Record Display for the EPA National Library Catalog

RECORD NUMBER: 2 OF 2

OLS Field Name OLS Field Data
Main Title Alternative processes for treatment of sinter plant wastewater /
Author Rudasill, Cinthia L. ; Brantner, K. ; Hall, S. A.
Other Authors
Author Title of a Work
Brantner, Karl.
Hall, Stephen A.
CORP Author Metcalf and Eddy, Inc., Boston, MA.;Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC. Air and Energy Engineering Research Lab.
Publisher GPO,
Year Published 1985
Report Number EPA/600/2-85/060; EPA-68-02-3195
Stock Number PB85-211258
OCLC Number 48174175
Subjects Steel industry and trade--Waste disposal--Environmental aspects--United States. ; Iron industry and trade--Waste disposal--Environmental aspects--United States. ; Sintering. ; Sewage--Purification--Filtration
Additional Subjects Water pollution control ; Iron and steel industry ; Sintering ; Substitutes ; Industrial waste treatment ; Standards ; Filtration ; Precipitation(Chemistry) ; Clarification ; Chlorination ; Best technology
Holdings
Library Call Number Additional Info Location Last
Modified
Checkout
Status
NTIS  PB85-211258 Most EPA libraries have a fiche copy filed under the call number shown. Check with individual libraries about paper copy. NTIS 01/01/1988
Collation 73 pages : illustrations
Abstract
The report gives results of an evaluation of the effectiveness of two treatment alternatives in achieving best available technology (BAT) standards: (1) direct filtration, using a dual media filter; and (2) hydroxide precipitation with lime, followed by dual media filtration. With the promulgation of Best Available Technology Economically Achievable Effluent Guidelines and Standards for Iron and Steel Manufacturing, a greater degree of treatment than the clarification process normally used to achieve best practicable technology (BPT) standards may be required for sintering plant blowdown. Evaluation of a third alternative, alkaline chlorination, was attempted; but, due to nonrepresentative test conditions, the effort was abandoned. Based on the limited data generated during the study, it appears that either treatment alternative tested would produce an effluent that would meet the promulgated BAT standards. Direct filtration is less expensive and requires less maintenance and operator attention than the hydroxide precipitation/filtration alternative. The treatment processes were tested, using two EPA-owned mobile pilot plant trailers: one contained a clarifier, used to simulate preclarification; and the other contained the hydroxide precipitation clarifier, chemical tanks, dual media filter, and associated equipment.
Notes
"May 1985." "EPA/600/2-85/060." Microfiche.