jig/L and the EAD-MF variability factor. The determination of the
resulting universal standard for chromium (total) in wastewaten (2.77 mg/L) is shown in
Table 4-1.
D008-Lead
BDAT for lead was identified as lime conditioning followed by sedimentation (L+Sed).
Although lime conditioning followed by sedimentation and filtration (L+Sed+Fil), lime
conditioning followed by sedimentation (L+Sed), and sgdifcntafo" followed by filtration
(Sed+Fil) data were available from the EAD-CMDB, the Agency believes that the lime
conditioning followed by sedimentation data are representative of an effluent value that can be
routinely achieved by industry.
The universal standard for lead was caloilated usiiig the BAD mean Ic^-term average
of 198 ^g/L and the EAD-MF variability factor. The determination of the resulting universal
standard for lead in wastewaten (0.69 mg/L) is shown in Table 4-1.
2I21\2U\MA
B-9
-------
D009- Mercury
BDAT for mercury was identified as lime conditioning followed by sedimentation and
filtration (L+Sed+FU). Lime conditioning followed by sedimentation and filtration was selected
as BDAT because this treatment train represents treatment performance data from the EAD-
CMDB that showed a lower effluent concentration value than other HAD data. Although
sedimentation followed by filtration (Sed+Fil) data were available from EAD-CMDB, the
Agency believes that the lime conditioning followed by sedimentation and filtration treatment
train provide more effective treatment of wastewaters containing metals. The Agency preferred
the use of the EAD data base rather than other data sources because the BAD data base
represents a comprehensive source of wastewater treatment performance data with longer-term
sampling and a greater number of sample sets than other wastewater treatment data bases.
The universal standard for mercury was calculated using the EAD mean long-term
average of 36 pg/L and the EAD-CMDB variability factor. The determination of the resulting
universal standard for mercury in wastewaters (0.15 mg/L) is shown in Table 4-1.
D010 - Selenium
BDAT for selenium was identified as lime conditioning followed by sedimentation and
filtration (L+Sed+Fil). Lime conditioning followed by sedimentation and filtration was selected
as BDAT because this treatment train represents treatment performance data from the EAD-
CMDB that showed substantial treatment of selenium and a lower effluent concentration value
than the other EAD data. The Agency preferred the use of the EAD data base rather than other
data sources because the EAD data base represents a comprehensive source of wastewater
treatment performance data with longer-term sampling and a greater number of sample sets than
other wastewater treatment data bases.
The universal standard for selenium was raiflifofrd using the EAD mean long-term
average of 200 pg/L and the EAD-CMDB variability factor. The determination of the resulting
universal standard for selenium in wastewaters (0.82 mg/L) is shown in Table 4-1.
D011- Silver
BDAT for silver was identified as lime conditioning followed by sedimentation (L+Sed).
Although lime conditioning followed by sedimentation and filtration (L+Sed+Fil), lime
conditioning: followed by sedimentation (L+Sed), and sedimentation followed by filtration
(Sed+FU) data were available from EAD-CMDB, the Agency believes that the lime conditioning
followed by sedimentation data from the EAD-MF data base are representative of effluent values
that can be routinely achieved by industry,
The universal standard for silver was calculated using the EAD mean effluent
concentration of 96 pg/L and the EAD-MF variability factor. The determination of the resulting
universal standard for silver in wastewaters (0.43 mg/L) is shown in Table 4-1.
2121\2UMaa
B-10
-------
. Table B-4
Treatment Performance Data for Arsenk in Wastewaten
* ' ^-.^JW^V^ ^
ttcbttitgf •
AL
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
CAC
CAC(B)
CAC (8)
Chnd/R+S
ed+FQ
L+S«d
L+Sad+FO*
TV
:ilifii^f'
'JM**#1
-^ ' &&'*"?''''.
Ml .
RtB
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
BNOh
ta*
Ml
Ml
FuB
Ml
£•*&&?<**.
.^$&Y
N^VT;;.JV..-\
•Xv . / -y ;. ? O«sv.w
-•iKii>^-
*m~*
t.VWvV
0.00
50.00
40.00
50.00
75.00
19.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
0.00
33.00
27.00
34.00
67.00
99.69
NR
NR
NR
0.00
v."' ; '
WEHL
WERL
WBRL
WERL
WBRL
WERL
WERL
WERL
WERL
WBRL
WERL
WERL
WERL
WERL
WERL
WBRL
BOAT
BAD04DB
EAIXMDB*
WERL
*D«u uttd ta d
Theiiiflua*
NR
Source: RtfanM 1
B-ll
-------
Table B-S
Treatment Performance Data for Barium in Wastewaters
"*./i ':;;;f";:'-
• :'i .. ' !' ^ ', '
'iWfaittiiitr'
AL
AS
Al
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
W™ %fL v; • >
•"4- "*?/ •::••!•.<:
'.;.-.• Star; *;--
Ml
Ml •
Ml
Mi
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Mi
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
MI
pun
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Mi
i;; Ml
fc-'-M-
•'""'"MI
Ml
Pun
Ml
Ml
\-. ; ' ' | "
f.\ X '
&\gsjjj*-;;
IB
IB
IB
IB
IB
IB
IB
IB
IB
IB
IB
IB
201B
IB
IB
IB
IB
IB
IB
IB
11
IB
IB
IB
IB
IB
IB
IB
'• •/%/. -
&*«*•'•'
. LWt
*; <»*iv
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
Ml
rat
rat
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
rat
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
V -•••••rf'
~ Ijrfb^ .; • ^
'•-* \tw—^
100-1000
0-100
0-100
0-100
0-100
100-1000
100-1000
0-100
100-1000
0-100
100-1000
100-1000
100-1000
100-1000
100-1000
100-1000
100-1000
100-1000
100-1000
100-1000
100-1000
0-100
100-1000
0-100
100-1000
100-1000
100-1000
100-1000
v , f.if
N».rf
Ort«
NiM
<
6
6
6
6
5
«
6
<
«
4
«
35
«
<
6
«
4
tf
<
•
6
6
6
4
6
tf
6
:: .- AwnVr/V
^^•w-^r
47.000
22.000
irooo
17.000
54.000
17.000
49.000
19JOO
15.000
23.000
2.000
31.000
30400
94400
44.000
34.000
41400
110.000
67400
11400
59400
19400
64400
29400
46.000
34.000
16.000
11.000
.%'. / * *•
•ffm^v^K
•.-m^-
76.00
7540
72.00
79.00
4640
16.00
62.00
64.00
16.00
73.00
MJO
6540
7540
6140
63.00
81.00
7140
6740
61.00
95 JO
tZ.00
76.00
7740
7140
6240
69.00
M.OO
15.00
' . ' ' ' '•'
WBW.
WERL
WBRL
WBRL
WBRL
WBRL
WERL
WERL
WERL
WERL
WBRL
WERL
WERL
WERL
WERL
WERL
WBRL
WERL
WERL
WERL
WERL
WBRL
WERL
WERL
WERL
WERL
WERL
WERL
B-12
-------
Table B-5 (continued)
•% -ii
iPl^-.*fcWf*
"Q§am&&8»>>
ft^fpidlBy^
IB
IB
IB
IB
IB
. IB
NR
rat
IB
IB
IB
IB
IB
IB
IB
IB
IB
IB
IB
IB
IB
f!f:;': '<:i
.•JMKdM'
ii^*«k;.^;'
&**&*••
rat
rat
N»
rat
rat
rat
rat
rat
rat
rat
rat
rat
rat
rat
rat
rat
rat
rat
rat
rat
rat
'. :::''AlB|*l|r:;,. -''
.x°3-v j* . . .•• .•¥*'
\CwtMtrawM:
x!.*N*n*--^'
0-100
100-1000
100-1000
100-1000
100-1000
100-1000
MOO
2600
100-1000
0-100
0-100
0-100
100-1000
100-1000
100-1000
0-100
100-1000
100-1000
100-1000
0-100
100-1000
" ', :',:,•:• '••
':**.*
": o^t:-
Nte
6
tf
«
<
6
6
rat
rat
6
6
6
6
6
«
6
6
6
<
6
6
6
| vjjjy :;'
•:C«N«MlfMiM':
•^''""WW^*^
21.000
32400
M.OOO
31.000
100.000
43.000
420.000
210.000
26.000
33.000
13.000
32.000
72.000
120.000
110.000
43.000
53.000
79.000
47.000
17.000
140.000
i- ;.•
B*M«tf
^-^w^^
72.00
73.00.
61.00
19.70
44.00
73.00
NR
rat
71.00
39.00
S3.00
61.00
52.00
62.00
21.00
49.00
71.00
58.00
57.00
10.00
39.00
\ •• •. •* v,. \. '. ^
•^K'i.v • ,: :«-'_ A
WBW.
WBRL
WBU.
WHM.
WBU.
WBRL
EAD-CMDB
HAIVCMDB-
WERL
. WERL
WERL
WERL
WERL-
WERL
WERL
WERL
WERL
WERL
WERL
WERL
WERL
NR-Natnpaittd
Source: R«famM 2
B-13
-------
Table B-6
Treatment Performance Data for Cadmium in Wastewaters
-. Trfrnl.p-
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
CAC
CAC(B)
ChOx/Pl(B)
Tlfl llm
:.: fibe
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Pun
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
• Ml
Fun
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Puffl
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
BMCfc
-. ikflty •
243A
234A
234A
234A
243A
201B
167B
IB
IB
234A
IB
IB
167B
IB
IB
167B
IB
IB
IB
IB
167B
97SB
IB
IB
IB
393A
63SB-
24IA
Dtdethft,
UUt
:,'.!*/«,.<
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
;" %M|tOf
<*.. 4j0|>. -:
0-100
0-100
0-100
0-100
0-100
0-100
0-100
0-100
0-100
0-100
0-100
0-100
0-100
0-100
0-100
0-100
0-100
0-100
0-100
0-100
0-100
0-100
1000-10000
0-100
0-100
0-100
0-100
10000-100000
N*«f
D*a
hi*
NR
7
7
7
NR
10
NR
7
6
7
6
6
NR
6
6
NR
7
6
6
6
NR
NR
6
6
6
NR
1
1
.Alarm •!
••••&„ wu*! AY
OJOO
0.100
0.100
5JOO
1.000
7.000
1.000
2.000
7.000
0.100
2.000
3.000
1.000
5.000
2.000
1.000
5.000
2.000
6.000
3.000
1.000
21.000
65.000
96.000
15.000
5.300
30.000
900.000
•-• Wrv-
90.90
99.41
99.47
6S.OO
1540
30.00
95JO
60.00
16.00
95.SO
S7.00
KM
90.90
12.00
10.00
93 JO
$8.00
67.00
40.00
62.00
97.SO
77.00
94.10
90.10
91.20
44.00
75.00
91JO
••. "•••
WBRL
WBUL
WBRL
WERL
WBRL
WBRL
WBRL
WBRL
WBRL
WBRL
WBRL
WEJ
WE&i.
WBRL
WBRL
WBRL
WBRL
WERL
WBRL
WERL
WBRL
WERL
WBRL
WERL
WBRL
WBRL
WERL
WERL
2121\233\tt*
B-14
-------
Table B-6 (continued)
'*».*
24U
NR
10000D-1000000
100.000
WBRL
Oft
Ml
J45B
NR
1000-10000
11.000
99J1
WHU.
L+M*
MI
NR
NR
NR
OS
130.000
NR
RAMIP
2541
NR
0-100
u
34.000
40.00
WEIL
L+M
Mi
NR
NR
1004*30
NR
79.000
NR
EA&OIDB
L-ffcd+FB
Ml
NR
NR
39-2119
NR
49.000
NR
BADOfDB
Ml
NR
NR
100-3SM
NR
IOJOOO
NR
BADO4DB
TF
Ml
IB
NR
0-100
16.000
76X0
WBRL
TF
Ml
IB
NR
0-100
2.000
9240
WERL
SOOTM:
B-15
-------
Table B-7
Treatment Performance Data for Chromium (Total) in Wastewaters
Tir^nhp
AL
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
TKhMbfr
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Pufl
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
PuO
Ml
Ml
MT
Fun
Ml
Ml
Ml
^v.i •••;'>
• •>???:;-' -:f'";
.<-£<£|;Sj«:;,:--::
rttHtr
IB
234A
IB
167B
IB
IB
234A
IB
167B
IB
243A
IB
IB
IB
IB
234A
IB
IB
19SB
234A
234A
IB
IB
243A
IB
IB
IB
IB
•' *J^^^w4b^tf
.•f *^^^^^^^^
'•^lifcrtP"^
To««$?
rat
NR
MR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
rat
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
y' ' J^^f :K-~
i^'^iUM* .,..:;:
t'friCiMMtMlMi'';:!
??i*.frgte •-:•
100-10000
0-100
0-100
0-100
0-100
0-100
0-100
0-100
0-100
0-100
0-100
0-100
0-100
0-100
0-100
0-100
0-100
0-100
0-100
0-100
100-1000
100.1000
100-1000
100-1000
1000-10000
100-1000
100-1000
100-1000
N«.rf
,'Oidr,
Ntes
6
7
6
NR
6
7
7
6
NR
6
NR
6
6
6
6
7 ;
6
6
33
7
7
«
6
NR
6
<
6
6
' Amp
.^•MttHhil
•••:•- "fclWvV.
130.000
7.000
29.000
9.000
5.000
22.000
10.000
6.000
3.000
12.000
124)00
36.000
35.000
6.000
11.000
34.000
36.000
24.000
40.000
3.000
14.000
16.000 ,
40.000
21.000
62.000
59.000
19.000
ss.ooo
'*«•«•*'
'"•••m-"-
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
. NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
'::tewni;::
i--:m*$
n M
t4M
64M
72.00
90 M
69.00
12.00
15.00
96.10
76 M
13.00
62.00
65.00
S9.00
71.00
51.00
64.00
70.00
79.00
9440
(9.00
17.00
76.00
77.00
9540
16.00
19.00
14.00
-• ' ' :- v ' ' '
WBRL
WBRL
WBRL
WBRL
WBRL
WBRL
WERL
WERL
WBRL
WBRL
WERL
WERL'
WERL
WERL
WERL
WBRL
WERL
WERL
WBRL
WERL
WERL
WERL
WERL
WERL
WERL
WERL
WERL
WBRL
2121\235Metf
B-16
-------
Table B-7 (continued)
N
\ \
*- \ ^^*.
Tirhiilw
AS
AS
AS
AS
Ai
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
CAC
CAC(B)
CbO*/Pl(B)
ChFl
ChPt(B)
ChFKB)
cu*+ro(B)
CMH-Fil (B)
L-fS*f
Chnd/Fl+
s«d+Ri
O N
^JrtOBPKDr
x^cStot, v
Ml
Mi
Ml
Ml
Hot
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
BMCfc
B_di
Ml
.H*£r:
Fi^T-
n*
not
Ml
Ml
v^ *
* V
< *.
*dKr
167B
IB
167B
IB
1290
IB
IB
IB
IB
IB
Mil
2MA
IB
IB
IB
IB
IB
393A
63IB
24IA
MSB
254
2S4B
2S4B
254B
rat
KD62
V >*»
•*W~*L.»^
^•^^^^^^^™v>
5 tou^'
Ml
NR
NR
KR
NB
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
50
NR
iMfHt %,
sj ^••^^BBB* «!•.«<•
y/ jjj^^^^j^y^., vv
s"5«"S:
100-1000
100-1000
100.1000
100-1000
UXXMOOOO
100-1000
1000-10000
100-1000
1000-10000.
100-1000
100-1000
NO-1000
100-1000
100-1000
100-1000
100-1000
100-1000
100-1000
100-100*
1000-10000*
10000-lOOOOt}
100-1000
10000-100000
10000-100000
100-1000
(M5400
70417000
\<
Wfcrf
vl««:
iHlttv
NR
6
NR
6
3
«
«
<
w
«
35
7
7
6
6
6
6
NR
1
1
1
16
14
14
16
31
9
" fan*"-
(.^MMMtn^M
XX0(*«>?
6.000
16.000
1LOOO
4IXXJO
390.000
26.000
110A10
51UMO
140AM)
19400
51400
20408
46400
2*400
35.000
50400
19400
40.000
50.000
0500
34400
77400
170.000
47.000
75.000
572.000
57400
*» V --VtfvN
fsi?
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
KR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR .
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
\NS ^> jy'y, SMaa
B-17
-------
Table B-7 (continued)
* * . "* "".
•&*(ir''J'&5f '<$'•*'<%•• ^'ty
•^Illllliiufcj
Ond/Pl+
M+n
Fll
L+fad
L+M+Fi
PACT*
M
s*d+pa
TP
TF
TF
TF
TF
TF
TF
Tuiiihp
,^.8h» • :«
PuB
Fa*
Pott
FOB
Riot
POol
Pun
p»n
FOB
Pul
Pul
Pul
Pun
Pun
•* ".•'.'• \\
*&•* °?
':, :.•;<"%
F«d«y
KD62
isa
NK
HE
12M»
12MB
HR
IB
IB
IB
IB
IB
IB
IB
•^v^;:"' * ''
DMCtiM
jj:.-.&te»^
/•WW^;-
K&
MR
NB,
HK
NR
KB,
HR
HR
KR
HR
KR
HR
KR
KR
x-'; *Hgint"?: •>
• - '' /liBtfnt^' :
•^ • JP^^^^^fefv^rfl^BB^. :'*v
^::«»>.^ ^-^-A
iklr
D*l
-,TstaHV
11
14
KR
KR
3
3
KR
«
6
«
«
«
6
6
^- *«w«i£ ;.'
?' ' ,'ltaJlif •&"';'
A- ^/>.'/^P^B**r ^>y\'V-. ^
135.000
39,000
14.000
70DOO
33AJOO
1100400
10400
57.000
34.000
15.000
«.ooo
110.000
44.000
17400
. < '•''
'•iftt&Ntf.C.
s;«':->
61.0
KR
KR
KR
KR
KR
KR
KR
HR
HR
KR
HR
NR
KR
'~^^L^^:X
. >jVhVHVC^V>
'.'lil^x
HR
90 JO
HR
HR
7140
M.OO
HR
54.00
(9.00
67.00
23.00
25.00
71.00
41.00
<<«' "yy.r "
>...w r-y.i. j .
BOAT
WBRL
BADOIDB
BADOJDB
WBRL
WBRL
BADOfDB
WBRL
WBRL
WBRL
WBRL
WBRL
WBRL
WERL
^Ib* iafluMt eooMfltotiM WM NpotMd u bftiwfa dw fug*.
KR«Nomparttd
SOOMC: R«bnac«2
2121\235ted
B-18
-------
Table B-8
Treatment Performance Data for Lead in Wastewaters
'" \; -'
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
AS
. S J ;." s\
:Tmhiiiny'::
:. •: &»•' • :
PuD
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
Pull
FuO
Ml
Fun
PUD
Ml
Pun
Ml
Pun
Ml
PUtt
Ml
Ml
Ml
Ml
PuB'V""
MK-V"'
Ml
PUD
Ml
Ml
', •..••,: 'A '.
*• '• "*' • *%.» '"' ft ^
'! lktt$i:;
IB
IB
IB
201B
167B
167B
234A
IB
167B
234A
IB
167B
234A
IB
243A
201B
234A
12MB
IB
IB
IB
1MB
IB
USA
IB
234A
IB
IB
"" "• <'<
'JMx&m-
'^•iMk-1--
'"3*1*^
NR
MR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
*"*•*"'' 3mini " •
:vo-V lafloM"
':; Cmaattfkm '•'
:^:(ftfU^:-,,
100-1000
0-100
0-100
0-100
100-1000
0-100
0-100
0-100
100-1000
0-100
1000-10000
0-100
0-100
0-100
0-100
100-1000
0-100
1000-10000
0-100
100-1000
0-100
0-100
100-1000
0-100
100-1000
0-100
0-100
100-1000
Ntrf
Dttt
•»aUf
6
t
6
10
NR
NR
7
6
NR
7
«
NR
7
«
NR
«
7
3
6
6
6
33
6
NR
6
7
6
6
Ann*
, EfflM* '
. :-WU •>'
K.OOO
20400
20400
50400
16.000
17.000
1.000
50.000
12.00»
1.000
59.000
21.000
ND
20.000
5.400
70400
1.000
650400
44.000
25.000
20.000
40.000
70.000
2JOO
47.000
1.000
24.000
56.000
R«B8W7
-;-.w
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
taMmf-
' (*> ;*:•
$7.00
66.00
66.00
34.00
1640
7340
98.70
50.00
90.20
9SJO
95.10
52.00
91.00
70.00
M.OO
50.00
97.10
61.00
52.00
U.OO
64.00
50.00
50.00
91.10
75.00
97.10
70.00
57.00
< . ^ •
WBRL
WBRL
WBRL
WBRL
WBRL
WBRL
WBRL
WBRL
WBRL
WBRL
WBRL
WBRL
WBRL
WBRL
WBRL
WBRL
WBRL B
WBRL
WBRL
WBRL
WBRL
WERL
WBRL
WERL
WBRL
WERL
2121\235Mca
B-19
-------
Table B-8 (continued)
AS
M
IB
NR
100-1000
304)00
'NR
7»4»
WBRL
AS
7751
NR
100-1000
NR
66.000
NR
404)0
WHBL
AS
NR
100-1000
9TOOO
NR
234)0
WBRL
AS
IB
NR
100-1000
534)00
NR
C7.00
WBRL
CAC
393A
NR
100-1000
NR
3X000
NR
TIM
WBRL
chnd/it+
j«d+ra
Ml
00
NR
10000-212000
11
104)00
NR
BOAT
L-t-SW
MI
MR
NR
NR
511
191000
NR
NR
RA1W
n
Not
2MB
NR
100-1000
14
1004)00
NR
634)00;
WBBL
L+Std
Ml
NR
NR
100-29200
NR
1204MO
NR
NR
BAD-
CMDF
L+M+R
Ml
NR
NR
100-29300
NR
NR
NR
CMD1
PACT*
Hal
1294B
NR
1000-10000
500 Off)
NR
75.00
WEBL
POM
12MB
NR
1000-10000
2000 000
NR
714)0
WBBL
Ml
NR
NR
100-29200
NR
304WO
NR
NR
BAD-
CMDB
Tf
Mi
IB
NR
0-100
204)00
NR
754)0
WBBL
IP
M
IB
NR
100-1000
130.000
NR
194)0
WBBL
SOHM:
B-20
------- |