Allowable Limits for Phosphate Waste
Question: We are about to incorporate a batch powder-coating system into our production and intend to phosphatize a very small amount of bare steel sheet prior to coating.
Question:
We are about to incorporate a batch powder-coating system into our production and intend to phosphatize a very small amount of bare steel sheet prior to coating. While it appears that the amount of acidic effluent is so minimal (estimated at 140 ppm of total wastewater discharge) as to be of no concern, I have not been able to determine the allowable limits that EPA has for injection wells or discharge into private septic systems. Can you steer me in the right direction? Also, the microbiologists I’ve spoken with feel that phosphoric acid at these minimal levels would not inhibit biological activity in the septic system. Do you have any experience with similar situations? Any info you have would be appreciated. T.S.
Answer:
Your questions could take many pages to fully answer, but let me bring up several issues.
First, I assume that your proposed phosphatizing wastewater is not a RCRA hazardous waste. That is, its pH is between 2.0 and 12.5 and its metal concentrations for arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, lead, mercury, selenium and silver would pass the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP). Making this assumption and based upon your information, your septic tank system would be classified as a Class V injection well. While these types of wells are allowable, U.S. EPA regulations require that, at a minimum, you must notify your state EPA or U.S. EPA regional office, depending who has underground injection control (UIC) authority in your state as required by 40 CFR 144. They would then make a determination if you require a UIC permit. Furthermore, Class V wells must meet certain criteria and standards as required by 40 CFR 146-Subpart F. These include construction features, nature and volume of wastewater, assessment of contamination potential, assessment of available corrective alternatives and recommendations for remedial action. Lastly, it is the policy of U.S. EPA and many states to strongly discourage the construction of new Class V wells and encourage the closing of existing Class V wells. In summary, for the small amount of wastewater that you expect to generate, it is my opinion that the number of regulatory hurdles that you would have to overcome to permit this discharge is not worth it. Furthermore, I strongly recommend that you do not discharge in this manner due to its high risk and liability. May I suggest several alternatives assuming that a sanitary sewer is not nearby.
You could investigate the feasibility of a direct discharge to the nearest surface water after treatment. Again, for small dischargers, the permitting and ongoing compliance costs can be expensive, especially with biological monitoring typically required for finishing discharges. This test can cost $1,500-5,000.
You can evaluate, along with your phosphate equipment supplier, the option of recycling and reusing the wastewater through the use of chemical treatment and filtration. The residuals or wastes generated by this process would then be shipped offsite for disposal or its volume further reduced by evaporation before offsite disposal.
If reusing the wastewater is not feasible, another option is to collect the wastewater and dispose of it offsite, or, again, further reduce its volume by evaporation before offsite disposal.
While all of these options are technically proven and feasible, your decisions will likely be guided by their costs.
Related Content
Zinc Phosphate: Questions and Answers
Our experts share specific questions about zinc phosphate and pretreatment
Read MoreNASF/AESF Foundation Research Project #121: Development of a Sustainability Metrics System and a Technical Solution Method for Sustainable Metal Finishing - 15th Quarterly Report
This NASF-AESF Foundation research project report covers the twelfth quarter of project work (October-December 2023) at Wayne State University in Detroit. In this period, our main effort focused on the development of a set of Digital Twins (DTs) using the Physics-Informed Neural Network (PINN) technology with application on parts rinsing simulation.
Read MoreNovel Wastewater Treatment Targets Micropollutants
Swiss wastewater treatment technology provider Oxyle specializes in advanced wastewater treatment for removal of highly persistent micropollutants such as PFAS.
Read MoreNASF/AESF Foundation Research Project #120: Electrochemical Destruction of Perfluorooctanesulfonate in Electroplating Wastewaters – January – December 2023
This NASF-AESF Foundation research project report covers quarterly reporting for the year 2023 at the University of Illinois at Chicago. The objective of this work is to utilize a cost-effective reactive electrochemical membrane (REM) for the removal of PFAS from synthetic electroplating wastewater. Discussed here are the oxidation of PFOA with three different catalysts, development of a method for detecting PFAS, as well as work on 6:2-fluorotelomersulfonic acid (6:2 FTS) and electrodeposited bismuth/tin oxide catalysts.
Read MoreRead Next
Episode 45: An Interview with Chandler Mancuso, MacDermid Envio Solutions
Chandler Mancuso, technical director with MacDermid Envio discusses updating your wastewater treatment system and implementing materials recycling solutions to increase efficiencies, control costs and reduce environmental impact.
Read MoreDelivering Increased Benefits to Greenhouse Films
Baystar's Borstar technology is helping customers deliver better, more reliable production methods to greenhouse agriculture.
Read MoreMasking Solutions for Medical Applications
According to Custom Fabricating and Supplies, a cleanroom is ideal for converting, die cutting, laminating, slitting, packaging and assembly of medical-grade products.
Read More