ASSESSMENT OF INDUSTRIAL HAZARDOUS WASTE PRACTICES
IN THE METAL SMELTING AND REFINING INDUSTRY
Volume III
Ferrous Smelting and Refining
This final report (SW-145o,3) describes work performed
for the Federal solid waste management programs
under contract no. 68-01-2604
and is reproduced as received from tne contractor
The report is in four volumes: (I) Executive Summary, (II) Primary
and Secondary Nonferrous Smelting and Refining, (III) Ferrous Smelting
and Refining, and (IV) Appendices
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
1977
-------
This report has been reviewed by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency and approved for publication. Its publication does not signify
that the contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, nor does mention of commercial products
constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the U.S. Government,'
An environmental protection publication (SW-145c.3) in the solid waste
management series.
-------
ABSTRACT
Investigations of on-land disposal of process and pollution
control residuals from the United States metal smelting and refining
industry were conducted. This volume presents the results of studies of
the U.S. ferrous smelting and refining industry including iron and steel
(SIC 3312), iron and steel foundries (SIC 332), ferroalloys (SIC 3313), .
and primary metal products not elsewhere classified (SIC 3399). Volume
II of this report includes the results of investigations of hazardous
waste generation and treatment and disposal in the primary and secondary
nonferrous smelting and refining industry. Volume I summarizes major
findings in both ferrous and nonferrous categories. Characteristics of
each industry sector, including plant locations, production capacities,
and smelting and refining processes, have been identified and described,
Land-disposed or stored residuals, including slags, dusts, and
sludges, have been identified and characterized by physical and chemical
properties. State, regional and national estimates have been made of
the total quantities of land-disposed or stored residuals' and potentially
hazardous constituents thereof.
Current methods employed by the ferrous metals industry for
the disposal or storage of process and pollution control residuals on
land are described. Principal methods include lagoon storage of sludges,
and open dumping of slags, sludges and dusts. Methods of residual
treatment and disposal considered suitable for adequate health and
environmental protection have been provided. Finally, the costs incurred
by typical plants in each smelting and refining category for current and
environmentally sound residual disposal or storage on land have been
estimated.
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The EPA Project Officers responsible for overall direction of
this program were Messrs. Allen Pearce, and Timothy Fields, Jr., Office
of Solid Waste, Hazardous Waste Management Division. Technical program
performance was vested with Calspan Corporation, Buffalo, New York. The
Calspan Project Engineer was Mr. Richard P. Leonard. Dr. Robert Ziegler,
Calspan Consultant, assumed technical program responsibility in the Iron
and Steel, Ferroalloy, and Iron and Steel Foundry sectors. Mr. Hans
Reif of Calspan provided cost analyses•of waste treatment and disposal
technology. Mrs. Sharron Pek and Mr. Michael Wilkinson of Calspan
assisted in plant visits and waste sampling and analysis.
Assistance in industry characterization and review of draft
reports was provided by the following associations:
American Iron and Steel Institute . . ;
'Ferroalloy Association
American Foundrymen's Society
Appreciation is extended to the American Iron and Steel
Institute .which recommended and enabled the extensive composite sampling
and analyses program to be carried out in the iron and steel sector. In
addition appreciation is extended to the many companies who allowed
plant visits and interviews, and supplied samples for chemical analyses.
"IV
-------
TABLE -OF-CONTENTS
Section
ABSTRACT ill
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS i v
LIST OF FIGURES , vi
LIST OF TABLES vi -j
I. CONCLUSIONS.. , , ,. 1
II. INTRODUCTION 3
III, FERROUS METAL SMELTING AND REFINING. , 5
1. Iron and Steel (SIC 3312) 6
2. Iron and Steel Foundries (SIC 332) 70
3. Ferroalloys (SIC 3313) 97
4. Primary Metal Products Not Elsewhere Classified
(SIC 3399) 145
LIST OF REFERENCES 149
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
FigureNo. • Page
1 Flow Diagram For Iron and Steel Making 11
2 Foundry Operations , 74
3 Ferromanganese and Silicomanganese Production 101
4 Process and Solid Waste Flow Diagram For Ferronickel
Production , 103
VI
-------
LIST OF-TABLES
Table No. Page
1 Major United States Steel Ingot Producers, 1972 , 7
2 State Distribution of United States Iron and Steel
Production Capacity, 1974 8
3 EPA Regional Distribution of U.S. Iron and Steel
Capacity, 1974 ... ............................. . . ..... . . 9
4 Production Data For Typical Integrated Steel Plant ..... 15
S Waste Generation Factors For Iron and Steel Plants ..... 21
6 Yearly Generation of Residuals By Typical Iron and
Steel Plant .... ..................... . ......... . ....... . 23
7 Estimated State, Regional and National Land Disposed
Wastes From Iron and Steel Production ..... ............. 27
8 Summary Table, Level I, II and III Treatment and
Disposal Technology, Iron and Steel ........ ...... ..... .. 46
9 Cost of Level III Treatment and Disposal Technology,
Integrated Steel Mill - Pickle Liquor Sludge ... ...... .. 66
10 Cost Summary 'For Treatment and Disposal Technologies,
Iron and Steel .................. . ........ . . ............ 69
11 State, Regional, and National Shipments of Iron and
Steel Castings , 1973 ..................... ...... ........ 71
12 Waste Factors For Iron and Steel Foundries ...... ....... 78
13 Yearly Generation of Waste Residuals by Typical Iron
and Steel Foundries ............ . ......... . ....... ...... 79
14 Estimated State, Regional and National Land Disposed
Wastes From Iron and Steel Foundries ............ ....... 80
15 Producers of Ferroalloys in the United States, 1972 .... 98
16 State, Regional and National Distribution of Ferroalloy
Plants By Process
99
-------
LIST OF TABLES (Cont.)
Table No. Page
17 . Waste Generation Factors, Ferroalloy Production 108
18 Yearly Generation of Residuals by Typical Ferroalloy
Plants ... • '. 109
19 Estimated State, Regional and National Solid Waste
for the Ferroalloy Industry .,..,,,, 110
20 Summary Table, Level I, II and III Treatment and
Disposal Technologies'- Ferroalloys 116
21 Cost of Level'I Treatment and Disposal Technology -
Ferromanganese and Silicomanganese 127
22 Cost of Level I Treatment and Disposal Technology -
Ferrochrome 130
23 Cost of Level I Treatment and Disposal Technology -
Ferronickel 134
24 Cost-of Level III Treatment and Disposal Technology -
Ferromanganese and Silicomanganese , 137
25 Cost of Level III Treatment and Disposal Technology
. Ferrochrome 138
26 Cost of Level III Treatment and Disposal Technology
Ferronickel , 139
27- Summary Costs, Ferromanganese and Silicomanganese ...... 141
28 Summary Costs, Ferrochrome 142
29 Summary Costs Ferronickel 143
30 Geographic Distribution of Miscellaneous Primary Metal
Product Manufacturing Firms, 1972 (SIC 3399} 146
31 Production of Metal Powders 147
32 Disposition of Residuals From Metal Powder Production .. 148
vm
-------
SECTION I '
- ,• CONCLUSIONS
The ferrous smelting and refining industry disposes'or stores
large quantities of process and pollution control residuals on land.
These residuals are predominantly inorganic slags, sludges, and dusts
containing oxides and other'compounds of iron, silicates, and trace
metals. The only highly organic sludge encountered is decanter tar
sludge from iron and steel industry byproduct coke plants. In addition
to slags, sludges and dusts, the iron and steel foundries dispose of
significant quantities of waste sand on land. Significant quantities of
acid waste pickle liquor and waste, oil are produced at iron and steel
plants and usually handled by contract disposal services for reclamation
or disposal.
The principal- potentially hazardous constituents found in
ferrous smelting and refining residuals are heavy metals including
chrome, copper, zinc, lead, and nickel, and fluorides. Coke plant
wastes contain phenols, cyanides, ammonia, oils and greases. Phenol and
cyanide appear to a much lesser extent in blast'furnace dust and wet
scrubber sludges as well. Foundry sands may contain phenol* as a result
of the use of phenolic binders which are not degraded by process heat.
Some mill scales from steel plant rolling'mills contain significant
amounts of oils and grease.
The predominant practice used in the ferroalloy and iron and
steel industries for the disposal of non-recyclable slag and dust resi-
duals is open dumping. Because the iron and steel industry generally
d'ewaters sludges before disposal, sludges are more often open dumped
rather than contained in lagoons. The foundry industry produces relatively
small quantities of sludge and generally mixes them with waste sands and
dusts before land disposal. The ferroalloy industry is more likely to
employ lagoons for containment of sludges.
The iron and steel industry generally reclaims iron from slags
before land disposal or sale as road ballast-or aggregate, A much
higher percentage of blast furnace slag is sold because of lower density
and greater chemical stability than basic oxygen or electric furnace
slag. Approximately 80% of mill scales generated, in steel mills is
recycled to recover iron value. Blast furnace dust is normally recycled
to sinter or blast furnaces while basic oxygen furnace dust is occasionally
recycled to sinter. The high zinc content of electric furnace dust and
many basic oxygen furnace (BOF) dusts generally makes it impractical to
recycle these dusts. The industry is attempting to develop technology
for accepting greater quantities of dusts and sludges as sinter or blast
furnace inputs. In a similar manner the ferroalloy industry which
generally cannot accept dusts as furnace inputs because of trace metal
contamination is exploring technology for greater recycling of dusts.
-------
The foundry industry directly recycles significant quantities of
mold sand and reclaims significant quantities of core sand for recycle.
The presence of potentially hazardous constituents in slags,
sludges, sands, and dusts has been shown including heavy metal and fluorides.
Solubility tests described in Appendix B of this report indicates that
some of these hazardous constituents may be leached from some wastes.
In general, slags were found to solubilize to a lesser extent than.sludges
or dusts. Process wastes have been categorized as potentially hazardous
or not hazardous based on the results of the .solubility tests and con-
sideration pf physical (i.e. particle size) and chemical properties.
Practices to protect ground and surface waters in the event of
demonstrated significant leaching of potentially hazardous constituents '
include the use of-lined lagoons for storage or permanent disposal of
sludges. Leachable sludges which are dredged or pumped from lagoons or
settling pits and dumped on land can often be chemically "fixed" so that
leaching of heavy metals is prevented according to fixing chemical manu-
facturers. Alternatively, sealing of soil in disposal areas with bentonite
or other sealants should prevent leachate percolation.
For those slags,, dusts, sludges, and or other land-disposed
or stored solid residues shown to, or suspected to solubilize toxic con-
stituents significantly, then soil sealing of disposal or storage areas
would be needed. Collection of runoff from disposal dumps containing slags,
sludges or dusts with leachable heavy metals or other potentially hazardous
constituents may be needed. Collected runoff would require treatment
before discharge or retention and evaporation in lagoons.
Costs for present and environmentally adequate potentially
hazardous waste treatment and disposal are given for each smelting and
refining catego.ry.
-------
SECTION II
INTRODUCTION
This report is the result of study commissioned by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency to assess "Industrial Hazardous Waste
Practices in the Smelting and Refining Industry, Concurrently, the
USEPA is pursuing similar studies of other industry categories. This
program is intended to provide the USEPA with as detailed and pertinent
information on the generation, management, treatment, disposal, and
costs related" to wastes considered to be "potentially1hazardous."
Such information will be used by the USEPA in developing guidelines or
standards for the management of hazardous wastes.
Throughout this report whenever the terms "hazardous wastes" or
"potentially hazardous wastes" are used, it should be kept in mind that
no final judgements are intended as to such classification. It is
recognized and understood that additional information will be required
as to the actual fate of such materials in a given "disposal" or "manage-
ment" .environment before a final definition of "hazardous waste" evolves
and is used. As an' example, for certain of the waste streams identified
in this report, the USEPA is currently supporting other studies designed
to investigate leaching characteristics in various soil and moisture con-
ditions.
-------
Page Intentionally Blank
-------
SECTION III
FERROUS METAL SMELTING AND REFINING
This section presents the results of investigations and analyses
of on-land disposal or storage of process and pollution control residuals
from the United States ferrous smelting and refining industry including
iron and steel,, iron and steel foundries,.ferroalloys and ferrous metals
not elsewhere classified such as metal powders. Characteristics of each
industry sector including plant locations, production capacities and
smelting and refining processes have been identified and described.
Land disposed or stored residuals including slags, dusts, sands
and sludges have been identified and characterized physically and chemically.
State, regional and national estimates have been made of the total quantities
of land disposed or stored residuals and potentially hazardous constituents
thereof for 1974, 1977, and 1983.
Current methods employed by the ferrous metals industry for the
disposal or storage of.process and pollution control residuals on land
are described. Principal methods include lagoon storage of sludges and
open dumping of slags, sludges, dusts and sands. Methods of residual treat-
ment and disposal considered suitable for adequate health and environmental
protection have been provided. Finally, the costs incurred by typical
plants in each primary smelting and refining industry for current and
environmentally sound residual disposal or storage on land .have been esti-
mated.
-------
1.0 IRON AND STEEL
1.1 INDUSTRY CHARACTERIZATION
The United States steel industry is very large. The industry
ranks third in the nation, behind the automotive and petroleum industries,
in the value of its total shipments and, with approximately 487,000
employees, is second only to the automotive industry in the number of
people on the direct payroll. Over the decade since 1962, steel industry
sales have increased 60%, from sales of $14.0 to over $22.0 billion
(Ref. 1). Steel mills may range from, comparatively small plants to
completely integrated steel complexes. Even the smallest of plants will
generally represent a fair sized industrial complex. Because of the
wide product range, the operations will vary with each facility.
Approximately ninety-two per cent.of the 1972 total United
States annual steel ingot production was produced by fifteen major steel
corporations. This total also represents 22,5% of the world total of
556,875,000 metric tons (625,000,000 tons). Table 1 presents the pro-
duction breakdown by corporation. Tables 2 and 3 list the number of
steel plants by state, EPA regional, and national total iron and steel
capacity. The capacity by each of the three major steel producing modes
(i.e. basic oxygen furnace, open hearth furnace, and electric furnace)
are also given in these tables.
Three, basic steps are involved in the production of steel.
First, coal is converted to coke. Second, coke is then combined with
iron ore and limestone and fired in a blast furnace to produce iron.
Third, the iron is purified into steel in either an open hearth or basic
oxygen, or furnaces. Electric furnaces remelt and refine predominantly
scrap iron and steel. Further refinements include degassing by subjecting
the steel to a high vacuum. Molten steel is usually cast into ingot
molds but the use of a process called continous casting is increasing
steadily. These processes are discussed in more detail in Section 1,2.
Coke plants are operated as -parts of integrated steel mills to
supply the coke necessary for the production of iron in blast furnaces.
Nearly all coke plants today are byproduct plants, i.e., products such
as coke oven gas, coal tar, crude and refined light oils, ammonium
sulfate, anhydrous ammonia, ammonia liquor, and naphthalene, are produced
in addition to coke. A very small portion of coke is also produced in
the beehive coke process. A byproduct coke plant consists essentially
of the ovens in which bituminous coal is heated, out of contact with
air, to drive off the volatile components. The residue remaining in the
ovens is coke; the volatile components are recovered and, processed in
the byproduct plant to produce tar, light oils, and other materials of
potential value, including coke oven gas.
-------
Table 1
MAJOR UNITED STATES STEEL INGOT PRODUCERS, 1972
Metric Tons/Year Tons/Year
United States Steel 31,750,000 35,000,000
Bethlehem Steel 19,960,000 22,000,000
Republic Steel 9,980,000 11,000,000
National Steel 9,520,000 10,5*00,000
Armco Steel - 7,710,000 8,500,000
Jones S, Laughlin Steel 7,280,000 8,000,000
Inland Steel 6,800,000 7,500,000
Youngstown Sheet § Tube 5,440,000 6,000,.000
Wheeling Pittsburgh 3,540,000 - 3,900,000
Kaiser 2,720,000 3,000,000
McLouth 1,819,000 ' 2,000,000
Colorado Fuel & Iron 1,360,000 1,500,000
Sharon 1,360,000 1,500,000
Interlake . 907,000 1,000,000
Alan Wood" ' 907,000 1,000,000
Source; Development Document For Proposed Effluent Limitations Guidelines
For the Steel Making Segment of the Iron and Steel Manufacturing1
Point Source Category, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
February, 1974.
-------
TABLE 2
ESTIMATED STATE DISTRIBUTION OF UNITED STATES IRON AND STEEL PLANTS
AND PRODUCTION CAPACITY, 1974 (METRIC TONS)
State
Alabama
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Illinois
Indiana
Kentucky
Maryland
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
New Jersey
New York
North Carolina
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
South Carolina
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Virginia
West Virginia
Washington
Totals
No. of
Plants
5
1
1
*
10
1
1
1
2
1
1
16
8
4
3
5
1
1
1
2
7
2
20
1
2
42
1
2
9
1
1
2
3
158
Estimated Iron
Capacity (Blast
Furnace)
5,208,500
0
0
2,194,300
938,800
0
0
0
0
0
6,906,700
15,977,300
1,039,700
5,558,500
7,815,600
0
0
0
0
4,807,600
0
17,181,100
0
0
21,179,600
0
0
634,100
1,779,500
0
3,106,302
0
94,327,600
Estimated Steel Capacity
Basic Oxygen
Furnace
2,656,700
. 0
0
1,^600,400
1,066,900
0
0
0
0
0
7,261,500
15,239,100
1,717,900
2,528,700
8,830,800
0
0
0
0
5,469,200
0
11,213,800
0
0
15,224,000
0
0
0
0
0
4,062,200
0
76,871,200
Open Hearth
Furnace
1,024,000
6
0
1,904,700
0
0
0
0
0
0
841,800
5,790,500
0
2,729,800
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8,881,300
0
0
11,932,400
0
0
1,160,600
2,483,300
0
0
0
36,748,400
Electric
Furnac e
601,800
82,500
57,800
674,400
165,000
234,400
524,700
257,600
302,000
20,600
4,427,000
1,013,200
790,400
343,700
1,382,400
209,900
72,800
961,900
453,000
503,900
213,200
4,642,700
244,800
301,300
4,500,500
346,400
122,000
2,832,200
0
71,100
106,600
536,600
26,996,400
Estimated
Total Steel
Capacity
4,282,500
82,500
57,800
4,179,500
1,231,900
234,400
524,700
257,600
302,000
20,600
12,530,300
22,042,800
.2,508,300
5,602,200
10,213,200
209,900
72,800
961,900
453,000
5,973,100
213,200
24,737,800
244,800
301,300
31,656,900
346,400
122,000
3,992,800
2,483,300
71,100
4,168,800
536,600
140,616,000
Source; Iron and Steel Works Directory
ofthe United States and Canada, Iron and
SteelInstitute,1974.
-------
TABLE 3
EPA REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION OF U.S. IRON AND STEEL PLANTS
AND PRODUCTION CAPACITY, 1974 (METRIC TONS)
EPA No. of Estimated Iron Estimated Steel Capacity Estimated
Region Plants Capacity (Blast Basic Oxygen Open Hearth Electric Total Steel
Furnace) Furnace (EOF) Furnace Capacity
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
VIII
IX
X
1
10
48
18
50
11
1
2
12
5
0
4,807,600
29,844,400
6,248,200
47,880,700
634,100
0
2,718,300
2,194,300
0
0
5,469,200
21,814,900
4,374,700
42,545,200
0
o •
1,066,900
1,600,400
0
0
0
14,662,200
1,024,000
15,513,500
1,160,600
Q '
2,483,300
1,904,700
0
234,400
1,481,500
5,021,900
2,706,200
11,675,100
3,134,800
961,900
165,100
777,600
837,900
234,400
6,950,700
41,499,000
8,104,900
69,733,800
4,295,400
961,900
3,715,300
4,282,700
837,900
158 94;327,600 76,871,300 36,748,300 , 26,996,400 140,616,000
-------
1.2 WASTE CHARACTERIZATION
This section contains descriptions of production technology at
iron and steel plants and the resultant byproducts or wastes which are
either recycled, handled by contract disposers, or disposed of on site.
Estimates are given for the quantities of wastes and potentially hazardous
constituents thereof which are disposed of on land, either in lagoons or
dumps.
1.2.1 Process Descriptions
Integrated steel mills perform all the operations required to
convert the principal raw materials of iron ore, limestone, and coal
into finished steel products. The principal operations consist of raw
material processing, iron making, steel making, primary rolling or
roughing, and hot and cold finishing. Additional operations night
include forging, annealing, tempering, tin plating and galvanizing. The
interrelationships between the operations carried out in a typical large
integrated steel plant are shown in the flow diagram of Figure 1.
Smaller plants might lack the facilities for some of the operations
shown, such as sintering, continuous casting, tin plating and galvanizing.
The major operations are described in the following paragraphs.
Sintering. The sintering operation takes natural fine iron
ores and metallic fines derived from residues of other steel plant faci-
lities (e.g., flue dust from the blast furnace and scale from' hot rolling
mills) and fuses them into pieces large enough to be charged into the
blast furnaces. In a typical sintering machine the fine material is
mixed with coke breeze or powdered coal and spread on a moving bed. The
mixture is ignited as it passes under an intense flame. The reaction is
sustained by the combustion of the coke or coal as air is drawn downward
through the bed. At combustion temperatures, the particles fuse together
into a caked layer which is usually quenched with air and broken into
pieces of the desired size. Particulates collected by one or more of a
variety of emission control systems are generally recycled back into the
sintering process. Therefore, no significant amounts of wastes are
generated at sintering plants.
Coke and Byproduct Production. Coke serves both as a fuel
and as a reducing agent in the making of iron. "To produce the required
coke, bituminous coal is heated to drive off the volatile components.
Two methods of producing metallurgical coke are in use today, the byproduct
method and the beehive process, although the beehive process accounts
for less than two percent of all metallurgical coke produced.
In the beehive process, the volatile components are burned
through the addition of controlled amounts of air into the coking chambers.
The heat generated by burning of the combustible volatiles provides
energy for maintaining the distillation process.
10
-------
METALLIC FINES IRON
(ORE. SCALE, DUST, ETC.) • ORi COAL
1 1
COK1N
SINTERING ' ' ' BYPRC
R6CO
SCALE
RECYCLE
i i i
D«
0 AND
VERV
COKE
SINTER
JST AND SLUOGE RECYCLE
28.3 k;
I ' 1
WASTE AN
TOBIDLO
180kg
,,. f
ALLOYING „_., IRON MAKING
METALS SCRAP (BLAST FURNACES!
MOLTEN
BOF -16kg
ELECTRIC FUBNAC
OPEN HEARTH - 13
OUST
TO LANDFILL
(COVERED!
1
CONT1
SCAtE CAS
9.7kg
SCALE
M.Bkj
SCALE
18.3kg.
SCALE
0.052 he
1
* 1' 1
- -«.»"« STEEL »
9 k° (SAS1C OXY
ELECTRIC i
f
NUOUS
TINQ *
SLUOGE -
PIG IRON
WOMA LIQLOR
SLUDOETO
2.8Kg
FLUX
DOLOMITE, ETC.)
SLAG TO ROAD FIL
BUILDING AGGREG
MO kg
LIMESTONE, fLUO»
DOLOMITE
'"*
MAKING
GEN, OPEN
AND/OR
URNACESI
T
!.
MOLTEN
STEEL
-0.104 kg
DUMP
!
LUDGE
O OPEN OUMP
LAG
0 OPEN DUMP
\
IIMOOT
TEEMING
1
SOA
1
1
f
PRIMARY
(ROUGHING!
BILLETS. BLOOMS,
, SLABS
1
PICK
1
*
COLO
1
iVASTE PIC
TO CONTH
!2,S kg
SLUDGE TC
OPEN OUMP
0 16kg
KLE LIQUOR
ACT DISPOSAL
ANNEALING
TEMPER INC
11
LIMESTONE
LIME
MAKING
. LIME
ATi
SPAR,
BOF -17 Jill
ELECTHIC FURNACE - 1.7 kg
BOF - 145.0 kg
OPEN HEARTH - 243 kg
ELECTHIC FURNACE - 120 kB
SLAG TO OPEK OUMP
36.2 kg
SLUDGE TO OPEN DUMP
1.87H3
SLUGE TOOPEN DUU?
1 ,74 kg
5.32 KO
f WASTE LIQUOR
PBODUCT TO CONTRACT
- , Bisonsai R fj kj
*• GALVANIZING
« 1C 3 kg
NUMERICAL VALUES ARE
KILOGRAMS OF WASTE PER
METRIC TON Of STEEL PRODUCT.
Figure 1 FLOW DIAGRAM FOR STEEL MAKING
11
-------
In the byproduct process, no air, is admitted to the coking
chambers, the heat for distillation being provided by the combustion of
fuel gas in contact with the walls of the coke ovens. The' volatiles
driven off during distillation are piped from the coke ovens and processed
for recovery of useful byproducts. After coking is completed (16 to 24
hours), the hot coke is pushed from the ovens into a waiting car which
transfers it to a quenching tower where it is cooled by water sprays.
Iron and Steel Making. In iron and,steel making, fluxes are
added which combine with impurities to form slag. Fluxes include lime-
stone, lime, dolomite, and fluorspar. Lirae is often made onsite at the
steel plant by the calcination of limestone. The dusts generated in the
required crushing, screening, and handling of the materials are generally
collected and recycled.
Blast Furnace. Almost all of the basic iron required for
steel making is produced in blast furnaces. Input materials, consisting
of iron ore, sinter, coke, and fluxes (primarily limestone), are charged
into the top of the furnace. Air preheated to 1400 to 2100 F (760 to
1150 C) is forced into the bottom of the furnace, the coke reacts with
the oxygen in the air to produce carbon monoxide which, in turn, reduces
the ore to metallic iron which settles to the bottom. The molten iron
is tapped off into transfer ladles known as submarine cars for transfer
to the steel making shop. Slag is drawn off at the surface of the
molten metal.
The hot gases leaving the top of the blast furnace have' fuel
value and are commonly used in the blast furnace stoves to preheat the
incoming air and for underfiring the coke ovens. Prior to use, the
gases are cleaned by passing them first through a dust catcher to remove
the coarser particulates and then through a wet scrubber. Electrostatic
precipitators are also used at some plants. The water from the wet
scrubber system is generally piped to a clarifier where the particulates
settle to form a sludge or slurry which is subsequently'dewatered, often
by a vacuum filter system. Thus, the wastes derived from blast furnace
operations generally consist of slag, flue dust and sludge. •
Steel Making. For making steel, three different furnace
types are in use: the basic oxygen furnace (EOF], the electric furnace,
and the open hearth furnace. As stated previously, open hearth furnaces
are gradually being phased out and being replaced by BOF's. Electric
furnaces are particularly well suited for making high quality and alloy
steels because of better control on operating conditions such as tempera-
ture and oxygen input.
The metal charge to the basic oxygen furnace consists of about
70 percent molten iron and 30 percent cold steel scrap. The open hearth
generally operates with a metal charge of SO percent molten iron and 50
percent scrap, although it can also accept a metal charge of 100 percent
scrap. The charge to electric furnaces is predominantly.cold scrap.
12
-------
All three furnaces use limestone and/or fluorspar fluxes to facilitate
the removal of impurities as slag.
For control of emissions from basic oxygen furnaces, the use
of high energy wet scrubbers appears to be predominant. Of the ten
steel plants visited during this program, seven plants had BOF furnaces;
and of these plants, six were controlled by wet scrubbers. One plant
used a dry electrostatic precipitator preceded by a wet spray system for
gas cooling.
Five of the plants visited had electric furnaces. Three of
these plants used dry baghouses for dust collection. The other two used
a wet scrubber followed by a clarifier and vacuum filter for handling
the scrubber water. • •
Four of the plants had open hearth furnaces and, in all cases,
emission control was handled by dry electrostatic precipitators.
Thus, wastes from steel making consist of slag for all 'furnace
types, and dusts and/or sludges, depending on the type of furnace and
the associated emission control system. For BOF furnaces, sludges
appear to be the most common form of pollution control waste, while for
electric furnaces and open hearths dry dust appears to be most common,
In addition to the above wastes, particulates called "kish" are released
to the air during the pouring of the molten pig iron. In BOF shops,
this material is commonly collected in baghouses.
Ingot Molding and Rolling. Molten steel is tapped from the
steel making furnaces into teeming ladles and then transferred to a
teeming area or to a eontinous casting area. In the teeming area, the
molten steel is poured into ingot molds. Upon solidification, the
ingots are placed in soaking pits to bring them to the desired uniform
temperature. They are then rolled into billets, blooms, or slabs which
are blocks having different shapes and weights. Wastes consist of slag
that accumulated at the bottoms of the soaking pits, scale generated in
the rolling operations and sludges from treatment of scale pit water.
Continous Casting. In eontinous casting, the molten steel in the
teeming ladles is cast directly into billets, blooms, or slabs, thereby
eliminating the need for ingot molds, soaking pits and primary rolling
described in the next paragraph. As the castings leave the molds, they
are sprayed with cooling water. As a result of coining in direct contact
with the steel, this water contains fine scale that is removed as sludge
during treatment of the water. Coarser scale accumulates in settling pits.
Rolling. The billets, blooms, and slabs formed in the roughing
mill or in the eontinous caster are sent to the hot rolling mills where
they are converted into a wide variety of finished or semi-finished products,
including bars, rods, tubes, rails, structured shapes, sheets, and plates.
These hot rolling operations produce scale which is collected in pits.
Sometimes surface defects in billets, blooms and slabs are removed prior
13
-------
to .rolling by automatic or hand scarfing, an operation in which oxygen, under
pressure is directed at the surface. Grinding and chipping are also used
for removing surface defects. Thus, scarfing scale and grinding and chipping
residues are additional wastes generated at the rolling mills.
Hot rolling is often followed by cold-rolling and cold-forming
operations. Prior to cold processing, the steel is pickled by passing it
through vats of hydrochloric or sulfuric acid solution to clean the surface.
Waste pickle liquor is sometimes disposed of directly on land and, therefore,
constitutes a waste of interest to this program. Neutralisation of the waste
pickle liquor is sometimes accompanied by the formation of sludges which are
also land disposed.
In cold rolling, sheet steel becomes hardened and usually requires
annealing (i.e. softening by heat treatment). Coils .of sheet steel are
annealed by heating them in a controlled atmosphere. After cooling, the
annealed steel is then generally passed through a temper mill which gives
it the desired hardness, flatness, and surface quality. No wastes are
generated in the annealing and tempering operations. .
Coating and Plating. Further processing of the sheet steel
might include coating the surface with nonferrous metal, paint, or other
coatings. Two common coating operations, tin plating and galvanizing,
are included in the flow diagram of Figure 1. One common method of tin
plating involves electrolytic deposition. The steel is first washed and
scrubbed and then cleaned in a dilute acid solution. It is then passed
through an electrolytic solution, washed, and rinsed. The coated sheets
are then heated so the tin flows to form a surface coating of high luster.
Finally, the surface is water quenched, electrochemically treated, and
coated with oil. In galvanizing, the sheet steel is cleaned, heated,
dipped in molten zinc, cooled, and chemically treated. In galvanizing and
tin plating, sludges are generated containing residuals from the cleaning
lines and from neutralization of the acid rinse water.'
Capacity of Typical Plant
For the typical plant an annual capacity of 2,500,000 metric
tons of molten steel was selected.. This value is slightly greater than
the average ingot steel production for 45 of the major steel making plants
in the United States, Facilities at the typical plant consist of a sinter
plant, blast furnaces, basic oxygen furnaces, electric furnaces, coke ovens,
a continuous caster, primary (or roughing) mills, other hot rolling mills
(hot strip, bar, etc.), cold mills, annealing and tempering mills, a tin
plating mill and a galvanizing mill. Table 4 gives the annual production
figures for each major facility at the typical plant. The figures are
generally internally consistent, but in any one plant the relative amounts
of products of different types will vary as will the amount of home scrap
produced. In addition, intermediate products such as blooms, billets or
slabs might be purchased and/or sold in any given year, so that the
ratio of weight of finished products-to-weight of steel produced will vary,
14
-------
TABLE 4 - PRODUCTION DATA FOR TYPICAL INTEGRATED STEEL PLANT
Facility
Coke Ovens
Blast Furnaces
Basic Oxygen Furnaces
Electric Furnaces
Soaking Pits
Primary Mills
Continuous Caster
Hot Rolling Mills
Cold Rolling- Mills
Tin Plating Mill
Galvanizing Mill
Product
Coke
' Iron
Steel
Steel
Steel Ingots
Billets, Blooms, Slabs
Billets, Blooms, Slabs
Sheet Steel, Bars, Rods
Structural Shapes, etc.
Sheet Steel
Tin Plated Sheets
Zinc Coated Sheets
Annual Amounts (Metric tons)
1,120,000
1,600,000
2,000,000
500,000
1,560,000
1,350,000
790,000
1,800,000
700,000
100,000
125,000
15
-------
1.2.2 Description of Waste Streams
This section describes the types of wastes associated with
each of the steel making processes previously described. Generation
factors for each type of wastes are given as well'as an assessment of
their potential environmental hazard.
Coke and_ jyproduct Plants. Wastes generated from coke and byproduct
coke plants include waste ammonia liquor, ammonia still lime sludge'and
decanter tank tar. The relative amounts of these wastes will vary
considerably from plant to plant depending on the specific design of the
byproduct recovery plant.
Waste ^Ammonia Liquor. Ammonia is recovered from coke gas by
one of two methods. In some plants ammonia is recovered in the form of
ammonium sulfate by passing the coke gas through dilute sulfuric acid.
This produces a waste ammonia liquor generated at a rate of 190 kg/MT of
coke produced or 125 kg/MT of steel produced based on the use of 0.66 WT
of coke for-1 ton of steel. Waste ammonia liquor contains significant
concentrations of phenol and cyanide and is therefore considered potentially
hazardous.
Ammonia Still Lime Sludge. At other plants ammonia is removed
initially from the coke oven gas by spray cooling and scrubbing and sold
as a concentrated ammonia liquor. Concentration of the liquor is achieved
in a ammonia still which produces a. waste lime sludge formed as a result
of adding milk of lime to decompose 'ammonium salts. Ammonia still lime
sludge along with decanter tank tar to be described is generated at a
rate of 0.28 kg/MT of finished'steel product (dry weight). This sludge
will contain significant concentrations of cyanide, phenol, and oils and
greases. In solubility-tests described in Appendix B ammonia still lime
sludge was found to leach significant concentrations of phenol and
cyanide (198 ppm Cn, 20 ppm phenol). It is therefore considered potentially
hazardous.
Decanter Tank Tar. The spray cooling of coke oven gases also
condenses tars which are sent to 'a decanter tank where lighter recoverable
oil fractions are decanted off. The heavier tar generated at a rate of
2.3 kg/MT steel along with ammonia still lime sludge is sent to open
dumps. In solubility tests described in Appendix B decanter tank tar
was found to leach significant concentrations of phenol (500 ppm) and
oil and grease (198 ppm) and is therefore considered potentially hazardous.
Wastes generated from iron and steel making includ'e slags,
• sludges and dusts. The quantities and nature of these residuals are
described in the following paragraphs as well as an assessment of their
hazardousness or non-hazardousness.
Blast Furnace. Residuals from blast furnace processing of iron ore to
produce molten iron metal include slag, dusts from dry air emissions
controls or sludge from wet air emissions controls.
16
-------
Slag. Blast furnace slag is generated at a rate of 348 kg/OT
of iron -output from the blast furnace or 250-kg/WT -of finished -steel.
It is normally granulated by quenching the molten slag with water. This
produces sand size to large chunks of a hard vesicular slag containing
predominantly silica, lime, iron, sulfur and traces of minor metals
including chromium, manganese, lead, copper and zinc. In solubility
tests described in Appendix B blast furnace slag did not leach toxic
constituents in significant concentrations and is therefore not con-
sidered potentially hazardous.
Dust. Dust from dry emissions controls on blast furnaces
including baghouses and electrostatic precipitators is predominantly
iron oxide, silica and lime but contains significant concentrations of
chromium, copper, manganese, nickel, lead and zinc. Concentrations of
these metals is significantly higher in dusts than in slag. It is
generated at a rate of 16.2 kg/WT of blast furnace iron output or 11.7
kg/MT of steel product. In solubility tests described in Appendix B
blast furnace dust did not leach toxic heavy metals significantly and is
therefore not considered potentially hazardous at this time.
Sludge. Sludge from wet emissions controls "on blast furnaces
including wet electrostatic precipitators, venturi scrubbers, and spray
towers is also predominantly iron oxide, silica and lime and contains
significant concentrations of the trace metals chromium, copper, manganese,
nickel, lead and zinc. Concentrations of these metals is significantly
higher in sludges than in slags. It is generated at a rate of 24.4 kg
per metric ton of blast furnace iron output or 17.6 kg/MT of steel (dry
weights). In solubility tests described in Appendix B blast furnace
sludge was not found to leach toxic constituents in significant concentrations
and is therefore not considered a potentially hazardous waste.
Basic Oxygen Furnace (EOF). Residuals from BOF processing of iron,
scrap and alloying metals to produce steel while reducing carbon sulfur,
phosphorus and other impurities, include slag, dusts and sludges.
Slag_. A dense slag containing large amounts of silica, iron and
lime, minor amounts of sulfur and phosphorus and significant concentration's-
of the trace metals chromium, copper, manganese, nickel, lead and zinc is
generated at a rate of 145 kg/MT of steel output. In solubility tests des-
cribed in Appendix B blast furnace slag was not found to leach significant
concentrations of toxic constituents and is therefore not considered poten-
tially hazardous.
Dust. Fine dust from dry air emissions controls is mainly iron
oxide, silica oxide and lime but also contains significant concentrations
of trace metals including chrome, copper, manganese, nickel, lead and zinc,
.Dust is generated at a rate of 16 kg/hfT of steel product. Data indicates
zinc and lead are more concentrated in dusts and sludges whereas 'chrome
tends to stay with slag. In solubility tests described in Appendix B
BOF sludge did not leach appreciable concentrations of toxic constituents.
The low solubility of BOF sludge indicates that dust will also not leach
-------
significantly. For this reason BOF dust is not considered potentially
hazardous at this time.
Sludge. Sludge from wet control of air emissions from BOF's
is also predominantly iron oxides, silica oxide and lime with small but
significant concentrations of the trace metals chrome, copper, manganese,
nickel, lead 'and zinc. It is generated at a rate of 17.3 kg/MT of steel
product (dry weight). In solubility tests described in Appendix B BOF
sludge did not leach significant concentrations of toxic constituents
and is therefore not considered potentially hazardous at this time.
Open Hearth Furnaces. Residuals generated from open hearth furnaces
include slag, dusts' and sludges.
Slag. A dense, hard slag is generated at a rate of 243 kg/MT
of steel product. It is mainly iron oxides," silica oxide and lime, with
minor amounts of sulfur and phosphorus compounds. Trace metals present
in significant concentrations include chromium, copper, manganese,
nickel, lead and zinc. In solubility tests described in Appendix B
toxic constituents did not leach to a significant extent. Open hearth
slag is therefore not considered hazardous at this time.
Dust. Dust from dry emissions control is generated at a rate
of 13.7 kg/MT of steel product, It is predominantly iron oxides, silica
oxides and lime but contains significant concentrations of chrome,
copper, manganese, nickel, lead and zinc. As with BOF furnaces data
indicates that lead zinc, and to a lesser extent copper concentrate to a
greater extent in dusts whereas chrome stays with the slag. Solubility
tests described in Appendix B showed no appreciable leaching of"toxic
constituents. For this reason open hearth dust is not considered potentially
hazardous at this time.
Sludge. None of the plants visited or surveyed during this
study used wet emissions controls on open hearth furnaces. Thus no
generation factors could be developed or chemical analyses made. The
sludge would be similar in composition to"dust and would not be expected
to leach significantly so as to be considered hazardous.
Electric Furnaces. * Residuals from electric'furnaces include slag, dust
'and sludge.
Slag. A dense hard slag is generated at a rate of 120 kg/Ml
of steel. • It is composed principally of iron, silica and calcium compounds
with minor amounts of sulfur and phosphorus compounds. Trace metals
include chromium, copper, manganese, nickel, lead, and zinc. In solubility
tests described in Appendix B toxic constituents did not leach significantly,
Electric furnace slag is therefore considered non-hazardous at the
present time.
18
-------
;Dust. Dust from dry emissions controls is generated at a
rate of 12.^8 kg/MT of steel. It is principally iron and silica oxides
and lime with significant concentrations of the trace metals chromium,
copper, manganese, nickel, lead, and zinc. Zinc, lead and copper are
much more concentrated in dusts and sludges than in slag. In solubility
tests described in Appendix B lead was found to leach at appreciable
concentrations (150 ppm). Electric furnace dust is therefore considered
potentially hazardous,
Sludge. Sludge'from wet emissions controls is generated at a.
rate of 8.7 kg/MT of steel product. It is comprised principally of iron
and silica oxides and lime and contains significant concentrations of
the trace metals chromium, copper, manganese, nickel', lead and line. In
solubility tests described in Appendix B'electric furnace sludge leached
chromium (94 ppm) and lead (2.0 ppm) in significant concentrations.
Electric furnace sludge is therefore considered potentially hazardous at
this time.
Soaking Pits. Soaking pit slag of -gravel to boulder size is,generated
at a rate,of 35.2 kg/MT of steel. It is composed principally of iron
and contains significant concentrations of trace metals including
chromium, copper, manganese, nickel, lead and zinc. In solubility tests
described in Appendix B this slag did not leach significant concentrations
of toxic metals. It is therefore considered non-hazardous at this time.
Mill Sludges. Mill sludges are produced from a number of steel plant
facilities as a result of water pollution control operations. Generation
factors for various mill sludges are as follows:
Primary Mills (production of ingots, slabs, billets 1.87 kg/MT steel
Continuous Casting Mill - 0.104 kg/MT steel
Hot Rolling Mill - 1.74 kg/Ml" steel
Cold Rolling Mill - 0.16 kg/MT steel
Tin Plating Mill - 5.32 kg/MT steel
Galvanizing Mill 10.8 kg/MT steel
Samples of two of the above types of sludges were obtained and
chemically analyzed including hot rolling mill sludge and tin plating
mill sludge. Both of these sludges contained significant concentrations
of trace metals including chromium, copper, manganese, nickel, lead,
zinc and oil and grease.
Solubility tests were not conducted on mill sludges. They are
believed to be susceptible to leaching of oil and grease and quite
possibly some toxic metals because of the presence of these constituents
and fine size of sludge particulates.
19
-------
Mill- Scales. .Mill scales .containing-over 50% iron axe generated from
the following mills:
Primary Mills 44.9 kg/MT steel
Continuous Casting Mills '8.7 kg/MT steel
Hot Rolling Mills 18.3 kg/MT steel
Cold Rolling Mills 0.052 kg/MT steel
Mill scales contain over 501 iron as well as small but significant
concentrations of trace metals including chromium, copper, manganese,
nickel, lead and zinc. Mill scales can also contain as much as 0.4% oil
and grease. Oil and grease can be leached from mill scale and pose a
threat of ground water contamination. For this reason mill scales are
considered potentially hazardous at this time.
Pickle Liquors. Acid pickle liquors (HCli H.SO.) are used in cold
rolling mills and galvanizing mills to clean iron and steel metal surfaces.
Spent acid is generated at a rate of 22.8 kg/MT steel from cold rolling
mills and 5.17 kg/MT steel from galvanizing mills. Waste pickle liquor
contains about 4-6% acidity and large concentrations of dissolved and'
suspended iron. Chromium, copper, nickel, lead and zinc are also present
in minor concentration (less than 20 ppm). The high acidity (pH less
than 1.0) of waste pickle liquor and resultant solubilization of toxic
metal constituents are reasons why waste pickle'liquor is considered
potentially hazardous'.
1.2.3 • Waste Quantities
During the conduct of this study, intensive sampling and
chemical analyses of steel plant residuals were carried out. Ten steel
plants located in the North Central and Great Lakes region of the United
States provided personnel to obtain daily samples of steel plant production
and pollution control residuals, including slags, sludges, dusts, scales,
and pickle liquor. These samples were shipped to the Calspan Laboratory
at Buffalo, New York, where the daily samples were composited into
weekly samples and then chemically analyzed. Steel plant residuals were
therefore well characterized as to average chemical-content and variability
in composition. Results of chemical analyses from the ten steel plants
are given in Appendix A.
, Table 5 gives generation factors for the various residuals
from iron and steel production as well as concentration factors for
potentially hazardous constituents. These factors were computed by
averaging all available data collected from the 10 iron and steel plants
visited on generation rates and chemical analyses data from collected
residuals samples of slags, sludges, dusts and other wastes.'
Using the residuals generation factors given in Table 5 the
yearly amount of residuals generated from a typical integrated steel
plant producing 2,500,000 MT of molten steel as described in Table 4
were estimated. Quantities of potentially hazardous constituents were
also calculated for the typical integrated plant. These estimates are
given in Table 6. 20
-------
TABLE 5
WASTE GENERATION FACTORS - IRON § STEEL PLANTS
Type of Waste
Coke Oven - Sludge
Blast Furnace - Slag
Blast Furnace - Dust
Blast Furnace - Sludge
Basic Oxygen Furnace - Slag
Basic Oxygen Furnace - Dust
Basic Oxygen Furnace - KisB
Basic Oxygen Furnace - Sludge
Open Hearth Furnace - Slag
Open Hearth Furnace - Dust
Electric Furnace - Slag
Electric Furnace - Dust
t
, Electric Furnace - Sludge
Generation Factors
Kg/MT
of Steel
Produced
or
Processed
2.6*
250*
11.7*
17.6*
145
16.0
0.14
17.3
243
13,7
120
12.8
8.7
Kg/MT
of
Facility
Output
5,5
348
16.2
24,4
145
16.0
0.14
17.3
243
13.7
120
12.8
8.7
Concentration Factors (ppm)
Cr
Cu
10,0 4.0
Mn
102
46.9: 21.9, 3000
92.4 93.2: 8800
56.1' 37.4
1290 ; 31.3
315 : 202
110 45.7
708
2360
568
4820
1380
2690
174
49.8
1130
79.0
1940
1130
3700
41,600
11,400
3810
10,300
42,710
4810
50,580
42,610
34,100
Ni
5.5
C7.5
57.6
38.4
12.2
115
56.6
130
23.7
314
53.9
246
421
Pb Zn
30.5
21.5
302
1210
12.0
7350
137
4190
57.4
11,650
32.7
24,220
7900
96.5
8.2
516
11,650
16.2
3350
660
10,094
47.9
113,000
80.5
95,710
13,540
Oil §
Grease
203,070
-._
--
i
.
--
—
--
—
•
._
._
--
•Approximately 0.72 MT of pig iron required to produce 1 MT of steel (on the average). Approximately 0.66 MT
of coke required to produce 1 MT pig iron. Coke oven sludge consists of ammonia still lime sludge and decanter
tank tar. Values are averages for- data from a number of steel plants. Plus or minus
variation for individual plants from averages may be a factor of 2 to 3.
-------
TABLE 5 (Continued)
WASTE GENERATION FACTORS - IRON & STEEL PLANTS
Type of Waste
Soaking Pit - Slag
Primary Mill - Sludge
Primary Mill - Scale
Continuous Caster - Sludge
Continuous Caster - Scale
Hot Rolling Mill - Sludge
Hot Rolling Mill - Scale
Cold Rolling Mill - Sludge
Cold Rolling Mill - Scale
Cold Rolling Mill - Waste
Pickle Liquor
Tin Plating Mill - Sludge
Galvanizing Mill - Sludge
Galvanizing Mill - Waste
Pickle Liquor
Generation Factors
Kg/MT
of Steel
Produced
or
Processed
35.2
1,87
44.9
0.104
8.7
1.74
18.3
0.16
0.052
22.8
5.32
10.8
5.17
Kg/MT
of
Facility
Output
Concentration Factors CPPm3
Cr
Cu j Mn
I
35.2 373 j 278
1.87
44.9
0.104
8.7
1.74
18.3
0.16
0.052
22.8*
S.32
10,8
*
5.17
» _, i -'
318 i 449
--
__
198 232
5280
--
5410
Ni
117
—
385
1
3280 i 253
208 274 13170 545
i, .. . I. i
-_
12.7 1 7.35
2760
__
—
2730
--
--
--
179
1040
__
--
—
—
19.2
250
—
—
Pb
760
"
58
--
--
1050
154
_«
—
1.1
688
—
--
Zn
59.3
—
32.5
--
--
669
26.9
--
--
8.3
2260
—
—
Oil §
Grease
--
'
10,180
--
--
45,290
42,246
~
—
63.9
._
--
--
* Wet weight - all other factors are dry weight.
-------
TABLE 6
YEARLY GENERATION OF RESIDUALS BY TYPICAL IRON AND STEEL PLANT*
Coke Oven - Sludge
Blast Furnace - Slag
Blast Furnace - Dust
Blast Furnace - Sludge
Basic Oxygen Furnace - Slag
Basic Oxygen Furnace - Dust
Basic Oxygen Furnace - Sludge
i Electric Furnace - Slag
i
Electric Furnace - Dust
Electric Furnace - Sludge
Soaking Pit - Slag
Total
Quantity
of Waste
(MT)
6,200
557,000
25,900
39,000
290,000
Quantity of Potentially Hazardous Constituents (MT)
Cr
0.062
26.1
2.40
2.19
374
280 i 0.031
34,600 [ 24.5
60,000 • 289
6,400
8.83
4,350 : 11.7
54,9,00 j 20.5
Primary Mill - Sludge 2,520 i
Primary Mill - Scale
60,600
Continuous Caster - Sludge j 82.2
Continuous Caster - Scale
6,900
19.3
- --
Cu
Mn
0.025 i 0.628
f
12.2
j
1670
2.42 i 228
1.46 144
! "
9.08
0.013
6.02
4.74
12.4
4.92
15.3
„„.
27.2
- —
—
12064
1.07
356
3035
273
148
290
•nnnnnninnnnnJ
Ni Pb ! Zn
0.034
oil a
Grease
0.188 0.594: 1250, ;
x4.2 12.0
1.49
1.50
3.54
0.016
7.83
47.2
3.48
0.038
4.50 145
3.23 i 1.96
1.57
1.83
6.42
--
328
•
—
--
23.3
—
—
155
34.4
41.7
__
3.52
--
~
4.57 -- 1
13.4
' 455 •
4.70
0.185
349
4.83
j
613
58.9
3.26
—
1.97
'-'-."
—
--
--
-- .
i
\
_.
--
617;
__
-------
TABLE 6 (Continued)
YEARLY GENERATION OF WASTE RESIDUALS BY TYPICAL IRON AND STEEL PLANT
Type of Waste
Hot Rolling Mill - Sludge
Hot Rolling Mill - Scale
* Cold Rolling Mill - Sludge '
Cold Rolling Mill - Scale
Cold Rolling Mill - Waste
Pickle Liquor
j Tin Plating Mill - Sludge
Galvanizing Mill - Sludge
Galvanizing Mill - Waste
Pickle Liquor
Total
Quantity
of Waste
COT)
3,130
32,900
112
36.4
16,000
532
1,350
646
Quantity of Potentially Hazardous Constituents (MT)
Cr
0,620
6,85
Cu
0.727
9.03
Mn
10.3
104
]
• ;
~~
0.203 i 0.117 : 2,86
1.47
1.45 ! 0.553
Ni
0.792
18.0
Pb
3.29
5.07
j
_,
0.306
-
0.018
0.133 ; 0.366
i __:__*__
i — j
Zn
2.10
Oil 6
Grease
141
0.886 1392
--
__
0.132
1.20
—
«. ^
--
--
1.02
__
--
--
*Quantities calculated from generation and concentration
factors given in Table 5 based on annual production figures
given in Table 4. Divide by 365 to obtain daily quantities.
Multiply by 1.1 to convert to short tons.
-------
Using state-by-state production, capacities as previously given
.and -waste -generation-and hazardous constituent factors per unit* of
product as previously given in Tabl'e 5 estimates were made of the state,
regional, and national land-disposed wastes and hazardous constituents
from iron and steel production. These estimates are, given in Tables 7a
to 71 for 1974, 1977 and 1983,. Extrapolations of waste quantities to
1977 and 1983 were based on an annual growth rate of the steel industry
(and accompanying residuals generation) of 2.1% from 1974-1977 and 2.5%
from 1974 to 1977. This' compares with annual growth of 2.51 predicted
by the industry over the same-period (Reference 9).
, Tables 7a to 7c contain estimates of the total quantity of
slags from all sources {blast furnace, EOF, open hearth, electric furnaces,
soaking pit] which are or which will be generated in the iron and steel
industry in 1974, 1977, and 1983,, Although practices may vary widely
from plant to plant it is estimated that approximately 90% of generated
slag is processed for- recovery of contained iron and steel and then sold '
for use as road fill building aggregate and other purposes. It may be
stored for many months before use. The remainder is open dumped.
Tables 7d through 7f gives estimates of sludges generated from
all -sources in the iron and steel industry for the years 1974, 1977, and
1983. Approximately 55 percent of the total sludge generation originates
from wet scrubbers of the blast furnace and is considered non-hazardous.
Approximately 70% of blast furnace sludge is recycled to the sinter strand
for recovery of iron.
Approximately 20% of-the sludge estimated in Tables 7a to 7c
originates from-wet emissions controls on EOF furnaces, 10% of which is
recycled to sinter strands. In total some 75% of estimated sludge
generated is from blast furnaces plus BOF furnaces and'is not considered
potentially hazardous.
The remaining 25% of the sludge estimates given in Tables 7d
through 7f consists of sludges from electric furnaces, galvanizing mills,
primary and secondary rolling mills, lime pit sludges, and tin mill
sludges. These sludges are considered potentially hazardous.
Tables 7g through 7i contain estimates of the total quantities
of dust generated by the iron and steel industry for 1974, 1977 and 198'3
through dry emissions controls on blast furnaces. Approximately 57% of
the state, regional and national estimates consists of blast furnace
dust. Approximately 90% of blast furnace dust is recycled to the sinter
for iron reclamation with the remainder being placed on land dumps.
Blast furnace dust is not considered'potentially hazardous.
Approximately 12% of the dust generated in the iron and steel
industry is from electric furnaces and is considered potentially hazard-
ous. Electric furnace.dust is hot presently recycled. The remaining 31%
of the dust quantity estitnates_-given in Tables 7g through 7i consist
predominantly of BOF dust with a small-percentage of open hearth dust.
EOF dust and open hearth dust are not considered potentially hazardous.
25
-------
Tables 7j through 71 contain estimates of quantities of scale
generated in the iron and steel industry from hot rolling mill, cold
rolling mills, primary mills, and continuous casting mills. It is esti-
mated that 80% of mill scales are recycled for reclamation o'f iron
content. The presence of high contents of oil and grease prevents
complete recycle, and for the sane reason causes mill scales to be a
danger to the environment and be considered potentially hazardous.
Tables 7m through 7o contain estimates of the quantities of
spent pickle liquor (dilute solutions of sulfuric or hydrochloric acid
containing iron oxide and iron metal particles and traces of other
metals) generated in the,iron and steel industry. They are normally
disposed of by contract disposal services but may be regenerated for
reuse. . Pickling liquors are considered potentially hazardous.
Generation of slags, sludges,'and dusts follows production
patterns. The largest producers of total iron and steel residuals and
potentially hazardous wastes from the iron and steel industry are the
states of Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Indiana followed by"Illinois, Michigan
and New York in that order. Alabama; West Virginia, California, and
Utah also generate significant quantities of total and hazardous wastes.
1.3 TREATMENT DISPOSAL-TECHNOLOGY
1,3.1. Current Treatment and Disposal Practices
This section will describe the prevalent methods used by the
iron and steel industry for the treatment and disposal of all waste
types be they considered hazardous or non-hazardous. Sections 1.3.2
through 1.3,4 will present more detailed discussions of the technologies
used to treat and/or dispose of those waste streams which are considered
to be potentially hazardous. Waste types are discussed with reference
to the plant facilities from which they originate.
Coke Plant. Land disposed wastes from the coke plant of an integrated .
steel facility includes waste ammonia liquor, ammonia still lime sludge
and decanter tank tar, All of these wastes are considered potentially
hazardous because of the presence of phenols, and cyanides which are
susceptible to leaching. The ususal treatment of waste ammonia liquor
is input to biological wastewater treatment plants. This is environ-
mentally acceptable since the toxic constituents (phenol, cyanide) will
be detoxified in the biological treatment. Sometimes this waste is dis-
posed of in -'deep wells,
Ammonia still lime sludge and decanter tank tar are normally
disposed of by open dumping which is not environmentally acceptable
because of the suspectibility to leaching of phenol, cyanide and oils.
Blast Furnace. Residuals from blast furnaces include slag, dust from
dry emissions control, or sludge from wet emissions controls. Slag is
usually processed for recovery of iron metal before sale as road fill,
26
-------
Table 7a
ESTIMATED STATE, REGIONAL, AND NATIONAL SOLID WASTE
FROM IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY
TOTAL SLAG, 1974 (METRIC TONSJ
STATE
ALABAMA
ARIZONA
ARKANSAS
, CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
DELAWARE
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
HAWAII
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
KENTUCKY
MARYLAND
MiCHlCAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
NEW JEP5ET
NlffYOPtK
ft, CAROLINA
OHIO
TOTAL
GENERATED
2,666.500
12,900
6900
1.670. WC
642,800
, 38,000
11.803
30.900
W.600
2,500
4,58?,JQG '
9031 IOC
TBi.OW
a, 132.900
4,511,200
25 2S:
8,700
147,900
62.000
1.721 JOO
25,600
(1.114, 100
OKLAHOMA 29,400
OHIGON AE,MQ
PENNSYLVANIA
s. CAROLINA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
W. VIRGINIA
tPA REGION
I
1
13
nr
TT
m
m
"PTT1
IX
X
NATIONAL TOTALS
14,033.600
a 1,600
14.600
577,600
1,308,400
10,900
82,*oo
1,769.700
36,000
2,780.300
19,078,800
3.aie,400
xi.in.mo
1,01 3JHB
147,900
1JJS14WO
l.BBtflOO
12IJBOO
. 60.528,800
TOTAL
POTENTIALLY
HAZARDOUS
'
1
•
TOIAL
HAZARDOUS
CONST TUENTS
1
DISPOSAL*
METHOO
SOLD AS
ROAD BASE
OH BUILDING
AGGREGATE
OB
OPEN DUMPED
1
COMSTITUINTS
Cf
IJ571.6Z
ten
13 B
1^6520
325 62
1ISJ!
3mm
14S.90
17637
'1,83
4,063.16
7J50.51
0!]-S8
i .135 IS
ZJ06.B7
121.31
42.0G
WS 12
2Mie
1,46?,SS
123.21
in.iisn
141.54
17J.B5
. 13,010,20
JflQ 24
7066
2,362.68
1,A63.0S
41,97
316.DO
904,53
138 41
1.732.56
lfc,C«S3
3.1M46
JS.1M.15
2JJ?6C
5!
1484.23
123-44 3^31.34
&3.0fi
738J
1JU3.S1
1^98.S2
•06 12SJ6 '
^C.IM.10
25*58-00
1J9S4.40
6/5348
10,431.90
S1.3S
17^1
2J5,«7
110 JB
8^&€i1
S2.IB
2335600
. 'S9.W
73.76
29JWO.OO
EJ.BO
29.88
1,747.62
2.4SS.B?
17,40
131.3S
4,aC19B
57,37
6.4C7.60
40,09130
7JJ&S.H
8633S-38
1J2J.72
JJS:47
3,723-TS
3J0631
206.11
IJ1,24i.4»
JS.74610
178,180,00
18.647,20
12,459,10
? 1637 33
1273,83
441,6S
6.008.G5
2.78B.73
42 131 M
IJ93.98
210.113,00
1,486,38
i,as2«
270.448.DO
3,102,60
TSM
30. UK 10
28.081,30
444,01
3,352.33
23K-JJC
1.46122
44,121,1]
3S6.43X65
61.197,96
§48^60.23
3244527
timm
3BJ1S.62
Jt,1J3.31
5^34.7S
1.130J3I2.I
Ni
' 15-29
BJ7
0-17
39.1«
10JS
244
H3
1J7
3.14
;i3
111 S8
182-32
19.75
MM
16.17
1.38
0.47
10.01
3J2
41,00
138
29.37
1.68
313
29S.43
2.24
n.n
42.38
2SJ]
0.14
5£S
26.12 .
2,44
H82
3£8A8
?4,?J
818*1-
<-1i3
18,01
39. 18
40.18
8.T1
1.27B.88
n
172J1
2.4S
CJ3
148.99
41.17
6,94
ijg
1,01
g-Sa
008
«i1B1
711J37
71.W
727.34
341J8
6S2
OJS
28^8
7£8
200 J6
DM
691.81
OM
i B2
1,14148
1M
04fl
134.09
113^6
2. ID
urn
MM
S.84
K1,K
1,476J9&
2S7J7
2i49 £4
135,78
KM
15JJ7,
1608J
14 50
4,7»3.W
Z.
4765
0-B?
C-5S
4S.4S
8JS
2.73
SJ9
249
3J>2
3 JO
113J7
18€,f3
H 16
WOI
76^6
2.Q3
0.70
I1JJ1
4J13
4340
2.06
27368
i.37
351
33882
319
1.18
SC.68
31.06
OJ3
6J6
24.S9
2.73
«23
437H4
3UM
859 JEW
53.61
11.22
4SJ31
• 7j65
9.77
IJSS.47
'- 90% Of SLAQ IS PRCJCEEtD FOR BECXJVEfl t OF METALLIC: AND THIN SOLD FOR USE AS ROAD Fill. ETC,
REMAINOER ISLAND DISPOSED, AMD/OR USED AS FLUM. SLAC3S FROM 9LAST FURNACES. OPEN HEARTH
FyRNACES. BASIC OXYGEN FURNACEE, ELECTRIC FURNACE!, AND SOAKING PITS NOT CONSIDERED
HAZARDOUS OH THE BASIS OF CALSPAH SOL JfllUlY TESTS DESCRIBED IN AIVENDIX B.
SOURCE:
N CORPORATION
27
-------
Table 7b
ESTIMATED STATE, REGIONAL, AND NATIONAL SOLID WASTE
FROM IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY
TOTAL SLAG, 1977 (METRIC TONS)
STAT1
ALABAMA
ARIZONA
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
DELAWARE
ftORtOA
GEORGIA
HAWAII
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
KENTUCKY
MARYLAND
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
Missiaippi
MISSOURI
NC* JERSEY
NEW YORK
N. CAROLINA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RMODI ISIANB
S CAHOLISA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VIRGINIA
*A5HiNGTQ'Y
W. VIRGINIA
EPA BE SIGN
J
n
m
m
T
S3
SS
an
B.
X
NATIONAL TOTAIS
TOTAL
GENERATED
2426,500
13,620
7.350
TOTAL
POTENTIALLY
HAZARDOUS
D
1.771.MO
575,400
38.200
TfclJO
32,770
49.230
J.MS-
4,873,500
10527.300
929,000
3.J34.SOO
»,7«1.80Q
26.700
9.HS
156.600
,
ae.73o
2J»2.MO
27,120
11.781,000
ai.ieo
4S.1 20
14.875. 500
NA
44,060
15630
1 036.1 00
1 3S6.S00
11,590
87,470
1,175300
3EUOO
!,«5T,?so
70.223,620
>ai3,««
31,990,400
1,074,610
156,800
1,962.300
1,787,1*5
IJMW
K 166,860
1
TOTAL
HAZARDOUS
CONSTITUENTS
0
(
DISPOSAL*
METHOD
10 IDAS
ROAD BASE
on
iUILDING
AGGREGATE
OR
OPEN
DUMPED
1
CONSTITUENTS
Cf
1,865,81
51,70
3S.3S
1,877,11
345.37
146.72
324,97
157,83
18=07
12 64
4.94306
7.8BS54
872,98
2*40.03
2.B6S.39
126.58
44.58
60221
»0,H
1,65595
13D62
11,073 «»
15003
188.63
13.790.81
NA
217-26
7fl,79
2,50444
1,57288
44 49
335,91
•91.80
14672
1,636.5!
17,659.10
3.J47.95
26.69945
2,68985
602.21
1.818,25
i.W1.4|
524.54
57,4«,OJ
Cu
117.62
1-63
0.58
95.31
ZG66
4 69
7(9
2.59
60S
0.31
265 .63
473.11
47.11
110.82
221.32
2.H
on
19.25
181
129 75
21«
517.51
2.46
6.03
74241
NA
34B
1 23
88 27
71.50
1.4!
10.74
71.3B
tte
13G.56
"71.80
180.85
1 ,550.25
91,31
19.25
98 1C
97 1«
1677
3,189,03
f
S,«il.B
21.42
14,99
3.79S.31
1,332^»
60.81
13614
66,84
71,37
5.3D
10,768 «
2iSii.es
2.00S.06
ewcES
11.057J1
S4,4»
ia. Be
249,60
11J.S4
6.738 01
15.12
24.73S.IO
6356
78.18
31.78972
NA
89.89
31,67
1,852 4B
2.63608
ie 44
135 23
4,666 10
603'
6.S55.55
43.451.09
9.040.98
70,537 3 1
1,83103
24».60
3.Mal7
]j22.ei
217.41
139.124.94
Mn
38,712-50
54701
37155
3S.68S Ml
9,155,56
145207
3,425.22
1.657,32
2,000,14
132.78
94.081,4?
1B8.I7D80
17,54603
550E65
75.935.54
1.J50.JJ
A6B.15
6.370.44
2,95711
44.659.28
1J71.62
212.719. 71
1^7553
1,99540
jat ,174 .90
NA
2JZ2B.B2
78535
32,444.90
2'], 766. 18
470.65
3.SS3.47
30.5(2.27
K52.07
47,816.39
37675863
64.869J1
562,857.85
34,391.98
6,370.44
38,921.74
3S365.K
6,549.87
1.1SB.3S4.3
Ni
4a,oi
0,82
Q.40
41il
10.6?
1M
4m
1.77
3.33
0.14
iiBje
193J5
20W
62 H
B,
1B2.B6
2.M
0^4
156.93
4].«<
7J5
9.32
1,07
94S
3.09
42570
754.69
76,1 B
241 .51
BO-2E , 362JK
1.<4
OKI
10.81
4jOS
51«
IM
252.67
1.66
332
lie 33
NA
2.38
0*1
44.92
30.66
0.78
512
27.68
2,51
5563
411,76
nn
655.63
47.00
10.61
11.53
4J.57
824
J54.4S
OJ]
ex
30.18
B.Q5
2I2J1
03B
94731
102
1.48
1,209J6
NA
1.44
051
142.66
119.84
2J3
1BS<
102*4
735
220.96
l.WE.«
272.71
2,490.62
143.92
30.19
163 4B
15968
26.30
i.080.76
2n
50. a 5
1.9]
039
49.27
040
2M
5*3
3.64
373
0-21
120,11
207 M
20,31
72.09
81. '-3
US
Q.7S
11JB
5,12
46 HI
>.!8
28692
251
3.73
359.1 S
NA
149
1JE5
6372
41,41
O.B6
0.63
26.07
250
EI.13
444.12
34,8&
898.91
INCLUOIS SLAGS f HOM BLAST FURNACES. OPEN HEARTH FURNACES, BASIC
OXYGEN FURNACES £LEC7RfQ FURNACES AND SOAKING PIT$ SLAG CONSiOGRlD NON-HAZARDOUS
ON BASIS OF CAL5PAN SOLUBILITY TESTS DESCRIBED IN APPENDIX B.
SOURCE CALEPANCOfif OHATIQN
28
-------
Table 7c
ESTIMATED STATE, REGIONAL, AND NATIONAL SOLID WASTE
FROM IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY
TOTAL SLAG, 1983 (METRIC TONS)
STATE
ALASAMA
ARKANSAS
CALI^ORM^
COIORADO
CONNECTICUT
DELAWARE
FLORIDA
0101101 A
HAM AH
ILIINQI*
INDIANA
KENTUCKV
MARYLAND
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
NEW JERSIV
NEW VCRK
N. CAROLINA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE [SL'AND
S, CAROLINA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VffiGlNiA
WASHINGTON
W.VIROiNIA
I
n
ffl
JS
IF
"SI
JBJ
tnn
n
x
TOTAL
3,279,800
15.7OQ
IJ0@
' 2,064, ?M
' 663 ?QO
f 44.300
§8,309
38,000
-7.100
a, GOO
5.MMQQ
12,21^,600
SfiljQO
3,327,300
8,S48JGQ
31S000
10.700
182,006
76,300
3.3&5,BQO
31,500
13,670,300
36,300
$1,000
t?,2Bl,2GG
_
51,100
13,000
1,703,300
I 1,609,300
I3,$o»
101,500
2,t?S,700
*4JOO'
3.435,100
23,466,900
4,fl«8,IOtJ
37,120,100
I JM 7,000
TOTAt
POTENT1AIIY
0
• I
1
182,000 |
' 2.277,000 ]
2.073,400
1&5,SOO
1
TOTAL
HA2ARDOUS
i
' |
:
DISPOSAL"
MiTMOO
EOiO AS
ROAU BASE
OK
BUELOIMG
AOGBBBA-IE
OH
OPEN C
1
UMPED
CONSTITUENTS
Cr
1,932. 87
m.m
4i.oe
C«
1M.4C
1-B4
a-.-i
110.18
40G.7B 30.93
1M.25 | S.44
377,09 ! i,15
1i3 14 j 3.00
2».«0
I4S?
5.735J1
I,itl.l3
1 ,013.00
2.K7 J9
3^J9.5?
149-21
61,13
688.79
325J6
1. 105 49
151.57
! 12.842 70
: I»M
7,01
054
JOSiJ
M9.se
§4.66
175.01
25B62
2.99
0.85
22.34
f
6.KW40
24.85
Hn
44.92 I.OB
(34.74
17.39 4J1,14
4/64.69 4yl,S90,2m
1,M5« 10.6:391)
»,f? 1JOO.M
157.88
77,6*
9094
8.21
3.9M.S5
1 J23.12
2^20,91
1S4A7
12,4»,W 109,170.00
27,74859 ?19,1S1,40
- 2^30 1 1 26.470,08
7,937,78 64,524.69
12331 M 8$,1t3.Sa
U 10
I«l
789.63
? 93 j 13&.3S
iso.se
249
S31J1
J.SS
1 :i&.as ?.oo
16.002.65
~
2«B.3D
| 8«,79
| 2,906.50
| 1.826,"
| il.«2
189 78
1.H2.57
1TO.M
2,131.05
2D.491.22
3,BS4.tO
30,981-42
3,121.25
m.n
IX&Sto
2.968 ;ae
| BOS*
66.B2.TO
aii.47
^
4,04
14Z
102.43
B2.97
1.S5
12.4S
82.81
5.44 '
15E.1B
1,13009
109.99
1,788 .8?
109 B6
22.34
113.K3
112.77
19.48
3,677.24
7^ie.63
64.20
ti.mai"
73.75
M.72
»,B8«.U7
-
104,31
Jt.re
2.149.57
3.0S8.6S
21 40
liMBl
543.23
7,39212
3,431 37
S1.821.62
IWI.60
2sa,4j8,eo
iwa.2i
JJ1S.41
332.BS1.00
-
2»».»7
911.30
37,641.33
M.MCOC
548.13
161. B6 |- 4,113.37
t,414,U
7067
7,955.02
M.41M7
IJ30.24
!1,B3E76
2,i«)J1
MS S3
4^04.81
4^JS,7e
252 iS
181^137.44
35.4BB.98
1J0099
SS^iW
43I.1l9.3i
75J73.57
87«.«t,(!9
»,907,Si
7^92,12
4i,1S3,90
4547901
6.438. 7S
1,390«»M
Ml
6S.71
1.06
48.17
1J.S1
3.00
54i
2*
3.87
1)16
137.16
224. i5
24 ,»
- 72,27
IWJS'
1,87
0,68
12.31
*.7D
60.26
I.JO
113.11
1,85
3 SB
167,07
-
».7I
D87
62 12
35.50
0.81
6J7'
32.12
3 -DO
64.H
477.81'
91 .83
761.13
64 J3
12.31
<8.19
49 N
1073
'*'""
Pi>
212.11
3.08
OJ9
1*2 10
50.64
B.53
'582
1-24
11.00
c i:
433.91
875 /J
sa.37
28CUS
420 11
1.01
. Zn
56.50
1.11
8.69
S7.I7
11.38
3.36
6.S8
3.08
4.3J
02i
139.45
' 241.32
' 23.57
83.6i
H.M
2.49
0.3S use
3S.03
9.34
347.D6
1J»
1.09923
1.16
!037
1,403.90
-
1J7
0.59
18S.64
139.06
2.58
U.S4
119,10
BS3
2S6.40
1^118.66
316J3
2J!9Q,0$
187.00
3SD?
119.78
166-16
30.51
iw.ci
JJJO
5.94
§3.38
141
332.94
2.91
4.12
416.75
.
4.12
1,45
62.33
48.05
1.02
7.70
aus
3.36
19.32
$38,55
tXM
< 10.84
65 ,H
13JO
68.43
68.61
12.DZ
1.720.12
•DISW3SAL PBSCTICE FC» IM3 IS IXPICTED TO BE ESSENTMLLY TH6 5»ME M CUflHtNI PRACTICE
(SEE 1674 SLAO T4Sit I INCIUOES S1.AGS FROM BLAST FURNACtS. WIN MEABTM FUBNACtS. BASIC
OKTOIN FU8K6CES ILiCTBIC FUHNACtSAMCSOAKING PlIS.StAO CO«.SiDtB£O«IONHAZ4BDOU5
ON BASIS OF CAISPAN SOLUBILITY TESTS OtSCQtMQ IN Af^NDIK B
SOURCE: MCSPA
29
-------
Tabia 7d
ESTIMATED STATE, REGIONAL, AND NATIONAL SOLID WASTE
FROM THE IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY
TOTAL SLUDGE, 1974 {METRIC TONS) DRY WEIGHTS
5TAT|
ALABAMA
ARIZONA
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
TONNICT'CUT
DELAWARE
! Fiomoft
HAWAII
ILLINOIS
mOIANA
KENTUCKY
MA3VLANQ
MICHIGAN
MiNNEiOTA
MISSISSIPPI
Mi
NEW JERS£V
m#i. VORK
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
$, CAROLINA
TEfti "JESSES
T£XAS
UTAH
VIRGINIA
W&SHfMGTQN
W. VIRGINIA
£PA REGION
TOTAl
HNtfUTSE
i«ajoe
302
141
97,740
«3fEWfi_
1^80
1,800
BSD
S7,5
321,200
73SJSQ
60.WQ
HW.060
349,100
514
' 487
3,930
1,590
217,000
719JQO
900
1,100
gcnjQQ
JM
970
SOD
33.650
«1,JW
260
1.9S3
157,300
I 2,084
n 218,890
m 1,268,520
IS 283,800
V 3,1 2 6,814
2T 3-8,381
W 3,950
SOB iaM»
S 08,1310
X 3.093
NATIONAL TOTALS 4,124,612
TOTAL
HAZARDOUS
ta^ao
75,5
353
24,638
10,380
4JO
400
213
350
21.9
80,330
1W.QQO
is. tee
27 .370
87,230
129
123
BS8
398
M.TSfl
178,300
1W
2*5
235,300
S1.0
243
125
8,110
1B.34D ,
w:
48i
33,330
531
54,948
'292.36S
,ss,aoe
531,538
S.5tS
• asa
28,320
S4327
7M
1. 008,1 «
TOTAL
OOMSTITyOVTS
ijm^s
Z-W
1.30
9S«.2B
383.85
ttM
18 13
798
10 M
1 It
3,022-QS
6J«Ji
S12J4
t,1*8-5i
3U275.G8
i4Q
2-3S
34,81
i&,as
2 OS
8JS
7J8B70
BO-l
1Q.93
9^00.13
OOJ
1037
4,81
39g,45
raue
358
1B.<6
' 13«32S
B.71
i?,?a
ij.ws^e
a^soas
20.3SS 13
385.36
DISPOSAL*
MITHOD
OKN
DUMP
OR
fUCVCLf
1
04J9
1 '2&03
14»C*«
M.3B
I7i783J
Ct
34 13
025
0-15
; 14.60
11 11
0,72
1,SQ
0-«
0-06
$7,11
211,23
IS. 77
38,71
9216
0,58
0.1S
1.56
BS.9?
187.33
0,65
M2
21B-4S
Gu
1I.AB
B.1B
O.OB
'5.BS
4.23
0^7
O.B7
0.33
0.04
M.78
125.W
7AS
J4.4S
3S.EU
S«
0.1 Q
0,75
21.62
1MJS
0-31
0.59
130.06
NECillGISLE
0,91
0,32
11, SO
656
0,22
1,65
s?,ee
0,72
67,2?
31&.tS
6646
559.10
12,40
2S&
17M
24, SI
2,17
1,060,59
0^45
0,13
9,61
9,10
0.1 «
1,05
32 :i
q.4?
Z13J
ia7Ji
iB.33
jse.3c
10.02
i.ra
13^43
I&.09
t.M
M».3S
Mn
96C.38
3.47
101
4T1J6
2H.W
a .9*
M 1?
s.se
084
1.75BJ9
34*4,46
316.S1
901. je
T^OQ 33
J.32
i.M
1,159.47
a, sso.ro
8,54
12,66
4,3n.7Z
0,02
11,83
4,26
2DG.7T
Z13.50
2.W
2S-&4
81@-»
9,96
1.17G.90
0,06305
I^M.17
10,62101
2^1,36
4D.41
44J.34
471.S9
3S, 20
MJ»JO
COHSTITUEN18
Hi
13,78
0,11
turn
8.71
366
0.31-
0£4
0'5
D03
3074
&S ia
SIM
18,20
ft
3DB.CT
0,68
DA0
190.1!
B0.«
1JM
4.38
2.11
an
609.9«
1JS6.16
13D.4Z
349.30
3Q.47 ] 66S.JO
0,17 j 1.77
0,06 | O.Ef
18.4!
WS1
0.19
0,3S
61. 64
410.47
^J90-03
2.C6
2.41
1.&65 19
En
1JM,)1
1,0*
014
^,230.71
19137
298
SOB
324
9J8
3,021-82
7.5W«
B02&4
2,426 65
s^Wja?
Cn
2-88
NA
KA
1,13
D.48
NA
NA
NA
NA
3-M
843
034
2M
4,03
268 NA
D9J
•
;,00d5)
B.OJ1.M
312
3JS1
10 J42 IB
— NESHGIBLE - — •
Q.n
0.1D
5.83
5.41
O.OS
0,ffi
1478
0,31
ifl.as
113.17
20.91
13033
9,17
1.33
8,06
9.85
106
)70W
2.M
1.S3
67.55
106.8-3
Q,SS
4.43
293.55
1,6-s
4(4.3ffi
ZJiZ.St
440.12
1,525-95
70.10
7.M
1BT1B
181.0!
6.f2
7.5W-N
4.36
1,56
NA
243
a, is
NA
NA
10J1
NA
NA
NA
449 W | 0,33
1.0C033 I 062
0.90 1 NA
fi,7B NA
1.364JB | 1.60
?0£
?,OOG,28
14,04049
2,51804
2'J12 53
463-39
12 16
1,38670
1J92CW
TOSS
43,056 «8
NA
2,48
15J7
3ja
H.6?
0^3
NA
1,40
US
NA
48,60
f
OSM
o.a
OJO
ii3*r
67.73
OJ1
1J2
QJ9
0.37
*aoj«
&02J4
BUS
236.1!
H79JO
fl.>3
0.15
IS4.61
Md.ie
OJS
1-05
1,S!73,6a
NA
1JO
-------
Table 7e
ESTIMATED STATE, REGIONAL, AND NATIONAL SOLID WASTE
FROM THE IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY
TOTAL SLUDGE, 1977 (METRIC TONS) DRY WEIGHTS
AI.A&AM*
ARIZONA
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
DIS.AWAR1
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
HAWAII
I»Z»
MABliAND
WCM1SAN
MINI*! SOT A
MISSiSSlWI
MISSOURI
Ntwjg^Siy
NEWYOKK
K CAROLINA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
torn 1 «TAL
iENEHATED
218.MO
320
160
4SJ70
1,990
1.760
900
1,4*5
93
3MJ56C
6CJQO
221,600
350,000
! wi
S17
S,1flO
1.680
2313,000
480
762,300
636
HAZARDOUS
M»0
m
38
!S,MO
11J4Q
<8S
426
373
23
1HMO
1 8.070
i^Uffi
m&K
138
1»
IfK
430
6750C
120
180 JIB-
1SS
ORSGDN 1,17U | Z93
ff N NSV L VANE A
RHODE ISLAND
& CAROLINA
l«
1.Q3Q
ase
TlKNfiSSse I 929 132
TfcKAS | 38,670 | *&&
UTAH | BB.Eiid j IB^SC
VinONNIA
WASHING TON
I
B
M
JOT
•v
izi
w
ins
a
X
NATIONAL TOTALS
276
2,010
;mym
231,680
tMstn
278.42E
IX'.tK
je«;
i.iac
1^1,610
11*02:
!J55
«J71,«2J
63
sje
41.BBO
^^^—^^^~
57,920
336,424
BSB5I
M3 ^56
1,117
IflM
27jKM
«W5
B13
1OT7M3
TOTAL
MAZAR0OU3
COMTITUiNTS
2*42«2
J.17
1flM»
417i7
9.20
19,21
• ii.tr
124
7««5
5*3,51
3 .471. SO
1JS
2 S3
36 68
16.63
2.12$ 73
8.74
7,64123
8.77
ti.se
0,84
1190
4.2$
40g£7
77S27
2.73
20 63
144166
«.
2.1S3J5
I1.2B1.U
9.«»JK>
,21j67«,«
S1S34
HJ«
1.182.14
vc«oj;
12J1
'"»•"
DlSPQSAi*
METMOO
OPEN
DUMP
OR
CONSTITUtWTS
0
36 18
«7
3S.OB
Jl.JB
C.77
t.i8
0.88
0,07
223.81
41,03
07 ra
O.B9
OJO
3.13
1,3?
6933
0.58
177,36
0.69
0,88
MEGUt
O.B6
5,34
53,10
7J6
0-23
1.7S
60.80
0,7?
8B.7Q
WJn>
66J3
593,64
13,15
3,13
18.04
3642
273
1.1 13 J?
C«
17.88
0.17
1AM
4.59
fl.BO
O.JS
fl.W
41.08
128JZ
mis
a. sa
0.1C
2DO
C.BO
ia BZ
02€
1D6.27
, O.J5
0,63
3I6L1
QftH
0.19
10,19
9.S4
a.i5
1,12
34.2Q
O.BO
23,72
i«Ca
2T,62
314,06
1062
7,00
u,n
1?.OS
1.76
K1Q.M
Mn
912,00
3.31
499.88'
HI
14.53
0.11
10^9
243.87 | 3J7
10.&4 i : 3J
9>20 I 0.18
13.45 i
1SJS
Q.33
20,03
1T8-W
22.11
201.74
8.53
1.3C'
s.ao
10.43
1,13
333.21
Pb
327.62
0.72
iSAfi
2^»
023
,«:"
37QJH
TOO'-l
1J7
0.6E
3.43
4, DO
43S.10
1J|
1,387.43
2.16
fB
2,119,88
1.11
«KJtfi
3.14
4.05
0.3 1
7J53.9G
a,6T2.14
3.445A3
2J4-
DM
12.B6
8. 10
2.12O.56
2^5
B^13.3?
3.31
NEGLIGIBLE —
3.01
1.06
71 .«0
m.26
D.S2
4. JO
31098
2.99
939.10
3,451.57
466.74
4.161 .&C
?4,31
1.43
IBS 73
20248
74«
8,01 2 Jt6
4.63
't£
47840
1^68.88
OW
7-ia
1.44»,U
3.14
2.12B.66
14JB2.92
2,688,88
23.120.86
4B0.4B
12J8
1^30.60
W74,1T
1U3
484«2,«
On
044
MA
1JO
051
iVA
NA
hA
6,3
3.04
4J7
NA
' HA
Nft
NA
2.S3
NA
9J8
«A
NA
NA
NA
OJE
0.8?
MA
NA
1,70
HA
>2.&
>1B^1
>3,41
>2«.1I
•>045
NA
1.46
>1JK>
NA
>"•"
P
24219
BJfl
61J»
OJK
1,1 T
0.08.
»j<
9WJ9
8,77
Oi7
3S4
IjiT
311.29
a.n
891 42
080
'
.U48.04,
'. 1i>
0,M
• 31.B7
. N41
OIL
aREASE
*A**M
643
4.10
9IM1
38.7^
1&49
J3.17
3,»
M^JiB
8JT3.73
UJO
6.1J
I3JO
S3J7
«^«S-H
12«
18.JM.OS
17J8
ifl.m.ia
WJ3
947
KI7J1
I.KB«
oa wi
1.B7 «5.17
IW«
oja
31396
1.W7J7
331.12
2.KJ1SJ
32,78
i&l
119S3
1M«
9,06
EJJE67
2.7B1J1
«.?5
4^01.71
ZB3MJIO
5«7J6
41MU9
K21J9
73*0
J.437,00
WBT.7B
PMINQL
«J>5
NA
NA
7J1
NA
NA
NA
,^
HJt
SO^S
NA
«A
NA
NA
»A9
NA
13376
NA
1MJO
NA
NA
NA
*,»
13^5
NA
MA
74.19
NA
> 37,43
>ZS2J8
>M.M
J37J.J7
>4.M
MA
!1.5>
> 17.08
WJ9 I MA
BS.BS8-BO 1 >7SiJS
•DISOSALMETH[»S»,LLPROMBLr
ITH OBEa TIB TEKWNCV
)MCT£: Hft DEhQTIS THAT DATA WERE NOT AVAILABLE-
SOURCE; CAlSPAN COWHATION
31
-------
Table 7f
ESTIMATED STATE, REGIONAL, AND NATIONAL SOLID WASTE
FROM THE IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY
TOTAL SLUDGE, 1983 (METRIC TONS) DRY WEIGHTS
STATE
AUI3AMA
ARIZONA
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
TOTAL
iENfRATEC
243J6C
371
174
120,200
COLORADO M.040
CONNECTICUT 2,310
DELAWARE 1,870
GEORGIA
HAWAI!
ILLfSOIS
INDIANA
K£NTUCIt¥
MARYLAND
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MltSGUR*
NEW JERSEY
1.T3Q
108
3SSJIO
905.100
74.5BC]
167,140
429,400
832
GOO
1.8SQ
WE* YORK 2B7.QQO
N, CAROLINA BW
OHIO SW WC
OKLAHOMA
OH £30*
BMOD6 MJJLANP
J. CAROLINA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
yT AH
VlRQINiA
WASHING TON
W, VIRGINIA
?3H
1.3SS
26 1
1,183
614
76,480
320
2410
183,460
EPA HEGiOM
1 2.&61
U
ffi
ffi
V
•m
•SB
TTTft
IK
I
NATIONAL TOTfttS
2G8,%G
15*1. ISC
324,263
2,614,813
s 2,302
4.890
129120
120,678
3,?te
S.973,372
TOTAL
POTENTIALLY
HAZARDOUS
90JWO
93
44
3D.OSQ
13,510
S7B
489
MO
433
37
88,790
aiejaa
tB.&SO
38.290
107 JM
IM
1JJO
4as
88.158
321.150
IBS.
339
277,150
63
2S8
10,350
19.670
SO
603
*a,3?0
641
6J.23B
365,383
R1JJ74
BS3.72B
110,578 '
1JM1
2SJ&Q
30,170
WJ
1,243,356
TOTAL '
HA1AHOOUS
CONSTITUENTS
3J6S.B1
J--J
IJ3
1J76.^3
•ad IB
10.8W
22J0 •
B,44
1.44
, 3.71711
8,*1832
S3DS?
2J642.77
4.03B.25
6,4? ,
•a"
19.20
2,*67.a
5.12
EJW.J
g^9
13.44
"'""«
12JB
47d,ia
SSI SO
3.17
23 .B4
U673.10
10.72
2.417(06
!S.«11J>
sosisa
25.039.11
WB32
49J!
1J8379
1JJO.B5
«JI
M.W1J?
OtVOML*
MiTHOD
OWN
DUMP
QR
REC
1
YCLE
CONSTITUSN'8
c,
<1J«
0.31
019
20J6
, 13.CT
O.M
1J5
1.14
Q.B8
1DB.02
259,12
2J.K
17.51
1 11,39
063
3.K3
t.U
62.M
2MB'
0.6C
t,14
«OL,G.
0.40
14.27
R.42
0.27
2.02
70,55
e.ea
7DW
sas.sg
«/e
6B7&3
15-26
3.BJ
22.D9
3a.es
LIE
i^»«
Cu
TCJt
030
a.io
19. 5'.
S.J3
0,56
1.07
0.73
tim
14S.7S
9.16
3Q.11
44,31
0,33
3,32
D.i3
2B.10
1^32
D.41
O.J3
1LI
01Q
us?
11.13
o.n
1.29
3SM
0.5A
2!i2
231.01
92.19
3&149
12.13
3.32
1B.G2
18.7S
2,02
TOUI
Mte
1.1Z6J6
«.J7
:«
HO 05
281.47
1923
2«.fll
1E.61
1.03
4,394.31
12C31
i,ioa,s9
2,317.39
9.00
«e>i
21.44
1,426, IB
», 170.07
10.SO
15.57
CC2
5,24
24B.SS
262 -S1
1.17
27.73
1.004.6C
12.2S
1 ,«47 J9
7.USIC
1j42,il
13.Oe3.B4
JMlBb
46.71
M4.06
b«35
43,30
»jru<
Nt
18.81
013
0.06
It.M .
4.4S
Q,X8
0.67
0.47
0.03
3761
79,17
Pb
ISO 10
3.W
0.60
Z33JS
99.19
2.39
6,39
3.07
TSO.iO
1,9W-i3
7.43 146.12
19.92 42B.S4
37,47
0.20
151
9.58
Ufa
79.35
5.24
0.47
0.12
J.29
S.Ol
o.n
BU.»
117
g?a
4.ffi
2.»«0«
1,536.74
2,M
3.06
NEOLI2I8L
IJt
B3M
13141
0,7!
ti.M | S«5
is.oe
5»
22.24
138^0
SS'i
234.10
7.5B
131
11,14
12,10
1.31
«6626
HOJ»
2J5
vss;
!*ta.75
HIM
4jlI9«>
M23
a.Ts
meo
234,86
§5i
•JOT»
2>
!,4M«
C*i
3.30
1J8 j NA
OJ1 j NA
M7657 | 1*
<«1.B , 6l»
3» ' M
819
4 70
NA
NA
3.HM4 j *Ji
S.229.&3
6'C.iZ
2J84.B6
4.000.B4
3.29
14,96
7.37
2.460,66
ID, 12
0.66
3,52
4 as
NA
NA
NA
3,05
9=7977 j 10^
3,84
4.SS
1,91
5 52, BO
1 .226.56
1,11
8,34
IJ 78,06
3.S&
2.5S7J2
17^9-33
3,388,1?
29.528,32
&E7.55
W^6
1J17J8
MMJ1
13.03
Q«<1.3I
NA
1X12
NA
HA
0,40
1.13
iNA
NA
1J7
NA
?3,CS
»a,3i
S3.96
>3644
JCJIO
NA
1.71
>).»
NA
>W-"
F
91 JH
OK
OJ6
118-81
71,131
1,00
234
u.
I17J1
1,110-M
99.81
201.11
6».4!
o.to
4,11
1.93
JSJ8
I.W,3>
1,96
1J9
HA
Oil
M.7S
67*8
0.30
2JS
261.60
>1J»
364.31
ijie.»4
3S»S5
SJilil
E(6
«_H
1M.7C
14&26
3Ba
>I.1MM
911
SRE«SE
V1«JB
JJB
*,?•
• use 11
m is
21 S9
7/MO.M
16,643.99
1.IS0.5Q
I,<»,64
S.092 Ifi
S.9B
BS.S4
3S.9S
•WM-
li^22W
26.17
26,82
O.M
10,08
937.37
1J56, 70
8^3
45.??
3,23SJ7
21, *3
* .981,81
31JT2J1
Bji4i3-32
SG,43«^4
W2.M
ffi.M
2jE07-ffii
2^ft.4i
MM
PWENOL
47J36
MA
NA
1lJ)2
lAi
NA
NA
NA
€240
1*1 34
8,39
&Q.22
«3,81
NA
NA
&A
43.43
15S 22
NA
NA
lfH.34
NA
NA
5.73
16-08
NA
MA
28,06
NA
) 43.43
>ZM.fi2
>i644
>4BJT
>$.?3
NA
2*,5fl
>»aj2
KA
«ft,iZ2J*! | SS2.17
•METKOOS Of MANOLIKG SLUDGE WILL PnOBAllV FDLLOW CyRSINT PRACTICt. BUT WITH INtftiASID EMWiMfSCHN BgC
MOT I; NADiNGTES THAT E>*TA WERE NOT AVAILABLE.
SOURCE CAISPAM CORPORflT1CM
32-
-------
Table 7g
ESTIMATED STATE, REGIONAL, AND NATIONAL SOLID WASTE
FROM IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY
TOTAL DUST, 1974 {METRIC TONS)
STATE
ALABAMA
ARIZONA
ARKANSAS
CAUFQfiNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
DfLAWAflE
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
HAWAII
IttlWQlS
INDIANA
KENTUCKX
MAS ViAN D
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSlSSSPfl
MISSOURI
NEW JERSEV
NEW VOHK
N. CAROL ENA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
S. CAROLINA ,
TENNESSEE
TEKAS
UTAH
WBGMIA
WASHINGTON
». VIRGINIA
' IPA RiGICW
! i
a
m
IS"
I
SI
CT
inn
33
2
NATIONAL TOTALS
OENEflATED
ii?>Me
S$g
9W
72.«QQ
23,250
2700
Eoeo
2.B5Q
3,600
Z»
213,150
4Si,4QB
35,800
137,300
193,200
2^W
950
11,106
5400
115,100
2.4GO
488,000
E^QD
3.450
816,900
4,800
1.AOG
55,000
M.7M
IK*
6.200
74.B50
ZJOQ
12Q.30C
825 .BQD
169,150
, U1IJ60
5fl,4SQ
11,100
77,960
73,800
»,»G
2,663,750
POTENTIALLY
HAZARDOUS
MJMO
114
78
8,flW
2.7&C
JI1
7M
354
420
30
25.600
MM10
4,300
18,4-10
23,180
288
.102
1,330
6M
i3,s to
284
Sa,670
1M
*I4
72^30
450
lie
E.BOO
e,B70
&€
7Ad
a,Mo .
3ZS
IJ1
O.BI
21,14
5.93
3-72
Cu
3B.4S
IBS
1JW
«M
633
SJJ
8.33 11.73
4.Q9 $.7$
4MB 6.75
0.33 cue
S8M 127.U
1G1.43 132J1
17.17 21-70
344?
49.3?
'3,33
i.ie
15.28
, 7JO
24,33
3.39
173.IS
J.99
4.79
2D1J04
5SC
IW
i2£2
i?ja
1.13
a.52
ia.s;
372
2! 13
2&S.64
BELZB
4Z4J4
57.63
iBjra
23,33
39,79
1341
B24-75
SU4
§2.76
4. S3
l.K
2IJI
10 J3
24.75
4.7?
247.M
W7
6J4
191,07
7.7B
2,73
78,01
32.06
1S9
1JOO
11,®
BJ4
34.3S
M7.32
B7-04
S«5J5
'&a,?7
21JI
38 JS
4BO6
1874
1.2SB-4S
f"
MJ3
2J9
1.60
3M4
45?
6^8
14. &4
7,14
fl.3?
OJi7
139,50
82.06
2t.au
34JS?
ajo
5JI1
rea
26. 6i
12.55
13 M
5.S1
211,43
8,71
a.3B
23S.93
s.so
3~38
B8J9
2 J.I 5
1-8?
MJ?
2,M
8.43
2&.&1
I90,3fi
84. M
«aa,39
67.S?
fB-K
37,72
39,30
23. 22
1£BO££
fcfci
1J«JJ9
•*06J
2836
MZ.4B
2H.&4
11S.M
J57.M
NI
f1-6B
5JE3
0.%
!1JO
2.04
0.66
149
1»>* 073
148.M Q£6
' 10.13 6.0@
3,367 Jfi 26.48
4,
-------
Table 7h
ESTIMATED STATE, REGIONAL, AND NATIONAL SOLID WASTE
FROM IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY
TOTAL DUST, 1977 {METRIC TONS)
1TAIE
ALABAMA
ARIZONA
AP KANSAS
COLORADO
ODKNECTICUT
DELAWARE
| fLOFMDA
6EORQIA
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
KENTUCKY
MAR V LAND
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
NEW VOR*
TOT* I
GCNHEHATiDi
124,300
1,000
200
74.600
3JS&Q
9.400
3, ISO
3700
no
226,200
443,500
37,950
145400
xr. mo
ItSSO
900
11,760
6 .850
N.CAROLtNA 2,800
OHIO 616,200
OKLAHOMA 3,000
OREGON 3,700
PENNSYLVANIA
SHODJ ISLAND
B.CAROLINA
l*ENN|SSEf
TEXAS
UTAH
VIRGINIA
WASHrNQTON
W. VIRGINIA
EPA REGION
1
37
ni
isr
"Sr
EC
HE
rj
X
HATiQftftL TOTALS
6*3,360
— -
4,250
1,500
SBJOO
5fi,QOG
850
63<50
79JSO
2JSD
127.SSO
875,100
178,350
1,395,250
63,000
11.750
62,800
77,950
18,250
2123 ,«so
TOTAL
POTENTIALLY
HAZARDOUS
14J20
120
84
i.2W
2JSS0
342
zsa
378
444
30
27,140
53,220
4,560
17,4ZD
2-*,&8Q
206
Mia
1,416
14 WO
312
62.1BG
380
4M
77JOO
_
6?&
ISO
7,OOO
6,960
102
TBS
9,520
W2
ts,306
105,0(0
71,402
1«7£26
j 444
1,410
9.3IC
9,350
1,230
338,830
TOTAL
CONS TITUi NTS
479
an
14
27
58
130
84
76
S
1J50C
1,840
244
719
604
52
19
237
112
311
&3
3,240
BO
74
3JBEW
_
as
916
473
IB
132
IBS
&B
4S3
4JM3
1.CM8
?^7S
B90
237
550
BS7
206
16^88
CiSPOSAL*
METHOD
OPEN
DUMP
OR
CONSTITUENTS
C*
2SA4
1.3S
KM
a,2B
3 .95
6fi3
4.34
5.00
0-35
104.40
1D7&5
18JZD
»0.53
5233
3.53
1,23
1S.20
7.B3
3,58
1B3-4B
413
S.03
213 10
— .
S.B3
55.OT
IB 43
1-20
9.04
14.J8
3,95
34.D6
274.M
?Q IB
45031
8108
1S.20
24.71
31.57
1411
980.21
C«
38.H
1.M
45.31
8,70
GJSS
12.44
6.11
7,16
o.as
140,56
23,47
N.32
&5J2
fl.B?
1.72
10-24
26.23
5.05
F»
27.78
2.43
UQ
30.63 .
4J5
fiJB
15.41
756
fi.BJ
0,61
M.«
23 Z1
3707
40.80
6.16
!,ia
2S^5
13.30
14JO
6^6
Z62-4I 224 11
5,90
7,14
30853
.
6 21
82.69
34 .DO
i se
12.72
12.40
B.K
sag?
389,37
7.19
8.55
z^)-oe
—
IQ.17
3.M
M.64
2fl.&4
2-ff9
1S.76 •
3.13
6J&
28. ID
367.78
3?. 25 J 99.58
SSS.1S
SB an
4070
47.76
1i36
1.M4.37
4i6,16
^03.53
2825
K.33
41.M
24.81
I.IiS.BG
M«
1^35.01
4286
3COS
893 03
300.M
121 94
27299
13403
IS?. 14
10.7*
Nf
13.38
OJ?
0.17 .
11.92
3.16
Q.?0
1*6
0,77
0,81
Off
4,213 Si 4850
685-58 4,58
1,238.53
J 303. 86
1QB.20
3738
600.49
335 ,S8
11092
E .243, S3
127.40
168.77
7J16.H
18S.2S
17.78
17,89
Q.&3
OJ2
1.36
10.0*
064
B9.SS
0.7S
0.81
86 JB
l«
fi3_B? 0,37
T.631-17 13,17
401.03
36 a? "
27916
302.03
121.94
1,59749
8. 994 31
9.70B.20
rj.tKffli.53
1,188,82
900.49
7Dt.se
PS, 72
435,95
38,500,74
104Q
0,21
LSI
E20
0.70
11.41
1123&
2Q^e
TG&.74
Id. OS
13 H
12.78
2A2
3S6.73
Rt
«62,S7
2443
'T.oa
10CJ7
mss
1SS 19
7B.19
8i 33
B.10
MKJ7
3ia.lG
sw,n
•X4B
£2 A?
2 1C!
2»S1
m.M
63.9S
ajMB.n
»3JJ
81 12
3«3«
ioi
-------
Table 7i
ESTIMATED STATE, REGIONAL, AND NATIONAL SOLID WASTE
FROM IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY
TOTAL DUST, 1983 (METRIC TONS)
STATE
ALABAMA
ARI2QNA
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO ' '
CONNECTICUT
DELAWARE
FLORIDA
OECRGIA
HAWAII
ILLINOIS
jNfciAtslA
KENTUCKY
MARYLAND
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSISSIPPI ,
wnssoufii
NEW JERSEY
Nlft YOU*
N. CAROLINA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
s, CAROLINA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
«. VIRGINIA
EPA REGION
I
Q
m
IS
ST
TEL
ig|
VHT
s
i
NATIONAL TOTALS
TOTAL
OENERATEDI
144,200
1,150
BOO
99,000
2S.&00
3.300
7.4SO
3.550
1.300
300
2SJ.400
S14.700
44.000
I18.SQO
237,700
2.B50
1,060
13.650
MOO
141.&00
3.000
501.390
3. (50
4JSO
746 .SCO
4,900
1.750
I7.MO
67,JSO<
1,000
7,600
92,100
3JOO
ttr,MO
I.QISJSI
!«^50
1,619,060
71,a»
13,850
9S«0
90.1W
11.850
3,276,450
TOTAl
POTENTIALLY
HAZARDOUS
17400
138
m
nms
3,430
398
894
431
511
u
11.490
61.7SO
S.2«0
20J20
28.520
334
136
1 MO
7«8
16.980
3M
• " 72,160
414
510
89,530
set
210
8,120
1,010
12D
912
11.BM
3«
17,748
121.M4 .
24JIS
194^24
6830
1,840
11 £10
1U.8M
1,482
3t3,
4.10
1.42
'883
3,85
J0.6J
4.17
211,67
0
B1.43
sza.se
7CES
1i,BO
19.69
33.82
16.37
1.137,43
0,
44,84
2JIT
1,S»
5Z5J
7.W
64
3,139-QS
I8,"1.«
2.Q7SJ17
MO. 78
814.11
1.0B86S
50G8S
41.1M23
w.
14.33
DJB
0.2C
13.B3
!,61
O.Si
1.B3
o.:-j
1.55
O.D7
32187
S7.U
5-33
20,11
20,tl
0-73
0,29
3.3S
1,61
11,66
0,74
80,70
OJi
1.0S
100.31
1.21
0.13
16 7E
i2.og
0.2S
1J7
7.W
QS3
13J4
130.19
24.24
192.31
1S.33
3.35
14.SJ
14.19
2.92
41Z.18
«,'
SJ5.62
28.33
19,82
61C.87
1163S
B0.43
1WJ.07
§1.41
103.65
7,06
2.8W.67
2.0e!,«3
38454
687,84
M8.T7
72 .03
M.67
330,14
1IS46
478,17
7J.17
J.SS3.37
M.H3
ID3.41
4^28.21
111.90
4189
l,14i,47
3SJ21
21.39
134. IS
Ht.oe
i043
KM 33
t.381.53
1J41.1S
8.75047
1^S3J2
330.14
498^6
644.DB
' 287.58
19^2357
to
2,417^1
HIM
7E.32
3,739.0)
KS3i
317^2
711,55
349.34
409.58
47 M
7.4M.M
10293A2
1,112,42
4.MJM
2,1Sfl.M
284 ,«2
98,63
1,304.50
814,30
859.55
ZS9.1t
19,119.24
392.05
4C8.«1
23*87.71
4«t,l1
155 ,B4
i431,41
• 3,S!1.BS
»6.37
7!7 6S
27C88
31742
VT3.8S
29.608-M
SJ31.49
3S.B2212
5,94 1.78-
1.5W60
3^79«
3^7744
1,138^7
B2J9439
CN"
0.96
« 0
~Q
0*0
017
"-P
-0
-0
~0
-»
US
291
0.19
101
1.42
-0
-0
~o
,8 .
O.BS
.0
3,13
-8
-0
3J1
•.»
~o'
O.lZ
0.3!
~0
-0
O.S7
.5
OM
5.44
1.14
8.72
0.12
~8
Q.4S
0,44
-0
17.19
F"
32 JS
Ul
1.17
M-S2
' SA3
7JH
17.88
676
1CJW
0.70
160.51
1QCJ3
J643
43.01
47.11
7.15
• J.M
32.7S
. 16^4
! 17-17
7-2«
9M.OS
1 8.34 •
10.27
• MB 19
mi
4.16
ioe.8;
26 .46
242
! IIU«
• 3.63
7JW
3M1
3S7. 13
101M
675.75
121,13
JJ.J1
34.11
an
mm
134134
PHiNOl"
0.15
* 0
~ 0
0,06
0-03
~0
-0
~o
»o
-0
OJO
CM 7
. 0^)3
0.16
OJ3
-0
~0
-0
~0
0.14
»0 '
0,61
»0
~0
o,u
~o
~o
0,0!
0,05
~0 ,
~0
0.06
~0
0-14
0,87
- O.IS
1*1
0,02
- 0
(1.06
006
~0
• 2.78
•DISPOSAL mACTICE FOR liOa IS exPICTIO TO ISSSNf 1ALLY n TNI SAHI AS THE CUBBMTPBACTICI. iUT.WITH ATBiHD
TOWARD INCfliASED USE OF SINTERING OR AOGlOMERATINfl TO «LLQ« RECVCLE.
•VALUES FOR CN f AND PHENOL ARE TO BE CONSIDERED AS MINIMUM SINCE DA TAKERS NOT AVAILABLE FO
CONSTITUENTS FOB ALL TWES OP OUIT INCtUDlD IN TH8 SUMMATIONS.
AJ-^AN CORPORATION
-------
Table 7j
ESTIMATED STATE, REGIONAL, AND NATIONAL SOLID WASTE
FROM THE IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY
TOTAL SCALE, 1974 (METRIC TONS)
STATl
AtAiAMA
ARIZONA
ARKANSAS
CAL1POHMA
1 COLCSAOO
TOTAL
106.400
3,798
1,380
IBS. MO
56,500
| CONNECTICUT 10.700
| OEtAWARf -
FLORIDA
IB, 100
3,3«0
GlORSfA 13,100
HAWAII
ILLINOIS
KENTUCKY '
MARYLAND
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
Missi6Si?pi
MISSOURI
NEW JERSEY
NJWVOBK
OHIO '
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PfKNSYlVANlA
5. CAROLINA
TINNISSEE
TtXAS
UTAH
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
H. VIRGINIA
t
n
m
ET
5
SI
a
uni
a
X,
NATIONAL TOTALS
720
S62JOQ
I3B.090
109,500
258,900
46tJOO
5,000
1,730
44,100
15,800
' 273,900
8,760
l.'ISWOO
5,830
1J.800
7.440
2,910
183,000
113.900
3J60
24,600
206,100
1B,7GG
2D.700
1,901,160
337260
3.123.7W
190,210
44.10G
1T0.400
189.580
36,400
6ja*J3»
TOTAL
POTENTIALLY
HAZARDOUS
»jlt
766
27i
37.020
2,140
666
1.180
144
I12.MO
187,600
21. WO
51 .380
93,660
1,000
34«
8.320
3.160
54,780
S52
230,540
1,170
2,760
263 320
1,480
562
36,600
22,780
650
4.S2D
• 1.210
!,MO
57.940
3*3.230
57,578
624,740
16,046
8,820
34.080
37J20
7,8«0
1.256,174
TOTAL
HAZARDOUS
CONSTITUENTS
9919
1S.I
944.1
i*3
100.6
31,1
59.9
8.7
2.H5 1
4,6429
561,1
!,2i7J
2.36S 1
J1.9
11 1
222.7
S49
1^83,4
6,0ti >
3J2
46.1
1I.«
92S.4
575,1
165
1242
864.0
54.3
1,470.3
9.603J
1,764.£
16,127.8
8704
2221
B60J
969,9
194.0
32,227.8
METMOO
OPEC
VCLE
IB
DUMP
CONSTITUENTS
Cr
U-M
1,08
O.J1
52.67
3.0S
4.67
0,69
3.97
0.15
31 06
73,68
134.34
1,19
6M
12. 65
«,22
7B.56
O.i7
e«
7S.46
0.4!
7327
4.78
6.71
9.91
5.53
0.20
367.35
43-ie
1Q2.62
167.0S
1.63
0.13
17.62
5.61
109.42
451.31
1.33 | 1 7S
3.18
404 18
1.71
5.5!
562.41
2,30
0.66 \ 0.89
52.51 | 73.12
32,67
C=3
7.06
S8.6I
3.00
mm
542.55
9S.3B
8BS.15
&4.15
12.8i
A6.e?
93,81
11.02
1.789.77
45,4S
130
983
61,95
4.29
115.23
754 .98
127.03
1JM.77
75.33
1?.«2
68-05
74.18
15.35
2,489.11
Mn '
937.47
4.81
B74JG
269.60
51.31
79.70
10.57
ee.m
2,21
4,382.72
51S.51
U2I,14
2J3S.40
17.83
613
210,49
66,96
»,3»S.S3
20,60
85,83
26,17
IS. 37
873 74
549.94
15.55
117.41
979.BO
51.31
1 ,176.44
S.Oll.lB
1M1.BO
14,690,88
699.96
21048
S13.14
89S.20
183 M
2S.719.21
Ni
64.49
1.63
0,71
80.25
2430
1,63
6.40
1 82
5.96
0.39
410.38
47.63
110.11
201.47
1M
0.8C
18J7
7J7
502.34
3.Q1
5.94'
3.82
l.W
78,74
48.98
«,
16.72
0,32
0.1S
16,13
4J1
0.92
I tM
1 051
' 1.18
0.11
83.95
• 8.63
' 21J'
; 39.87
0.6B
' 0.24
3.75
' 1,83
10243
010
122.57
1,00
0,40
15SS
9.SB
1.40 | 028
10.58
86.07
4.S3
125.11
822.12
147 .63
1458.68
82^6
18,9?
73i«
82.27
W-5J
2.73S.68
2-oe
17,76
0.92
24.96
154-31
30.11
275.4!
IE -57
3.75
14.5S
16.56
3,37
950,43
In
6,07
0.1J
QJM
MO
1.75
0.33
OJ5
O.OS
OA3
992
28,76
3,37
7,94
ia«
o.u
0.05
1J6
35.30
0.1S
0.43
43.68
0.09
S.66
3-52
0.10
0.76
tM
3JJ
' iM
58.63
10.37 "
96.0J
5.66
1.J6
6J7
6.*4
1-19
1MJ»
OIL
GflEASI
718!
3733
1JXKISO
206.93
141,03
X6M
M"3
18,677.00
4.M3.T3
9J13.00
135.Cf
47.03
648.60
MU3
116.72
168 M
266.61
189.66
7890
3322,47
2.191,46
62,69
473,15
3,«7,20
Z06J3
6,618,04
36.657.82
6,774,74
62,101 15
3. 71 B 06
WftG
3.278.38
3,720^6
733.16
173,683.73
*3tis ESTIMATED THAT ^a
EVENTUAL BICYCLE, THE
SOURCi, CALSPAN COSPO
? TNESCALI ss RECYCLID DSRECTLY OR SOLES FOR
is LANC DISPOSED, OIL CONTENT PREVENTS TOTAL
36
-------
Table 7k
ESTIMATED STATE, REGIONAL, AND NATIONAL SOLID WASTE
FROM THE IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY
TOTAL SCALE, 1977 (METRIC TONS)
STATE
ALABAMA
ARIZONA
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
DELAWARE
f LOR I DA
GEORGIA
HAWAII
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
KENTUCKY
W*RV!.AND
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MtSStSStPPI
MISSOURI
NEW JERSEY
NEW YORK
N. CAROLINA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
£, CAROLINA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
W. VIRGINIA
EPA REGION
I
IE
m
sr
¥
m
im
iBM
- a
X.
NATIONAL TOTALS
TOTAL
GtNEHATEO
2O8.2OO
4.010
1.4*0
IB6.2QQ
S8.600 '•
11,400
19,400
M40
14,700
760
596,900
990,300
IWM
272,300
«96,4M
5,300
1,840
46,700
16300
290,300
2,830
1419,200
6,180
14,600
1401,600
NEC,
7*90
3,080
194,000
120,700
3.ASO
26.000
216.6QQ
11,400
307,100
2,016^543
)W£W
3,311,100
201.MO
46,700
1 80. 600
200,970
»0, MC
3,673,740
TOTAL
PCTINTIALLV
HAZARDOUS
41,640
802
792
39.240
11.880
2,280
3380
706
2.940
' 1S2
- 11i.HO
18g.i€0
23.330
54.480
99,2«0
1,0*0
36»
e.Mo
3J80
sa,oeo
5W
253440
1.240
2,920
300.320
-
1.MO
616
IS MO
24,140
6f,0
5,200
43,7,20
2JSJ
61.4W
403 flJO
TT^Ba
»2JW
40JJJ
BJ40
38.120
10,1 M
l.UO
1,3M,JM
TOTAL
HAZARDOUS
CONSTITUENTS
1061 a
»,3
BJ
1,000}
302J
S7.6
106,7
33.0
?4.1
7.1
3.0J«,4
• S.123.S
iM.l
1J75.1
2.S07.0
MJ
11.7
2U.1
82.1
1.4BS-4
27.3
SJ94i
B.5
J38
7,637.<
-
47.8
19.7
979.1
BOS6
17.4
131,7
1,043.1
S7.6
1 5S6.5
10,1>B7
1JS9.7,
174W.S
1^3ZB£
2M!
3*11,9
Text
Z05.6
34.101 3
DisrasAt.'
METHOD
REC
0
OPEN
YCLt
P
DUMP
CONSTilUENTS
Cr
5972
1,15
0.33
Cu
8} 16
ieo
D.45
55.SJ T786
17. U 33.B!
3JJ
5.17
0.74:
4-S5.
J.12
B.9I
dji s.ag
0 16 3^1
170.J!
280.31
32.9!
2Xm
3KM
46,71
78.11' 108.77
142,40
1-21
0.42
13.41
4,47
K3JS
0.61
344.31
1«1
4.20
428,44
-
1J1
0,70
ss.ee
34.63
0.93
7.4«
•92,42
3.21
•7.71
175.13
101.13
91845
&7.40
1341
SI SO
S7.14
ii.ee
1»7_17
13B.31
1.02
0.56
- 18*3
6.16
m.m
CM
47B.aa
1.B8
5.1!
5H.1B
-
2.44
9.34
77.51
«HL2Z
1.38
10.42
de.U?
4.55
m.is
BQD.3C
140^1
1J04.»1
7MS
16.6 J
7J.14
79.47
16 JJ
2,838^2
)**>
M3.72
IS. 18
SJO
927.35
70S 7 =
S4.39
«4,«
11^0
70.0S
2.4!
, z«2e.se
4,«4!,B8
S46.44
ii«e.7i
N,
69 M
1.73
0.78
ism
25.78
ISO
8.91
JJ3
«.•)!
0.42
257.41
4K.-X
5Q.49
1 17.14
2JSS.5S | 21*H
1EK
665
223-12
»3.11
1,18561
9,2>
2.J4
OJS
20.11
1.71
124*1
1.GO
E.Tda.ee SU.^B
12,09
99.8B
7,119.99
-
tt.tt
10,99
1.19
8JO
64
-------
Table 71
ESTIMATED STATE, REGIONAL, AND NATIONAL SOLID WASTE
FROM THE IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY
TOTAL SCALE, 1983 (METRIC TONS)
STATE
ALABAMA
ARIZONA
ARKANSAS
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
DELAWARE
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
HAWAII ,
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
KENTUCKY
MARYLAND
MICHIGAN
MINNEJOTA
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
NEW JERSEY
NEW YORK
N. CAROLINA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
TOTAL
GENERATED
24 WOO
4,650
1,890
227,600
69.5*0
13.200
22,500
4,110
17,000
890
891,500
1,153,800
134,700
315,900
574.000
6,150
2,199
54,200
19.500
338,800
3,400
1,414, 700
7,175
IJ,000
1.742,400
NEC.
S. CAROLINA 9,160
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
W. VIRGINIA
EPA REGION
I
H
m
a
y
M
m
"ffifffl
IX
Z
NATIONAL TOTALS
3,580
22SJGO
140,000
4,000
30,300
253,600
13,2 00
3SMOO
2438,400
415,580
3,842,150
233,9*1
§4,200
20S ,100
233,140
47,300
7,743,935
TOTAL
POTENTIALLY
HAZARDOUS
48J20
no
358
45.520
13^00
2,640
4,500
822'
3,400
178
13BJOO
230,760
28,940
El, 110
118.200
\3M
428
10.440
3,900
•7,310
680
112.940
1,435
3,400
348,410
_
i,aa2
716
45,020
28,000
BOO
6.060
f 50,720
2,640
71,280
467.580
, ea,i3i
7M.430
-------
Table 7m
ESTIMATED STATE, REGIONAL, AND NATIONAL WASTE FROM THE IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY
PICKLE LIQUOR, 1974 (METRIC TONS) DRY WEIGHTS*
STATE
ALABAMA
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
KENTUCKY
MARYLAND
MICHIGAN
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
NEW JERSEY
NEW YORK
OHIO
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
S, CAROLINA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
W. VIRGINIA
EM REGION
I
E
m
PET
H
m
sn
VJTJ
m
NATIONAL TOTALS
TOTAL
DISPOSED
7,«27
4.321
207
745
31
31
12.369
93.363
4,667
5,712
9,588
32
45
135
8,410
28.872
32,991
141
21
21
21
2,321
17.537
886
I.S4S '
SB. 240
12.630
94,197
Z1
45
2,528
4,321
178,411 .
TOTAL POT.
HAZARDOUS
7,827
4,321
207
74S
31
31
12,369
43,368
4,667
5,712
9,588
32
45
135
• 8,410
28.B72
32,981
141
21
21
21
2321
17,537
886
8,545
56.240
12,830
94,197
21
4!
2,528
4321
178,411
TOTAL
HAZARDOUS
CONSTITUENTS
11.41 :
6.291
0301
1.086
0.045
0.045
18.03
63.21
6.80
8.32S
13.97
0.047
0.065
0.196
1226
42.08
48.085
0.205
0.030
0.030
0.030
3,38
25.56
1,281
12.456
81.97
18.437
137.29
0.030
OMB
3681
6.298
261.52
DISPOSAL METHOD
NEUTRALIZE DON SITE
OH BY CONTRACT
DISPOSAL SERVICE
i
r
HAZARDOUS CONSTITUENTS
Cr
0.497
0.274
0.013
0.047
0.0020
0.0020
0,785
2.7S4
0.298
0.363
0.609
0.0020
0.0028
0,0088
O.S34
1.833
2.095
0,0089
O.OO13
0.0013
0.0013
0.147
1.114
0.056
0.543
3.572
O.H02
5.981
0.0013
0.0028
0.16
0.274
11.391
Cu
0.288
0.1 59
0,0076
0.027
0.0011
0.0011
0.455
1.59*
0.172
0.210
0.3S2
0.0012
0.0016
QMS
0,309
1.061
1.212
0.0052
0.00076
0.00076
0.00076
0085
0.644
0.032
0,314
2.086
0.465
3.462
0.00076
O.0016
0.0926
0.159
8.593
Mn
7.005
3.8*7
0.185
0.667
0.028
0.028
11.070
38.815
4.177
5.112
8.581
0.029
0.040
0.121
7.527
25.84
29.526
0.126
0.018
0.018
04)18
2.078
15.696
0,793
7.648
50.334
11.303
84.306
0.018
0.04
2.263
3,867
160.572
Ni
0.711
0415
0.020
0.072
00030
0.0030
1,187
4,163
0.448
0.548
0.920
0,0031
0.0043
0.013
0,807
2.772
3.167
0.014
0.0020
0,0020
0.0020
0.223
1.684
0,016
0.82
S.399
1.212
9.042
0.002
0.004
0.243
0.415
17.223
Pb
0.043
0.024
0.001
0,004
0.00017
0.00017
0.068
0.239
0.026
0X131
O.OS3
' 0.00018
00002S
0X10074
0.046
0.159
0.181
0.00077
0.00011
0.00011
0.00011
0.013
0.096
0.0048
0.0467
0.308
0.0697
0.519
0.0001
0.00025
0.014
0.027
0.9866
Zn
0.323
0.178
0.0085
0,031
0.0013
0.0013
O.SI1
1.791
0.183
0.236
0.396
0.0013
0.0018
0X1056
0347
1.182
1.362
0.00&8
0.00086
0.00086
0.00088
0,096
0.724
0.0368
0.3528
2.322
0.5216
3.89
0.00086
0.0018
0.1045
0.178
7.408
OIL ft
GREASE
2501
1.380
0.068
0.238
0.010
0.010
3.952
13.856
1.491
1-825
3.063
0.010
0.014
0.043
2.687
9.225
10.S40
O.M5
0.0066
0.0066
0.0061
0.742
5,603
0.283
2.73
17.961
4,035
30.096
0.0066
0.014
- 0.808
1.380
57.321
•MULTIPLY BY 1.0 TO CONVERT TO APPROXIMATE WET WEIGHTS. MULTIPLY BY 1,1 TO CONVERT TO SHORT TONS.
SOURCE: CALSPAN CORPORATION
-------
Table 7n
ESTIMATED STATE, REGIONAL, AND NATIONAL WASTE FROM THE IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY
PICKLE LIQUOR, 1977 (METRIC TONS), DRY WEIGHTS*
STATE
ALABAMA
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
KENTUCKY
MARYLAND
MICHIGAN
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
NEW JERSEY
NEW YORK
OHIO
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
S. CAROLINA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
W. VIRGINIA
EPA REGION
I
D
m
ni
TZ
w
zn
sro
a.
NATIONAL TOTALS
TOTAL
DISPOSED
8,297
4,580
219
790
33
33
13,111
45,971
4,947
6.0S4
10,163
34
48
143
8.916
30,604
34,970
149
22
22
22
2,461
18.589
939
9,057
59,614
13,387
99,648
22
46
2,680
4,580
190,173
TOTAL POT.
HAZARDOUS
8.Z97
4,580
219
790
33
33
13,111
45,971
4,947
6,054
10,163
34
46
143
8,915
30,604
34,970
149
22
22
22
2,461
18,589
939
9,057
59,61 «
13.387
99,848
22
46
2,880
4,580
190,173
TOTAL
HAZARDOUS
CONSTITUENTS
12.09
6.68
0.32
1.15
O.OS
0.05
19.11
67,0
7.21
8.82
14,81
0.05
0.07
O.Z1
12-99
44.B1
50.97
0.22
0.03
0.03
0.03
3.S9
27.09
1.37
13.2
86.88
19.51
148,53
0.03
0.07
3.91
6.68
277.18
DISPOSAL METHOD
NEUTRALIZED ON SITE
OR BY CONTRACT
DISPOSAL SERVICE
1
'
HAZARDOUS CONSTITUENTS
Cr
0.527
O.291
0.014
0.050
0.0021
0.0021
0,833
Z.919
0.314
0.384
O.84S
0.0022
0.003
0.0091
0.566
1.943
2.221
0.0095
0.0014
0.0014
0.0014
0-1 56
1.180
0,0595
0.57S
3.785
0.850
&34
0.0014
0-003
0.17
O.Z91
12^078
Cu
8.305
0.168
0.0081
0.029
0.0012
0.0012
0.482
1.689
. 0.182
0-222
0.373
O.O012
0.0017
OJ0052
0328
1.125
1.285
00055
0.0008
0.0008
0.0008
0.090
0.683
0.0385
0,333
2.19
0.492
3.669
O.O008
0.0017
0.098
0,168
6.9915
Mn
7.426
4.099
0.198
0.707
0.029
O.OZ9
11.734
41.144
4.428
5.419
9.096
0.030
0.043
0.128
7.979
27.391
31.298
0-133
0.02O
0.020
0-020
2.202
16.637
0.84
8.107
53.351
11.982
89,365
0.020
0.043
2.398
4.099
170.208
Ni
0.796
0.440
0.021
0,078
0.0032
0.0032
1.259
4.413
0^475
0081
0.976
0.0033
0.0046
04)14
0.856
2.938
3.357
0.014
0.0021
0.0021
0.0021
0-236
1.78S
0.09
0,87
5.723
1.282
9,586
0,0021
0.0046
0.257
0.44
18.254
Pb
0.046
0.025
0.0012
0,0043
0.0002
0-0002
0.072
0.253
0.027
0.033
0.056
0.0002
O.OOO3
0.0008
0049
0.1S8
0.192
00008
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.014
0-102
0.0051
0.0498
0.327
0.074
0.549
O.OO01
0.0003
0.015
0.025
1.045
Zn
0.341
0.189
0.0091
0.033
0.0014
0.0014
0541
1.899
0.204
0.250
0.420
0.0014
0,002
0X1059
0.368
1-264
1.444
0.0062
0.0009
0.0009
0.0009
0.102
0.768
0.039
0.374
2.462
0.553
4.124
0.0009
0.002
0.111
0.189
7.855
OIL 81
GREASE
2.651
1.463
0.070
0.2S2
0.011
0.011
4.189
14.687
1.511
1.934
3.247
0.011
0.015
0,046
2.B48
9.778
11.173
0.048
0.007
0.007
0.007
0.786
S.939
0.3
2.894
19,046
4.279
31.901
0.007
0.015
0.856
1.463
60.761
•MULTIPLY BY 5,0 TO CONVERT TO APPROXIMATE WET WEIGHTS. MULTIPLY BY 1.1 TO CONVERT TO SHORT TONS.
SOURCE: CALSPAN CORPORATION
-------
Table 7o
ESTIMATED STATE, REGIONAL, AND NATIONAL WASTE FROM THE IRON AND STEEL INDUSTRY
PICKLE LIQUOR, 1983 {METRIC TONS), DRY WEIGHTS*
STATE
ALABAMA
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT •
FLORIDA .
GEORGIA
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
KENTUCKY
MARYLAND
MICHIGAN
MISSISSIPPI
MISSOURI
NEW JERSEY
NEW YORK
OHIO
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
S. CAROLINA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
W, VIRGINIA
EPA REGION
I
n
m
or
i
13
sn
mm
m
NATIONAL TOTALS
TOTAL
DISPOSED
9.627
3.315
254
917
31
38
11.213
53.343
i.741
7.025
11,793
39
SS
166
10,344
3S.512
40,571
173
25
25
25
2.155
21,571
1,090
10,510
89.174
15,534
115,862
25
55
3,110
5.315
220,875
TOTAL POT.
HAZARDOUS
9.627
5,315
254
917
38
38
154(13
53.343
5.741
7.025
11.793
39
55
166
10.344
35.512
40,578
173
25
25
25
2.8S5
21,571
1.090
10,510
69,174
15,534
115,862
25
55
3,110
5,315
220,675
TOTAL
HAZARDOUS
CONSTITUENTS
14.03
7.75
0.371
1.34
0056
0.056
22.17
77,75
8-37
10.24
17,19
0.057
O.OB
0.241
15,08
51.76
59,14
0.25
0.037
0.037
0.037
4.1E
31,44
1.59
15.32
100.82
22.S4
169.87
D.D37
0.08
4.53 -
7.75
321.64
DISPOSAL METHOD
NEUTRALIZE ON SITE
OR BY CONTRACT
DISPOSAL SERVICE
1
I
;"
HAZARDOUS CONSTITUENTS
Cr
0.611
0,337
0.016
0.058
0.0024
0.0024
0.966
3.387
0,365
0.448
0.749
0.0025
0.0035
0,011
0.657
2.Z55
2.577
0.011
0.0016
0.0016
0.0018
0.181
1.370
0.069
0.668
4.393
0.986
7.367
0.0016
0.0035
0.197
0.337
14.013
Cu
0.354
0,195
0.0093
0.034
0.0014
0.0014
O.S59
1.960
0.211
0.258
0.433
0.0014
0.002
0.0061
0.380
1.305
1.491
0.0064
0.0009
0.0009
0.0009
0.105
0.793
0.04O
0.38S
2.542
0.571
4.267
0.0009
0X102
0.114
0.195
8.109
Mn
8.816
4.757
0.228
0.820
0.034
0.034
13.616
47,742
5.138
6.288
10.554
0.035
0.049
0,148
9,258
31,784
36.318
0.155
0.023
0.023
0.023
2.555
19.306
0.975
9,408
61.912
13.903
103.696
0.023
0.049
2.783
4.757
197,504
Ni
0.924
0.510
0.024
0.088
0.0037
0.0037
1460
6,121
0.551
0.874
1.132
0.0038
0.0053
0.016
0.993
3.409
3.896
0.017
0.002
0.002
0.002
0.274
2,071
0.1OS
I.OOfl
6.641
1.490
11.122
0.002
0.0053
0.298
O.510
21182
Pb
0.053
0.029
0.0014
0,005
0.0002
0.0002
0.084
0.293
0,032
0.039
0.085
0.0002
0.0003
0.0009
0.057
0.195
0.223
0.001
0.0001
0.0001
0.0001
0.016
0119
0.008
0.579
0.381
0.088
0.637
0.0001
0.0003
0.0174
0.029
1.2145
?»
0.398
0,219
0,011
0.038
0.0016
0.0016
0.628
2,203
0.237
0.290
0.487
0,0016
0.0023
0.0068
0.427
1.467
1.876
0.0071
0.0011
0.0011
0.0011
0.118
0.891
0.045
0.434
2.857
0.642
4.795
0.0011
0.0023
0.129
0.219
9.114
OIL&
GREASE
3.07i
1.898
04)81
0.293
0.012
0.012
4.861
17.043
1.834
2.245
3,768
0,013
0.018
O.OS3
3.305
11.346
12.965
0.055
0,0081
0.0081
0-0081
0.912
6.OT2
0.348
3.358
22.102
4.963
37.018
0.0081
0.018
0.993
1.698
70.506
•MULTIPLY BY S.O TOCDNVf RT TO APPROXIMATE WET WEIGHTS. MULTIPLY BY 1.1 TO CONVERT TO SHORT TONS.
SOURCE: CALSPAN CORPORATION
-------
road ballast or building aggregate. It may be stored on the ground for
many months or years before use for these purposes. Flue dust contains
significant concentration of iron and is normally sent to sinter strand
to be agglomerated prior to reprocessing for iron recovery. Sludge from
wet emissions control is also sent to the sinter facility for agglomera-
tion prior to reprocessing for iron recovery,
All of the blast furnace residuals (i.e. slag, dust, sludge) are-
considered non-hazardous. Fluorides may leach to the extent of a few parts
per million from these materials which is not considered sufficient to pose
an environmental- threat.
Basic Oxygen Furnace, Residuals from basic -oxygen furnaces include slag,
dusts from dry emissions controls, sludges frora wet emissions controls and
kish from metal pouring. Basic oxygen furnace slag is usually open dumped,
after recovery of metal lies.- This practice is adequate since basic oxygen
furnace slag is not considered potentially hazardous at the present
time.
Dusts and sludges from emissions controls are usually open dumped
as is kish. This practice is adequate since' none of these wastes are con-
sidered potentially hazardous at the present time.
Op_en_ Hearth Furnace_s_. Slag from open hearth furnaces is usually open
dumped after processing for recovery of rnetallics. Open hearth dusts from
emissions controls are open dumped and are often wetted down before dis-
posal to prevent blowing. At some steel plants open hearth dusts and EOF -
dusts are recycled to the sinter. Disposal practices are adequate since
these wastes are; considered non-hazardous at the present time.
Electric Furnaces. Residuals from electric furnaces include slag, dusts
from dry emissions controls and sludge from wet emissions control. Slag
is usually open dumped1 after recovery of metallies. A small amount of
slag (approximately 10%) is used as road fill or railroad track ballast.
These methods are adequate since electric furnace slag is not considered
potentially hazardous.
Dusts from dry emissions control and sludge from wet emissions
control can leach potentially hazardous heavy metals as previously dis-
cussed. Open dumping of these wastes as currently practiced is environ-
mentally inadequate.
Soaking Pits. Slag is the only waste generated at the soaking pits. • '
It is generally broken into chunks and hauled to open dumps. This practice
is adequate since this waste is not considered potentially hazardous.
Mill Sludges. This category of residuals includes sludges from various
mill operations at an integrated steel plant including primary mills
which produce ingots, slabs and other primary steel shapes, continuous
casting mills, hot rolling mills, cold rolling mills, galvanizing mills,
•and tin plating mills. Sludges from these mills are produced as a result
of water pollution control operations including oil and grease removal,
flocculation and settling of particulates, and pH adjustment.
42
-------
All of the above sludges are considered potentially hazardous
because of possible leaching of hazardous constituents including chro-
mium, copper, nickel, lead, zinc and oil and -grease. ' :
Currently the most prevalent management of the above sludges
is open dumping except for tin plating sludges which are put in unlined
lagoons. These practices are inadequate because of the danger of toxic
heavy metal leaching through permeable soils to groundwater,
Mill Scales. Mill scales containing over 50% iron are generated in
primary and hot rolling mills, continuous casting mills, and cold rolling
mills. Scales from primary and hot rolling mills and continous casting
mills are recycled to the sinter or blast furnace for iron recovery.
This practice is environmentally sound since land disposal is precluded.
Scale from cold rolling mills is often highly contaminated
with oil which discourages recycle to the sinter because of hydrocarbon
emissions in the sinter. Normal disposal is by open dumping. This
practice is not environmentally adequate because of the possible movement
of oil and grease through permeable soils to groundwaters or surface
waters'. . • • -
Pickle Liquors. Currently the prevalent practice employed by steel
plants for handling of waste piclcle liquor is the service of outside
contract disposal services who generally neutralize the acid 'before
disposal in unlined lagoons. Disposal in unlined lagoons is inadequate
if heavy metals leach from the sludge formed from neutralization and
percolate through permeable soils to groundwater.
1.3.2 Present Treatment andDisposal Technology (Level I)
Coke Plant. Wastes from coking operations and'associated byproduct
production which are considered potentially hazardous include waste
ammonia liquor, ammonia still lime sludge and decanter tank tar. Treatment
of ammonia liquor in a biological treatment plant is adequate since des-
truction of potentially hazardous constituents (i.e. phenol, cyanide) is
achieved. Inputs of these wastes to the biological treatment plant must
be sufficiently dilute so as to not interfere with normal biological
activity. Deep well disposal of waste ammonia liquor is adequate only
when done according to EPA guidelines as stated in EPA Administrator's
Decision Statement No. 5 dated February 6, 1973 (Reference 10).
Ammonia still lime sludge and decanter tank tar are presently
open dumped. This practice is environmentally inadequate because of the
danger of toxics including phenol, ammonia, or cyanide leaching and
percolating to ground or surface water.
Electric Furnaces. Residuals from electric furnaces which are con-
sidered potentially hazardous include emission control dusts and sludges.
Present disposal of dusts and sludges is open dumping. This practice is
environmentally inadequate because of the danger of heavy metal leaching
through permeable soils to groundwater or surface water.
43'
-------
Mill Sludges. Potentially hazardous sludges are generated from water
pollution control operations in primary mills, continuous casting mills,
hot rolling mills, cold rolling mills, galvanizing mills and tin plating
mills. Present treatment and disposal is open dumping which is environ-
mentally inadequate because of the threat of heavy metal and oil or grease
leaching.
Mill Scales. Potentially hazardous mill scales are generated in primary
and hot rolling mills, continuous casting mills and cold rolling mills.
The scale from all of these operations excepting cold rolling mills is
normally recycled to the sinter for iron recovery and is environmentally
adequate. Highly oil contaminated scale from cold rolling mills is
presently open dumped. This practice is not environmentally adequate.
Pickle Liquor. Present treatment and disposal technology generally
consists of disposal by contract disposal companies who neutralize the
acid pickle liquor and leave the neutralization sludge in unlined lagoons.
Some steel plants dispose of pickle liquor by deep well disposal. The
use of unlined lagoons is not environmentally adequate because of the
danger of toxic heavy metal leaching through permeable soils to groundwater
or surface waters. Deep well disposal is adequate when done in accordance
with EPA' guidelines.
1.3.3 Best Technology Currently Employed (Level II)
- Coke Plaiv^. Level II technology for treatment and disposal of waste
aimonia liquor, ammonia still lime sludge and decanter tank tar is the
same as Level I and is inadequate except for deep well disposal of
pickle liquors which is adequate.
El ectric_F_urnaces . Level II technology for treatment and disposal of
potentially hazardous electric furnace dusts and sludges is the same as
Level I (i.e. open dumping) and is inadequate.
Mill Sludges. At approximately 5% of the steel plants sludges from
primary and hot rolling mills are recycled through the sinter for iron
recovery. This precludes land disposal and is therefore environmentally
adequate.
Cold rolling mill and galvanizing mill sludges are open dumped
which is inadequate for environmental protection.
At some plants tin plating mill water treatment sludge is
reprocessed for tin recovery, This is environmentally adequate.
Mill Scales. Level II treatment and disposal technology for mill
scales from primary mills , continuous casting mills, hot rolling mills,
and cold rolling mills is the same as .Level I.
44
-------
Pick 1-e Liquors. At a few steel plants spent pickling liquor is processed
for reclamation-of sulfuric-acid or -hydrochloric, acid and reuse in the
pickling operations. The iron oxide or iron sulfate residues can be
recycled for recovery of iron. This practice is environmentally adequate.
Deep well disposal of pickle liquors according to EPA guidelines is
adequate.
1.3,4 - Technology to ProvideAdequate Health and Environmental
Protection (Level III)
Coke Plant. Biological treatment of waste ammonia liquor from the
byproduct coke plant will detoxify toxic constituents including phenol,
cyanide, and ammonia if present in low'concentrations. Solvent recovery
and ammonia stripping will normally precede biological treatment of
ammonia liquor. Deep well disposal of pickle liquors in accordance with
EPA guidelines is adequate for environmental protection.
Sealing of permeable soils at dump sites to prevent leaching
of phenol, cyanide, or ammonia from lime sludge or decanter tank tar, or
collection and treatment of leachate constitutes Level III treatment and
disposal technology.
Electric Furnaces. Sealing of permeable soils at dump sites for disposal
of sludge or dust from control of emissions from electric furnaces or
collection and treatment of leachate will be necessary for adequate
environmental protection,
Mill Sludges. If primary or hot rolling mill sludges are not recycled
to the sinter, chemical fixation would be required prior to open dumping.
Chemical fixation of cold rolling and galvanizing sludges would be
•required before open dumping.
Metal reclamation from tin plating sludge would qualify as
Level III technology. If this sludge is lagoon disposed,'the use of
lined lagoons would be needed for adequate environmental protection.
Mill Scales. If mill scales are recycled to the sinter adequate environ-
mental protection is assured. If mill scales are open dumped the use of
bentonite or other soil sealants would be required to prevent percolation
of toxic heavy metals or oil and grease,or collection and treatment of
leachate would be necessary.
Pickle Liquor., Processing of spent pickle liquor to reclaim hydrochloric
or sulfuric acid and metallic value (i.e. iron),or deep well disposal
according to- EPA guidelines is Level III technology.
Tables 8a through 8f summarize features of Levels I, II and
III treatment and disposal technologies for potentially hazardous wastes
from the iron and steel snelting and refining industry.
45
-------
Table '8A
Treatment and Disposal Technology Levels
Smelting and Refining Category Iron and Steel SIC 3312
Byproduct Coke Plant Wastes
Factor
Physical +
Chemical
Properties
(kg/MT Product)
Level I
(Prevalent)
Ammonia Liquor - dilute ammonia
with traces of phenol and cyanide
Lime Sludge - predominantly lime
with phenols, cyanide, oil and
grease, trace metals.
Tank Tar - tarry sludge; hydro-
carbons with oil and grease,
phenol, cyanide traces
Waste _Ampjpni_a Liquor - 190
AmmoniaStill Lime Sludge - 0,6
Decanter Tank Tar - 4.5
Level II
(Best Currently Employed)
Same as I
Same as I
Level III
(Adequate Health and Enviro-
mental Protection)
Same as I
Same as I
Factors
Affecting
Hazardousness
Above wastes contain phenol and
cyanide, ammonia and oils and
greases, trace metals
Same as I
Same as'I
Treatment/
Disposal
Technology
Ammonia liquor* - biological
treatment
Line Sludge - open dump
Decanter tar - open dump
Biological treatment or deep
well disposal according to
EPA guidelines for lime sludge
and decanter tar
Same as for ammonia liquor; ground
sealing of disposal area with
bentonite or other sealant for lime
and decanter tar sludge if significant
leaching of phenol, cyanide or ammonia
Estimate of Ammonia liquor - >90%
# + % of Plants Lime kludge - >75%
Using Technology Decanter tar - >75%
Same as I
Ammonia liquor - >90%
Lime sludge - 0
Decanter tar - 0
•Included as land disposed waste only because a few plants dispose in deep wells.
-------
Table 8A -(cont'd.)
Factor
Level I
Level II
Level III
Adequate for ammonia liquor;
Adequacy of inadequate for lime and tar
Technology sludges if significant leaching
of phenol, ammonia or, cyanide
Same as I
Same as I
Problems and
Comments
Non-Land
Environmental
Impact
Ammonia liquor nomally is treated
without land contact with discharge
of treated effluent to receiving
stream or sewer. A few plants use
deep well disposal.
Lime and decanter tank tar
sludges could contaminate
ground or surface water if
leached.
None
None
Same as I
None
Compatibility
With Existing
Facilities
Coaipatible
Compatible
Compatible
Monitoring §
Surveillance
Methods
None
None
Groundwater surveillance
wells and surface runoff
monitoring
Energy
Requirements
Negligible
Negligible
Negligible
-------
Table SB
Treatment and Disposal Technology Levels
Smelting and Refining Category Iron andSteel SIC ,3312
ELECTRIC FURNACE DUST
Factor
Physical +
Chemical
Properties
Level I
(Prevalent)
Level II
(Best Currently Employed)
Colloidal to silt size particles;
iron, silica, lime, traces of
heavy metals and fluoride
Same as I.
Level III
(Adequate Health and Envlro-
mental Protection)
Same as I
o£ Amount of Waste
(kg/MF Product) 15.0
Same as I
Sane as I
Factors Contain trace heavy metals
Affecting including Cr, Cu, , Ni, Pb,
Hazardousness Zn and fluoride
Same as I
Same as I
Treatment/
Disposal
Technology
open dumped
Same as I
Ground sealing at disposal site
Estimate of
* + % of Plants
Using Technology
>80%
-------
Table 8B-(cont'd.)
Factor
Level I
Level II
Level III
Adequacy of
Technology
Inadequate
Same as I
Adequate
Problems and
Comments
Significant leaching of lead
from electric furnace dust
in solubility tests
None
None
«> Non-Land
Environmental
Impact
Possible contamination
of groundwater or
surface water
Same as I
None
Compatibility
With Existing
Facilities
Compatible
Compatible
Compatible
Monitoring §
Surveillance
Methods
None
None
Groundwater monitoring
Electric furnace dust
disposal areas
Energy
Requirement s
Negligible
Negligible
Negligible
-------
Table 8C
Treatment and Disposal Technology Levels
Smelting and Refining Category Iron and Steel SIC 3512
ELECTRIC FURNACE SLUDGE
Factor
Physical +
Chemical
Properties
Level I
(Prevalent)
Colloidal to silt size
particles; iron, trace
metals, fluorides
Level II
(Best Currently Employed)
Same as 1
Level III
(Adequate Health and Enviro-
mental Protection)
Same as I
g Amount of Waste Electric furnace sludge - 5.8
(kg/Ml Product)
Same as I
Same as I
Factors Contain traces of heavy metals
Affecting including Cr, Ni, Pb, Zn, Cu,
Hazardousness fluoride
Same as I
Same as I
Treatment/
Disposal
Technology
Open Dump
Open Dump
Chemical fixation if leaching
of heavy metals from open dumped
sludges
Estimate of
# + % of Plants
Using Technology
>90
>90
0 chemical fixation
-------
Table 8C -(cont'd.)
Factor
Level I
Level II
Level III
Adequacy of
Technology
Inadequate
Inadequate
Adequate
Problems and
Comments
Significant leaching of
Cr, Pb in solubility
tests
Same as I
None
Non-Land
Environmental
Impact
Possible contamination of
groundwater and surface
water
Same as I
None
Compatibility
With Existing
Facilities
Compatible
Compatible
Compatible
Monitoring §
Surveillance
Methods
None
None
Groundwater monitoring
wells
Energy
Requirements
Negligible
Negligible
Negligible
-------
Table 8D
Treatment and Disposal Technology Levels
Smelting and Refining Category Iron and Steel SIC 3312
PICKLE LIQUORS
Factor Level I
(Prevalent)
Physical + Dilute sulfuric or hydrochloric
Chemical acid with dissolved and
Properties particulate iron
Level II
(Best Currently Fmployed)
Iron sulfatc or oxide salt
residues; acid is 100%
regenerated
Level III
(Adequate Health and Enviro-
mental Protection)
Same as II for acid regeneration
Same as I if not regenerated
Amount of Waste
(kg/OT Product)
Factors
Affecting
Hazardousness
Cold rolling mills - 22.8
Galvanizing Mills - 5,17
Acid, trace heavy metals
including Cr, Cu, Mn, Ni,
Pb, Zn
No acid wasted (100% Sane as II
recycle) Residual salts are
land dumped only if no
market (36.3 kg, FeS04)
Same as I Same as I
Treatment/ Outside contract disposal
Disposal service who neutralize in
Technology uniined lagoons
Estimate of
# + % of Plants
Using Technology
Acid regeneration or deep well
disposal according to EPA
guidelines
10
Acid regeneration or neutrali-
zation with sludge kept in lined
lagoons if heavy metals leach;
deep well disposal according
to EPA guidelines
10
-------
Table 8B-(eont'd.)
Factor
Level I
Level II
Level III
Adequacy of
Technology
Inadequate
Inadequate if land
dumped residues leach
heavy metals; adequate
for acid problem
Adequate
Problems and
Comments
None
None
None
Non-Land
Environmental
Impact
Possible contamination of
ground and surface water
Possible contamination
of ground and surface
water by residual salts
if leached of heavy metals
None
Compatibility
With Existing
Facilities
Compatible
Compatible
Compatible
Monitoring §
Surveillance
Methods
None
None
Groundwater monitoring,
Hell and surface runoff
monitoring
Energy
Requirements
Negligible
Moderate [0.24 kw/MT
Steel)
Moderate for acid
regeneration, negligible
for lined lagoon
-------
Factor
Physical +
Chemical
Properties
Table 8E
Treatment and Disposal Technology Levels
Smelting and Refining Category Ironand Steel SIC
5512
MILL SLUDGES (galvanizing, primary, continuous casting,
hot rolling, cold rolling, tin-plating)
LevelI
(Prevalent)
Mill sludges are colloidal to
silt size aggregated particles,
high in iron; trace metals,
oils and greases
Level II
(Best Currently Employed)
Same as I
Level III
(Adequate Health and Emriro-
mental Protection)
Same as I
Amount of Waste
(kg/Mr Product)
Galvanizing Mill - 10,8
Primary Mill - 1.87
Continuous Casting - 0.104
Hot Rolling Mills - 1.74
Cold Rolling Mills - 0.159
Tin Plating Mill - 0,532
No sludge "waste from
primary, hot rolling, or
tin plating mill if
reprocessed; other factors
for other mill sludges same
as Level I
Sane as II
Factors
Affecting
Hazardousness
Treatment/
Disposal
Technology
Estimate of
# + % of Plants
Using Technology
Contains trace heavy metals
including Cr, Cu, Mn, Ni, Pb,
Zn and oil and grease
Open dumped except for tin
plating sludges which are
lagooned
90%
Same as I
Same as I
Primary,.* continuous casting, Primary I hot rolling mill -
5hot rolling mill- recycle
to sinter
Co Id rol1ing 6 galvani zing
mill - open dump
Tin plating mill-tin recla-
mation
Primary 6 hot rolling - 5%
Cold rolling S j^^yanlzing-
Mi
Tin plating - 20%
recycle to sinter or chemical
fixation
Cold rolling ft galvanizing -
chemical fixation
Tin plating - metal reclamation
Primary I hot rolling - <5%
recycle; 0 chemical fixation
Cold rolling § galvanizing-
0 chemical•fixation
Tin plating - ^20% tin recla-
mation, 0 lined lagoon
-------
Table 8E-(cont'd.)
Factor
Level I
Level II
level III
Adequacy of Inadequate if significant
Technology leaching of heavy metals
Adequate if sludges are
recycled - otherwise same
as I
Adequate
Problems and
Comments
None
None
None
Non-Land
Environmental
Impact
Possible contamination of
ground or surface water if
leached oil and grease or
heavy metals percolate
through permeable soils
Same as I
None
Compatibility
With Existing
Facilities
Compatible
Compatible
Compatible
Monitoring 6
Surveillance
Methods
None
None
Groundwater surveillance
wells and surface runoff
monitoring
Energy
Requirements
Negligible
Negligible
Negligible
-------
Factor
Physical +
Chemical
Properties
Table 8F
Treatment and Disposal Technology Levels
Smelting and Refining Category Iron and Steel SIC 5312
MILL SCALES (Primary mills, continuous casting,
hot rolling, cold rolling)
Level I
(Prevalent)
i-
Fine sand to small granular size
flaky particlds - predominantly
iron (>60-70%)
Level II
(Best Currently Employed)
Same as I
Level III
(Adequate Health and Enviro-
mental Protection)
Same as I
in
en
Amount of Waste
(kg/Ml Product)
Factors
Affecting
Hazardousness
Primary Mill - 44.9*
Continuous Casting - 8.7*
Hotrolling mills ~ 18,3*
Cold rolling milTs - 0.052
Contain trace heavy metals
including Cr, Cu, Mn, Ni, Pb,
^Zn, oil and grease
Same as I
Same as I
Same as I
Same as I
Treatment/
Disposal
Technology
Primary 5 hot rolling §
continuous casting - recycled
to sinter or blast furnace
Cold roLLing mills - open dump
Same as I
Recycle to sinter or ground
sealing with bentonite or
other sealant if land disposed
Estimate of
# + % of Plants
Using Technology
>90%
Same as I
0 ground sealing
*These scales are not wasted if recycled to sinter or blast furnace
of total scale is recycled.
-------
Table 8F-(cont'd.)
Factor
Level I
Level II
Level III
Adequacy of
Technology
Recycling - adequate;
inadequate if land
dumped and heavy metal
leaching occurs
Same as I
Adequate
Problems and
Comments
None
None
None
Non-Land
Environmental
Impact
Possible contamination of
surface or ground water if
heavy metals or oils and
greases leach
Same as I
None
Compatibility
With Existing
Facilities
Compatible
Compatible
Compatible
Monitoring §
Surveillance
Methods
None
None
Groundwater surveillance
and surface runoff
monitoring
Energy
Requirements
Negligible
Negligible
Negligible
-------
1.4 COST ANALYSIS
In the last section various treatment and disposal technologies
currently employed or considered for adequate health and environmental
protection were described. The costs" o'f implementing this technology for
a typical integrated iron and steel mill complex are estimated in this
section. Costs of land disposal from individual operations such as steel
furnaces and rolling mills are also given. The exemplary plant has an •
annual capacity of 2,500,000 MT of steel and is assumed to operated 350 •
days per year. Facilities at the plant include the operations given in
Table 4 and generate the wastes listed previously in Table 5. All disposal
sites are situated on semi-industrial land.
Dust
Dust results from blast furnace, basic oxygen furnace and
electric furnace operations. Dust from the blast furnaces is recycled ;
to the sinter plant. No disposal cost is incurred. The dust,froji the
basic oxygen furnace operations amounts to only 288 MT (222 m )/year.
It is not considered hazardous.
Electric Furnace Dust. Dust from the electric furnaces considered poten-
tially hazardous (7,500 MT or 4165 m /yr) is hauled to an on-site dump.
This requires 1 hr/day of front loader and truck time plus 40 hrs/yr of
bulldozer time at the dump. The dust is piled to a height of S m. The
dump area is sized to hold 20 years of waste and extends over 1.7 ha.
Electric Furnace Dust
Capital Cost
Dust Dump
Survey $ 1,065
Land 6,725
Equipment
* Truck (12.5%) 3,125
Front Loader (12.5%) • 2,500 !
Bulldozer'(2%) . 320 . -'
Total . $13,735
Annual Cost
Land $ 675
Construction Amortization 125
Equipment Amortization 945
Equipment Repair and Maintenance 295
Operating Personnel 8,045
Energy
Fuel 995
Electricity ^ 100
Taxes . ' 170
Insurance 135
Total $11,485
58
-------
Sludge wastes are generated by all operations except by the
electric furnaces (where a dry control system is assumed) and the soaking
pits.
Coke Oven Sludge. Ammonia still lime sludge (6,160 MT or 5,135 m /yr) is
produced at the coke ovens. The sludge is disposed at_a dump. One hr/day
of frontloader and truck time are needed for loading and transporting the
sludge and 50 hrs/yr of bulldozer time at the dump site. The sludge is
piled to a height of 5 m. The dump occupies 2.1 hectares and accommodates
20 years of waste sludge.
Coke Oven Sludge (ammonia still lime sludge)
Capital Cost
Sludge Dump
Survey $ 1,315
Land - 8,305 ••
Equipment
Truck (12.5%) 3,125 - .
Front Loader (12.5%) 2,500
Bulldozer (2,5%) 400
Total • $15,645
Annual Cost
Land $ 830
Construction Amortization 155
Equipment Amortization 960
Equipment Repair § Maintenance 300
Operating Personnel 8,170
Energy
Fuel 1,005
Electricity 100
Taxes 210
Insurance 155
Total' ' $11,685
PrimaryandOther Hot Rolling Mill Sludge. The primary and other hot
rolling mills produce 5739 WT of sludge per year. The scale wastes
generated by these operations are recycled to sinter on the blast furnace.
However, about 2 percent of the scale, containing oil contaminants, is
skimmed off and disposed with the sludge.
The total yearly waste disposed is about 7,750 MT or 4840 m .
Loading and hauling require 1 hr/day of front loader and truck time, and
50 hrs/yr of bulldozer time is assigned at the dumpe site. The dump
occupies 1.9 ha.
59
-------
Primary and Other Hot Rolling Mill Sludge
Capital Cost
. Sludge Dump
Survey > $ 1,190
Land 7,515
Equipment
Truck (12.5%) • 3,125
Front Loader (12..5%) 2,500
. Bulldozer (2.5%) 400
Total ' $14,730
Annual Cost
Land $ 750
Construction Amortization 140
Equipment Amortization 960
Equipment Repair § Maintenance " 300
Operating Personnel 8,170
Energy
Fuel 1,005
Electricity 100
Taxes 190
Insurance • . 145
Total $11,760
Cold Rolling Mill Sludge. The cold rolling mills produce only 111 MT of
sludge annually. For the purpose of costing, the disposal cost of this
sludge is combined with that generated by the galvanizing mill.
Tin Plating Mill Sludge. The sludge from the tin plating mill is disposed
in a lagoon. The wet sludge (50% solids) produced annually amounts to
1064 NTT. The lagoon is sized to hold 20 years of waste. The lagoon character-
istics are:
Volume 21,300 m Circumference 390 ra_
Bottom Width 55 m Dike volume 5,900 m2
Top width . 67 m Dike surface 5,540 m
Bottom length 110 m Total width 81 m
Top length 122 m Total length 136 m
Total depth 3 m Required area 1.1 ha
Depth of Excavation .9m
60
-------
TinPlating Mill Sludge
Capital Cost
Lagoon
Site Preparation
Survey $ 690
Test Drilling 980
Sample Testing ' 500
Report Preparation 1,500
Construction
Excavation and Forming 7,845
Compacting 10,910
'Fine Grade Finishing . 2,490
Soil Poisoning 485
Transverse Drain Fields 1,500
Land . . '* 4,jSQ
• • Total $31,250
Annual Cost
Land $ 435
Construction Amortization 2,695
Construction Maintenance § Repair . 695
Taxes , 110
Insurance 315
Total $ 4,250
GalvanizingMill Sludge. The sludge produced by the galvanizing mill is
combined with that from the cold rolling mill. Also included is the small
amount of scale waste (36 MT/yr) from the cold rollingimill. The total waste
disposed is 1500 MT/yr, Loading, hauling and diposing on land requires
about .25 hrs/day of front loader and truck time and a .4 ha sludge dump.
Galvanizing and Cold Rolling Mill Sludge
Capital Cost
Sludge Dump
Survey $ 250
Land 1,580
Equipment
Truck (5%,) ' 1,250
Front Loader (5%) ' 1,000
- • • Total . . . $. 4,080
61
-------
Annual Cost
Land ' $ T60
Construction Amortization 30
Equipment Amortization • 360
Equipment Repair $ Maintenance 115
Operating Personnel 1,890
Energy
Fuel 240
Electricity • 25
Taxes 40
Insurance 40
Total. $ 2.900
Scale
Scale is produced by primary and hot rolling mills and the cold
rolling mills. Practically all of the scale of the former 'is recycled to
sinter or blast furnaces. No disposal costs are incurred. Scale from the
cold rolling mill is land disposed together with the sludge from that opera-
tion. No separate costs are incurred.
Waste Pickle Liquor
Waste pickle liquor results from cold rolling and galvanizing mill
operations. The liquor is treated 'and disposed of by an outside contractor
at a cost of $10.55/m ($.04/gal).
No capital costs are incurred. The annual cost is $149,010.
Waste Ammonia Liquor
Waste ammonia liquor is normally not land disposed. It is normally
detoxified in a biological treatment plant as a minor flow. Occasionally it
is disposed of in deep wells. The associated costs of deep well disposal
were not'ascertained since no land disposal is considered as Levels I, II and
III treatment and disposal technology.
1.4.2 Cost of Best Technology Cur rent ly__Emp_lpy_gd (Level II).
Dust .-
Dust disposal and-associated costs are the same for Level II as
Level I.
Sludge from the, blast furnaces, basic oxygen furnaces and primary
and hot rolling mills can be, recycled to sinter depending on its composition.
62
-------
Tin .plating mill sludge in- some plants has a sufficiently high
metal content so that it can be sold to an outside contractor for metal
reclamation. We were unable to 'obtain information on prices paid by
reclaimers for the sludge. This treatment method would eliminate the need
for the lagoon specified for Level I and its associated costs. Level II
treatment for the other sludges is the same as for Level I.
Waste Pickle Liquor
Acid regeneration is the Level II treatment for waste pickle
liquor. Reference 2 indicates a cost of $13/m of waste treated. This
cost is included as an annual cost. It includes the amortization of capital
treatment plant investment. Acid regeneration results in an annual cost
of $183,610 which is about a $35,000 increase over the Level I treatment cost.
Incremental changes resulting from the implementation of Level II
technology are shown below.
Capital Cost Annual Cost
Slag . . -
Dust
Sludge ($31,250) ($4,250)
Waste Pickle Liquor - , 34,600
Total ' ($31,250) $30,350
( ) = savings engendered by sale of tin plating mill sludge and
resultant elimination of sludge 'lagoon.
1.4.3 Cost of Technology to _Proyide_ Adequate^ Health and Environmental
Protection (Level III)
'Dust
The soil is sealed at the dump used for storing the dust from
the electric furnaces. Collection ditches, pump and piping, are provided
at the dump site.
Electric Furnace Dust • • •
Capital Cost
Soil Sealing $34,000
Collection ditches 1,970
Pump 9,100
Piping 2,210
Total ' $47,280
63
-------
• Annual .Cost
.Construction Amortization $ 4,175
Equipment Amortization 1,800
Construction Repair § Maintenance 1,080
Equipment Repair 6 Maintenance 565
Energy
Fuel
Electricity 95
Insurance • 475
Total ' $ 8,190
The soil is sealed at the coke oven sludge dump; collection
ditches, pump and piping are installed.
Coke Oven Sludge
Capital Cost
Soil Sealing $ 42,000
Collection Ditches 2,195
Pump 9,300
Piping ' 2,210
Total $ 55,705
Annual Cost
Construction Amortization S 5,130
Equipment Amortization 1,835
Construction Repair | Maintenance 1,325
Equipment Repair S Maintenance 575
Energy
Fuel
Electricity 110
Insurance 560
Total $ 9,535
The sludges from the primary and other hot rolling mills as
well as those from the galvanizing and cold rolling mills are chemically
fixed prior to land disposal.
Primary and Other Hot Rolling Mill Sludge
Capital Cost Not Applicable
Annual Cost
Chemical Fixation $63,930
Total $63,930
'64
-------
Galvanizing andJ^oId Rolling Mill Sludge
Capital Cost . Not Applicable
Annual Cost
Chemical Fixation $13,175
• Total $13,175
Level III for. tin plating mill sludge disposal consists either'
of the sale of the sludge to a metal reclaimer'or installing a lagoon liner
where the sludge is disposed on land. The former entails no cost to the
plant. Costs for the latter are shown below. , ..
Tin Mill Sludge
Capital Cost
Lagoon Liner • $38,235
Total $38,235
Annual Cost
Construction Amortization $ 4,440
Construction Repair 6 Maintenance , 1,145
Insurance ^580
Total $ 5,965
Waste Pickle Liquor,
Level III treatment of waste pickle liquor consists either of
acid regeneration or neutralizing the waste by lime treatment, allow for
settling of the sludge in a lined lagoon followed by chemical fixation and
land disposal of the sludge. Acid regeneration involves no additional costs
beyond those listed under Level II treatment. Costs for the other alternative
is shown in Table 9.
The total annual waste liquor.amounts.to 15,100 MT. This results
in the formation of 6,285 MT or 4,910 m ,of sludge.' The selected lagoon size
is 10,000 m and it assumed that 4,910 m of sludge are dredged annually.
The removed sludge is chemically fixed and hauled to a dump site.
A 236 1/inin slurry pump is used for dredging. The pump is operated
350 hrs/yr and 400 hours of labor are assigned to its operation. Loading
and hauling of the sludge to the dump site requires 265 hrs/yr of front
loader and truck time and 50 hrs/yr of bulldozer time at the sludge dump.
65
-------
TABLE 9 ..COST OF LEVEL III TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL TECHNOLOGY
INTEGRATED STEEL MILL - PICKLE LIQUOR SLUDGE
Capital Cost
Lagoon
Site Preparation
Survey $ 375
Test Drilling ' 490
Sample Testing 250
Report Preparation 1,200
Construction
Excavation and Forming 4,535
Compacting • 6,310
Fine Grade Finishing 1,705
Soil Poisoning' 345
Transverse Drain Field 855
Lagoon Liner 20,025
Land 2,375
Sludge Dump
Survey 625'
Land 3,955
Equipment
Slurry Pump 13,730
Flexible Pipe (100 m) 440
Front Loader (15%) 3,000
Truck (15%) 3,750
Bulldozer (2.5%) 400
Total $ 64.565
66
-------
TABLE 9 (Continues)
Annual Cost
Land 635
Construction Amortization 4,270
Equipment Amortization 3,405
Construction Repair and 1,015
Maintenance
Equipment Repair and 1,065
Maintenance
Operating Personnel 10,110
Energy
Fuel ' 775
Electricity 90
Chemical Fixation 64,810
Taxes 160
Insurance 645
Total $ 86,980
Less Acid Regeneration (183,610)
Total ($96,950)
C ) = savings
67
-------
The lagoon characteristics .are:.
Volume 10,000 m Circumference 277 in-
Bottom width 36 m Dike volume 3,410 m
Top width 48 m Dike surface 3,790 m
Bottom length 72 in Total width 62 m
Top length 84 m Total length 98 m
Total depth [ 3 m Required area 16 ha
Depth of excavation 1,15 m
The dump is sized to hold 20 years of waste piled to a height of
10 m. It occupies 1.0 ha. The lime treatment facility used to neutralize
the waste pickle liquor is considered part of "the water treatment system
and its cost is not included.
Summary costs for Level I, II and III waste treatments for an
'integrated steel plant are given in Table 10. Annual costs for Levels I
and II disposal of potentially hazardous wastes are estimated as $7,570,000
which represents less than 0,1% of the estimated 1973 sales value.
Annual costs for Level III technology (i.e. adequate for environmental
protection) are estimated as $12,930,000 or 0.151 of estimated 1973 sales
value.
68
-------
TABLE 10 - COST SUMMARY FOR
TREATMENT
Annual Production: Model Plant 2,500,
Waste (Type)
Dust
Sludge
Pickle Liquor
AND DISPOSAL TECHNOLOGIES, IRON
000 MT Industry 100,929,
Amount (MT/MT of Production)
0.003
0.007
0.006
AND STEEL
000 MT
Cum. Unit Waste Disposal Costs:
Waste (Type)
$/MT of
Waste
Dust
Capital Cost $ 1.83
Annual Cost 1.53
Sludge
Capital Cost 3.99
Annual Cost 1.87
Pickle Liquor
Capital Cost
Annual Cost 10.55
Total Capital Cost
Total Annual Cost
Cum. Industry Wa^te Disposal
Waste (Type)
Cap.
Dust $0.50
Sludge 3.03
Pickle Liquor
; Total: $3.53
1973 Metal Price: $82.57/MT
Percent Treatment Cost/Price
Waste (Type)
Cap.
Dust 0.01%
Sludge 0.04
Pickle Liquor
Total: 0.05%
I
Level
II
$/OT of $/MT of $/MT of
Prod. Waste Prod.
$ 0.005 $ 1.83 $ 0.
O.OOS 1.53 0.
0.03 3.99 0.
0.01 1.87 0.
-* _«.
0.06 13.00 0.
$0.04 — $0.
0.08 -- 0.
005
005
03
01
- -
07
04
09
$/MT of
Waste
$8.14
2.62
9.69
7.49
13.00
--.
Costs ($ Million)
I
Ann.
$0.50
1.01
6.06
$7.57
of Metric
I
Ann.
0.01%
0.01
0,07
0.09%
Level
II III
Cap. Ann. Cap.
$0.50 $0.50 $2.02
3.03 1.01 6.06
7.07
$3.53 $7.57 $8.08
Ton of Production
Level
Arm.
$0.81
5.05
7,07
$12.93
II III
Cap. Ann. Cap.
0.01% 0.01% 0.02%
0.04 0.01 0.07
0.08
0.05% 0.10% 0.09%
Ann.
0.01%
0.06
0.08
0.15%
Ill
$/MT of
Prod.
$ 0.02
0.008
0.06
0.05
0.07
$0.08
0.13
-------
•2.0 , "IRON AND STEEL-FOUNDRIES
2,1 INDUSTRY CHARACTERIZATION
The three major groupings of ferrous castings are gray and
ductile dron castings, malleable iron castings, and steel castings. While
specific procedures might vary from•foundry to foundry, the overall opera-
tions for producting castings of all three types are essentially the same
and include metal melting and pouring, casting shakeout and cleaning and
finishing.
There are about 2000 foundries in the U.S. producing ferrous
castings. There is great variability in plant si^.e with monthly capacities
ranging from 20 net tons to over 10,000 net tons.* It is important to note
that only about 60 percent of all castings produced in the United States
are covered under SIC 332 (Iron and Steel Foundries). The remaining 40
percent are produced under other SIC categories,.such as SIC 3714 (Motor
Vehicles), SIC 3541 (Machine Tools), etc.
The production data and waste data presented in this report
represents only those operations covered under SIC 332 which are within
the primary metal smelting and refining industry.
The 1973-74 directory of members of the Gray and Ductile Iron
Founders Society, Inc. lists 186 foundries. The monthly average production
of these foundries was calculated to be about 1125 MT of finished castings
giving an average annual production of 13,500 MT. Using data from "The
Metal Casting Industry Census Guide" (1972 Edition, published by Penton
Publishing Co., Cleveland, Ohio), the average annual production for all
gray and ductile iron foundries (an estimated 1300 to 1500 foundries) was
calculated to be about 9,250 MT. Thus, a reasonable capacity figure.for
a typical gray and ductile iron foundry plant would be about 11,000 net
tons per year.
Steel foundries average about 5,440 MT of capacity per year and
malleable iron foundries average about 12,700 MT per year.
Table 11 gives state by state, regional, and national shipments
of the various type of ferrous castings for 1973. These figures are
believed to reflect 1973 capacity. Iron and Steel foundries
are concentrated in states heavy in manufacture of iron and steel and
automobiles and heavy industrial equipment which are principal consumers
of foundry castings.
2.2 WASTE CHARACTERIZATION
This section contains descriptions of production technology at
ferrous foundries and the resultant byproducts or wastes which are either
recycled directly, reprocessed, or disposed of on land or in lagoons.
* amount of metal smelted for finished castings exceeds net output of
castings products.
-------
' " TABLE 11 .
STATE, REGIONAL, AND NATIONAL SHIPMENTS OF IRON AND STEEL CASTINGS, 1973*
(METRIC TONS)
State
Alabama
Arizona
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Lousiana
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
Nebraska
New Jersey
New York
North Carolina
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
Gray § Ductile
Iron Castings
1,543,121
0
412,769
98,883
35,380
0
9,072
10,886
1,364,406
970,688
368,317
10,886
291,206
9,072
72,575
59,870
2,597,270
170,551
63,503
10,886
347,452
822,820
107,048
2,255,260
34,473
9,979
1,954,980
28,120
Malleable
Iron Castings
17,237
0
o
0
8,165
0
0
0
118,841
35,380
9,072
0
0
0
0
1,814'
395,533
10,886
0
0
0
16,329
0
128,820
0
0
111,584
3,629
Steel
Casting
87,090
58,060
60,781
5,443
0
6,350
10,886
6,350
236,775
72,575
23,587
59,874
0
12,701
6,350
0
60,781
20,865
49,895
13,608
6,350
72,575
0
318,422
10,886
32,659
221,353
0
Total Iron
Steel Cast:
1,647,448
58,060
473,550
104,326
43,545
6,350
19,958
17,236
1,720,022
1,078,643
400,976
70,760
291,206
21,773
78,925
61,684
3,053,584
202,302
113,398
24,494
353,802
911,724
107,048
2,702,502
45,359
42,638
2,287,917
31,749
71
-------
TABLE 11 (cent.)
STATE, REGIONAL, AND NATIONAL SHIPMENTS OF-IRON AND STEEL CASTINGS, 1973* (METRIC TONS)
State
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah.
Vermont
Virginia •
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
EPA Region
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
VIII
IX
X
Gray | Ductile
Iron Castings
25,401
0
378,296
495,323
196,859
9,980
162,386
9,072
74,389
453,592
133,350
1,170,272
2,264,330
2,365,030
7,811,767
538,868
453,592
295,742
412,769
19,051
Malleable
Iron Castings
0
0
0 i
29,030
a
907
0
0
1,814
46,266
14,515
16,329
113,398
17,237
735,726
29,030
9,072
0
0
0
Steel
Castings
0
2,722
37,195
42,638
&,Q32
0
5,443
26,308
9,979
130,635
0
78,925
249,475
141,521
840,053
66,225
146,964
17,237 '
118,841
58,967
Total Iron S,
Steel Castin,
25,401
2,722
387,368
566,991
205,931-
10,887
167,829
35,380
86,182
630,493
147,865
1,265,526
2,627,203
2,523,788
9,387,546
634,123
609,628
312,979
531,610
78,018
U.S. Total 15,464,771 935,307 1,718,208 18,118,286
* Believed to Reflect U.S. Production Capacity in 1973
-72
-------
Estimates are given -for-the quantities -of -wastes and potential 1-y'hazardous
constituents thereof which are disposed of on land either in lagoons,
landfills or open dumps.
2.2,1 Process Descriptions
While specific procedures might vary from foundry to foundry,
the overall operations for producing iron castings, malleable iron
castings, and steel castings are essentially the same and include: sand
preparation, mold and core making, metal melting and pouring, casting
shakeout, and. cleaning and finishing. The interrelationship between
major operations in a typical foundry is shown in Figure 2. Also shown
are the major sources of solid wastes. Although not all foundries
practice sand reclamation,, its use has become sufficiently widespread in
the industry to require its inclusion in Figure 2.
Clay bonded molding sands are prepared by mixing silica sand,
organic additives, bentonite clay'and water together. Some foundries
use olivine, zircon, chromite, biasill or other aggregates instead- of
silica sand. Carbonaceous material in the amount of 2 to 10 percent' is
also added to the molding sand 'as may be required to impart special
properties. Materials in this category include finely ground bituminous
coal, ground corn flower, fuel oil, and finely ground cellulose material.
The molds are made by packing the molding sand around previously
made patterns to form the required shapes. For castings having hollows
or recesses, 'cores are required to complete the mold. Since the cores
must be removed after the castings have solidified, the core sands have
special properties that facilitate1their removal. The desired properties
are achieved through the use of special binders, the most common- of
which are: (1) combinations of vegetable, fish and petroleum oils; (2)
phenol formaldehyde resin, (3) sodium, silicate; (4).phenolic isocyan'ate;
(5) alkyd isocyanate; and (6) mixtures of urea and furfural alcohols.
The first item is generally baked to promote hardening, and items 2 and
6 are generally1 heat-cured. The difference is that baking is done at
the rate of approximately one hour per inch of thickness while curing is
done in a matter of- 30 to 60 seconds at approximately the same temperature.
In the case of sodium silicate binders, hardening is achieved by forcing
CO- gas through the sand.- For the isocyanate binders setting occurs at
room-temperature through the use of special catalysts. For- the urea-
furfural alcohol binders, setting is possible at room temperature or
higher depending on the type of catalyst used. With the successful use
of the newer core binders that do not require high temperatures for
setting, it appears that fewer and fewer foundries will continue the
practice of core baking.
In addition to special binders, certain other materials are
frequently used in preparing core sands. These include: iron oxide,
ground corn flour; water soluble compounds of wood sugar; coke pitch;
and ground hardwood cellulose. These materials facilitate removal of
cores.
: ' • 73
-------
Fresh Sand
I Binders
Freeh Sand
Binders
Reclaimed
Sand
Sand
Reclam-
ation
Note; Figures in (') indicate
amounts of waste expressed
as Kg per metric ton of
metal melted. Example
given for iron produced
in cupola.
Flux
Metallics
, Coke
Metal
Melting
Refractories
Hot
4-Metal
Metal
Pouring
Casting
Shakeout
^*"**
f"™
*
•gun*
**")
**-**
^j
CD
a
i
»""™v
O CO
f^i qg>
f*o ' ^**
%**-
•d 03
0)
CO
0)
^j
inl
CQ
cu
(•-*
O
O
i i 1
CO
"""
Si
c
•l-l
A
0!
0)
*
w
SH
o
o
l-t
'
Dust (7.8)
•
Castings
Cooling
Castings
Cleaning &
Finishing
Open
Dump
Finished
Castings
Figure 2 - Foundry Operations
74
-------
Once the cores are formed and cured, they are integrated with the
final molds which are then transferred to the metal pouring area. Molten
metal of the desired composition is prepared in one of several different
types of commonly used furnaces. Charge materials for the cupola furnace
usually consist' of a'flux material, coke, and metallics. Electric arc or
induction furnaces do not require coke. Typical fluxes include limestone
(CaC03), fluorspar (mostly CaF_), and soda ash (Naj:)^). The metallic
charge consists mainly of external scrap and some,internally generated
scrap. For producing gray and ductile iron castings, cupolas and electric
induction furnaces are the most widely used, with cupolas accounting for
an estimated 60 to 65 percent of total production. Reverberatory furnaces
account for one percent or less of gray and ductile iron castings. Most
malleable iron castings are produced in cupolas and electric induction
furnaces, although a number of air furnaces are still in operation. Electric
arc furnaces account for .almost all of the steel castings produced with
electric induction furnaces accounting for probably less than 5 percent.
The molten metal is tapped from the furnaces into ladles and
poured into the waiting molds. After the castings have solidified they
are separated from the molds in the shakeout area. The separated castings
are then cooled prior to cleaning and finishing. Cleaning and finishing
operations include shot blasting, chipping and grinding.
Following casting shakeout, the mold and core sands are screened.
Larger remnants of undisintegrated cores (core butts) and larger chunks of
molding sand are transferred to a disposal area. Most of the molding sand,
along with the degraded core sand, proceed directly back to molding sand
preparation without going through sand reclamation (i.e., this sand is
recycled, rather than being reclaimed). In some foundries a portion of
this return sand is bypassed through a reclamation system and then returned
to either the core or molding sand mixing operation. In the case of no-bake
sands, most of the sand from the shakeout may be returned through the sand
reclamation unit before recoating. Excess sand is sent to landfill.
2.2.2 • Description of Waste Streams^
The major types of solid wastes generated at iron and steel
foundries were indicated in Figure 2. The general types of waste generated
are essentially independent of the type of metal being cast and the type
of furnace in use. On the other hand, metal type and furnace type can
affect the quantities of waste produced. The numbers in parentheses in
Figure 2 indicate the amounts of waste in each category expressed as kilo-
grams of waste per ton of metal melted. The numbers correspond to an
average plant producing iron in a cupola. The values are given on the
basis of a ton of metal melted rather than on the basis of a ton of finished
castings, because yield factors (weight of finished casting/weight of metal
melted) vary depending on the foundry and the type of metal cast. For
iron (gray, ductile and malleable) the yield factor is generally in the
range of 0.6 to 0.7, while for steel values of 0.5 are common. For the
purpose of computing total waste quantities for an average iron foundry,
75
-------
a yield factor of 0.65 would be reasonable. Thus, a typical iron foundry
•would melt about 11,^000/0.65 » 16,900 tons of metal -per year (15,300
metric tons/year).
Waste Sand. As stated previously and shown in Figure 2 there are two
types of waste sand. One type is the clay bonded molding sand used in
interior parts of the mold. Combined production of the two types of
waste'sand is 330 kg/MT of cast product. Although these.sands have
different organic additives as described on page 72 the organic fractions
are burned and charred during the pouring of molten metal leaving principally
sand coated with carbon residues and traces of metal compounds including
copper, lead, chromium and zinc. Solubility tests on spent foundry sand
as described in Appendix B did not show significant leaching of heavy
metals or phenol. For this reason foundry sands are not considered
potentially hazardous at this time.
Core Butts. After the metal pouring process most of the sand is devoid
of binder and has little aggregation. Quite often portions of the core
sand retain its binder. It is removed as large chunks known as core
butts and brought to dumping areas. Core butts are generated at a rate
of 48.1-kg/MT of casted metal. Although solubility testing on core
butts was not conducted it is not expected to leach to a greater extent
than spent sand. Core butts are therefore not considered potentially
hazardous at this time.
Dust. Dust is generated at a rate of 31.7 kg/MT of foundry product
from the sand reclamation process and from baghouuses on metal milling
furnaces. Dust will principally be silica oxides and iron oxides with
traces of heavy metals including lead, cadmium, copper chromium, nickel,
and zinc. Solubility tests on foundry dust as described in Appendix B
did not show significant leaching of potentially hazardous metals. For
this reason foundry dust is not considered potentially hazardous at this
time.
Sludges. Wet scrubbers used to scrub emissions from metal pouring
operations produces a wastewater which in turn produces a sludge at a
rate of 18.2 kg/MT cast metal product. This sludge will contain iron
for the most part along with traces of cadmium, copper, chromium, nickel,
lead and zinc. Solubility tests were not conducted on sludges. They
would be expected to be of similar composition and nature as furnace
dusts however which were studied in solubility tests as described in
Appendix B. Since the dusts did not leach significant concentrations of
toxic constituents sludge was assumed to be of a similar solubility and
therefore is considered as not potentially hazardous at this time.
Sla£. Slag from iron and scrap steel furnace smelting is produced at a.
rate of 56.3 kg/MT of finished iron and steel casting. The gravel size
to sand size pieces of slag contains iron, lime and soda ash principally,
with small traces of heavy metals including, cadmium, copper, chromium,
.nickel, lead and zinc. Solubility tests as described in Appendix B did
not show significant leaching of potentially toxic constituents. For
this reason furnace slag from'iron and steel foundries is not considered
hazardous at this time.
-------
Floorsweepings. Cleanup of floors in core 'making rooms results in
"sandy floor sweepings at aerate of 11,8'kg/MT of product, "This 'is •
assumed similar to other waste sands and therefore non-hazardous at this
time. Solubility tests were not conducted on floor sweepings.
Refractories. Broken and weathered brick refractories from metal
melting furnaces are generated at a rate of 10- "kg/Ml of finished castings.
These bricks 'are predominantly highly insoluble fired clay ceramic and
are not considered potentially hazardous.
Appendix A gives analyses of iron and steel foundry wastes
including sands, dust and slag. •
2.2.3 Waste Quantities ' ' •• . • ';
Table 12 gives generation factors' for the various residuals
from iron and steel foundry production as well as concentration factors1 . . '
for potentially hazardous constituents. The waste' residual factors
given in Table 12 are estimated average values for all foundries in each
of the three major foundry categories. In developing the waste factors,
consideration was given to the different types of furnaces used in each
metal category and to the different types of furnace emission control
systems. For example, gray and ductile iron is made in cupola furnaces •
and electric induction furnaces in the ratio of about 3 to 2. Control
for cupola furnace emissions is devided about equally between wet and
dry systems, while electric induction furnaces generally require no
emission control.
In generating the overall waste factors, the computation of
sludges, and dusts' and slag accounted for the percentage of castings
within a given category made from a specific type of furnace with a • .
specific type of control by weighing the waste factors for specific
combinations according to the frequency of their occurrence.
Table 13 presents the amounts of wastes- and the amounts of
specific potentially hazardous constituents generated annually for an • .
average plant in"each of the three major foundry categories. The amounts
shown were calculated using the waste factors given in Table 12 and
taking the following average annual production figures for finished
castings for each type of foundry: (a) gray and ductile iron foundries -
10,000 metric tons, (b) malleable iron foundries - 12,700 metric tons;
and (c) steel foundries - 5,400 metric tons.
The quantity of waste generated by ferroalloy plants on a state-
by-state basis are given in Table 14 for 1974, 1977, and 1983. The quantities
of sludges and dusts are based directly on information derived from a solid
waste survey sponsored by the Ferroalloy Association in which the quantities
.of wastes from furnace emission control were tabulated for each s/tate for each
type'of ferroalloy. The sludges result from the collection of furnace
emissions using,wet scrubbing systems. The dusts represent the furnace'
77
-------
TABLE 12
WASTE GENERATION FACTORS, IRON AND STEEL FOUNDRIES, DRY WEIGHTS
Type of Waste
Gray | Ductile Iron Foundries
Slag
Sludge
Dust
Sand
Refractories
Malleable Iron Foundries
Slag
Sludge
Dust
Sand
Refractories
Steel Foundries
Slag
Sludge
Dust
Sand
Refractories
Generation
Factor
Kg/MF of
Finished
Casting
62.9
32.8
65.6
600
13.8
55.5
31.9
64,7
600
13.2
122
36.4
186
780
53.0
Concentration Factors (ppm)
Cd
1.0
Cu
23.1
2.0- 146
>0.7 79.9
—
—
8.3
i
I
1.0: 25.4
2.0
>0.7
—
--
1.0
2.3
>1.4
--
, —
146
79.3
8.3
—
52
150
224
8.3
— —
Cr
36.6
47.6
60.3
4.8
—
46.1
48.0
60.7
4.8
—
150
50
105
4.8
— —
Mn
1410
826
1075
52.9
—
1730
749
1041
52.9
—
5200
375
2806
52.9
_ _
Ni
10.0
5.3
>28
28.1
—
10.0
4.4
>28
28.1
—
--
—
>85
28.1
•""•""
Pb
6.6
134
75.5
53.6
—
7.4
133
74.3
53.6
—
16
130
187
53.6
™"~ "
Zn
14.7
423
144.5
6.0
—
17.0
393
126
6.0
—
42
250
158
6.0
..
Phenol
—
—
--
1.1
—
—
—
1.1
—
--
—
.
1.1
mm —
-------
TABLE 13
YEARLY GENERATION OF WASTE RESIDUALS - BY TYPICAL IRON AND STEEL FOUNDRIES, DRY WEIGHTS
i
Type of Waste
al
Gray § Ductile Iron Foundries
Slag
Total
Waste
Quantity
CW)
629
Sludge 328
Dust 656
Sand 6000
Refractories 138
a) Based on production of !
10,000 Mrr/yr of finished
Quantity of Potentially Hazardous Constituents
(MT)
Cd
0.0006
0.0007
> 0.0005
__
--
castings, multiply by 1,1 j j
to convert to short tons
Malleable Iron Foundries
Slag
Sludge
Dust
Sand
Refractories
b) Based on production of
12,700 MT/yr of finished
castings, multiply by 1.1
to convert to short tans
Steel Foundries0^
Slag
Sludge
Dust
Sand
Refractories
c) Based on production of
5400 MT/yr of finished
castings, multiply by 1,1
to convert to short tons
f
I
Cu
0.0145
0.0479
Cr
0.0230
0.0156
0.0524 0.0396
0.0498 0.0288
__
-
.
,.
--
Mn
0.8870
0.2710
0.7050
0.3170
__
i
704 j 0.0007 \ 0.0179 : 0.0325
405 0.0008 1 0.0591 : 0.0194
822 >0.0006 \ 0.6520 , 0.0499
7620 ' -- 0.0632 • 0.0366
-_--
1.218
0.3030
0.8560
0.4030
IftR '
JL\jO i „_ »«„ i «.«. «.«»
- i * " '
' J *
j - *
'
i .
i
659 , 0.0007 : 0.0343 0.0989
3.427
Ni
0.0063
0.0017
>0.0180
0.1690
-.
0.0070
0.0018
> 0.0230
0.2140
Pb
0,0042
0.0440
0.0495
0.3220
--
0.0052
0.0539
0.0611
0.4080
__ —
i
--
197 0.0005 0.0296 ; 0.0099 0.0739
i i
1004
4212
286
>0.0014 0.2250 0.1050 2.817
__
—
0,0350 ! 0.0202 0.2230
—
>0.085
0.1180
--
i
0.0105
0.0256
0.188
0.2260
—
Zn
0.0092
0.1390
0.0948
0.0360
--
Phenol
__
—
__
0.0066
--
.
0.0120
0.1590
0.1040
0.0457
__
--
--
__
!
1
»
0.0277
0.0493 i —
0.159
0.0253
—
:
; 1 J '
0.0046
—
-------
Table 14a
ESTIMATED, STATE, REGIONAL, AND NATIONAL SOLID WASTE
FROM IRON AND STEEL FOUNDRIES
TOTAL SLAG, 1974 (METRIC TONS)
STATE
ALABAMA
ARIZONA
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
DELAWARE
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
IOWA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MARVLANB
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSOURI
NEBRASKA
NEV. JERSEY
NEW VOW K
N. CAROLINA
OHIO
1 OKLAHOMA
| OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
S. CAROLINA
S. DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TiXAJ
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
W VIRGINIA
WISCONSIN
EH REGION
I
n
n
IV
TT
m
sn
T^Tt
XX
; i
NATIONAL TOTALS
TOTAL
DISPOSED
122,400
7, BOO
37,500
7*00
3.040
880
2,116
1,130
mug
e 1,000
28,900
MM
21], 6SC
2,368
6,010
4,370
210,200
15,600
11.240
2,600
21,900
68,500
7,600
211,400
3,020
B.I1D
175.900
J.230
1,800
370
31,580
42 ,180
1UM
7TO
12.270
4,200
TOTAL
POTENTIALLY
HAZARDOUS*
1
«,7W
62.6M
10,410
M.BOC
201.790
IBB, 'DO
715,600
48,080
53,550
2J.370
45.300
BJltt
U90JSO
i
TOTAL
HAZARDOUS
CONSTITUENTS
3
DISPOSAL
METHOD
LANDFILL
OR
OPEN DUMP
1
CONSTITUENTS
Cd
0.122
0,008
0.038
0.008
0.003
0,901
0.001
0,002
0.137
0.081
0,029
0,009
0.020
0.002
C.C06
0.004
cjie
0.016
0.011
0.003
Cu 1 CT
3.18
0.41
1.10
0.2
0,07
0.04
0.09
DM
4.W
lit
0.78
0.44
0.48
0.10
0.16
0.10
5.32
0-4*
0.45
0.11
0.026 0,6'
0,070 I 1.M
0.008
0.311
0,OM
0,005
017S
0,002
0,002
-0
0.032
0,043
0,015
0.001
0.012
O.OQ4
0007
0.053
0,010
0.096
0.202
0.188
0.718
0,049
0,062
0.023
0,046
0.005
13*0
0.11
6,1!
0.13
0.25
4.93
0-05
0,04
0.02
o.sa
1,18
039
O.D2
0,30
0.20
8.20
1.71
0-24
259
563
«8S
19.87
1.38
1.78
0.61
141
045
38.90
S-8S
1,17
2,30
0,37
0,12
0.13
0.24
C IS
86?
4,09
140
1.W
0.76
0.28
032
0.16
UK
0.90
1.17
0.10
1.03
3.66
0.28
12.6C
0.31
C63
3,87
O.OB
0.07
0,05
1,73
2.99
QJO
0.03
0.53
0.55
0.40
I.H
0.38
4.68
11.28
8.04
39.42
2.82
4,17
via
3.4J
1.24
77,iO
Hi
317.7
U.7 •
M.D
13.7
4.5
<.<
B.S
B.5
««.t
1S2J
MM
•3.1
29J
9.S
11,7
BJ
347.J
32,9
41.3
10.E
39.3
135,2
10.?
463.7
11.1
219
363.7
3.2
2,5
1.9
S4.0
82. B
2S.1
1.1
20.1 •
Nl
tja
o.oa
0-38
0-08
0X13
0.01
om
0.02
137
OJ1
0.29
0.09
0.20
0.02
0.06
0.04
J.18
Q.1B
0.11
0.03
D.2t
9.70
0.08
3.11
O.IK
0,05
1.76
0.02
0.02
~0
0,32
0.43
0.15
0.01
0.12
11.3 • j 0.04
14.7
14I.J
1S.B
17S.5
41A.6
338.1
1,554.4
103.7
14S.5
41,7
1J4.7
43J
2JBS9.1
0.07
0.53
0.10
0.96
2.02
l.BS
7.18
0.4ft
O.SJ
0.23
0,46
0.09
13.90
Pb
OJ2
0,11
CJ3
0.06
0,02
0,01
0.03
0,02
MO
060
OJ3
0.13
0.14
0,03
0.05
0.03
154
0.13
0.14
0.03
0,16
0,56
o.oe
ui
O.D4
0.38
1 45
Q.Q1
Q.01
-0
0.26
0,M
0,11
0.01
0.09
o.oe
0,36
O.S2
0.07
0.73
166
1,43
5JB3
0.41
0.63
0,17
0.41
0.14
1140
Zn
2.12
OJ3
0.71
0.13
0.06
am
0-07
0-05
2.90
1,46
0.53
0.38
0.30
0.08
8.11
0,06
3.49
0.31
0.3S
0-DS
0,40
1J1
,0,11
4.10
0.10
OJO
3,42
0.03
0-03
0.02
0.61
0.7»
058
0.01
0.20
0.18
0,14
• 1.»
0.1 S
1,69
3.91
3^9
13,71
OS7
1.32
e.41
1.11
O.M
28.90
LAQ NOT CONSIDERED HAZARDOUS
ON BASIS OF CALSPAN SOLuBI LITV TESTS
OESCniBff) IN APPENDIX B.
SOURCE: CALSFAN CORPORATION
80
-------
Table 14b
ESTIMATED STATE, REGIONAL, AND NATIONAL SOLID WASTE
FROM IRON AND STEEL FOUNDRIES
TOTAL SLAG, 1977 (METRIC TONS)
STATI
ALABAMA
ARIZONA
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
DELAWARE
FLORIDA
GEORGIA .
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
IOWA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA -
MISSOURI
NEBRASKA
NEW JERSEY
TOTAL
DISPOSED
135,374
1.627
41,475
1,62?
3.362
K1
2334
1,803
110,169
89,586
33,069
9.718
22,872
2,810
6,847'
4,833
241,329
17,254
12,431
1,878
2M03
NEW YORK 76,646
N.CAROLINA 8,406
OHIO 213.908
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
S, CAROLINA
S, DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
W. VIRGINIA
WISCONSIN
EPA REGION
I
S
m
TS
7
TO.
ur
Tfflj'
m
X
NATIONAL TOTAL
4,331
5,652
194.548
2.466
1,991
409
35.359
47,337
16^11
052
13,571
4.E45
7,468
sa.M7
11*13
104,849
223,110'
208,039
. 781,343
S4.ZB2
68,165
25.B47
50,102
1039?
1,S37,B16
TOTAL
POTtNTIALLY
, HAZARDOUS-
1
i
,
TOTAL
HAZARDOUS
CONSTITUENTS
1
1
DISPOSAL
METHOD
LANDFILL
OH
OPEN DUMP
1
CONSTITUENTS
ca
0.135
0.309
0.042
Cu
1.49
0.45
1.2
o.oos ajz
0.003
0001
0.002
0.002
0162
0.090
0.032
0.910
0.08
0.04
0.10
0.07
4.52
2.39
OJ6
0.49
0.922 0.53
0.902 0.11
0.00? 0.18
0.004 0.11
0.241
o.oia
0.012
0,003
0.028
O.OTJ
0.009
588
0.49
0.50
0.12
0.67
2.0S
0.20
0.233 8.78
0.004 0.14
0.006
i 0.195
i
0.002
0,28
5.45
006
0.002 0.04
"0
0336
0.941
0.017
0.00 1
0.013
0.004
0,02
0.97
1.W
0.43
0.02
0.33
0.22
0.001 0.22
0.059 1,91
0.011
0,198
0.223
o.Joe
0,792
0054
0-OS8
002S
0.051
0.050
1.54
0-26
1.75
6.23
Ml
21.98
1.54
1.97
0.67
1.«7
050
43.0
Cr
8.41
1.29
2.S4
0.41
0.13
0.14
0-26
0.11
9.1,9
4J2
1.81
1.37
DM
0.31
0.35
0-18
10.12
1-00
1,2*
0.33
1.14
4.04
041
14.00
0-34
0.76
1042
0.09
o.os
0,06
1-81
247
0.77
0.03
058
0,61
o.«
4.37
0.43
S.1I
12.44
10.00
43.60
3.12
4.61
1J4
3,84
1.37
85J
Mn
240J
46,0
92.9
1f,2
6.0
4.8
14
61
348.6
188,3
60,3
47.7
32.3
106
12.9
6.8
384,1
3S4
45.7
11.7
43.5
149.6
us
S12J
124
264
402.2
3-5
3-6
3,1
70.8
11.8
28,9 .
1.2
22.2
21.3
16-2
1i7.3
166
113,0
ase.E
173J
1.608,6
114.7
1653
«.l
. 137,9
47«
3.1C2.5
W
1-35
0.09
042
D.OB
0.03
0.01
' 0,02
0,02
1.52
0.90
032
0.10
n.22
002
0.07
0.04
241
0.18
0.12
0.03
0.29
B.77
008
2.33
0.04
0.06
1.96
0.02
0-02
— 0
0.35
04fl
0.16
001
9.13
0.04
0,08
0.59
0.11
1«6
2J>3
2.08
7m
OSi
0.58
OJS
0,51
. 0.10
15.4
1*
1.02
0.14
OM
0.07
0.02
0.01
0,03
0.02
1.33
0.70
0-K
g.i4
8.15
0 03
0,06
0.03
1.70
O.U
0.16
0.03
0-20
0.61
0.06
2.00
0.04
0.09
1.60
tat
0.01
— 0
0.39
0,31
B.12
0,01
0-10
047
0.07
0.18
0.03
OJ1
144
ija
6,46
049
OM
0.18
O.S1
0.1S
12.6
2n
234
036
0.86
0.14
0.06
0.04
OM
0.06
3.21
1.61
059
0.39
0.33
0,08
0.12
0.07
3,86
034
039
0.10
0.44
143
0.12
4,76
fl.11
0.22
3.78
003
0,03
0.02
067
0,87
0.29
0.01
022
0.11
0.15
1J9
0.16
1«
4.32
3.84
18,17
1.07
141
OM
1.23
040
29J
*FOUNDR Y SLAG NO? CONSIOERED HAZARDOUS ON
BASIS OP CALSPAM SOLUBILITY TESTS DE 5CBI BE D
IN APPENDIX B.
SOURCE: CALSfAN CORPORATION
81
-------
Table 14c
ESTIMATED STATE, REGIONAL, AND NATIONAL SOLID WASTE
FROM IRON AND STEEL FOUNDRIES
TOTAL SLAG, 1983 (METRIC TONS)
STATE
ALABAMA
ARIZONA
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
DELAWARE
FLORIDA
GEDflGIA
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
IOWA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSOURI
NEBRASKA
NEW JERSEY
NEW YORK
N, CAROLINA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
S, CAROLINA
S. DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
fi VIRGINIA
WISCONSIN
EPA REGION
r
n
m
BT
2
JB
W '
Mill
m
3.
NATIONAL TOTAL
TOTAL
DISPOSED
166 JCW
10.800
51,100
10,600
4,140
1,110
2,880
2.220
188.100
110,400
40,800
12.100
28.190
' 3.230
8,190
5,960
297,400
21JOD
15,320
3.540
34,800
94JOO
10,400
288,100
5,340
8,970
239,800
3.B40
2,450
504
43.450
SB, 30:
20,500
1,060
16,700
5,730
9,200
72,900
14,190
129,330
271,060
2S6J90
975300
8E.ESO
71,768
31,81X1 '
61,700
12.700
1,895,084
TOTAL
POTENTIALLY
HAZARDOUS"
I
TOTAL
HAZARDOUS
CONSTITUENTS
C
•1
DISPOSAL
METHOD
LANDFILL
OR
OPEN DUMP
(
CONSTITUENTS
Cd'
0.1SS
0,011
0,052
0,011
0.004
0.001
0.003
0.003
0.187
0,110
0040
0.012
0.02?
0.003
O.OOS
0005
0.297
0022
0015
0,004
0.035
0.095
0.011
0-288
0.005
0.007
0.240
0.003
0.003
Cu
4.31
O.Si
1.80
0.30
0,10
0,05
0.12
0.08
5.57
2.94
1.36
0,60
0.55
0.14
0.22
0.14
7.25
0.60
0.61
tu5
0.83
j.56
074
8.3S
o.ie
0.34
6.72
0.07
O.OS
~0 0.03
0.044 1.20
0,059 1.5B
0-020 0.53
0,001 0.03
Ci
7.90
IMS
3,13
0.50
0.16
0.18
0.33
0.23
11.82
5.67
1.»
1.B9
1.D4
0.38
0.44
0.22
12.47
1.23
1.5S
0.41
1.40
4J7
0.38
17.26
0,42
0.94
13.45
0.11
0.10
0.07
2.36
3.04
0.95
O.CM
0.016 0,41 0.72
0.005
0.010
0.072
0.014
0.27 0.75
0.27 B.S4
Z.36
0.33
0.131 3.39
5.38
0,63
S.M
0.275 7.67 15.S3
0.2S6 6.66 12,33
0.976 Z7-OS S3.73
0.067 1J8 344
0.071
0.031
0.063
0.012
1.88
2.43 6,«
OJ3 1.53
2,06
0.61
53.0
4J3
1.69
105 J
Mn
296.7
B6J
114.$
'1S.7
8.1
e.o
iu
7.5
4304
207.4
74J
5»,7
39.1
,13.4
15J
8,4
473,4
US
58J
14,4
53.6
ISO
14,6
632.0
15.1
32.6
4SS.7
4-4
34
2.6
87.!
112*
35.6
IS
27.4
26.3
20.0
193.8
204
237 J
566.1
480.8
1,982.3
141.3
2038
MB
170,0
689
3J97.4
Nl
166
0.11
0.52
0.11
0.04
0.01
003
0.03
1.87
1.10
0.40
0-12
DJ7
0.03
0.08
0.05
2,97
OJ2
0.15
0,04
0.35
0,95
0.11
'2.81
0.05
0.07
2.40
0.03
0.03
~0 .
0.44
0.5S
0.20
0.01
0.16
O.M
0.10
0.72
0,14
1.31
2.76
Z.56
§.7i
0.67
0.71
OJ1
0,83
0.12
11J4
Pb
1-ZR
0.18
0.4S
O.Ofi
0.03
0.01
0,04
0.03
1.64
0*6
0.31
0.18
0.19
0.04
0.07
0,04
2 10
C 18
Q.19
0.94
0,24
0.7S
0.07
2.47
0.05
0.11
1,98
0.01
0.01
~0
0.35
04G
0.15
0.01
0.12
0.08
O.M
0.71
0.10
1.00
2J6
1.85
1M
g^e
0.72
EU3
0.63
o.ie
1i£
Zn
1£9
045
1.06
0.18
0.07
O.OS
0.19
0.07
3-95
14?
072
0-48
0,41
0.11
0.15
038
4,76
042
0,48
0.12
0,54
US
0.15
5£E
0.1»
OJ7
4.66
0.04
0.94
0.03
0.33
i.oa
0.3S
0.01
0.27
0.22
0.19
1-7i
020
2.30
633
4.48
18.70
0.32
1JO
9J«
131
0.49
38,7
•FOUNDRY SLAG NOT CONSIDERED HAZARDOUS ON
BASIS OF CALSPAN SOLUBILITY TESTS DESCRIBED
IN APPENDIX B.
SOURCE: CALSPAN CORPORATION
82
-------
Table 14d
ESTIMATED STATE, REGIONAL, AND NATIONAL SOLID WASTE
FROM IRON AND STEEL FOUNDRIES
TOTAL SLUDGE, 1974 (METRIC TONS)
STATE
ALABAMA
ARIZONA
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
DELAWARE
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
IOWA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSOURI
NEBRASKA
NEW JERSEY
NEW YORK
N.CAROLINA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
S. CAROLINA
S. DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
W.VIRGINIA
WISCONSIN
EPA REGION
1
0
in
cr
V
izr
m
*&rn
EE
X
NATIONAL TOTALS
TOTAL
DISPOSED
ei.zso
2,350
17,«0
3.900
1.600
250
100
650
61,450
40, ISO
14300.
2,800
10, BOO
850
2.950
1,300
113,280
7.SSO
4,3iO
950
13,100
33,900
3.9SO
101,100
: 1,700
1,700
• 86100
uoo
$80
100
11500
21,100
7,650
400
6,200
1,400
; 3,200
23,800
6,500
47,000
38,000
93,800
360.300
23,650
23,000
11.650
20,100
3,100
676.200
TOTAL
POTENTIALLY
HAZARDOUS'
C
TOTAL
HAZARDOUS
CONSTITUENTS
1
'
DISPOSAL
METHOD
OPf H DUMP
AND
LANDFILL
1
CONSTITUENTS
Cd
0.12
0.01
0.04
0.01
0
0
0
0
0.13
008
0.03
0.01
0.02
0
0.01
0
0,22
0.02
O.Q1
~0
0.03
0.07
0.01
0.20
~0
~fl
0.17
~0
-ff
~a
0.03
0.04
0.02
'~D
0.01
-0
0,01
O.OS
~0
0.10
0.20
o ia
0.70
0.04
O.OS
0.03
0.05
~0
14O
Cu
8.94
0.3S
2,i9
0.57
024
0.04
0.11
0.1D
944
SJ7
2.18
0.42
1.67
0-13
0.43
0.33
16.S2
1.11
084
0,14
1.81
4.B7
MS
14.79
0.2S
CZ'j
12.49
0.17
0.14
0,02
2,27
3.09
1.12
006
0.91
0,21
047
349
OJO
6.88
14.34
1S.71
51,22
347
3.38
1.71
1M
0,48
9890
Qj
2.B2
0.12
0.8S
0.19
0.08
0.01
0.04
0.01
3.09
1 92
0.71
0.14
0.51
0.04
0.14
0-11
6.40
0.38
0.21
0.05
o,s2
1.62
0.20
4.84
o.oa
0.08
4-oa
0.08
0.04
0.01
0.74
1.01
0.36
0.02
0.30
0.07
D.1S
1.14
0.27
2J4
4.S9
448
18.75
1,13
1.11
O.H
0-97
0.15
32.40
Mn
4848
o-ee
13-54
3.11
IJl
0.10
0.44
0.43
48.S1
31.71
11J7
1.24
B.9C
0.47
2,32
1.8fl
8133
S.83
, 2.70
OS4
10-M
26.71
' 327
77.36
1J2
MO
66.23
OJN
0.1S
0,04
12.13
1660
8.16
0.31
S.OS
O.H
2.48
17.13
tM
SIM
78,16
74.13
272.02
18-29
16,35
9.31
1442
148
S24J90
Nl
0.38
NA
008
0.02
0.01
NA
"t
~0
0.26
0.20
0.07
~0
0.01
-------
Table 14e
ESTIMATED STATE, REGIONAL, AND NATIONAL SOLID WASTE
FROM IRON AND STEEL FOUNDRIES
TOTAL SLUDGE, 1977 (METRIC TONS)
STATE
ALABAMA
ARIZONA
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
DELAWARE
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
IOWA
KANSAS
' KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSOURI '
NEBRASKA
NEW JERSEY
NEW YORK
N.CAROLINA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON,
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
S, CAROLINA
S, DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
W. VIRGINIA
WISCONSIN
EPA REGION
I
n
m
ur
TT
m
m
inn
rz
X
NATIONAL TOTAL
TOTAL
DISPOSED
67,746
2,800
19,830
4,315
1,770
210
US
720
7 1,280
44,410
16,480
3.100
11, WS
940
3J65
2,545
125,260
jjso
4,81 0
1,050
14490 .
37,590
4.370
111,620
1,880
1,810
94,450
1,330
1.050
110
17,140
23,340
8,4(0
440
6,660
1550
• 3,540
26,326
9,085
58,355 '
108,396
103.850
387,445
K.I 60
26,440
12586
22,230
3.430
754 ,875
TOTAL
POTENTIALLY
HAZARDOUS*
1
1
TOTAL
HAZARDOUS
CONSTITUENTS
i
1
DISPOSAL
METHOD
OPEN DUMP
AND
LANDFILL
1
CONSTITUENT*
Cd
0.13
001
0.04
0.01
-0
~0
~o
~0
0.14
o.os
0,03
0,01
0.02
~0
0,01
~0
0,24 •
0.02
0.01
—o
0.03
0.08
0.01
0.22
~0
~0
0.1B
~o
~0
_0
0.03
DM
0.02
~0
0.01
~0
0.01
o.o*
~0
0.11
0.22
0.20
0.77
0.04
6.06
0,03
0.06
~o
1.6
Cu
S.8S
0.39
2.S6
0.83
0.2J
0,04
0.12
0.11
10,44
8.49
2.41
0,46
1 74
0.14
0.4S
03ft
18,27
1,23
0.71
0,18
i n
S.SO
0.64
ie.3e
0.28
0.2B
13.81
0.19
0.15
0.02
2.51
3.42
1.24
0.07
1.01
023
0.52
386
088
7,81
1566
15.16
56.65
3.84
3.74
US
3.25
Oil
1094
Cr
3,23
0.13
044
0,21
0.09
0.0!
0.04
0,03
3.42
2.12
0,79
0.15
0.58
fl.W
0.15
0.12
5.97
0.40
0.23
0,06
069
1.79
OJ2
1,35
8.09
0.09
4.52
0.07
0.04
0-01
0.62
1.12
0.40
0.02
'0.33
008
0.17
1JS
8.30
2,48
8.19
4.95
18.53
1JB
1.23
0.62
1,07
0.17
16.6
Mi
54,17
0£7
14J8
3 .41
145
0 11
0.49
0.48
53.78
38.13
13,13
1.37
0.84
O.B2
257
2.08
101.01
i,4i
2.81
0.60
1186
21 -54
3.82
8i.Se
1.3S
0,88
73.25
1.06
0.86
0.04
13.42
18.36
8-81
0.36
5,59
0.75
J.74
IB.iS
4.95
41,40
84.28
82.67
300.85
20.23 •
11.08
10.30
16.55
1,84
sao.5
Ni
0.33
NA
0.09
0,62
0.01
NA
~0
~0
0.32 •
022
0,01
~0
0.07
~o
0.01
0.01
O.C3
3.04
0.01
rtfl
O.OS
0,18
0.02
OJ51
0.01
~fl
0,44
0,01
0.01
NA
o.oa
0.11
QJJ4
~o
0.03
-0
0.01
0.11
0,03
OJS
050
051
1.84
o.w
OM
0.07
009
~o
3.5
ft
9.06
DJ3
2.61
ata
OJ4
0.03
0.11
0.10
9.50
iJ3
220
0.41
1J9
0.12
0.43
D.34
1i.74
1.12
0.64
0.14
1.94
5.03
O.SS
14.91
0.25
0.24
12.61
0.18
0.14
0.01
2,26
3.12
1.13
0,06
0.82
0.20
0.48
34*
0.81
tm
1447
ma
il.69
349
340
1.71
2J4
044
99-6
Z.
27 -86
O.H
7J2
i.n
0.74
0.07
(UK
OJS
M.1T
18.18
6.78
OJS
5.04
0,30
1J3
1.06
52.02
3.36
1.66
0.34
6.08
11.32
1J6
44.ee
0.72
0-54
38.10
0.54
0.44
0.03
6,91
(.52
3-51
0.19
2,88
0.45
1,43
10.05
233
SI 40
43JO
42,80
1S644
10.54
9.6J
S.31
847
1.00
301 J
•FOUNDRY SLUDGE NOT CONSIDERED HAZARDOUS
ON HASISOF CALSPAN SOLUBILITY TESTS
DESCRIBED IN APPENDIX B.
SOURCE; CALSPANCORPORATION
84
-------
Table 14f
ESTIMATED STATE, REGIONAL, AND NATIONAL SOLID WASTE
FROM IRON AND STEEL FOUNDRIES
TOTAL SLUDGE, 1983 (METRIC TONS)
STATE
ALABAMA
ARIZONA
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
DELAWARE
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
TOTAL
DISPOSED
13,480
3,200
24,190
SJ20
2,160
TOTAL
POTENTIALLY
HAZARDOUS*
340 i
1,0tfl
860
ILLINOIS i 87JSQ
INDIANA 54.730
IOWA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MARYLAND1"
• MASSACHUSETTS •
MICHIGAN
; MINNESOTA,
MISSOURI
NEBRASKA
NEW JERSEY
NEW YORK
N.CAROLINA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
S. CAROLINA
5, DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
W.VIRGINIA
WISCONSIN
• EPARSSION
I
20,310
3,820
14,720 ]
1,160
, 4,020
3,135
154.360
10^90
S,§30
UK
17,860
48,210
. 5,380
\ 137,800
2.320
2,320 i
118,400
1,640
1,285
140
21,130
28,760
10,430
54S
g.450
1J10
4,360
32,440
7JOO
n 1 84,070
m
IS
¥
m
m
•em
IX
x
NATIONAL TOTAL
133,870 ,
127J85
477,460
32.240
31JS6
15,090
27,390
4,230
931,650
>
TOTAL
HAZARDOUS
CONSTITUENTS
.
)
DISPOSAL
METHOD
OPEN
AND
LAND
)
1
'
DUMP
FILL
• CONSTITUSMTS
Cd
0.16
8.01 •
OJH
0-01
-0
~0
^0
-0
Cu
12.19
0,4*
3.S3
O.TS
0.33
Ci
338
0.18
1.16
OJ6
0.11
g 0.05 | 0.01
0.15
0.14
0.18 12J7
0.11 8.00
9.04 2.97 ,
0.01
0.03
0.67
2.14
-0 0.18
0,01
^-0
0.30
0.03
0,01
0.5S
0.45
22.82
1.51
0,05
O.CM
hto Ml
eti.76
1.20
18.46
' 4.24
1.7B
." 0.14
041
NA
0,11
0.03
Pb
11,1*
041
0.71
0.01 0,30
NA
O.«0 ~0
O.BJ ~O. , •
4.21 66,26 9.49
2.62 "43,29 0,27
" 0.87 16,18 0.10
0,19 1.69 ~0
0.70 12.13 0.08
0.05 0.64
0.19 3.16
0.19
7.SS
0.4S
0.67 0.28
~0 0.19
0.04 2.80
0.10 • 6.77
0.01
0-27
0.79
20.18
--•0 0.34
^0" , 0.34
,0.23 ' 17.02
-0 . 0.23
~0 0.19
~0
0.04
0.03
am
8.05 4.21
8.03 1.S3
~« 0.08
0.01 1.24
~o
0.01
0,07
"0
0-29
0.64
4.76
109
0.14 i 9,38
0,27
OJS
0.8G
1955 .
18.69
68,81
0.05 i , 4.73
a.07
D.04
0-07
"0
1.9
4*1
2,33
4.01
0.03
138.6
~o
0.01
2.9« 0.01
124.48 O.Tt
735 D.OC-
.
3,68 001
0.07 0.74 —0
0,85 14.61 0,10
2.21 36.41 0.22
0.27
. 6.60
. 0.11
0.11
4.48 0.03
105,44 0.63
166
1.0S
S.S7 90.27
0.08 ' 1.31
O.OS ' 1,06
0.01
'B
om
0.01
0.01
0.01 006 NA
101 . 1653 0.10
1,38 22.63 0.14
0.49 840 COS
0X13 0,45
0.41 648
0.10 0.93
"0
0,04
! ~0 .
0.20 3.38 0.01
1J*
23.35
0.14
037 8.11 004
3,05 81.02 0.31
6.33 103J3
0.61
811 102.13 0.63
22,63 370.7»
1*4 24 M3
1J1
0.76
1J2
0.20
44J
22.29
12.88
18.66 <
2.02
1M
0.15
0.11
0.08
0.11
~fl
71S.4 43
0.04
0,14
0.1Z
Zn
34 M
OM
2.18
0,81
0.08
OJ4
BJ1
11.71 34.72
7J1 2241
2,71 5.38
: OJO 1.06
1-9B 622
015
O.S3
042
20.84
1.38
0.79
0.11
2.3S
8.19
0.72
1837
OJ7
1.64
tjl
64.10-
< 4.14
2.04
042 |
7.50 i
18.88
2.2*
6S.04
0.31 OJt
0.30
15.84
0.22
0,18
0.01
2,82
3.64
1.3S
0,07
1.13
OJft
0.69
4.31,
1.01
8.67
0,67
46:98
0.67
0.55
. 0,94
6.59
11.74
4.32
0-23
3.54
0.56
1,78
12,39
3.12
26.37
17J3 I 63.97
17.11 S2.7S
63.71 1 162^0
'" 4.31
4.18
2,11
3-63
O.H
122.9
12J9
11*7
8£4
1044
1J3
372.1
•FOUNBRV SlUOOi NOT CONSIDER EC HAZARDOUS
ON BASIS OF CALSPAN SOLUBILITY TESTS
DescniiEC m APPENDIX a.
SOURCE'. CALSPAN CORPORATION
85
-------
Table 14g
ESTIMATED STATE, REGIONALrAND NATIONAL SOLID WASTE
FROM IRON AND STEEL FOUNDRIES
TOTAL DUST, 1974 (METRIC TONS)
STATE
ALABAMA
ARIZONA
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
DELAWARE
FLORIDA
QEORGIA
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
IOWA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSOURI
NEBRASKA
NEW JERSEY
NEW YORK
N. CAROLINA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
S. CAROLINA
S. DAKOTA
TENNESSEI
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
•V VIRGINIA
WISCONSIN
EPA REGION
I
n
m
EZ
i
m
m
'tfyi
IK
I s-
NATIONAL TOTAL
TOTAL
DISWSIO
«M«J
11JW
4J.JOO
MM
3im
1.300
2,900
2,100
188,800
89,490
32.600
13,150
21,550
1JOO
I.7M
4,556
2 34. KM
17,750
15. MM
3.600
27000
71,100
7,800
242.300
4JOO
7500
198,700
2,350
1JOO
550
35,650
47.BO
18450
no
13,150
6,100
7,700
64.000
10.860
194.100
227,560
205.400
B08JJOO
55,750
64.660
26,450
•UM
I3,»oo
1.588,400
TOTAL
POTENTIALLY
HAZARDOUS'
1
3
TOTAL
HAZARDOUS
CONSTITUENTS'
1
'
DKTOtAL
METHOD
WIN
DUMP AND
LANDFILL
S
1
f
CONSTITUENTS
Cd
01]
0.01
O.OB
0.01
,.a
-0
.0
-0
0.17
0.09
0,03
0.02
0.02
0.01
041
~0
0.22
0,03
0,02
0.01
0.13
0,08
0.01
0-26
0.01
0.01
0.21
~0
~0
~0
0.04
0,06
0.02
~0
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.07
~o
a. 11
0,24
-------
Table 14h
ESTIMATED STATE, REGIONAL, AND NATIONAL SOLID WASTE
FROM IRON AND STEEL FOUNDRIES
TOTAL DUST, 1977 (METRIC TONS)
STATE
ALABAMA
ARIZONA
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
DELAWARE
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
IOWA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSOURI
NEBRASKA
NEW JERSEY
NEW YORK
N. CAROLINA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
' S. CAROLINA
S. DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
W. VIRGINIA
WISCONSIN
EPA REGION
1
n
m
m
¥ -
SI.
an
ran
rx
X
NATIONAL TOTAL
TOTAL
DISPOSED
147,500
13,200
47,900
MM
3,600
1,450
3,200
2.300
175,800
99,950
3S.30C
14,56-0
23,850
3,690
7,400
TOTAL
POT1NTIALLY
HAZARDOUS*
0
5,000 j
259,350
19,650
166OO
4,000
29,900
asjQo
8,750
268,«W
5,300
8,300
IM.IM
.2,iOO
2,100
600
SMOG
52,700
1B.2DO
' 100
13,650
6,750
8 BOO
7CJOO
12,100
115,150
261,700
2T7.200
882 400
61,650
71,400
28, ISO
81,100
15,000
1,/3£,I60
\
TOTAL
HAZARDOUS
CONSTITUENTS"
0
DISPOSAL
METHOD
LANDFILL
OR
OPEN DUMP
CONSTITUENTS
Cd
0.14
0.02
0.0*
0.01
— 9
~0
~0
~0
0.18
0.19
0413
' Cu
14.98
3,00
5.91
094
0-79
0.03
0.62
0,40
22.19
10.50
3.75
0.02 ! 3.18
0,02 ! 1.98
0,01
Cr
e-M
Ml
3,18
0,«3
8-22
0.15
0.31
0.23
1324
e.M
248
1.50
147
0.72 0,35
0,01 : 0,82 0.51
—0
8.24
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.03
0,09
0.01
OJI
001
5.D1
OJ3
-~«
~fl
0/0
0,04
0,08
0.02
-0
0.01
0.01
041
0.08
-0
0.1]
9,41
2JJ4
230
3.00
a?7
2*7
. 8J8
0.72
32J5
OJO
1.75
25.31
031
9.17
0.14
4,41
§.72
1.79
0,08
1,37
1*2
ISO
10.10
OJB
13-04
021 28.66
0.22 ZU«
0.92 100.78
0.08 j 12i
0.09
0.03
0.08
002
1*
10.70
2J8
8 .80
1.17
mj
0.31
16 ec
1.43
1.E4
oJa
i*
6.98
O.S4
18.76
0,44
0*4
is Ma
0.13
0.13
0,07
M1
368
I.Z2
0.06
0.10
0.69
0.83
E.70
0.75
T9C
i7ai
1E1J
C3£6
449
S.91
1J1
4M
1S3
123,3
Mn
193,00
17.19
7522
12.19
1,82
4.IW
7,7«
E02
281 .«a
134.92
48,28
11.27
25,55
8.13
10. 4S
5.42
301.87
28-30
37,51
8.67
34.63
12026
Bi42
413.38
10.00
11.78
321,14
2.79
133
Nl
4JB
1.11
2.02
Ml
9.08
O.U
0.22
0.14
7.82
330
1*
l.1i
OJI
OJ2T
028
0.13
7^S
».77
1.08
0.28
049
3.14
022
11.08
. OJM
O.M
an
0.07
003
1-75 9M
S7J&
73.38
23.13
a«5
' 17.77
17,«4
13,08
127.62
1240
154.09
368.70
300.07
I2S8.S7
82.31
1M.7B
ITJ7
11138
39.42
2641.3
1-60
1.81
' OM
0.01
0.44
OJ2
0.3S
1S4
OJI
39e
».M
7.18
33 -3d
2.4*
37B
0-96
113
I.It
•7.1
n>
13.10
am-
B06
0,81
fll?
OJ>
OBJ
0.33
10.96
8.14.
1J3
26C
1.76
OJO
O.JI
OM
20,63
1.81
S48
0,14
2.37
6 13
0-84
27,85
0.66
144
'21.B2
019
0.1S
' 0,11
. 3«
4J7
1 E7
0.17
1J1
1.17
Ofte
SS4
OJn
1959
24 jg
M JS '
87.09
«J3
9.00
131
M1
2. 81
171*
Zn
71.60
2.08
7 .OS
1.J7
O.bl
033
0-60
0.35
28,04
I4J1
5.31
2.18
3,44,
O.M
1-08
O.T3.
37«
tss
2.65
O.S2
4.14
1J.64
1.21
39,48
o,eo
1.29
3X30
o,n
OK
0.10
1,12
771
266
0.13
2.11
0.96
\M
10 E7
1.78 '
16.88
IBM
mas
130 M '
1.97
1077
4.12
9.17
234
2S4.8
•IRON AND ITU1 fOUWiSV-QUStl NOT COSSlOfftB HA.IAROOU3 S*SED
ON sotueiLirr TESTS sfCAixftai AND DIKRIBEO IN AWENDIX B
SOURCI: CALSPAN CORPORATION
87
-------
Table 14i
ESTIMATED STATE, REGIONAL, AND NATIONAL SOLID WASTE
FROM IRON AND STEEL FOUNDRIES
TOTAL DUST, 1i83 (METRIC TONS)
STATl
ALABAMA
ARIZONA ,
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
DELAWARE
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
IOWA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICNIQAN
MINNESOTA
MISSOl'fl,
NEBRASKA
NEW JERSEY
NEW YORK
H CAROLINA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OBIOON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
S. CAROLINA
S. DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VE RMONT
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
W. VIRGINIA
WISCONSIN
EPA REGION
1
n
m
T* .
v .
m
•SB
TPm
n
X
NATIONAL TOTAL
TOTAL
DISPOSED
tnjoo
41300
19,000
11,500
4,400
1JOO
3,860
2,»50
21B.SOO
12tJOO
44,700
17 JOB
28,400
ȣ00
9,100
6.200
318600
24,500
20,450
a .900
36JJOO
105.100
10^00
330J50
. 6,550
10,200
270,800
3,200
2,600
750
48,600
64.*50
22.400
1,090
17,800
8,300
10,500
87.250
14,800
141JOO
310,110
278.BSO
i.ow.ew
76.000
88,000
34,700
75,300
16560
2,139,100
TOTAL
POTENTIALLY
HAZARDOUS*
1
'
TOTAL
HAZARDOUS
CONWTUINTS"
1
"
DISPOSAL
METHOD
LAND
OB
OPEN
!
FILL
OU«P
CONSTITUENTS
Cd
018
0,03
0,07
8.01
•vO
.0
.0
~C
01]
0.12
0,04
0.01
0.23
0,01
0.01
~0
0,30
0,03
0.03
0,01
0,04
0.11
0.01
0,35
031
0.01
0.29
~0
~0
~0
0.04
0-07
0.03
~0
0.01
001
0.01
DID
~B
848
0.33
0-2?
1.1J
0.10
0.11
0.04
0.10
0.03
2.3
Cu
11.41
3.8B
7,21
1.16
0.36
0.04
0 76
0.49
27,34
12.85
4.63
3,9fl
2.41
OJ9
1.01
0.50
38. M
3BJ
371
0.95
326
11. M
CBS
39-89
0.98
2,17
31, If
0.26
D.20
0,16
E.49
7.05
J.Z1
0,10
1.»
1,14
1.27
12*4
1J1
14^4
U,1«
IS.7D
124,20
8.91
11.11
354
10.97
3.91
244.7
Of
1JJ1
1J4
iM
0,71
Nto
237.84
46.80
92.70
19.02
0-27 4.70
0.19 6.00
0.38 »67
027 6. 18
16.32 M7.37
842 1U.77
3.0S 51.51
186 i«ac
1.S1 • 31 .S3
0,44 11.00
OM 12,88
Ni
6.08
136
141
0.38
e,ii
0,16
027
0.11
sja
431
1AI
143
0.75
O.J3
0.34
0.38 &S8 0.1B
20,46 371,77 f.18
1.76 36.11 OJS
1,89 «6-2S !,J4
0.48 ",»1 O.J4
2.34 • 42.61
7.39 148.20
0.87 11.81
24. 36 60943
0.55 12,32
1.04
19.48
0.20
0.16
D.OB
346
4.S4
1.50
0.07
0.12
0.85
Q.?3
7.02
093
973
2131
1».9J
78-13
SB2
7J6
233
8.13
IBS
I5J.4'
2C.I4
10S
3*7
OJ7
13,13
0.34
0.79
JM.47 10.H
3.43 0.08
2.75 0.07
2.15 0.07
70. 36 1£3
H.44 2.36
M.50 D.7J
1.17 0.53
21.90 0,56
21.74 0.64
18.12 o.u
157.15 «J6
15.88 048
190.98 4J2
4S4.»
3»fl.8
-------
Table Uj
ESTIMATED STATE, REGIONAL, AND NATIONAL SOLID WASTE
FROM IRON AND STEEL FOUNDARIES
TOTAL SAND, 1974 (METRIC TONS)
STATE
ALABAMA
ARIZONA
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
DELAWARE
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
IOWA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSOURI
NEBRASKA
NEW JERSEY
NEW YORK
N. CAROLINA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
t. CAROLINA
S. DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
W, VIRGINIA
WISCONSIN
EPA REGION
I
n
m
JZ
"X
H
•arc
VITT
ffi
x
NATIONAL TOTAL
TOTAL
DISPOSED
1,131,900
60JOO
133.000
71. BOO
29,700
6J500
1S.SOO
12.900
1.211,400
744,500
276.000
59^00
• 197,100
17.100
54,600
41,800
2,086,900
141,100
86,100
19,100
240,700
63 1.200
72,500
1,892.000
32,700
35,000
1,592,700
21.600
17,200
2,400
286.201)
331. too
141,100
7,400
114.100
23,900
60 300
452,300
100,500
•71,000
1,827,700
1,735,300
6,528,200
442,200
440,400
215,100
3S2.20C
63300
12,687,400
TOTAL
POTENTIALLY
HAZARDOUS*
0
TOTAL ] DISPOSAL
HAZARDOUS j METHOD
CONSTITUENTS
0
ALL OPEN
DUMP
OR
LANDFILL
f
I
CONSTITUENT* . .
Cu
9.38
0.42
2.7S •
C.S»
0.2S
O.IK
0.13
0,11
10.W-
6.17
3.23
0,49
I.BJ
014
0.45'
Q.35
!>.29
1.17
0.71
0-16
1*3
5.23
CM
1568
0.27
C-29
13.20
O.is
Ct
IJ9
OJ4
1£S
0.14
0.14
0.03
B-07
' BO*
S.77
3M
1J1
028
0*1
0.08
O.J5
«.20
»,S3
0«7
0,41
Q.D9
1 15
3.00
0.35
900
0.16
0.1 J
758
0.10
0.14 1 o.oa
0,02 j 0.01
2.38
1,25
»,17
1.17
!.»7
o.»?
006 ! O.M
Q.85
0.24
a. so
3.78
OS5
014
0-2S
2. IB
O.M 0.48
722
15. IS
4.W
6.71
14.38 1 8-M
64.10 : Jt.Oi
3.66
3M
17i
3.11
0.53
104.40
211
1.09
102
1.82
1 Ml
60.00
Mn
MJO
2.66
17.SJ
3.79
1.67
OW
as:
0.68
£4.10
J».40
14.81
3.13
10.43
Q£1
2.83
tai
110.40
7,47
156
1.01
12.74
33,40
384
100.10
1.73
1,85
M.28
1.14
0.91
0,12
I5.2S
30.77
747
0.38
6.07
1.63
3.19
23. M
6,31
' 46,14
«e.7j
91,83
39441
21.11
23.31
1118
10,23
338
661 10
Nl
31.7S
1J1
BJ1
2.01
O.B3
0.1S
0-44
0.3*
33.35
20.55
7.34
IS*
S.53
o.is
U3
1.17,
S8.54
3.M
242
• fl£4
• MS
17.70
2,03
B3J>7
0,92
0-M
44.68
0.81
0.48
0.07
S.09
10.01
3M
021
3J2
OJ1
1.6S
iz.ra
2.82
HAl
iiJ7
48.38
181.12
11A1
12JS
«,04
10.72
».7»
3E270
r »
mm
i.m
1J.J8
SM
V69
.0.29 '
333
ara
64,19
3835
14.7S
3.12
1Q.SS
0.83
2.93
2^4
111J5
7J8
4.81
1.03
12.M
13.81
3.98
101.30
1.75
1.88
. (9.32
1,16
0.92
0.13
15.14
21.02
7 SB
040
S.14
1JES
323
24.23
5.39
M.70
97.91
M.W
MI.W
23.89
23.60
11.53
20.47
343
675.30
in
8,71
0.30
1.97
0.43,
0.18
0.03
9.09
D.OS
7JO
4.42
1.64
OS
1.17
0,10
0.12
»2S
12.40
tJU
(.1*
10.B8
10.31
J8.79
2.62
' 2.6'
1.2*
sir
0.38
74.90
PHENOL
1J1
006
OJS
o.oe
OO3
0.01
0,02
O.«l .
IS)
OJO
0^0 '
006
OJ1
0X12
OM
0.04
2J4
0,15
0.09
0,02
C3t)
0,57
0.08
2,02
0.04
104
1,70
0.02
o.az
0
OJ1
0,42
0.15
0.01
0.12
0.03
0,06
948
9,10
0,93
1.9B-
•\se
aas
048
047
02
040
0.07
13-60
"FOUNDRY SANDS NOT CONSIDERED HA28RDOUS
ON BASES OF CALSPAN SOLUBILITY TESTS
DJFSCHIBEO IK APPiNDIX &
SCU8CS: CALSPAN CORPORATION
89
-------
Table 14k
ESTIMATED STATE, REGIONAL, AND NATIONAL SOLID WASTE
FROM IRON AND STEEL FOUNDRIES
TOTAL SAND, 1977 (METRIC TONS)
STATS
ALABAMA
ARIZONA
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
DELAWARE
TOTAL
DISPOSED
1J51.800
$$,120
167,200
78,200
32,400
8,100
FLORID* 17,100
GEORGIA 19,300
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
IOWA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSOURI
NEBRASKA
NEW JERSEY
. NEWYQHK
N, CAROLINA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
S CAROLINA
S DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TiXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
W. VIRGINIA
WISCONSIN
EPA REGION
I
a
m
nr
V
TD
-------
Table 141
ESTIMATED STATE, REGIONAL, AND NATIONAL SOLID WASTE
FROM IRON AND STEEL FOUNDRIES
TOTAL SAND, 1983 (METR 1C TONS)
STATE
ALABAMA
ARIZONA
CALIFORNIA
TOTAL
h DISPOSED
1£4!JOO
H.400
452,500
COLORADO j »7.MO
TOTAL
POTENTIALLY
HAZARDOUS4
CONNECTICUT | 40,400
&ELAWAR£
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
7,500
21,100
17,600
1,661;100 j
1,018,800
IOWA 176,200
KANSAS 80.700
KENTUCKY 288,600
LOUISIANA ; 23,300
MARYLAND 74,400
MASSACHUSETTS 57.000 ,
MICHiOAN ' JJ44.400 !
MINNESOTA . 112,300 j
MISSOURI ; 117,400 f
NEBRASKA I 26,000
NEW JERSEY 328,100 '
NEW YORK 860,300
N.CAROLINA ' ' WJOO
OHIO I 1.578,800 j
OKLAHOMA j 44,e0Q |
OREGON , , 47,700
PENNSYLVANIA 2,170,600
RHODE ISLAND Z«,400
S, CAROLINA 23,400
S. DAKOTA 3,270
TENNESSEE 392,000
TEXAS 534,800
UTAH 192,300
VERMONT 10,100
1 VIRGINIA 156,300
' WASHINGTON
W, VIRGINIA
WISCONSIN
EPA REGION
I
D
nr
m
V
m
•HB
'tffllj
a.
y.
NATIONAL TOTAL
39,400
82.200
616,500
117.00D
i,iaa,4oo
2,091,100
2096500
8,897,900
602.700
600,300
293,170
520,900
87,100
16,915,070 1
3
TOTAL
, HAZARDOUS1
CONST TUENTS
!
5
DISPOSAL
METHOD
LANDFILL
OR
DPiN DUMP
j ,
I
I
CONSTITUENTS
Cu Ci
12.78
! 0,57
1.7S
J.3S
OJ3
2 15
Mn
ei.w
a.<3
13M
O.W ! 0.46 6 17
0.34 0.19 2,14
0.07
0.13
. 0.15
13.61
«.4V
, O.M 040
0.10 l.<5
am 0.83
. 7*8 »7J7
*m SMI
3,04 1,79
0 67 . 0,38
1M1
4J7
2.22 1.28 1432
, 0.19 0.11
0.61 0.35
', • 0.48 037
' 33,5? 'U,i9 .
1,24
3M
Ni-
41.28
1.92
11.it-
8,74
1.1»
OJO
OKI
O.t9
4S.31
2B.4B-
, 10.55
i.29
7,54
0,65
2.09
3.01 I 1,59
159-4* | 71,78
159 OS' 10.18 > 540
038 USB 6-22 ' 3,30
O.ZJ O.U 148 0.74
2.71 137
17.36 S-20 •
7 13 j 4,10 45,52 24,13
06! U.48 5.23 ' 2.77
2t.37 i 12.27 11M4 M.13
0.37 j 0.22 2.1» • 1J5
n>
B2W
367
24 J3
5-23
2.17
0,40
1,11
OM
M.4f
C3.M
2X),1«
4.32
14,18
125
im
3.05
1S2-38.
10JO
8.28 '
140
17*7
4608
5.29
1M.07
2.39
In
• »,17
941
2,t»
tM
t3t
D,CM
0.12
. 0,11
9,81
BK
2.24
0.4i
1.19
0.1»
o,u
0.34
16.90
1.14
H 0.70
D.15
195
5.11
PrIENOL
l.ffi
B.CI7
ISM
8,11
O.M
o.ai
' 003
0,01
1.77
1,09
0.41
0,08
0.2S
0.03
0.08
B-05
JJB
D-20
0,12
0,03
0.35
0*1
058 j D.11
15,32
0,28
Z.75
0.05
• 0.40 0.23 2,52 ' 1.J4 1 2.56 ) O.M \ 0.05
i, 17.99 1 1033 114.87 60.90 ) 118,29
12.11 i 2.32
0.25 , Q.1« 1.6!. 083 1.H 0,18 ! 0,09
0.1.
0.03
0.11 1.24
0,01 0.16
9.26 1.83 20. J9
4.43 3,55 28.31
1.59 0.91 10.18
0,08 0.95 0,51
1.29
0.33
068
S.11
1.14
B.S4
20.6S
19.60
0.75 6.27
0.19 2,09
0,65 1.25
0.10 • • 0,18 •
1103 21.04
13 6J KM
5,40 10.3S
O.M 0.58
4.39 ' £31
1-10 2.11
0.40 335 2.30
2,91 32.83 17.30
0.65 7-2« UK
9.H | 62 89 ] 33,31
IW7
11.26
73.14 12,33
139 2.86
4.39 2,85
1.43 1.39
437 2M
3.?2 ; 0.4J
142.3 11.8
U1J3 ' B9J8
125. K ' 86.35
470.W 249.59
31.S1 15.55
31.77 1B.85
1551 8.23
J7.i7 14.61
4.61 , 2.44
«BJ
480.7
4.40
33,03
715
83.65
13346
126.89
478 m
23 .20
32.17
15.71
27,90
4M
sao.4
: 0,14
O.OI
2,13
3.17
1.14
0,05
0.83
0.23
049
aj?
OJ2
7JU
14.80
14.06
5Z.B7
M7
336
\.7»
3.09
0.52
103,1
0.03
0
OM
' 0,57
0.20
0,01 •
0,14 i
0.04
008
085 j
0.14
1J7
2.M
! 224
•33
0.6S
0.84
0.31
OSS
0.10
184
•FOUNDRY SANDS NOT CONSIDERED HAZARDOUS
ON BASIS Of CALSPAN SOLU111ITV Tf STJ
DESCRIBED IN APPENDIX 8
; CALSPAW CORPORATION
91
-------
Table 14m
ESTIMATED STATE, REGIONAL, AND NATIONAL SOLID WASTE
FROM IRON AND STEEL FOUNDRIES
REFRACTORIES, 1974 (METRIC TONS)
STATE
ALABAMA
ARIZONA
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
DELAWARE
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
IOWA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSOURI
NEBRASKA •
NEW JERSEY
NEW YORK
N. CAROLINA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
S. CAROLINA
S, DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
H. VIROINIA
WISCONSIN
EPA REGION
I
n
in
m
V
m
OT
1011
a.
X
NATIONAL TOTAL
TOTAL
DISPOSED
2SJ20
3,410
B38C
1JSO
67C
370
7BO
640
36.91C
1 9,870
7J40
3.69C
4,620
890
1.500
960
49.950
4, MO
3.920
970
5,760
1J.Z8Q
1,660
55.68C
t,1H>
2,070
45.0SO.
480
390
160
8,060
10,640
3,590
1JO
2,840
1 690
1,770
15.430
2,290
23,040
El, 520
•15.260
181, MO
ij.700
15,826
S.600
13J90
3,780
• 356^70
TOTAL
POTENTIALLY
HAZARDOUS
!
I
DISPOSAL
METHOD
ALL
DISPOSED
at IN
OPEN DUMP
OR
LANDFILLS
1
i
SOURCE: CALSPANCORPORATION
92
-------
Table 14n
ESTIMATED STATE, REGIONAL, AND NATIONAL SOLID WASTE
FROM IRON AND STEEL FOUNDRIES
REFRACTORIES, 1977 (METRIC TONS)
STATS
ALABAMA
ARIZONA
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONN ECU CUT
DELAWARE
FLORIDA
GEORGIA
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
< IOWA
KANSAS
K.INTUCK.V
LOUISIANA
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSOURI
NEBRASKA
Nl* JERSEY
NEW YORK
N. CAROLINA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
S. CAROLINA
S. DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRQ1NIA
WASHINGTON
W VIRGINIA
WISCONSIN
EPA REGION
I
m.
m
m
¥
EL
m
ffifl]!
a.
s.
NATIONAL TO7»l
, TOTAL
DISPOSED
32,428
3.771
11,038
2,0*8
741
409
BO
,W7
40,822
21,871
8,007
4,081
4,999
§84
1,669
1,062
58,2*5
4,468
4,336
1,073
6J71
18,112
1J38
81X2
1,294
3,216
49 #25 •
542
431
177
6903
11,768
3,971,-
188
3,141
1,869
use
11, Me
2*13
29,482
56,992 '
50,058
201,159
14,046 ,
17,497
«,194
14409
4,189
392,928
TOTAL
POTENTIALLY
HAZARDOUS
C
DISPOSAL
METHOD
ALL
DISPOSED
OF IN
CfiH DUMP
OR
LANDFILL
(
SOURCE: CALSPAKI CORPORATION
93
-------
Table 14o
ESTIMATED STATE, REGIONAL, AND NATIONAL SOLID WASTE
FROM IRON AND STEEL FOUNDRIES
REFRACTORIES, 1983 (METRIC TONS)
STATE
ALABAMA
ARIZONA
CALIFORNIA
COLORADO
CONNECTICUT
DELAWARE
FLORIDA
GEORGIA "•
ILLINOIS
INDIANA
IOWA
KANSAS
KENTUCKY
LOUISIANA
MARYLAND
MASSACHUSETTS
MICHIGAN
MINNESOTA
MISSOURI
NEBRASKA
NEWJfRSEY
NEW YORK
N, CAROLINA
OHIO
OKLAHOMA
OREGON
PENNSYLVANIA
RHODE ISLAND
S. CAROLINA
& DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
UTAH
VERMONT
VIRGINIA
WASHINGTON
W, VIRGINIA
WISCONSIN
EPA REGION
I
0
in
iff
V
SI
sn
HiO
n
X
NATIONAL TOTAL
TOTAL
DISPOSED
3S#i3
4,646
13,603
2J22
913
S04
1,063
' 736
SO JOE
17.083
TOTAL
POTENTIALLY
HAZARDOUS
g
ijtu
5,029
6.161
1,213
2, CMS
1,308
61,082
i.SOf °
5,343
1,322
7,151
23,653
2,263
75.892
1,595 |
2,821 1
61,403
M8
532 j
211 |
10,972
«,592
4,693
232
3,871
:,ao3
2,413
21,031
3,121 •
31,403
7IU35
61.669
247.S02
17,310
21.563
7,633
11,251
S.I25
484,233
,
DISPOSAL
METHOD
ALL
DISPOSED
OF IN
OPEN DUMP
OR
LANDFILL
l
•
SOUACE: CALSPAN CORPORATION
94
-------
emissions collected by dry control systems. The amounts of individual
constituents were calculated by multiplying the total waste figures by
the concentration values derived from laboratory analyses of waste
samples collected at several plants.
An alternative approach for compiling sludge and dusts values
for each state might be to multiply the waste generation factors given
in Table 12 by the production figures on a state-by-state basis. This
approach was not used since state production figures were not directly
available for each type of ferroalloy and the numbers of plants using
each type (wet/dry) of control system was not known, .
The waste slag quantities were calculated by multiplying the
slag generation factors obtained from plant visits (see.Table 12) by the
state production figures for each type of ferroalloy as estimated from •
the sludge and dust values obtained from in the ferroalloy survey and
from furnace emission data contained in Reference 7, The sums of the
sludge and dust values were divided by the furnace emission factors for
each ferroalloy category for each state to obtain-production estimates.
The state production estimates for each ferroalloy were then summed and
compared with published national figures. The individual state figures
were'then adjusted as appropriate so that the national figures agreed.
The slag constituent values for each state were obtained by multiplying
the total slag values for each alloy type by the concentration values
determined through the analyses of collected slag -samples, and summing
over all alloys.
2.3 . TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL TECHNOLOGY
2.3.1 Current Treatment and Disposal Practices.
Slag. Slag which originates from the metal smelting furnaces is open
dumped. This practice is considered environmentally adequate at this
time in the absence of significant leaching of toxic constituents as
ascertained in solubility tests as described in Appendix B.
Waste Sand. Waste sand from cores and 'molds may either be reclaimed
for making new molds or disposed of in open dumps. Open dumping is
considered environmentally acceptable at this time in the absence of
significant leaching of toxic constituents as ascertained in solubility
tests described in Appendix B.
CoreButts. Core butts containing non-degraded sands and binders are
also open dumped. Although solubility tests were not conducted on core
butts they are not considered potentially hazardous at this time.
Solubility testing on core butts is needed to confirm non-leachability.
95
-------
Sludges. Sludges -orrginating -from wet scrubbing of furnace emissions
is generally mixed with dry sands, dusts or other dry wastes and open
dumped along with these wastes. This practice is considered environ-
mentally adequate at this time in the absence of significant leaching of
toxic constituents as ascertained in solubility tests described in
Appendix B.
Dusts. Dusts originating from' sand reclaiming or control of emissions
from furnaces are open'dumped. -This practice is considered environmentally
acceptable at this time in the absence of significant leaching of toxic
constituents as ascertained in solubility tests described in Appendix B,
Refractories. The broken, or eroded -brick refractories from furnaces
are open dumped and are considered non-hazardous. Open dumping is
considered environmentally acceptable.
Floor Sweepings. Sweepings from the core making room are principally
sand and are not considered potentially hazardous at this time. Solu-
bility tests were 'not conducted on sweepings but are needed to confirm
designation as non-hazardous.
Since all of the wastes from iron and steel foundries are
considered non-hazardous at this time Levels I, II and III technology
need not be addressed at this time.'
2.4 COST ANALYSIS
Because none of the iron and steel foundry wastes have been
considered potentially hazardous based on -available evidence at this
time there- are no costs attributable to hazardous waste disposal.
96
-------
3.0 PRIMARY SMELTING AND REFINING OF FERROALLOYS (SIC 3313}
3.1 - INDUSTRY CHARACTERIZATION
Ferroalloy is the generic term for alloys consisting of .iron
and one or more' other metals. Ferroalloys are used in steel production
as alloying elements and deoxidants. •
.The major types of ferroalloys produced are-ferromanganese,
silicon manganese, ferrosilicon, ferrochronte and silvery iron. The 1972
production of the ferroalloys and percent of total ferroalloy production
for that year are as follows: (Reference 6)
Ferromanganese - 726,416 NTT 32%
Silicomanganese 139,014 . 6%
Ferrosilicon 763,305 ' • 33%
Ferrochrome 319;611 " 14%
Silvery Iron 147,940 6%
Other • 206,294 . 91
Total U.S. ferroalloy production in 1971 "and 1972 was 2,114,733
and 2,292,153 MT respectively. Production of the above alloys comprises
over 90% of the industry. Ferroalloys produced in minor quantities
(approximately 91 of total) are ferronickel, ferrophosphorus, ferrotitanium,
ferrocolumbian, ferrotungsten and ferromolybdenum.
U.S. producers of ferroalloys are listed in Table 15, Table
16 gives ferroalloy plants by process by state, EPA region and nationally.
There is insufficient information available to estimate state by state
and regional production capacities. Total value of U.S. ferroalloy
shipments in 1973 was $720,542,000 (Ref. 8).
3.2 WASTE CHARACTERIZATION ' "
This section contains descriptions of production technology at
ferroalloy plants and the resultant byproducts or wastes which-are
either recycled directly or disposed of on land. Estimates are given
for the quantities of wastes and potentially hazardous constituents
thereof which are disposed of on land either in lagoons or open dumps.
3.2.1 - Process Descriptions
Because of the common coproduction of ferromanganese and-
siliconianganese within the same plants and close similarities in pro-
duction technology these ferroalloys will be treated together. Production
of ferrosilicon, ferrochrome, and ferronickel will be dealth with separately.
Ferromanganese and Silicomanganese. The assumed plant has a
daily capacity of 236 metric tons (260 short tons} of ferromanganese and
74 metric tons (82 short tons) of Silicomanganese. Ferromanganese is
produced in two furnaces. The Silicomanganese is produced in a single
97
-------
TABLE 15. PRODUCERS OF FERROALLOYS IN THE UNITED STATES IN 1972
Producer
Plant location
Product '
df f
Airieo Chemical Co Pterce, Fla— FeP Electric.
CalvertCSty Ky 1 _ - _ _ „,
u~ *uoW*carbid. Ssffl;.*:?:::::::: f^'Si D,.
Niagara Fallj, N.Y j S|M°-
Alabama Metallurgical Corp Selma, Ala, .... F*SI - Do.
Bethlehem Steel Corp Johnstown, Pa .- FeMn Blast.
Chromium Mining & Smelling Co.. Woodstock, Tens FeMn, SiMn. FeCr, Electric.
FeSi, FeCrSi,
Climax Molybdenum Co Laogelotb, Pa FeMo. Alunlnotbermte.
Diamond Shamrock Corp Kinfwood. W, Va FeMn Electric,
FMC Corp.... Pocatello, Idaho FeP Da.
fCnnbrtdm,Ohio F«B, FeCb, FeTI, I
Graham, W. Va FeV, FeCr,
Foot* Mineral Co jKeokok, Iow» FeCrSi, FeSi, j Do.
Vaaeoram, Ohio silvery iron. i
I Wetsatehe*. Wash .. other.* j
Haana Furnace Corp ... Buffalo, N.V., , .. Silvery Iran Blast,
Haunt Nickel Smelting Co Riddle, Oreg,.: FcNi Electric.
Hooker Chemical Corp Columbia, Terra FeP Do.
loierlaka Steel Corp Havsrly, Ohio FeCr, FeCrSi, FeSi, Do.
Kaweckl Chemical Co Eaaton, Pa ' FeCb..". Alumtaothermli:.
Mobil Chemical Co Nichoto, Fla FeP Electric,
Molybdenum Corp, oj Am»rica Washin(toii, Pa FsMo, FeW, FeCb, Electric and
FeB. ahimiBOthermic.
M.«a>u chtmicai Co {s°^s^pju^::::}Fe[> »««=•
S L ladustriei, IDC Niagara Falls, N.Y FeTi, cthtr « Do.
New Jeraey Zinc Co Palmerton, Pa.. ... Spin . Do.
Phto" Ohio1"0 \ F«Cr, FeSi. FeB,
Ohio Ferro-Alloyi Corp pSUtu^oiuo FeMn.SiMn. Do.
Tacoma, Waah j »">".'
Rcadlw Alloy* Hobeaonla, Pa FeCb, FeV
Shieldilloy Corp_ Nuwfield, NJ FeV, FeTi, FeB, Do
FeCh, NiCb,
CrMo, other,*
Ta/poo Springs, Fla.... ]
Btaufler Chemical Co • Ml. Pleasant, Tenn 1 FeP i... Electric.
Silver Bow. Mont j
T.oa.-e.AIUx.Corp ^31^^.""::"} ™ »«•
Tennea««« Valley Authority Muscle Shoals, Ala FeP Do,
T«no-Te« Alloy Chemical Corp. ol Houston, Ten FeMn, SiMn Do,
KcuBton,
U.ionCarbidaCorp 1^^^^. I ^ R^^' D°'
U*S««ICorp M&SrPa-r.-.-.-.-.-.l ftMn B"""'
Wowlwaid Iron Co RortfJood' Ten J ) FeSi.PeMn.SlMn.. Eh* We.
1 CrMo, Chromium molybdenum; FeMn, lerromangBiisae; Spin, spiegeiebenr SiMn, siHe
f«*Si, ferrosilieon; FeP, fetfophosphorus; FeCr, ferrochrornium; FeMo, ferrdmotybdenum; FeN'i, ferroekkei;
FcTi, ferrotitarnum; F«W, ferrotungsteri; FeV, Eerrovanadliyra; FeB, f^rcoteorea; FeCb, lerr
NiCb, nickel eolu.mb'ium; Si, silicon medial.
i loclydea ALaifer, Siraaoal, tireoctium &Uoya, fenoaiHeoc boroa, aluaicuni silicon allay a, and z
Source: Minerals Yearbook, Volume I, U.S. Dept. of Interior, 1972
-------
. . •. TABLE 16
STATE, REGIONAL, AND NATIONAL DISTRIBUTION
OF FERROALLOY PLANTS BY PROCESS
Plant Distribution
State
Alabama
Florida
Idaho
Iowa
Kentucky
Montana,
New Jersey
New York
Ohio
Oregon
Pennsylvania
South Carolina
Tennessee
Texas
Washington
West Virginia
No. of
Plants
6
3
2
1
1
1
1
4
8
2
8*
1-
6
1
2
3
BF
0
• 0
0
0
0
0
0
1
, 0
0
3
0
0
'o
0
0
By Process
A
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
E
6
3
2
1
1
1
0
3
8
2
2
1
6
1
2
3
Plant Distribution
No..of _• ____;By Process
Plants BF A E
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Nation
0
5 •
11*
17
. 8
1
1
1
0
6
0
0 •
3
0
o,
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
5.
17
8
1
1
1
0
6
50
42
BF » Blast Furnace .
A = Aluminothermic
E * Electric Furnace
k
One plant enploys both aluminothermic and electric furnace processes
-------
furnace. Annual production is given as 81,100 metric tons (89,400 short
tons) -of ferromanganese and 25,400 metric -tons (28,000 short tons) of
silicomanganese on the basis of an 11.3 month operating year for each of
the three furnaces.
Raw materials 'for the production of standard ferromanganese (80%
Mn and 6.5% C, with the balance mostly iron) consist of manganese ore, coke,
mill scale and melted ferromanganese. The input materials are sized,
mixed together and introduced into the furnaces directly over the molten
bath. An overall flow sheet is shown in Figure 3. The furnaces are of
the open submerged-arc type having three vertical Soderberg-type electrodes
arranged in a triangle. The ends of the electrodes protrude 5 to 6 feet
below the molten bath material, A paste, consisting of., coke and pitch,
is fed into the electrode shells from the top. As the paste descends,
it is baked into a solid mass by the heat of the furnace.
The molten ferromanganese collects at the bottom of the furnace
and is tapped into ladles for transfer to a cooling area. Slag is decanted
from the top of the ladles, and the product 'is poured into a cooling bed
in layers, a process called layer casting. The solidified product is broken
into pieces and sized for sale. The ferromanganese slag is rich in manganese
and most of it is used as charge material for silicomanganese production.
The silicomanganese is also made in an open submerged-arc furnace
whose general operation is similar to' that of the ferromanganese furnaces.
The process flow diagram is shown in Figure 3, Input materials for silico-
manganese production consist of coal, coke, manganese ore, ferromanganese
slag, quartz, mill scale, dolomite, and reraelt. The molten silicomanganese
is tapped from the furnace into ladles, and the slag is decanted off. The
product is cast into layers prior to final sizing. The slag cannot be
recycled within the plant so most of it is sold to contractors for use as
road fill. Some is sent to an on-site disposal area.
The air emissions for all three furnaces are controlled by wet
scrubber systems. The emissions scrubwater from the ferromanganese furnaces
with solids amounting to 150.6 kg/MT of product is lime treated and clarified.
Ferrosilicon. There are three major types of ferrosilicdn
produced in the United States: 751 FeSi, 50% FeSi, and 16-22% FeSi, where
the percentages'indicate the amount of silicon in-the product. The 16-22%
FeSi type is commonly called silvery pig iron and accounts for about 20.
percent of the total ferrosilicon production.
}
Most of the ferrosilicon produced in the United States is made in
electric submerged-arc furnaces. An average furnace size might be about
15 megawatts with a daily capacity of 37 WT (41 tons) to 65 MT (72 tons),
depending on whether the furnace produces 75% FeSi or 50% FeSi. The energy
required for 75% FeSi production is about 75% greater than that required for
50% FeSi production. Specifically, the production of 75% FeSi requires
onlyS.S mw-hr per WT. Inp.ut materials for ferrosilicon production consist
of quartzite, scrap steel, coal, and coke.
100
-------
MANGANESE ORE
COKE
MILL SCALE
REMELTS
^-""**1 ' '
160.6 kg ^-"""^WCT EMISSIONS FERROMANGANESE
I
^^•w. SCRUBBc R ^c^ ji L. HJT*VI
^^%l^ |O/.* Kg /2l
L ' ^^^"•s.
/^LIME^X MANGANESE ORE
/ TREAT } COAL
I 8. J COKE
V MIX / QUARTZ — .
X___-/ MILt SCALE
'
(CLAR
i
1 AR<
DOLOMITE
f REMELTS
^X. s**^" '
lEle«l ^ ^^^ytfET _- EMI^IONS SILICI
.5
187.6 kg
/ DREDGED \
/ MATERIAL )
XOPENDUMP/
Fipire 3 FERROMANQANESE AND SILICOMANGANESE PRODUCTION
101
-------
Ferrgchrome Production. Ferrochrome is made in two grades, high
carbon (HC) and low carbon (LC), "Most of the-ferrochrome produced -in the
United States is of the high carbon type. Input materials consist of chromium
ore, quartzite, limestone, coal and coke. The electrical energy required
to produce (HC) ferrochrome averages about 4.6 megawatt-hours per metric ton
of product. Furnace emissions average 168 kg of particulates per metric
ton of product (335 Ib/ton) for either high or low carbon ferrochrome. 'An
average ferrochrome furnace might be rated at 20 megawatts. , Thus, the
average furnace would produce about 104 metric tons (US short tons) of
ferrochrome per day.
Ferronickel. There is only one ferronickel producing plant in
the United States located at Riddle, Oregon. Nickel ore is mined at the
top of a mountain and transported to the plant by tram cars.
The plant operates around-the-clock producing approximately 23,600
metric tons (26,000 short tons) of ferronickel (50% Fe, SOI Ni) annually.
Reduction of the nickel ore is accomplished by mixing the melted nickel ore
with ferrosilicon (48% silicon). The required ferrosilicon is produced in
the same plant at the rate of about 20,620 metric tons (22,730 short tons)
per year.
The sequence of operations for producing ferronickel consists of
ore mining and preparation, melting, reduction, and refining, A flow
diagram is presented in Figure 4. The mined ore is first dried and then
screened into three fractions. The coarser, low grade rock is diverted to
a reject ore pile for possible use in the future if an economical process"
for nickel extraction can.be developed. The ore fraction in the 5/16" to
3/4" range is crushed and temporarily stored. The-5/16" fraction is
further screened to remove the fines which are stored separately. The
coarser retained ore fractions are calcined and the fines are roasted.
The coarse and fine fractions are then transferred to hot ore bins from
which they are gravity fed to the furnaces. Ore melting is carried out in
four 20,000 KVA electric furnaces. The molten nickel ore is tapped into
ladles and vigorously mixed with ferrosilicon which acts as the reducing
agent. Mixing is accomplished by transferring the molten mixture back and
forth between two ladles. During the reduction process, a fraction of the
ferronickel is removed from the ladle at regular intervals and introduced
into two small electric furnaces for refining. Other input materials for
the refining operations are limestone, dolomite, fluorspar, iron ore, and
coarse concentrates from the skull plant.
The skull plant processes slag from the refining furnaces, metal
spills and residues from the ladles (called skulls.) to produce concentrates
of high metal content that are recycled to the refining furnaces and to the
ferrosilicon furnace. A hammer mill pulverizes the input materials and
the coarser metal-rich fraction is removed magnetically. The finer tailings
are slurried with water and piped -to a tailings pile.
102
-------
SOLIDS
f \ ^XWET
r~^musf
^\
1 ^i
STORAGE *~~\HOUSE
EMISSIONS
EMISSIONS
DEMISSIONS
EMISSIONS
SKULLS
(LADLE RESIDUE)
1 *"
{TAILING
PILE
t
ORE
DRYING
1
CRUSHING
AND
SIZING
*' '
,
CALCINING
AND
ROASTING
1 '
ORE
MELTING
MOLTEN
ORE
REJECT »/ LAND \
ORE ™«"\ STORAGE /
^Xl*AG- EMISSION
84ks/MT ^^^
' ' ^**x
/DISPOSAL IN \
V SLAG PILE 1
FERROSILICON
{WATER ,
t
SKIP
MIXING
S \
f
TAILINGS
5.3 MTflMT
<
SKULL
PLANT
SLAG
SLAG Suwj 31MT/M1
GRANULATION
RUNOFF |
r
REFINING
FURNACES
REFINED
1 FERRONICKEL
CONCENTRATES
RETURNED TO
REFINING FURNACE
AND FERHOSILICON
FURNACE
< LIMESTONE ^.^--^--v '
DOLOMITE JT \ OVERFLOW
FLUORSPAR / \ WATER
SKULL PLANT V /
CONCENTRATES ^^r^'
|576kg/MT
/ DREDGED \
\ SLUDGE /
•ESP - ELECTROSTATIC PRECIWTATOR
VALUES GIVE WASTE AMOUNTS PER METRIC TON
OF FERRONICKEL MADE.
/ QUARTZ
/ IRON TURNINGS
/ COKE
( C WOOD CHIPS
\ SKULL PLANT
^^CONCENTRATE
S FERROSILICON
FURNACE
,.
CASTING
AND
CRUSHING
J SLAB \
A "u /
1 \ WATiR
\ I TO STREAM
Figure 4 PROCESS AND SOLID WASTE FLOW DIAGRAM FOR FERRONICKEL PRODUCTION
-------
Ferrosilicon is produced in a 15,000 KVA electric furnace with
.input materials .consisting of quartz, iron turnings, coke, wood chips, and
skull plant concentrates. All ferrosilicon produced is cast, crushed and
used for reduction of the nickel ore.
The molten slag generated during the reduction of the nickel ore
is granulated by high pressure water sprays and transferred to the slag
pile by conveyor belt. The fines derived from granulation of the slag are
carried in the water stream to settling ponds (or lagoons)'.
3.2.2 DescriptiTO of Jfaste Streams
Ferromanganese and Silicomanganese
Slags. A dense vesicular slag is generated from ferroraanganese
production, at a rate of 600 kg/MT ferromanganese product. Approximately
360 kg/OT of the 600 kg/NTT generated is used as an input to the silica-
manganese furnace. The remaining 240 kg/MT is stored on the ground for
possible future use in Silicomanganese production.
In the production of Silicomanganese a glassy textured slag is
generated at a rate of 1100 kg/MT of Silicomanganese product. Of this
amount approximately 785 kg/MT product is sold for road base with 315 kg/MT
product disposed of in open dumps.
Major constituents of ferromanganese and Silicomanganese slag
are manganese, manganese oxide, silica, alumina, calcium oxide and magnesium
oxide. Trace metals in these slags include chromium, copper,- lead and zinc.
In solubility tests described in Appendix B there was no leaching
of toxic heavy metals at greater than 0,2 ppm from either ferroraanganese or
Silicomanganese slag. For this reason in addition to the dense nature of
the slags,ferromanganese and Silicomanganese slags are not considered hazardous
at this time. '
Dusts and Sludges. Depending on whether wet or dry emissions
controls are used on furnaces, dusts or sludges are produced. Figure 3
illustrates emissions control residuals using wet scrubbers. Emissions
from the ferromanganese furnaces are generated at a rate of 167.4 kg/WT
of product. Ninety percent of these emissions or 150.6 kg/Ml product are
captured in wet scrubbing systems. The scrubber water is lime treated and
clarified. Underflow sludge from the clarifier is generated at a dry
weight rate of 164,8 kg/MT product and settled in a'lagoon. '
» Emissions from the silico-inanganese furnace are generated at a
rate of 109 kg/MT Silicomanganese product. Ninety percent of the emissions
are captured in wet scrubbers as shown in Figure 3 and sent to a settling •
basin at a rate of 98.5 kg/MT product. Solids are collected -in the settling
basin, dredged several times per week and trucked to an on-site open dump
at a rate of 74 kg/MT product.
104
-------
Overflow from the settling basin carries 23 kg of dry solids /MT
-product -to -the -lagoon. -Solids -from the -lagoon -are periodically dredged and
open dumped at ^ fate of 187.8 kg/OT of product. "
In solubility tests described in Appendix B, dusts and sludges
from silicomanganese emissions control leached lead at approximately 1.3 ppm.
Ferromanganese dusts leached 110 ppm zinc and 560 ppm lead. For these reasons,
along with the fine particulate nature of these wastes, sludges and dust,
residuals from ferromanganese and silicomanganese production are- considered
potentially hazardous at this time.
Ferrosilicon
Dust. The production of ferrosilicon generates no slag. Therefore,
control of furnace emissions produces the only significant solid waste. While
dry-and-wet emissions control systems are utilized, dry type systems are more
prevalent. Furnace emissions average about 450 kg/NTT (9001 lb/ton)' for
75% FeSi and 225 kg/MT (450 lb/ton} for 501 FeSi. Thus, for furnaces controlled
by baghouse collection systems the average quantity of collected dry dust will
vary between 405 kg/Ml product and 202.5 kg/MT product depending on the type
of FeSi being made. An overall hooding and capture efficiency of 90 percent
is assumed. The collected dusts are trucked to a land disposal area for
open dumping.
In solubility tests described in Appendix B there was no leaching
of toxic heavy metals greater than 0.3 ppm from ferrosilicon baghouse dust.
Sludge would be expected to behave similarly. For this reason dusts and
sludges from ferrosilicon production are not considered potentially hazardous
at this time. - ',
Ferrochrme
In ferrochrome production the slag-to-product ratio is
estimated to vary from 1.5 to 2.0. Therefore the slag generation factor is
approximately 1750 kg/NfT of ferrochrome product. The slag occurs in dense 4
to 6 inch diameter clumps and has a vesicular surface. The slag is either
open dumped or processed to produce two or more fractions and sold for use
in road building,
In solubility tests described in Appendix B, there was insignificant
leaching of toxic constituents from ferrochrome slag. This slag is therefore
not considered potentially hazardous at this time.
Dust. Available data show that both wet and dry emissions controls
systems are used in ferrochrome production. If the furnace emissions are
controlled by a dry system 151 kg of dust per MT of ferrochrome product will
be collected on the assumption that the overall hooding and collection
efficiency is 901. The collected dust is usually trucked to an on-site
dump for final disposal .
105
-------
In solubility tests described in Appendix B it was found that
dusts from ferrochrome production leached over 100 pp'm chrome and around
1 ppra lead. For this reason dust from ferrochrome emissions control is
considered potentially hazardous at this time.
Sludg,_e, For a wet collection system operating at an overall
capture efficiency of 90%, the same weight of particulates would be contained
in the scrubber water as were captured by the dry system. The scrubber water
would be piped to a settling basin to allow the particulates to settle. An
estimated 97% or 146.5 kg/MT product of the solids would be, retained in the
settling basin. Accumulated bottom sediments in the settling basin would be
pumped out or clammed out periodically and dumped on adjacent land areas.
As discussed previously ferrochrome dust released, chrome and lead
in solubility tests. Sludge would be expected to behave similarly and is
therefore considered potentially hazardous at this time.
Ferronickel
Slag. Granulated,slag from the reduction operation is generated
at a rate of 31 MT/MT production, a very high ratio of waste to product.
Accumulation of
-------
•. .. Dusts. . Dusts, collected during ore preparation including drying,
crushing, calcining and roasting are fed to the furnaces so no significant
solid waste accumulates from control of emissions from these operations.
Dusts from' the electric furnace are captured in baghouses and
recycled to the furnaces with the exception of dust collected from the
ferrosilicon furnace. The ferrosilicon dusts are collected at the rate
of 84 kg/Mr product, wetted to prevent blowing, and disposed of in the
slag pile.
In. solubility tests described in Appendix B ferrosilicon furnace
dust did not leach any toxic heavy metals greater than 0,3 ppm and is
therefore considered, non- hazardous.
3.2.3 Waste Quantities
A number of ferroalloy plants were visited and samples of waste
residuals -obtained for subsequent chemical analyses. These analyses are
given in Appendix A. From these analyses and data provided by individual
plants on quantities of wastes, waste .generation and constituent concentra-
tion factors were developed. These factors are given in Table 17. Using the
generation and concentration factors in Table 17 the yearly generation of
waste residuals from typical plants have been estimated. These estimates
are given in Table 18 for typical plants producing the various ferroalloys
(FeMn, SiMn, FeSi, FeCr, FeNi), Based on plant capacities, data supplied
by individual plants, and chemical analyses of collected samples, estimates -
of the total quantities of land disposed wastes and potentially hazardous
constituents thereof have been made on state by state, EPA regional, and
national levels. This data is tabulated in Table 19 for 1974, 1977 and
1983. Estimates for growth in ferroalloy capacity by 1983 is approximately
4%. Inherent error in estimated waste quantities does not warrant meaningful
increased 1977 and 1983 projections at this growth rate.
Oregon with only two ferroalloy plants generates the greatest
amount of slag and sludge than other states with ferroalloy industries. This
is a result of the ferronickel plant which generates very large quantities of
waste per unit of product. Ohio which has 8 ferroalloy plants generates the
second largest quantity of slag and sludge and the greatest quantity of dusts.
3.3 TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL TECHNOLOGY
3-3.1 Current Treatment and Disposaj. Practices
Ferromanganese and Silicomanganese
Slag. Slag from the ferromanganese furnace which is not used
as charge material in Silicomanganese production (approximately 40% of total
slag) is stored on land for possible future use. Approximately 30% of
residual slag from Silicomanganese furnaces which .is not able to be sold as
road fill is open dumped. Open dumping or sale^as roadfill are environmentally
adequate since ferromanganese and Silicomanganese slags are not considered
potentially hazardous at this time.
107
-------
Table 17
WASTE GENERATION FACTORS- FERROALLOY PRODUCTION, DRY WEIGHTS
TYPE OF WASTE
FERROMANGANESE
SLAG
SLUDGE
SILICOMANGANESE
SLAG
SLUDGE
FERROSILICON
SLAG
SLUDGE
DUST
FERROCHROME
SLAG
DUST
FERRONICKEL
SLAG
TAILINGS
OUST
SLUDGE
FACTOR
Kg/MT
240
164.B
1,100
98.5
0
338
1.750
151
31,000
5,300
84
576
CONCENTRATION FACTORS !ppm)
Co
—
-
_
82
-
104
47
82
159
Cr
100
18
27
45
—
160
3,710
3,390
321
380
160
2,140
Cu
310
50
23
82
—
2,180
17
54
50
21
2,180
23
Mn
525,000
20,000
70,000
200,000
—
1,500
290
7,200
1,100
500
1.500
2,000
Ni
—
-
—
3,250
-
1,850
1,330
3,250
4,100
Pb
10
5,000
20
25,000
-
—
12
300
_
-
—
V
—
—
-
—
-
—
—
—
Zn
20
35,000
20
10,000
_
1,300
65
14,000
100
500
1,300
125
o
QO
-------
Table IB
YEARLY GENERATION OF RESIDUALS BY TYPICAL FERROALLOY PLANTS, DRY WEIGHTS
TYPE OF WASTE
FERROMANGANESEa)
SLAG
SLUDGE
a) PRODUCTION CAPACITY OF
30,000 MT/YEAR
SI LICOMANGANESEb|
SLAG
SLUDGE
b) PRODUCTION CAPACITY OF
40,000 MT/YEAR
FERROSILICONc|
SLAG
DUST
c» PRODUCTION CAPACITY OF
40,000 MT/YEAR
FERROCHROMEd|
SLAG
DUST
d) PRODUCTION CAPACITY OF
35,000 MT/YEAH
FERRONICKEL8'
SLAG
TAILINGS
DUST
SLUD0E
e) PRODUCTION CAPACITY OF
23,600 MT/YEAR
TOTAL WASTE
QUANTITY
IMT)
7,200
4,944
44,000
3,940
0
13,5%
61,250
5,285
732,000
125,000
1,980
13,600
QUANTITY OF POTENTIALLY HAZARDOUS CONSTITUENTS (MT>
Co
—
—
_
_
_
1.11
_
-
76
5.9
0.16
2.2
Cr
0.72
0.089
1.19
0.177
_
2.16
227
17.92
235
48
0.32
29
Cu
2,23
0.247
1.01
0.323
_
29.48
1.04
0.28S
37
2.6
4.3
0.31
Mn
3,780
98.9
3,080
788
_
20.28
17.8
38.1
805
62
3.0
27.2
Ni
—
—
—
_
_
43.94
_
—
1,350
166
.6,4
56
Pb
0.07
24.7
0.088
98.5
_
—
0.735
1.586
—
—
_
—
Zn
0.14
173
OJ8
39.4
_
17.58
3.98
74.0
73
62
2.6
1.7
-------
Table 19a
ESTIMATED STATE, REGIONAL. AND NATIONAL SOLID WASTE
FOR THE FERROALLOY INDUSTRY
TOTAL SLAG - 1974, 1977, 1983 (METRIC TONS!
STATE
ALABAMA
KENTUCKY
NEWttRSEY
MEM VOftK
OHIO
OREGON
S CAROL IMA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
W VIRGINIA
EPA NEGION
H
, m
ar
V
TH
-SB.
I
NATIONAL TOTALS
TOTAL*'
DISPOSED
27,100
131,000
3.2OO
8,900
m.Boo
787,900
KO.7OO
85,1m
17,300
as.'oo
12,100
ts.no
389,900
m.wo
17.3OO
0
797,900
M10.400
TOTAL
POTENTIALLY
HAZARDOUS
O
1
1
TOTAL'*'
HAZARDOUS
CONSTITUENTS
a
^
DISPOSAL
LAND
DISPOSED,
SOLD
LAND
DISPOSED,
SOLD
ON SITE
DISPOSAL.
SOMFSOLO
SOLO FOR
ROAD
CONSTRUCTION
METAL
RECOVERY
SOLO, LAND
DISPOSED
LAND
DISPOSED,
SOLD
PROCESSED TO
REMOVE
METALS
THEN SOLD
LAND
DISPOSED,
SOLO
LAND
OISPOSED,
SOLD
LAND
DISPOSED.
SOLD
CONSTITUENTS
Cd
NA
NA
MA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
O
NA
NA
Co
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
a
1
1
Cr
8.7
353
P
18.1
971
MC
522
I.B
1.7
2E.B
18.1
Z8.B
STI
371
1.7
0
246
1541
Cll
0-«
IS
f
0,7
1f
43
2.4
Mo
54
O.J
0.2
OA
19J
IS,
S.4
a
a
83
Mn
1900
22.100
P
S
21.000
9.600
41
4J5SO
B.09D
890
I
(WO
79,201
73.000
S.090
0
9J60O
71,»afl
Ni
NA
NA
P
NA
NA
21
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
21
21
Pb
0,5
1.1
P
NA
15
0.3
1.6
13
0.2
0,2
NA
0.2
4.5
1.6
01
0
0,3
1.7
V
MA
NA
f
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
NA
NA
Zn
OS
7JI
P,
NA
10.8
76 J5
9,1
13
04
2-O
MA
2.0
17.9
10,6
04
a
7M
107
•I INCLUDES SLAO SOLO, BUT NOT SLAq USED ON SITE FOB mODUCINO OTHER ALLOYS
k| SLAOS HOT CONSOEHID HAZARDOUS AT THIS TIME AS
A RESULT OP SOLUBILITY TESTING CONDUCTED B¥ CALSPAN
AMD DESCRIBED IN APPENDIX B.
NA - DATA NOT AVAILABLE P . CONSTITUENT KNOWN TO BE PRESENT, BUT AMOUNT NOT KNOWN.
l CALSPAN CORPORATION
-------
Table 19b
ESTIMATED STATE, REGIONAL, AND NATIONAL SOLID WASTE
FOR THE FERROALLOY INDUSTRY
TOTAL DUST - 1974, 1977, 1983 {METRIC TONS) - DRY AND WET
STATE
ALABAMA
KENTUCKY
NCWVOMK
OHIO
OREGON
S. CAROLINA
TENNESSEE
MASMINGTON
W VIRGINIA
EPA REGION
a
IB
nr
V
m
va
X
NATIONAL TOTALS
TOTAL
DISPOSED
39.800
30,700
6.900
KM 100
2.000
9100
10,900
15,400
*4.4M
5.800
84,400
90,300
1O4.100
11
«
17,400
302.100
POTENTIALLY
HAZARDOUS
O
I4J8O
5.900
1B.5OO
0
9.100
10.800
0
15.4OO
5.900
18.400
Mjno
1H.0JO
g
0
a
78. IOC
HAZARDOUS
CONSTITUENTS
0
IBB)
1,7
28
0
438
1104
O
17B
9.7
17i
3S»
28
0
0
O
1730
DISPOSAL
METHOD
LAND
DISPOSED
LAND
DISPOSED
DUMP
ON SITE
DUMP
WETTED AND
DUMPED ON
SLAG PILE
LANDFILL
LANO
DISPOSED
(.AND
DISPOSED
LAND
DISPOSED
r.d
NA
0.6
NA
NA
NA
O.9
NA
NA
NA
NA
MA
15
NA
0
0
NA
\S
Co
0.2
O.7
NA
2.3
0.2
NA
NA
0.1
1.2
NA
13
0,9
13
0
0
0,5
4.9
Cr
0.3
24*
0.1
5.1
o.»
363
0,1
o.s
2.5
0.2
J.S
«12
5.1
0
0
oa
«2i
CONSTIl
Cu
a.s
19.7
03
60.9
4.1
05
04
7J
31-2
0.3
31.2
2S.1
80.9
0
0
12.3
1»
ruENTS
""
3.1
12S1
4.1
&4.1
3.0
18.1
OHO
54
174
4.1
O4
2252
. S4.I
0
O
81
2433
Ni
KS
28.5
NA
B9.8
C.S
NA
NA
•n*
45.7
NA
«5.7
13.3
89.6
0
0
1BJ
187
M
NA
5S.2
NA
NA
NA
9.1
IS
NA
S.2
NA
5,2
MJ
NA
0
0
MA
106
W
NA
0.4
NA
NA
NA
D.b
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.9
NA
0
0
HA
0.9
Zn
2.7
408
4.1
48.6
2.8
45.*
17
4.7
37.1
4.1
37.1
5*3 1
48-1
0
0
T.3
640
NA - OAT A NOT AVAILABLE
f - CONSTITUENT KNOWN TO BE PRESENT, BUT AMOUNT NOT KNOWN.
SOURCE CAUPAN CORPORATION
-------
Table 19c
ESTIMATED STATE, REGIONAL, AND NATIONAL SOLID WASTE
FOR THE FERROALLOY INDUSTRY v
TOTAL SLUDGE - 1974, 1977, 1983 (METRIC TONS) DRY WEIGHT *
STATE
ALABAMA
IOWA
NEWT JERSEY
OHIO
OREGON
8. CAROLINA
TENNESSEE
TEXAS
WASHINGTON
W. VIRGINIA
EPA REGION
n
Iff
W
V
m
VII
I
NATIONAL TOTALS
TOTAL
DISPOSED
16600
•0.900
NA
ss.mo
142,200
MOO
0
3.300
0
0
NA
0
20,800
3S.800
3.3OO
10.900
MZ.JOO
212.700
TOTAL
POTENTIALLY
HAZARDOUS
16.600
10.900
NA
35.800
142.200
3.900
0
3.300
0
0
MA
0
ZO5OO
35.800
3.300
10.900
H2.20Q
212.700
TOTAL
HAZARDOUS
CONSTITUENTS
SSI
IMA
NA
2O27
883
188
0
!M
a
D
NA
1)
749
2027
196
NA
BBS
3.655
DISPOSAL
METHOD
LAGOONS
LAGOONS
LAGOONS
LINED
LAGOONS
TAILINGS
PILE &
LAGOON
LAGOON-
DREDGED
-
LAGOONS
-
-
HAZARDOUS CONSTITUENTS
CD
NA
NA
NA
05
NA
0.4
0
NA
0
0
NA
0
0.4
0.5
NA
NA
NA
0.9
Co
1.0
NA
NA
0.4
80
NA
0
NA
O
0
NA
0
1.0
0.4
NA
NA
6.0
9.0
Cr
1.»
NA
F
219
77
15fi
0
0.1
0
a
p
0
isa
219
01
NA
77
454
Cu
2S.5
NA
p
12
3.1
0.2
0
0.2
0
0
p
0
26.7
12
0.2
NA
3.1
42
Mn
4ZS
NA
f
847
163
IJ>
e
65.3
0
0
p
0
434
847
65.3
NA
1E3
I5O9
Ni
39.2
NA
p
11
222
NA
0
NA
0
0
P
0
33
IB
NA
NA
222
277
P*
14.5
MA
P
125
<(
3.9
0
18.3
0
0
f»
0
18.4
I2.S
"18,1
NA
18
178
V
NA
NA
P
03
NA
0.1
a
NA
0
0
p
0
NA
O.3
NA
NA
NA
0.3
Zn
61
NA
F
B07
19}
1f.S
0
114
0
0
p
0
72
«07
114
NA
1S2
1185
NA - DATA NOT AVAILABLE
f ' CONSTITUENT KNOWN TO HE PMESENT, BUT AMOUNT NOT KNOH
• TO CONVERT TO APPROXIMATE MET WEIGHTS MULTIPLY BY 2.S
SOURCE: CAL5PAN CORPORATION
-------
- • - Sludges• and Dusts.• At-the-present time--lime treated-scrub-
water from ferromanganese furnace emissions control and wet scrubber
sludge from silicomanganese emissions control is settled in-lagoons.'or
settling basins. Settled sediments are periodically dredged and dumped
on land. Dusts are either directly dumped on land or wetted before
dumping to prevent blowing. The present methods of disposing of sludges
or dusts'are considered inadequate because of the danger of leaching of
lead and zinc.
Ferrosilicon
Dusts and Sludges. Collected dust from ferrosilicon furnaces
is usually trucked to on-site open dump areas. Dust is wetted' down to • '
prevent blowing from the truck while being transported. If wet emissions
control is used a sludge- is-generated which is open dumped. Open dumping
of dust or sludge is environmentally acceptable since they are not con- -
sidered .hazardous at this time.
Ferrochrome • ' '
Slag. Electric furnace slag is open dumped or sold for use
in road building. These practices are environmentally adequate since
solubility tests indicated that ferrochrome furnace slag is non-hazardous-
at this time.
Dusts and Sludge. Either dusts or scrubber water is generated
from emissions control on ferrochrome electric furnaces depending on the
method of air. pollution control practiced. Dusts are open dumped while
scrubber waters are put in unlined lagoons with periodic dredging of
settled sediments. Dredged sediments are open dumped. Current practices
of dust and sludge disposal are considered inadequate because of the
possibility of chrome and lead leaching,
Ferronickel
Slag. Granulated slags from reduction furnaces,are presently
open dumped. This practice is adequate since ferronickel slag is not
considered hazardous at this time.
Skul1 P1ant Tai1ings. Skull plant tailings are currently open
dumped. This practice is not considered adequate because of evidence of
zinc and copper leaching at approximately 50 ppm in solubility tests.
Sludge s. ' Sludges result from settling of slag granulation
water and skull plant tailing water in an1-unlined lagoon. The sludges
are dredged from the lagoon and open dumped. The sludge from slag granu-
lation is not considered potentially hazardous while that from skull plant
tailings is considered potentially hazardous. Since they accumulate in the
same lagoon, the entire sludge volume must be considered hazardous at this
time and the use of an unlined lagoon as not acceptable.
113
-------
Pus t. The "only land disposed'dust from ferronickel production '-is
the emission control dust from the associated ferrosilicon furnace." This
dust is open dumped on land, an environmentally acceptable practice since
ferrosilicon dust is'not considered potentially hazardous at this time.
Levels of treatment and disposal technology for those ferroalloy
wastes which are considered potentially hazardous are discussed in the
following sections.
3.3.2 PresentTreatment and Disposal Technology (Level I)
Ferromanganese ajid Silicomanganese
Sludges and Dust. Lime treated scrubwater from ferromanganese
furnace emissions controls and wet scrubber sludge from silicoraanganese
emissions control is settled in lagoons or settling basins. Settled
sediments are dredged and open dumped. Dusts are either open dumped directly
or wetted before open dumping. These practices are inadequate because of
the possibility of heavy metal leaching and subsequent percolation through
permeable soils to groundwater.
Ferrochrome •
Dusts and Sludges. Dusts are open dumped and scrubber waters are
settled in unlined,lagoons with periodic dredging of settled sediments.
Dredged sediments are open dumped. These practices are inadequate because
of the possibility of heavy metal leaching and subsequent percolation
through permeable, soils to groundwater.
Ferronickel
Skull Plant Tailings. Skull plant tailings are presently open
dumped. This is not adequate since solubility tests indicate leaching of
zinc and copper which could percolate through permeable soils to groundwater.
Sludges. Sludges from skul-l plant tailings water accumulates
in a lagoon along with sludge from slag granulation water. Sludge is
'periodically dredged and open dumped. The lagoon is unlined. The use of
an unlined lagoon and open dumping of dredged sludge are considered in-
adequate because of the danger of heavy metal leaching through permeable
soils to groundwater,
3.3,3 Best Technology Currently Employed (Level II)
Ferromanganese and Silicomanganese ' •
Sludges and Dusts. Level II technology is the same as Level I
(i.e. open dumping of dust and dredged sludge).
114
-------
Ferrochrome
Dusts and Sludges. Level II technology is the same as Level I
(i.e. open dumping of dust and dredged-sludge).
Ferronickel
Skull Plant Tailings. Level II technology is the same as
Level I (i.e. open dumping),
Sludges. Level II technology is the same as Level I (i.e. lagoon
settling and open dumping of dredged sludge).
3.3.4 Technology To Provide Adequate_Health And_Environmental_
Protection (Level III)
Ferromanganese and Siliconiianganese
Sludges 'and Dust. The use of lined lagoons would be required for
settling of sludges. Dredged sludges would need chemical fixation before
dumping on land to prevent heavy metal leaching. Ground upon which dusts are
disposed would require soil sealing to prevent percolation of potentially
hazardous constituents,
Ferroni _ck e 1
Skull Plant Tailings. The ground area for disposal of skull
plant tailings- would require sealing with bentonite or other sealant to
prevent percolation of leachate. Runoff water would be collected and
diverted to the,lagoon.
Sludges. The lagoon receiving sludge from the skull plant
tailings pile and slag granulation would require a lining. Dredged lagoon
sediments would be dried and disposed of in sealed soil areas.
Tables 20a through 20e summarize features of Levels I, II and III
treatment and disposal technology for those wastes from the ferroalloy
industry which are considered potentially hazardous at this time.
3.4 COST ANALYSIS • .
In the last section, various treatment and' disposal technologies
currently employed or considered for adequate health and environment pro-
tection were described. The costs for implementing this technology for
typical plants is considered in this section. Costs are given separately
for plants producing 'ferromanganese and silicomanganese, ferrosilicon,
ferrochrome, and ferronickel.
115
-------
Table 20a
Treatment and Disposal Technology Levels
Smelting and Refining Category Ferromaneanese SIC 3313
Sludge
Factor
Physical +
Chemical
Properties
Level I
(Prevalent)
Colloidal to silt size
particles; lime, silica,
iron
Level II
(Best Available)
Same as I
Level III
(Adequate Health and Enviro-
mental Protection)
Same as I
Amount of Waste
(kg/WT Product)
150,6
Same as I
Same as I
Factors
Affecting
Hazardousness
Contains trace heavy
metals including Cr, Cu,
Pb, Zn
Same as I
Same as I
Treatment/
Disposal
Technology
Sludge - lagoons with
dredged material open dumped
Same as I
Sludge - lines lagoon with
chemical fixation of sludge
Estimate of
# + % of Plants
Using Technology
>75%
>75%
-------
Table 20a - (cont'd.)
Factor
Level I
Level II
Level III
Adequacy of
Technology
Inadequate
Same as I
Adequate
Problems and
Comments
Lead and zinc leached
in solubility tests
Same as I
None
Non-Land
Environmental
Impact
Possible contamination
of ground or surface
water
Same as I
None
Compatibility
With Existing
Facilities
Compatible
Compatible
Compatible
Monitoring §
Surveillance
Methods
None
Same as I
Groundwater and surface
runoff monitoring
Energy
Requirements
Negligible
Negligible
Negligible
-------
Table 20b
Treatment and Disposal Technology Levels
Smelting and Refining Category Si1icomanganese SIC 3313
Scrubber Sludge
Factor
Physical +
Chemical
Properties
Level I
(Prevalent)
Colloidal to silt size
particles; silica, iron,
magnesium, manganese
Level II
(Best Available)
Sane as I
Level __I_II_
(Adequate Health and Enviro-
mental Protection)
Sane as I
Amount of Waste
(kg/MT Product)
985
Same as I
Same as I
Factors
Affecting
Hazardousness
Contains trace heavy metals
including Cr, Cu, Pb, Zn, Mn
Same as I
Same as I
Treatment/
Disposal
Technology
Lagooned with dredged
material open dumped
Same as 1
Lined lagoons and chemical
fixation if heavy metals leached
Estimate of
« + % of Plants
Using Technology
>75%
>7S%
-------
Table 20b (Cont.)
Factor
Level I
Level II
Level III
Adequacy of
Technology
Inadequate if heavy metals
are significantly leached
Same as I
Adequate
Problems and
Comment s
Lead leached in solubility
tests
Same as I
None
10 Non-Land
Environmental
Impact
Possible contamination of
ground or surface water
Same as I
None
Compatibility
With Existing
Facilities
Compatible
Compatible
Compatible
Monitoring $
Surveillance
Methods
None
None
Groundwater surveillance
wells, surface runoff
monitoring
Energy
Requirements
Negligible
Negligible
Negligible
-------
Table 20c
Treatment and Disposal Technology Levels
Smelting and Refining Category Ferrochrome SIC
3313
Factor
Physical *
Chemical
Properties
LevelI
(Prevalent)
Dust-colloidal to silt size
particles
Sludge—colloidal to silt size
particles
Dust, Sludge
Leyel__II
{Best Available)
Same as 1
Level III
(Adequate Health and Enviro-
nmental Protection)
Same as I
fj Amount of Waste
0 (kg/WT Product)
- 168
Sludge - 146
Same as I
Same as I
Factors
Affecting
Hazardousness
Presence of heavy metals
including Cr, Cu, Pb, Zn, Mn
Same as I
Same as I
Treatment/
Disposal
Technology
Estimate of
» + % of Plants
Using Technology
Dust - open dumped
Sludjge - unlined lagoon with
dredged sediments
dumped on land
>75%
Same as I
>75%
Dust - land sealing and diversion
of runoff if heavy metals leach
significantly
Sludge - lined lagoons and chemical
fixation if heavymetals leach
significantly
0
*Dust from dry air pollution control system; sludge from wet air pollution control system.
-------
Table 20c (Cent.)
Factor
Level I
Level II
Level III
Adequacy of
Technology
Inadequate if heavy metals
are significantly leached
Same as I
Adequate
Problems and
Comments
Chrome and lead leached
from dust in solubility
tests
Same as I
None
Non-Land
Environmental
Impact
Possible contamination of
ground or surface water
Sane as I
None
Compatibility
With Existing
Facilities
Compatible
Compatible
Compatible
Monitoring §
Surveillance
Methods
None
Same as I
Groundwater surveillance
wells, surface runoff
monitoring
Energy
Requirements
Negligible
Negligible
Negligible
-------
Factor
Physical +
Chemical
Properties
Table 20d
Treatment and Disposal Technology Levels
Smelting and Refining Category Ferronickel SIC 3313
Level I
(Prevalent)
Sand to gravel size,
lime, magnesium, iron,
silica
Skull Plant Tailings
Level II
(Best Available)
Same as I
Level III
(Adequate Health and Enviro-
mental Protection)
Same as I
Amount of Waste
(kg/Mr Product) 5,300
Same as I
Sane as I
Factors
Affecting
Hazardousness
Presence of heavy metals
including Co, Cr, Cu, Zn,
Mn, Ni
Same as I
Same as I
Treatment/
Disposal
Technology
Open dump
Same as I
Ground sealing and
diversion of runoff if heavy
metals leached
Estimate of
# + % of Plants
Using Technology
noo%1
1 (100%)
-------
Factor
Level I
Table 2Qd (Cont.)
Level II
Level III
Adequacy of
Technology
Inadequate if heavy metals
are significantly leached
Same as I
Adequate
Problems and
Comments
Copper and zinc leached in
solubility tests
Same as I
None
w Non-Land
Environmental
Impact
Possible contamination of
ground or surface water
Sane as I
None
Compatibility
With Existing
Facilities
Compatible
Compatible
Compatible
Monitoring S
Surveillance
Methods
None
Same as 1
Groundwater surveillance
wells, surface runoff
monitoring
Energy
Requirements
Negligible
Negligible
Negligible
-------
Table 20e
Treatment and Disposal Technology Levels
Smelting and Refining Category Ferronickel SIC 3313
Sludge from Slag Granulation Water and Skull Tailings Water
Factor
Physical +
Chemical
Properties
Level I
(Prevalent)
Silt to sand size particles;
silica, iron
Leve
_
[Best Available)
Sane as I
LevelIII
(Adequate Health, and Enviro-
mental Protection)
Same as I
M Amount of Waste 576
*• (kg/Mr Product)
Same as I
Same as 1
Factors
Affecting
Hazardousness
Presence of trace metals
including Co, Cr, Cu, Zn,
Mn, Ni
Same as I
Same as I
Treatment/
Disposal
Technology
Unlined lagoon with
dredged sludge dumped
on land
Same as I
Lined lagoons with sealing
of sludge disposal area
Estimate of
# + % of Plants
Using Technology
i (100%)
1 (100%)
-------
Table 20e(cont'd.)
Factor
Level I
Level II
Level III
Adequacy of
Technology
Inadequate if heavy metals
axe significant leached
Same as I
Adequate
Problems and
Coimnents
Solubility tests indicate
that sludge from skull plant
tailings will leach copper
and zinc
Same as I
None
Non-Land
Environmental
Impact
Possible contamination of
ground or surface water
Same as I
None
Compatibility
With Existing
Facilities
Compatible
Compatible
Compatible
Monitoring §
Surveillance
Methods
None
None
Groundwater surveillance
wells, surface runoff
monitoring
Energy
Requirement s
Negligible
Negligible
Negligible
-------
3.4.1 • ..Cost^of _P_re_sent_ Treatment and .Disposal Technology .'(Level I)
Ferromanganese and Silicomanganese. The typical plane produces
81,000 WT of ferromanganese and 25,400 MT of silicomanganese operating
about 345 days/year.
Effluents from both operations go to a lagoon. It has a
volume of 10,700 m and allows for 4 days of residence. Its design
characteristics are;
Volume 10,700 m3
Bottom width 38 m
Top width 50 m
Bottom length 75 m
Top length 87 m
Total depth 3 m
Depth of excavation 1.15 m
Circumference 286 m_
Dike volume 3,546 nu
Dike surface 3,921 m
Total width 63 m
Total length 101 m
Required area ,65 ha
The daily inflow into the lagoon contains 40.6 MT of solids which
form about 29 m of sludge. This requires that the lagoon is dredged about
1.9 times/yr assuming that it is dredged when half filled with sludge. ,
This requires about 380 hours of dragline time based on a capacity of 27 m /yr
of frontloader and truck time. The lagoon is located on semi-industrial
land.
Scrubber water from the silicomanganese furnace flows through a
concrete-lined settling pit before entering the lagoon. The pit is sized
to allow a settling time of 30 minutes. About 38.7 MT of solids are
removed weekly from the pit and trucked to the on.-site dump. This operation
is estimated to require 80 hours of truck and backhoe time/yr.
Capital and annual costs of Level I treatment and disposal .
technology are given in Table 21.
Ferrochrome. The selected plant produces 62,790 MT of ferro-
chrome/year operating 345 days. Two types of wastes are generated, One
is furnace slag (non-hazardous) which is open dumped or sold for use in
road building. The other consists of wastes collected by air emission
control systems considered hazardous. Both dry and wet systems are
employed for handling the latter waste, and costs are developed for both
systems.
126
-------
TABLE 21
COST OF LEVBL I TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL TECHNOLOGY
FERROALLOYS - FERROMANGANESE AND SILICOMANGANESE
Capital Cost
Lagoon
Site Preparation
Survey $ 375
Test Drilling 490
Sample Testing . 250
Report Preparation 1,200
Construction
Excavation § Forming 4,715
Compacting , 6,560
Fine Grading 1,765
Soil Poisoning 355
Transverse Drain Fields 580
Land 2,570
Sump 3,870
Equi pment
Truck (1,1) 8,250
Front Loader (1.1) 6,600
Dragline (20%) 14,000
Bulldozer (30%) 2,305
Dump ,
Survey 1,350
Land 8,545'
TOTAL |63,780
127
-------
TABLE' 21 (Cont.)
Annual Cost
Land
Amortization
Construction 2,495
Equipment • • 4,955
Operating Personnel 20,110
Repair and Maintenance
Construction 535
Equipment ' 1,560
Energy
Fuel 2,310
Electricity 230
Taxes 280
Insurance
(Slag Sale) . ' • 640
TOTAL $34,225
128
-------
The dry system results in the collection of 15,7 WT of dust/day
with a density of 500-Kg/in . The dust is transported to an-on-site-dump,
which requires 2 hrs/day of frontloader and truck time.
In the wet system, the scrubber water is piped to a lagoon,
The lagoon, like all other waste disposal facilities is assumed located
on semi-industrial land. Inflow into the lagoon is at a rate of 80 I/sec.
The lagoon size allows for 4 days detention, Its characteristics are:
Volume ' ' 27,650 m3
Bottom width 63 m
Top width ' 75 m
Bottom length 126 m
Top length 138 m
Total depth 3 m
: Depth of excavation .85 m
Circumference 438 m_
Dike volume , ' 6,872 m?
Dike surface 6,282 m
Total width 90 m
Total length 153 m
Required area 1.4 ha
, About 15.2 MT of solids settle in the lagoon daily which form
12.7 m of sludge. Dredging is required only once every three years.
On the average, 4,150 m of sludge are dredged annually which represents
220 hours of frontloader and truck time.
The sludge dump is designed to accommodate lagoon sludge
dredged over a 20-year period.
Capital and annual costs of Level I treatment and disposal
technology are given in Table 22,
Ferrosi1icon. Since there are no hazardous wastes believed
associated with ferrosilicon production at this time, there are no costs
associated with hazardous waste treatment and disposal.
Ferronickel. The model plant produces 23,600 MT of ferronickel
operating 365 days/year. Ferrosilicon required for the reduction of
nickel is produced in the same plant at a rate of about 20,620 MT/yr.
The only wastes associated with ferronickel production which is believed
hazardous is skull plant tailings and associated sludge.
Tailings from the skull plant are piped to a tailings pile,
Solids accumulate at a rate of about 360 MT/d'ay, The water from the
tailings slurry drains into a lagoon which also receives water and
solids from slag granulation. The tailings have an estimated density of
1,300 kg/m . Thus, about 275 m of solids form daily and 100,375 m
annually. The accumulation over a 20-year period amounts to about
2,000,000 m . This will require a 7 ha area given that the tailings are .
built-up to a height of 30 m.
129
-------
TABLE 22
COST OF LEVEL I TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL TECHNOLOGY
-FERROALLOYS - FERROCHROME PLANT - DRY COLLECTION SYSTEM
Capital Cost
Equipment
Truck (35%)
Front Loader (351)
Bulldozer (51)
Dump
Survey
Land
TOTAL
Dust
$ 8,750
7,000
1,000
1,380
8,740
$26,870
Annual Cost
Land ,
Amortization
Construction
Equipment
Operating Personnel
Repair and Maintenance
Construction
Equipment
Energy
Fuel
Electricity
Taxes • •
Insurance
Dust
$ 875
160
2,665
16,265
840
2,000
200
220
270
TOTAL
130
-------
TABLE 22 (Cent.)
FERROCHROME PLANT - WET COLLECTION SYSTEM
Capital Cost
Lagoon
. Site Preparation
Survey , $ 875
Test Drilling 960
Sample Testing 500
Report Preparation 1,500
Construction
Excavation § Forming 9,140
Compacting 12,715
Fine Grading 2,825
Soil Poisoning 545
Transverse Drain Fields 2,070
Land , • 5,535
Equipment
Truck (10%) 2,500
Front Loader '(10%) 2,000
Bulldozer (l!) . 200
Drag Line (10%) 7,000
Dump
Survey 505
Land 3,230
TOTAL ' $52,120
131
-------
TABLE 22 (Cont.)
. Annual Cost
Sludge
Land $ 875
Amortization
Construction 3,670
Equipment ' 1,860
Operating Personnel 7,145
Repair and Maintenance
Construction ' 820
Equipment 585
Energy
Fuel 820
Electricity ' 80
Taxes 220
Insurance 520
TOTAL $16,595
132
-------
Solids carried into the settling lagoons accumulate at an estimated
rate of 13,600 MT/yr. The sludge formed has a wet density of 1,260 Kg/m
and a dry density of 1,390 Kg/m . Most of the solids settle in the first of
two lagoons (Lagoon A). The overflow from Lagoon A goes to the second lagoon
(Lagoon B). The characteristics of the lagoons are:
Lagoon^ A Lagoon B
Volume 80,000 m3 95,000 m3
Bottom width 139 m 152 m
Top width 147 m 160 m
Bottom* length 278 m . 304 m
Top length 286 m 312 m -
Circumference 879 m 955 m
Depth 2m 2m
Depth of excavation . 25 m_ -25 m_
Dike volume 9,990 m. 10,863 m2
Dike surface 9,893 m . 10,758 m
Total width 160 m 173 m
Total length 299 m 325 m
Required area 4.8 ha 5.6 ha
Lagoon A is dredged once per year at which time about 10,800 m
of sludge is removed. This requires about 400 hours of dragline time. The
sludge is then deposited on adjacent land. The transport is estimated to
require 520 hours of frontloader and truck time annually.
In a dry state, sludge removed amounts to 9,785 m /yr or 195,700 m
in 20 years. This will require a 2 ha area if the built-up is to 10 m.
All dust except those from the ferrosilicon furnace are recycled.
The latter are not considered hazardous and therefore have no hazardous
waste disposal costs attributed to their disposal.
Altogether, about 680,000 m of solids are deposited on land
each year. This is estimated to require 6,800 hrs of bulldozer time yearly
for spreading, shaping and compacting. Capital and annual costs of Level I
treatment and disposal technology are given in Table 23.
3.4.2 Cost of Best Technology Currently Employed (Level II)
Ferromanganese arid Silicomanganese. ' Technology and costs for
Level II are the same as those for Level I.
Ferrochrome. Technology and costs for Level II are the same as
those for Level I.
Ferronickel. Technology and costs for Level II are the same as
those for Level I.
133
-------
TABLE 23
COST QF LEVEL I TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL TECHNOLOGY
.. FERROALLOYS - FERRONICKEL .PLANT
Capital Cost
Lagoon A
Site Preparation
Survey
Test Drilling
Sample Testing
Report Preparatio n
Construction
Excavation 5 Forming
Compacting
Fine Grading
Soil Poisoning
Transverse Drain Fields
Land
Lagoon B
Site Preparation
Survey
Test Drilling
Sample Testing
Report Preparation
Construction
Excavation 5 Forming
Compacting
Fine Grading
Soil Poisoning
Transverse Drain Fields
Land
Tailing's Dump '
Survey
Land
Sludge Dump
Survey
Land
Equipment
Truck (35%)
Front Loader (351)
Bulldozer (55%)
Belt Conveyor
Dragline (20%)
f 3,000
900
250
1,500
13,285
18,480
4,450
1,090
6,625
8,400
3,500
900
250
1,500
14,450
20,095
4,840
1,185
7,960
9,800
Tailings
4,375
12,250
1,250
3,500
6,565
5,250
545 7,615
14,000
TOTAL
|153,390 $24,240
134
-------
TABLE 23 [Cont.}
Annual Cost
Sludge Tailings
Land $ 2,170 $ 1,225
Amortization
Construction 12,220 510
Equipment 4,190 1,210
Operating Personnel 16,920 11,565
Repair and Maintenance
Construction 2,775
Equipment. 1,320 380
Energy
' Fuel 1,945 915'
Electricity 195 90
Taxes • 545 ' 305
Insurance • 1,535 240
TOTAL $43.815 $16,440
135
-------
3.4.3 Cost of Technology to Provide Adequate Health and Environmental
"Protection (Level III)
Ferromanganese and Silicomanganeje. The lagoon is lined and the
accumulated sludge is removed by pumping instead of dredging. The sludge
is chemically fixed prior to being deposited at the slag dump. The slurry
pump is operated about 720 hrs/yr, and 1,000 labor hours are assigned for its
operation. The use of the slurry pump eliminates the use of the dragline.
Capital and annual costs are given in Table 24.
Ferrochrome. The lagoon is lined, and the sludge or slurried
dust is removed by pumping instead of dredging. The sludge is chemically
fixed prior to being deposited at the dump. The dump surface is sealed and
collection ditches installed, together with a pump and piping. The slurry
pump is operated about 300 hrs/yr and 450 hrs are assigned for its operation.
The use of the slurry pump eliminates use of the dragline. Capital and annual
costs are given in Table 25.
Ferronickel. Both lagoons are lined and the accumulated sludge
is removed from Lagoon A by pumping instead of dredging. The slurry pump
used for this purpose is operated about 765 hrs/yr and 1,000 labor hours
are assigned for its operation. The use of the slurry pump1 eliminates the
need for the dragline.
The pumped sludge is deposited on a sealed .25 hectare area
adjacent to Lagoon A for drying. The runoff is collected in ditches and
then flows by gravity into Lagoon B. The dried sludge is then hauled to
dump where the ground has been sealed.
The tailings from the skull plant are deposited on sealed ground
and collection ditches are constructed at the dump site. The capital and
annual costs of Level III treatment and disposal technology are given in
Table 26,
Tables 27 through 29 summarize the capital and annual costs for
Levels I, II and III treatment and disposal technologies for hazardous
land disposed waste from the U.S. ferroalloys industry, Costs are given per
metric ton of dry and wet wastes (i.e. sludges) and per metric ton-of
product. Cumulative total industry costs for each ferroalloy sector to
meet Levels I, II and III treatment and disposal technology are also given.
Costs for each type of waste and total costs for each ferroalloy sector are
also expressed as1percentages of product selling prices.
Estimated 1973 annualized industry costs for Levels I and IT
treatment and disposal technology of potentially hazardous wastes from
ferromanganese and silicomanganese production are $250,000 or 0.2% of
estimated national sales value. The industry cost of Level III treatment
and disposal technology (adequate for environmental protection) is estimated
as $1,310,000 or 0.81 of estimated-national sales value.
136
-------
TABLE 24
COST OF LEVEL III TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL TECHNOLOGY
FERROALLOYS - FERROMANGANES AND SILICOMANGANESE PLANT
Construction
Lagoon Liner
Equipment
Slurry Pump
Piping, Flexible
(Dragline)
Capital Cost
TOTAL
13,730
440
(14.000)
$21,610
Annual Cost
Land
Amortization
Construction
Equipment (1)
Operating Personnel (1)
Repair and Maintenance
Construction
Equipment (1)
Energy
Fuel (1)
Electricity
Taxes
Insurance (1)
Chem. Fixation .
TOTAL
$ 2,485
25
4,835
645
10
(435)
15
215
134.180
$141,975
(1) Costs shown are net costs, i.e. costs of new equipment less
dragline associated costs which are no longer incurred.
137
-------
TABLE 25
COST OF LEVEL III TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL TECHNOLOGY
FERROALLOYS - FERROCHROME PLANT
Capital Cost
Construction
Lagoon Liner
Equipment
Slurry Pump
Pipe, Flexible
(Dragline)
TOTAL
$47,630
13,730
440
(7,000)
$54,800
Annual Cost
Land
Amortization
Construction
Equipment (1)
Operating Personnel (1)
Repair and Maintenance
Construction
Equipment (1)
Energy
Fuel (1)
Electricity
Taxes
Insurances (1)
Chem. Fixation
TOTAL
$ 5,525
1,140
2,370
1,430
360
(175)'
10
550
54,780
$65,990
(1) Costs shown are net costs, i.e. costs of new equipment less
dragline associated costs"which are no longer incurred.
138
-------
TABLE 26
COST OF LEVEL III TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL TECHNOLOGY
FERROALLOYS - fERRQNICKEL PLANT
Capital Cost
Construction
Lagoon (A) Liner
Lagoon (B) Liner
Equipment
Slurry Pump
Piping, Flexible
Sludge Drying Area
Land Sealing
Collection Ditches
Pipe Rigid
Dumps
Survey
Land
Land Sealing
Collection Ditches
Pump and Piping
Sludge
$180,080
212,655
13,730
440
5,000
760
1,730
40,000
2,145
11,140
Tailings
140,000
4,010
18,210
TOTAL
$453,680 $162,220
139
-------
TABLE 26 (Cont.)
• Annual Cost
Sludge Tailings
Land ' -
Amortization
Construction $51,115 $16,705
Equipment 2,075 2,895
Operating Personnel • 4,590
Repair and Maintenance
Construction 13,220 4,320
Equipment • 650 910
Energy
Fuel (455)
.Electricity 95 ' 325
Taxes
Insurance 4,535 1,620
TOTAL $75,825 $26,775
140
-------
TABLE 27. SUMMARY COSTS - FERROMANGANESE AND SILICOMANGANESE
Annual Production: Model Plant 81,000/25,400 MT
Industry 620,977/167,002 MT
Waste (Type)
Sludge
Cum. Unit Waste Disposal Costs:
Amount (MT/MT of Production)
0.15 (Avg.)
Waste (Type)
Sludge
Capital Cost
Annual Cost
,_ Total Capital Cost
£• Total Annual Cost
$/MT of
Waste
Dry
$4.00
2.15
Cum. Industry Waste Disposal
Waste (Type)
Sludge
Total
1973 Metal Price:
Percent Treatment
Waste (Type)
Sludge
Total
Cap.
$0.47
0.47
I
Wet
$1,60
0.86
Costs ($
I
Ann.
$0,25
0.25
$/MT of
Prod.
$0.60
0.32
0.60
0.32
Million)
Level
II
Cap.
$0.47
0.47
$/MT of
Waste
Dry
$4.00
2.15
Ann.
$0.25
0.25
Level
II
Wet
$1.60
0.86
Cap.
$0.63
0.63
III
$/MT of $/MT Of
Prod. Waste
Dry Wet
$0.60 $5.36 $2.14
0.32 11.06 4.42
0.60
0.32
III
Ann.
$1.31
1.31
$/MT of
Prod.
$0.80
1.66
0.80
1.66
1199.20/MT C»vg.)
Cost/Price of Metric Ton of Production
Cap,
0.3%
0.3
I
Ann.
0.2%
0.2
Level
II
Cpp.
0.3%
0.3
Ann.
0.2%
0.2
Cap.
0.4%
0.4
III
Ann.
0,8%
0.8
-------
TABLE 28, SUMMARY COSTS - FERROGHROME
Annual Production: Model Plant 62,790 MT
Industry 426,846 MT
Waste (Type)
Sludge
Cum. Unit Waste Disposal Costs:
Amount (MT/MT of Production)
0,08
Waste (Type)
Sludge
Capital Cost
Annual Cost
Cum. Industry Was
Waste (Type)
Sludge
1973 Metal Price:
Percent Treatment
Waste (Type)
Sludge
I
$/MT of
Waste
Dry Wet
$9.91 $3.96
3.15 1.26
te Disposal Costs ($
I
Cap. Ann,
$0.35 $0.11
$365.20/MT
Cost/Price of Metric
I
Cap . Ann .
0.23% 0.07%
Level
II III
$/MT of $/MT of $/MT of $/MT of
Prod. Waste Prod. Waste
Dry Wet Dry Wet
$0.83 $9.91 $3.96 $0.83 $20.33 $8.13
0.26 3.15 1.26 0.26 15.70 6.28
Million)
Level
II III
Cap. Ann. Cap. Ann.
$0.35 $0.11 $0.73 $0.56
Ton of Production
Level
II III
Cap. Ann. Cap. Ann.
0.23% 0,07% 0.47% 0.36%
$/MT of
Prod.
$1.70
1.32
-------
TABiE 29. SIMiARY COSTS - FERRONICKEL
Annual Production: Model Plant 23,600 MT
Industry 23,600 MT (ast,)
Waste (Type)
Amount (MT/MT of Production)
Sludge
Tailings
Cum. Unit Waste Disposal Costs:
Waste (Type)
Sludge
Capital Cost
Annual Cost
Tailings
Capital Cost
Annual Cost
Total Capital Cost
Total Annual Cost
$/OT of
Waste
Dry
$11.20
3.22
0.18
0.13
—
—
Cum. fiulustry Waste Disposal
Waste (Type)
Sludge
Tailings
Total
1973 Metal Price:
Percent Treatment
Waste (Type)
Sludge
Tailings
Total
I
Cap.
$0.15
0.02
0.17
$1,430/MT:|
Cost/Price
I
Wet
$4.51
1.29
—
__
—
—
Costs ($
Ann.
$0.04
0.02
0.06
;est)
of Metric
I
Cap.
0.45%
0.07
0,52
Ann.
0.13%
0.05
0.18
0.58
S.S7
$/MT of
Prod.
$6.50
1.86
1.03
0.70
7.53
2.56
Million!
Level
II
Cap.
$0.15
0.02
0,17
$/MT of
Waste
Dry
$11.28
3.22
0.18
0.13
__
—
Ann.
$0.04
0.02
0.06
Level
II
Wet
$4.51
1.29
—
._
__
—
Cap.
$0.61
0.19
0.80
III
$/m of $/wr of
Prod. . Waste
Dry Wet
$6.50 $44.63 $7.85
1.86 8.80 3.52
1.03 1.42
0.70 0.33
7.53
2.56
III
Ann.
$0.12
0.04
0.16
Ton of Production
Level
II
Cap.
0.45%
0.07
0.52
Ann.
0.13%
0.05
0.18
Cap.
1.80%
0,55
2.35
III
Ann.
0.35%
. 0.13
0.48
$/MT of
Prod.
$25.
5,
72
07
7,90
1.83
33.62
6.90
-------
Assuming that'wet-systems are-used for emissions-control for
ferrochrome production the industry annualized costs for Levels I and II
treatment and disposal technology are estimated as $110,000 or 0.07% of
estimated national sales. The industry annual cost of Level III technology
using wet emissions controls is estimated as $560,000 or 0.361 of 1973
national sales.
The estimated annual cost for Level I'and II treatment and
disposal technology for potentially hazardous waste from the one United
States ferronickel plant is $60,000 or 0.18% of estimated 1973 sales
value. Estimated annual costs for Level III treatment and disposal tech-
nology are $160,000 or 0.48% of estimated national sales.
144
-------
4,0 PRIMARY METAL PRODUCTS NOT ELSEWHERE CLASSIFIED (SIC 3399)
This SIC category includes a number of miscellaneous metal
products and associated manufacturing processes including production of
ferrous and non-ferrous metal powders, metal paste, and ferrous and non-
ferrous nails, brads, wire and staples. Table 30 shows the geographic
distribution of industries in this SIC category as of 1972.
Brads, nails, tacks, spikes and similar items are manufactured
from metal by machining, extrusion and other similar processes. Solid
wastes will consist principally of metal turnings, clippings and other
metal remnants. These wastes are recovered for scrap and therefore do
not constitute a solid or hazardous waste problem.
Metal powders are produced by a variety of processes as summarized
in Table 31. The raw materials for production is either solid metal or
chemical compounds of metals - generally oxides of metals.
The three predominant practices for powder production are
atomization, gaseous reduction and electrolysis. .Atomization is the most
widely employed method for manufacturing low-melting metal powders, such
as tin, lead, zinc, cadmium and aluminum. Atomization consists essentially
in forcing a thin stream of molten metal through a small orifice and then
bombarding it with a stream of compressed gas, which causes the metal to
disintegrate and solidify into finely divided particles. Usually the gas
stream is directed through a nozzle, partly submerged in the molten metal,
in such a manner as to draw the metal up through the nozzle to the tip.
Solidification of the metal occurs instantaneously upon contact with the
gas stream. The product is then removed by means of a suction system and
collected in baghouses or cyclone dust collectors.
Electrolytic production methods for metal powders consist of
electrolytic deposition from solution and electrolytic deposition from
fused salts. These methods are most suitable for manufacture of extremely
pure powders of a variety of metals including copper, iron, silver, nickel,
manganese and chromium.
Gaseous reduction is employed for the manufacture of "commercial
quantities of iron and copper powders, the most common metal powders, and
less common metal powders including nickel, cobalt, tungsten and molybdenum..
Hydrogen, carbon monoxide or some other reducing gas is used to reduce
metallic compounds, usually oxides, to fine metal powders.
Because either pure metal or metal oxides are used as raw
materials for metal powder production there is little waste. Dust, slag
or sludge residues contain high metallic content and are reprocessed.
Table 32 which summarizes residual disposition for one of the largest metal
powder producers in the United States illustrates the dominant practice of
residual recycle.
145
-------
TABLE 30
GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION OF'MISCELLANEOUS PRIMARY METAL PRODUCT MANUFACTURING
' , FIRMS, 1972 (SIC 3399) ,.
Geographic Area
Total No. of
Establishments
No. with 20+
Employees
Value of Ind.
Shipments
U.S. Total 161
N.E. Region ' 56
New England Div. 8
Connecticut 3
Middle' Atlantic Div. 48
New York 9
New Jersey 14
Pennsylvania .. 25
N. Central Region 55
Ohio 14
Illinois 10
i
S. Region , 28
S. Atlantic Div. . 6
E.S. Central Div. 14
Tennessee 6
W.S, Central Div. 8
W. Region 22
Mountain Div. 5
Pacific Div. * 17
101
35
7
5
28
5
8
15
34
9
5
18
3
9
4
6
14
4
10
$341M
153
25
9
128
9
63
57
91
19
10
64
8
37
1-7
20
- 33
9
24
Source: Census of Manufacturing 1972
146
-------
TABLE 31 PRODUCTION OF METAL POWDERS
RM
mlctftl
Metal
Chemical
•i»i«
Solid
Molten
Vapor
Solid
Solution
Gas
PnxwM
Machining
Bessemer process
Screening beaten foil
Stamp mills
Hanwtag impact mills
Eddy mills
Grinding sponge
Grinding
Cleav&bV- nitttttk
Grinding brittle elec-
trolytic mclals
Grinding iirittk1 metab
mado finu by hoi, WHX
ALniuiialirm by nir
blast or steam
Granulation by ftir-
riiiR
Condvnsaiiou at nor-
mal or low pressure
Reduction by hydro-
pen or other gases
al U>mp«'r»tuJC8 bu-
Inw inctliiig point
Chemicftl precipitation
E loot rodppo.aii ion R.H a
piiwder
Carbonyl pnici-ai
PrlMpI* involve/)
Tearing
Severn working
Fracturing of cli-u-
vagc planca
TntArcryBtalline
fracturinK
Hpraying
Uruiiiing
Condonsation
Reduction
Precipitation
Electrolysis
Thermal decom-
position
Product
Mg
Cu and Al alloys
Au. Cu, and alloyi
Al, Cu, and alloys
Al, Cu, and alloys
Fe
Cu
Fe
Hi, SI), etc.
Fe
Ni-Fc ulloyb
Al
Pb
Pb alloys
Al
t»b alloys
Zn, Mg
W, Mo
Ni,C<»
Kc
Fe, Cu
PI, Pd
SD
Cu, Fe, etc.
Fe ;
Ni, Ni-Fo alloys •
Source: Treatise on Powder
Metallurgy, Vol. I,
Interscience Publishers,
NY, 1949
147
-------
- TABLE 32 DISPOSITION OF RESIDUALS FROM METAL POWDER PRODUCTION
Av. Production
Type of Powder per year
Copper
Copper Base
Alloy
Tin
Solder
Process
Type'"
6500 tons
400 tons
160 tons
150 tons
Electrolytic
Deposition
Water
Atomization
Air
Atomization
Air
Atomization
Dust
Quantity-Disposition
per year
150 tons
Reprocessed by
Re-Cycle
Nil
3 tons
R eproccssed
3 tons
Reprocessed
Waste Residue
Sludge or Slurry
Quantity-Disposition
per year
Other
Quantity- Dispositio
per year
50 tons
Reprocessed by
'Re-Cycle
2 tons
Reprocessed
Nil
Nil
Nil
Slag, 15 tons
Reprocessed
Dross, 8 tons
Reprocessed
Dross", ZO tons
Reprocessed
-------
LIST OF'REFERENCES
Development Document For Proposed Effluent Limitations Guide-
lines and New Source Performance Standards For the Steel
Making Segment of The Iron and Steel Manufacturing Point Source
Category, EPA 440/1-73/024, U. S. Environmental Protection
Agency, February 1974,-'
Sulfuric Acid and Ferrous Sulfate Recovery From Waste Pickle
Liquor, Joseph K, Seyler et. al., EPA-66Q/2-73-032,
January- 1974.
3. A Study of Foundry Waste Material, Carmen. Santa Maria, M.S.
Thesis, University of Wisconsin, 1974.
4. Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, 2nd Edition,
AP-42, U, S. Environmental Prj>te"ction Agency, 1973.
5. Washington Alert, Published by American Foundrymen's Society,
July 1975.
6. Minerals Yearbook 1972, Vol. I, Metals, Minerals and Fuels.
Prepared by Staff of the Bureau of Mines, U. S. Government
Printing Office, Washington, D. C. 1974.
7. Engineering And Cost Study of The Ferroalloy Industry, EPA-
450/2-74-008, March 1974.
8. Minerals Yearbook 1973, Vol., I, Metals, Minerals and Fuels..
Prepared by Staff of the Bureau of Mines, U.S. Government
Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 1975.
9. Steel Industry Economics and-Federal Income Tax Policy,
American Iron and Steel Institute, June 1975.
10. EPA Policy On Subsurface Emplacement of Fluids By,Well
Injection, Administrator's Decision No. 5, February 6,
1973.
Iiol538
SW-145c.-3
149
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA
SHEET
1, Report No
2.
I
icMsimNa.
I f j'
4. Title and Subtitle
Assessment of Industrial Hazardous Waste
Practices in the Metal Smelting and
Refining Industry ( Volume 3)
5, Report Date
y-i 1 TOT?
m °r Richard P. Leonard, Robert C. Ziegler, K. Eicha
^—.Brown., John Y. Ynng, Hano G. Iteif
9. Performing Organization «ame and Aaoceffs
8, Petfotming Organization Repi.
rd No.
10. Projeet/T«sk/Wotk Uoi« No.
Calspan Corporation
Box 235
Buffalo, New York 14221
11. Contracc/Graa: No.
EPA No. 68-01-2604
12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address
EPA Hazardous Waste Management Division
Office of Solid Waste
Waterside Mall
Washington, D.C, 20640
13. Type of Report & Period
Covered Final
lay 1974- April 1977
15. Supplementary Notes
EPA Project Officers - Timothy Fields, Allen Pearce
16. Abstracts rpj-^g repOrt covers primary and secondary metal smelting and
refining industries. .Characteristics of each industry sector,
including plant locations, production capacities, and smelting
and refining processes, have been identified and described.
Land-disposal or stored residuals have been identified and
characterized for physical and chemical properties. State,
regional, and national estimates have been made of the total
quantities of land-disposed or stored residuals and potentially
hazardous constituents thereof. Current methods employed by the
primary metals industry for the disposal or storage of process
and pollution control residuals on land are described. Methods
of residual treatment and disposal considered suitable for adequate
Health and environmental protection have been provided. Finally,
costs incurred by typical Plants -n ech primary smelting and
_
17, Key Wo« i\fe?iSeiS^rS^WTT7.HfcslT¥ifeiiBei1 a-ns environmentally " sound potelrtiatly
hazardous residual disposal or storage on land have been estimated.
Ferrous Smelting and Refining
Nonferrous Smelting and Refining
Secondary Smelting and Refining
.Primary Smelting and Refining
Hazardous Wastes
Slags, Sludges, Dust
Lagoons
Open Dump
Leaching
Heavy Metals
Lined Lagoons
Soil Sealing - Benton:
Sludge Solidification
Cyanide
Floride
Oil and Grease
te
I7e. COSATI Field/Group
18, Availability Statement
19.. Security Class (This
Report)
UNCLASSIFIED
20. Security Class (This
'UNCLASSIFIED
22. Pncc
NTis-35 IRCV. 10-73) ENDORSED BY ANSI AND UNESCO,
THIS FORM WAY BE REPRODUCED
USCOMM.DC 936S-P74
------- |