Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

  

Assessing the Management of Lead in

Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace

Dust

Final Report 

EPA530-R-09-004 

April 2009 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery

With assistance from:

ICF International

1725 I Street, Suite 1000

Washington, DC 20006

(202) 862‐1100

1
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

Table of Contents 

Foreword.......................................................................................................................... 5

Executive Summary ........................................................................................................6

1. Introduction ............................................................................................................9

2. Background..............................................................................................................9

3. Description of Study Methodology.......................................................................10

4. Data Gaps and Limitations of the Study .............................................................. 13

5. Lead in Scrap Material Flows ................................................................................ 13

5.1. Lead and Lead Products................................................................................. 13

5.2. Ferrous Metal Scrap ....................................................................................... 15

5.3. Non‐Ferrous Metal Scrap...............................................................................18

5.4. Electric Arc Furnace Steel Production..........................................................18

5.5. EAF Furnace Dust Recycling .........................................................................18

5.6. EAF Dust Characteristics ...............................................................................19

6. Industry Processes for Potential Lead‐Bearing Scrap .........................................19

6.1. Lead and Lead Products.................................................................................19

6.1.1. Primary and Secondary Lead Production.............................................19

6.1.2. Lead Products ........................................................................................20

6.1.3. Leaded Steel Products ........................................................................... 22

6.1.4. Best Practices for Lead and Lead Products.......................................... 23

6.2. Ferrous Metal Scrap Recycling .....................................................................24

6.2.1. Home, Prompt, and Post‐consumer Scrap..........................................24

6.2.2. Ferrous Metal Scrap Consumption ......................................................24

6.2.3. Ferrous and Non‐ferrous Metal Scrap Composition .......................... 25

6.3. Ferrous Metal Scrap Suppliers...................................................................... 27

6.3.1. Automobile Dismantlers.......................................................................28

6.3.2. Automobile Shredders ..........................................................................29

6.3.3. Ferrous and Non‐Ferrous Scrap Metal Recycling Facilities ............... 32

6.3.4. Construction and Demolition Materials.............................................. 33

6.3.5. Best Practices for Scrap Metal Suppliers ............................................. 38

6.4. Non‐ferrous Metal Scrap Recycling ............................................................. 39

6.4.1. Automobile and Industrial Batteries ................................................... 39

6.4.2. Construction and Demolition Materials..............................................40

6.4.3. Other Lead and Lead Product Scrap....................................................40

6.4.4. Other Lead‐Containing Materials .........................................................41

6.5. Iron Foundries ............................................................................................... 42

6.6. Integrated Iron and Steel Production.......................................................... 42

6.7. Electric Arc Furnace Steel Production......................................................... 43

6.7.1. EAF Scrap Metal Acceptance and Processing ..................................... 43

6.7.2. Scrap Acceptance Criteria.....................................................................44

6.7.3. Visual Inspection Practices and Procedures .......................................44

6.7.4. EAF Scrap Metal Management............................................................. 45

6.7.5. Hazardous Air Pollutant Emissions Standards for EAF Facilities .....46

2
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

6.7.6. International Standards and Guidelines.............................................. 47

6.7.7. Best Practices for EAF Operators ......................................................... 47

6.8. EAF Dust ........................................................................................................48

6.8.1. Generation .............................................................................................48

6.8.2. Processing ...............................................................................................51

6.8.3. Composition........................................................................................... 52

6.8.4. Treatment and Recycling (Zinc Recovery).......................................... 55

6.8.5. Federal K061 Waste Delisting Actions ................................................. 58

7. Study Findings.......................................................................................................59

8. K061 Lead Reduction Strategies ...........................................................................62

8.1. Future Strategy Considerations....................................................................62

8.2. Reduction and Separation Strategies........................................................... 63

Appendix A: Summary of Contacts ............................................................................. 65

Appendix B: Lead Consumption and Scrap Metal Consumption Data ....................68

Appendix C: Federal Delisting Actions Pursued by K061 Waste Generators...........78

Appendix D: Glossary ....................................................................................................81

3
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

List of Acronyms

AISI – American Iron and Steel Institute

ARA – Automotive Recyclers Association

BOF – Basic Oxygen Furnace

BOP – Basic Oxygen Process

C&D – Construction and Demolition  

CMRA – Construction Materials Recycling Association

CZO – Crude Zinc Oxide  

EAF – Electric Arc Furnace

EPA – (United States) Environmental Protection Agency

HTMR – High Temperature Metals Recovery  

ISRI – Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries  

NDA – National Demolition Association

NESHAP – National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants   

RCC – Resource Conservation Challenge

RCRA – Resource Conservation and Recovery Act

REACH – Registration, Evaluation and Authorization of Chemicals

ROHS – Restriction of Hazardous Substances Directive

SMA – Steel Manufacturers Association   

SRI – Steel Recycling Institute

TCLP – Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure

TRI – Toxic Release Inventory

TSCA – Toxic Substances Control Act

TSDF – Treatment, Storage and Disposal Facility

WEEE – Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Directive                 

XRF – X‐Ray Fluorescence Analyzer  

4
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

Foreword 

The following study investigates the sources of lead in ferrous scrap metal and potential

methods for increasing the recovery of lead. This study was conducted by the Office of

Resource Conservation and Recovery (ORCR) based on the interest from state and federal

environmental agencies, as well as industry who all recognize that large quantities of lead

end up in K061 and is not recovered. There is a mutual desire to capture a valuable

commodity and reduce a hazardous constituent of a listed waste. This investigation

revealed:  

• The residual (contaminant) lead content of ferrous metal scrap can be controlled

by electric arc furnace (EAF) operators to some extent; however, the majority of

lead content comes from the alloyed lead in ferrous products.   

• While there are opportunities at specific facilities to remove residual (non‐alloyed)

lead, there does not seem to be any unknown lead sources that could be easily

identified and separated from scrap to significantly reduce the lead content of

K061.  

• Reducing the amount of lead in products that can potentially enter the ferrous

metal scrap stream seems to be the most feasible and cost effective method of

managing lead in scrap.  

• Finally, this study outlines for industries in the scrap metal supply chain best

practices for managing lead in scrap metal.

The EPA intends to post this study in its entirety on our website to inform future waste

minimization activities in both the public and private sectors.  

5
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

Executive Summary

This study was conducted by EPA’s Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery (ORCR)

to investigate potential methods for reducing the lead content of scrap metal used as a raw

material in Electric Arc Furnaces (EAFs), thereby potentially reducing the lead content of

the EAF air emission control dust/sludge (listed as K061 RCRA hazardous waste)

generated from EAF operations.  Section 1 of this report describes the organization of the

report into six sections and four appendices.   

Section 2 provides Background information that sets the stage for this study.  EAFs use

ferrous metal scrap, rather than iron ore, as a raw material, and lead contained in the

scrap metal becomes largely incorporated into the EAF dust. This study focused on

existing practices and procedures to segregate out lead‐containing materials from the

ferrous metal scrap stream and potential practices and procedures for management of the

lead in scrap metal to further reduce the amount of lead in K061. The study also

considered the economic feasibility of further mitigation.  

Section 3 provides a Description of the Study Methodology.  The objective of the study

was to identify the primary sources of lead in scrap metal that contribute to the lead

content in K061 and to answer “with statistical significance” questions about lead in scrap

metal and lead in K061, including:

• What is the average lead content in K061?

• What is the range of variability?

• How has this average varied historically?

• Can trends be identified that would be responsible for this variation?

• How well can spikes in the concentration of lead in K061 be associated with

particular scrap grades charged to a furnace?

Information for the study to address these questions was obtained through a review of

published information concerning the characteristics of K061, review of existing studies, 1

and interviews with trade associations and individual company representatives in the

scrap metal supply industry, iron and steel manufacturing industry, automobile parts

industry, and primary and secondary lead industries.  

Section 4 describes Data Gaps and Limitations of the Study.  This study provides data

concerning the characteristics of K061, the characteristics of scrap metal, and EAF steel

production.  However, a principal finding of the study is that sufficient data are not

available to identify a statistically verifiable relationship between the lead content of K061

and the lead content of the scrap sources and scrap processed. EAF operators indicated

either that data are not collected to a sufficient degree to enable a reliable correlation

between the types or sources of scrap metal and lead concentrations, or that the scrap

metal streams are too variable to enable conclusive definition of their relative

contributions to the lead content of K061.   

Section 5 provides an overview of Lead in Material Flows, including potential sources of

lead in products potentially entering the ferrous metal scrap stream and specific types

6
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

(grades) of ferrous metal scrap likely to contain lead or lead materials.  Sources of lead in

products potentially entering the ferrous metal scrap stream include:

• Scrap Automobiles containing batteries; battery terminals; leaded‐steel parts (e.g.,

bearing metal); cast metal parts, etc.  

• Structural Steel (containing lead‐based paint)

• Construction and Demolition (C&D) Materials (including roofing materials,

counterweights, sheet steel, pipes, lead‐based paint)

• Cast Metal and Leaded Steel Components (e.g., bearing metal)  

• Turnings and Borings (e.g., from steel product fabrication)

• Electronics Components (e.g., solder)  

• Foreign Import Products (e.g., package strapping, steel cans)

Scrap metal feed streams (based on the Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries (ISRI) scrap

specifications) to EAFs include:  

• Shredded scrap (mostly shredded automobiles)

• No. 2 heavy melt steel (over 1/8 inch thickness)

• No. 1 heavy melt steel (over 1⁄4 inch thickness)

• No. 1 busheling (sheet clippings, stampings, etc.)

• No. 1 bundles (No. 1 steel cut to furnace charge box size)

• Cut structural and plate steel

• Turnings and borings

• No. 2 bundles

• Other (e.g., steel cans)  

Section 6 contains a description of Industry Processes for Potential Lead‐bearing Scrap,

and identifies practices and procedures, including best practices, being applied by scrap

metal generators, scrap metal recyclers, and EAF operators for managing lead in scrap.  

These include visual inspection of scrap loads and magnetic or other types of physical

separation.  One finding of this study is that various grades of ferrous metal scrap,

including shredded scrap, heavy melt steel, busheling, and turnings and borings have the

potential to contain lead or lead materials.  EAF operators therefore can control the types

(grades) and quality of ferrous metal scrap that they accept (e.g., turnings and borings) to

control the amount of lead in the ferrous metal scrap feed to the EAFs.   

Section 7 provides a Summary of the Study Findings. One principal finding of the study is

that automobile dismantlers, automobile shredders, scrap metal recyclers, and EAF

operators generally believe that they are already recovering the lead‐containing material

that is feasible for them to separate from the ferrous metal scrap stream, and that

identifying, segregating, and recovering additional lead‐containing material either would

be technically infeasible or would not be cost effective.  Study contacts indicated that the

most feasible method of reducing the amount of lead in ferrous metal scrap, and the

amount of lead in EAF dust, would be to reduce the amount of lead used in products that

could potentially enter the ferrous metal scrap stream.  Study contacts also indicated that

they considered it unlikely that further efforts to reduce the amount of lead in ferrous

metal scrap would result in the reduction of the lead content of K061 to below TC toxicity

7
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

levels, although unless delisted the K061 would still be considered a hazardous waste.  

This conclusion is supported by the EAF dust lead concentration data and EAF operating

data; the average lead concentrations in EAF dust are a factor of ten (10) higher than the

concentration that would correspond to the RCRA waste characterization toxicity level.  

Section 8 provides an overview of  further actions that can be taken to investigate lead

reduction and separation strategies and lead recovery strategies to reduce the amount of

lead in scrap feed to EAFs and thereby potentially reduce the lead content of EAF dust.  

These include establishing initiatives to reduce the amount of lead used in products

potentially entering the ferrous metal scrap stream, and investigating the cost and

effectiveness of improved separation and recovery strategies for lead and lead‐containing

materials in the ferrous metal scrap stream.

Appendix A includes a list of Study Contacts.  Appendix B is a summary of Lead

Consumption and Scrap Metal Consumption Data, Appendix C is a summary of Federal

K061 Delisting Actions, and  Appendix D contains a Glossary of terms used in this report.

8
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

1. Introduction 

This study was conducted by EPA’s Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery (ORCR)

to investigate potential methods for reducing the lead content of scrap metal used as raw

material in Electric Arc Furnaces (EAFs), thereby potentially reducing the lead content of

EAF air emission control dust/sludge (listed as K061 RCRA hazardous waste and referred

to hereafter as “EAF dust”) generated from EAF operations.  The remainder of the report is

organized into six sections and four appendices.   Specifically:

• Section 2 provides Background information that sets the stage for this study.   

• Section 3 provides a Description of the Study Methodology.

• Section 4 describes the Data Gaps and Limitations of the Study.   

• Section 5 provides an overview of Lead in Material Flows.  

• Section 6 contains a description of Industry Processes for Potential Lead‐bearing

Scrap, and identifies practices and procedures, including best practices, being

applied by scrap metal generators, scrap metal recyclers, and EAF operators for

managing lead in scrap.   

• Section 7 provides a Summary of Study Findings.

• Section 8 provides an overview of further actions that can be taken to investigate

lead reduction and separation and recovery strategies to reduce the amount of lead

in scrap feed to EAFs and thereby potentially reduce the lead content of EAF dust.

Appendix A includes a list of Study Contacts,  Appendix B is a summary of Lead

Consumption and Scrap Metal Consumption Data, Appendix C is a summary of Federal

K061 Delisting Actions, and  Appendix D contains a Glossary of terms used in this report.

2. Background 

EPA created the Resource Conservation Challenge (RCC) as a national effort to identify

innovative methods to conserve and protect natural resources, and is moving from a

cradle‐to‐grave approach for waste management to a cradle‐to‐cradle approach for

materials management, with the objective of safely recycling and reusing industrial

residuals and by‐products as material inputs.  The National Partnership for Environmental

Priorities (NPEP), a component of the RCC, focuses on hazardous materials management

and encourages public and private organizations to form voluntary partnerships with EPA

to reduce the use or release of 31 chemicals considered a priority by EPA due to their

persistent, bio‐accumulative, and toxic properties.  NPEP focuses on both source

reduction ‐ eliminating the use and generation of toxic materials – as well as the recycling

of toxic materials that are generated. Recycling is facilitated when the presence of toxic

materials are minimized. The focus of this study is on lead, the priority chemical

generated in the largest quantity. In 2006, a total of approximately 499 million pounds

(approximately 226,000 metric tons) of lead and lead compounds was reported disposed

or otherwise released to the environment, according to EPA’s Toxic Release Inventory

(TRI). However, a much larger quantity, 643 million pounds, was recycled.

9
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

One category of hazardous waste containing lead is EAF dust. EAFs use scrap metal, rather

than iron ore, as a raw material, and lead contained in the scrap metal is volatilized,

captured by air pollution control devices, and incorporated into K061, usually as a dry dust

instead of a wet sludge. Approximately 900,000 metric tons of EAF dust is generated

annually in the U.S. of which 600,000 metric tons is further processed for metals recovery

(primarily zinc) at Horsehead Corporation facilities in the U.S., while the remainder

(300,000 metric tons) is either treated prior to disposal in landfills or exported.  Zinc

Nacional, S.A. (Monterrey, Mexico), a zinc products producer, also operates an EAF dust

metals recovery facility. 2

   In 2006, approximately 160,000 short tons (145,000 metric tons)

of K061 were exported from the U.S. to Mexico.3

  

EAF dust was listed by EPA as an industry‐specific hazardous waste based on the presence

of hexavalent chromium, lead, and cadmium.4 Cadmium, lead, and chromium are the

primary hazardous constituents  contained in EAF dust generated from carbon steel

production. Chromium and nickel also are present in higher quantities in EAF dust

generated from stainless steel production.  EAF dust generated from carbon steel

production can contain on the order of 1.5 percent lead and also can contain chromium,

cadmium, and other metals.  However, the composition of EAF dust varies widely

depending on the types of raw materials used in the EAF and use of furnace additives.5

  

For example, one EAF dust processor reported EAF dust containing approximately 8

percent lead, 25 percent iron and 25 percent zinc. 6

  Typical lead TCLP concentrations for

EAF dust reported by EAF operators ranged from 100 – 500 ppm (mg/l).

Note that the total metal concentration in EAF dust and the TCLP metal concentration of

EAF dust are not the same.  The TCLP procedure is a leaching procedure that is intended

to measure the amount of a metal (e.g., lead) that can leach from the material, and not the

total concentration of the metal in the material.  The EPA protocol for the TCLP method

indicates that if a material is a solid, the maximum leachable TCLP concentration of a

constituent can be calculated by dividing the concentration of the constituent in the solid

by a factor of 20, although this assumes that all lead in the solid will leach out, which is

unlikely to occur.  This factor is derived from the liquid/solid ratio that is inherent in the

TCLP analytical method. 7

  Therefore for EAF dust having a total lead concentration of

15,000 mg/kg (1.5 percent), the maximum leachable concentration of lead would be 750

mg/liter.

The study focused on existing practices and procedures to segregate lead‐containing

materials from the ferrous metal scrap stream and potential practices and procedures for

management of lead in scrap metal to further reduce the amount of lead in K061. The

study also considered the economic feasibility of further mitigation.  

3. Description of Study Methodology 

The objective of the study was to identify the primary sources of lead in scrap metal that

contribute to the lead content in EAF dust (K061) generated from the production of steel

in electric arc furnaces and to answer “with statistical significance” questions about lead in

scrap metal and K061, including:

10
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

• What is the average lead content in K061?

• What is the range of variability?

• How has this average varied historically?

• Can trends be identified that would be responsible for this variation?

• How well can spikes in the concentration of lead in K061 be associated with

particular scrap grades charged to a furnace?

Information for the study to address these questions was obtained through a review of

published information concerning the characteristics of K061, review of the draft Report

on Lead and Mercury Flows in Iron and Steel Production, 8 and interviews with trade

associations and individual company representatives in the automobile dismantling, scrap

metal recycling, iron and steel manufacturing, automobile parts, and primary and

secondary lead industries.  

Review of Published Information

A review of published data for K061 was conducted, including data from EPA databases

such as RCRAInfo [Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Information System (RCRIS)

and Biennial Reporting System (BRS)].  The objective of this review was to assess the range

of composition and other characteristics of K061, the sources that generated the scrap

metal, and its methods of management.   

In addition, a review of hazardous waste delisting actions pursued by K061 hazardous

waste generators was conducted, including delisting actions published by EPA, and

delisting actions published by the state environmental regulatory agencies.  The objective

of this review was to identify generators that have pursued delisting actions, which actions

were successful, and identify potential correlations with process data for the delisted

hazardous waste generators.

Furthermore, a review was conducted of print and online metal recycling trade journals

identified by trade association/industry contacts (e.g., Scrap, published by the Institute of

Scrap Recycling Industries (ISRI)).  The objective of this review was to assess whether

these publications contain relevant information for the study.   

Review of Report on Lead and Mercury Flows

A Draft Report on Lead in Scrap Metal and Mercury Flows was reviewed.  The objective of

this review was to identify potentially significant lead flows into the scrap metal stream

and identify potential sources of additional data for the study.  Note that the Final Report

had not been released as this report was being prepared; therefore, the review used the

Draft Report and EPA and other external comments on the Draft Report. This report was

sponsored by EPA’s Great Lakes Program in Region 5. 9

Trade Association and Industry Contacts

A list of initial trade association and industry contacts was identified, in part using EPA’s

Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery (ORCR) contacts developed from a

previous phase of this study, and in part through research into the generation and flow of

11
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

scrap metal from the sources that generated the scrap metal to the EAFs.  The initial list of

contacts included trade association and industry contacts in the following industry

sectors:  

• Automobile Dismantlers

• Automobile Shredders

• Construction and Demolition (C&D) Materials/Scrap Processors

• Ferrous and Non‐ferrous Scrap Metal Facilities (other than Automobile Shredders)  

• Ferrous Metal Foundries and Steel (EAF) Mini Mills

Telephone interviews were conducted with these contacts, and an in‐person meeting was

conducted with the Steel Manufacturers Association (SMA) and several of their member

companies.  These interviews and additional research led to the identification of other

industry and trade association contacts that were then interviewed.  These additional

contacts included the non‐ferrous scrap metal and secondary lead smelting sectors.  A list

of the initial and additional industry and trade association contacts is included in

Appendix A.  The SMA consolidated data from eight SMA member EAF operators so

operating data for individual member companies could not be identified by company

name.  Another separate EAF operator was contacted and also provided operating data.    

Research and interviews with contacts focused on identifying the flows of scrap material

from sources that generated the scrap metal (e.g., automobile dismantlers,

construction/demolition operations) to the facilities (e.g., Basic Oxygen Furnaces (BOFs),

EAFs, Iron Foundries) where the scrap is reprocessed into steel (and where K061 and other

potentially lead‐containing residuals are generated) and on identifying the characteristics

of the scrap material flows and residuals.  Scrap material flows researched included home

scrap (i.e., scrap generated at the steel mills); prompt scrap (i.e., scrap generated by

manufacturers of iron and steel products) and post‐consumer scrap (e.g., automobiles,

appliances, C&D scrap).  

Information concerning scrap generation, management, and processing obtained from

trade association and industry contacts and from supplemental research was also assessed

for the purposes of identifying the “best practices” for the scrap generation, scrap supply,

and scrap processing sectors.  Similarly, practices and procedures for the management of

K061 were assessed to identify “best practices” and also to assess the relationship between

the characteristics of the K061 generated by EAFs and the characteristics of the scrap

processed by the EAFs.    

EPA recently promulgated regulations concerning the control of hazardous air pollutants

from stainless steel and non‐stainless steel EAFs and from steel and iron foundries. 10, 11  

These regulations establish requirements for management of scrap at EAF and foundry

facilities to control emissions of mercury, lead, and other hazardous air pollutants.   The

effects of these regulatory requirements are also considered in this study, along with

standard industry practices and best practices.    

12
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

4. Data Gaps and Limitations of the Study 

Some questions concerning specific practices and procedures for the management of lead

in scrap metal touched on possible business confidentiality issues.  Industry trade

associations, including the SMA and ISRI indicated that the best approach to address the

study questions, while avoiding their members’ confidentiality concerns, was for the trade

associations to aggregate responses from individual member companies.  In such cases,

trade associations (e.g., ISRI, SMA) are cited in this report to protect confidentiality

interests.  

This study provides data concerning the characteristics of K061, including its lead content,

data concerning the characteristics of scrap, and operations data for EAF steel production.  

However, a principal finding of the study is that sufficient data are not available to identify

a statistically verifiable relationship between the lead content of K061 and the lead content

of the scrap sources and scrap processed. EAF operators indicated either that data are not

collected to a sufficient degree to enable a reliable correlation between the types or

sources of scrap and lead concentrations, or that the scrap metal streams are too variable

to enable conclusive definition of their relative contributions to the lead content of the

K061.  Several EAF operators also indicated that collecting a sufficient amount of data to

assess trends in the concentration of lead in K061 would not be feasible and, even if

sufficient data were to be collected, any trends in lead concentration data would likely

remain inconclusive.  One reason for this is that the overall lead content of the scrap

metal processed in EAFs is low and the lead in scrap is “widely dispersed and in low‐

concentration materials,” as opposed to being primarily in relatively large, visually

identifiable items.  This is because items that may contain lead are – generally – already

being removed from the scrap stream using visual inspection and manual sorting

procedures.  Therefore, attempts were not made to conduct a statistical analysis of the

available data concerning the characteristics of EAF dust and the characteristics of scrap

processed in EAFs.

5. Lead in Scrap Material Flows 

This section describes the flow of lead in scrap material, including lead and lead products,

ferrous metal scrap, non‐ferrous metal scrap, electric arc furnace operations, and EAF dust

treatment and disposal.  

5.1. Lead and Lead Products 

Sources of lead in products potentially entering the ferrous metal scrap stream include:

• Scrap Automobiles (containing batteries; battery terminals; leaded‐steel parts (e.g.,

bearing metal); cast metal parts)

• Structural Steel (containing lead‐based paint)

• Construction and Demolition (C&D) Materials (including roofing materials,

counterweights, sheet steel, pipes, lead‐based paint)

• Cast Metal and Leaded Steel Components (e.g., bearing metal)  

13
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

• Turnings and Borings (e.g., from steel product fabrication)

• Electronic Components (e.g., solder)  

• Foreign Import Products (e.g., package strapping, steel cans)

Approximately 90 percent of U.S. lead consumption is for storage batteries.  In 2006,

approximately 2 percent of U.S. lead consumption was used in the production of cast

metal parts, including vehicle parts; 1.5 percent in other metal products; and 1.0 percent in

coatings and other lead oxide applications.  Leaded steel is approximately two percent of

total steel production in the U.S.; leaded steel is used in bearings and machined parts.  In

2006, only approximately 0.1 percent of U.S. lead production was used in bearing metals.  

Leaded‐steel contains between 0.15% and 0.35% lead according to AISI specifications.  

Conventional non‐leaded steel contains <0.01% lead.

Vehicle batteries and battery components, which are not difficult to remove from scrap

vehicles, have higher value as non‐ferrous metal scrap; therefore, these leaded materials

are mostly removed either at automobile dismantler facilities or automobile shredder

facilities.  Batteries and battery components enter the non‐ferrous metal (lead) scrap

stream.  Other vehicle components, e.g., lead‐containing bearings and cast metal parts,

are more difficult to locate and remove from the vehicles and are generally not removed

prior to crushing or shredding of the vehicles.  Lead‐containing components of white

goods (appliances), machinery, and other scrap that may also be shredded at automobile

shredder facilities would also generally not be removed prior to crushing or shredding.    

The use of lead in most product applications other than storage batteries and cast metal

and other metal products has declined sharply in the past 15 years, as indicated by U.S.

Geological Survey (USGS) data for 1993 and 2006 (see Table 5‐1).  Applications for which

U.S. lead consumption has declined include bearing metals, brass and bronze, extruded

products (e.g., pipes) sheet lead and solder for building construction, and lead oxide

applications, including pigments.  Some of the domestically produced lead‐containing

products (e.g., electronic components containing lead solder) may have been replaced by

similar imported products that would not be reflected in U.S. lead consumption data;

therefore the amount of lead entering the scrap metal stream may not be completely

represented by U.S. lead consumption data.    

As shown in Table 5.1, approximately 30,000 metric tons of lead was used in cast metal

parts in 2006 and approximately 23,000 metric tons of lead was used in other metal

products.  Lead wheel weight quantities would likely be contained in “Other Metal

Products” or “Miscellaneous Uses.” Because there are so few manufacturers, this product

category is not broken out by USGS for proprietary reasons. Some of these products, like

wheel weights, would be segregated into the non‐ferrous metal scrap stream, but others

could remain in vehicles or other products entering the ferrous metal scrap stream.  If all

of this lead entered the ferrous metal scrap stream (approximately 50 million metric tons

of scrap), it would result in an overall lead concentration of approximately 0.1 percent in

ferrous metal scrap.  Approximately 20 kilograms of EAF dust are generated per metric ton

of steel produced, 12 or approximately 28 kilograms of EAF dust per metric ton of ferrous

metal scrap charged.  Assuming that 100 percent of the lead in the ferrous metal scrap

ended up in the EAF dust, the 0.1 percent of lead in the ferrous metal scrap would

correspond to a concentration of approximately 3.7 percent lead in the EAF dust. Nine

14
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

companies reported the lead composition of EAF dust through the SMA, and one other

company provided EAF composition data. Based on data received from these ten

companies, the average lead content of K061 ranges from 800 mg/kg to 19,850 mg/kg lead,

with the average EAF dust lead content (from 26 individual data points) of  approximately

7,100 mg/kg lead.

5.2. Ferrous Metal Scrap 

The flow of ferrous scrap metal feed streams to EAFs is shown in Figure 5‐1.  Scrap metal

grades charged to EAFs include:  

• Shredded scrap (mostly shredded automobiles)

• No. 2 heavy melt steel (over 1/8 inch thickness)

• No. 1 heavy melt steel (over 1⁄4 inch thickness)

• No. 1 busheling (sheet clippings, stampings, etc.)

• No. 1 bundles (No. 1 steel cut to furnace charge box size)

• Cut structural and plate steel

• Turnings and borings

• No. 2 bundles

• Other (e.g., steel cans)  

TABLE 5-1 

U.S. CONSUMPTION OF LEAD, BY PRODUCT1 

(Metric tons, lead content) 

Product 1993 2006 1993 2006 

Ammunition, shot and bullets 65,100 65,300 5.05% 4.19% 

Bearing Metals (1) 4,830 1,240 0.37% 0.08% 

Brass and bronze, billets and ingots 5,750 2,620 0.45% 0.17% 

Casting Metals (2) 18,500 29,900 1.43% 1.92% 

Cable covering 17,200 Not reported 1.33% NR 

Calking lead (buildings) 961 Not reported 0.08% NR 

Pipes, traps, other extruded products: 5,740 845 0.44% 0.05% 

Sheet Lead: Building Construction 15,200 7,710 1.18% 0.49% 

Sheet Lead: Storage Tanks/Medical 6,030 850 0.47% 0.05% 

Solder: Electronic components, accessories and other electrical equipment 9,430 6,860 0.73% 0.46% 

Solder: Motor vehicles and equipment, metal cans, building construction 4,970 280 0.39% 0.02% 

Total storage batteries 1,050,000 1,400,000 81.40% 89.74% 

Other metal products (3) 5,360 22,600 0.42% 1.45% 

Total Pigments, glass, and ceramics 63,600 16,200 4.93% 1.04% 

Miscellaneous uses 11,800 12,300 0.91% 0.79% 

1,290,000 1,566,705 99.57% 100.45% 

Source: USGS Minerals Yearbook, Lead, 2006, 1994 

[Numbers in this table do not add up to 100 percent because of rounding.] 

(1) Includes Machinery except electrical, Terne metal, Motor vehicles and equipment, and Other transportation equipment. 

(2) Includes Electrical machinery and equipment, Motor vehicles and equipment, Other transportation equipment, Nuclear radiation shielding 

(3) Includes lead consumed in foil, collapsible tubes, annealing, galvanizing, plating, electrowinning, and fishing weights. 

Ferrous scrap grades processed by EAFs are not typically graded with respect to lead

content, although certain grades note that lead content should be limited, no numerical

specifications are applied; for example No. 2 bundles, by grade, cannot contain lead‐

coated material, and machine shop turnings by grade are to be free of “non‐ferrous metal

in a free state.”  In addition to ferrous scrap grade specifications, individual scrap metal

15
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

recyclers and EAF and BOF operators may establish site‐specific specifications with their

suppliers concerning the lead content of ferrous metal scrap.   

For example, automobile dismantler, automobile shredder, and scrap metal recycling

facilities all reported that they have established requirements that batteries and battery

terminals be removed from scrap vehicles before being shredded.  Scrap metal recycling

facilities and EAF operators also reported that they either do not accept turnings and

borings (from machined steel that is typically higher in lead content) or manage these

materials separately from the general ferrous metal scrap stream.  In addition, scrap metal

recycling facilities and EAF operators reported that they have established procedures to

segregate non‐ferrous metal scrap from ferrous metal scrap through visual inspection,

magnetic separation, and other means.  However, even with established procedures, they

indicated that some lead enters the ferrous metal scrap stream through various pathways.

Both scrap metal recycling facilities and EAF operators reported that lead is widely

dispersed in low concentrations in scrap containing leaded‐steel parts, cast metal parts,

lead‐containing components, or lead‐based coatings, and that these components are not

readily identifiable either through visual inspection, magnetic, or other physical means

and, therefore, are not readily separable from the general ferrous metal scrap stream.  

Most ferrous metal scrap coming to EAFs is therefore conventional steel grades that may

include such components.   

The range of lead content in mixed content grades of scrap like shred is unclear.

(Shredded scrap is one of the most common scrap grades; it consists of any ferrous metal

that has been processed through a shredder that pounds the ferrous item into fist‐sized

pieces.) It can be assumed this range would be lower than the average lead content of EAF

furnace dust, which ranges from 1 to 2% as discussed in section 6.8.3, since the volatized

lead would be concentrated in the air pollution control device. (The lead content in

section 6.8.3 is the actual, measured lead content of EAF dust, whereas in the previous

section and in this section the lead content is being extrapolated from assumed inputs.)

Using shredded scrap as an example: rough calculation for 11,000,000 metric tons of

shredded scrap generated and 1,400,000 metric tons of lead used in batteries would

indicate that over 7.5% of the batteries would have to enter the shredded scrap stream to

produce a lead content of 1%, based on our research. This could mean one of two things: 1)

commonly quoted recycling rates for lead acid batteries (>90%) is overstated and a

majority of this lead is lost in the ferrous metal scrap stream, or 2) lead acid batteries are

not big contributors to the lead content of K061. There is some research that suggests that

the recycling rates of lead‐acid batteries are lower than commonly stated13, however, mass

balances reveal that high estimates of batteries lost to the ferrous metal scrap stream

would still not make up a significant percentage of lead in K061. Rather, No. 1 heavy melt

steel, potentially containing cast metal parts, is more likely to be a source of lead as

compared to structural and plate steel or busheling (e.g., sheet clippings, stampings),

according to ISRI.   Also, it is reported that the amount of lead used in lead oxide

applications, including coatings has decreased significantly (see Table 5‐1), although lead

is still used in bridge and highway paints.  However, much of the structural steel entering

the scrap metal market would have been erected decades ago and may have been painted

with lead‐based coatings when these coatings were more widely used.  Therefore,

although the use of lead in lead‐based coatings is decreasing, there is a lag between the

amount of lead being used in coatings today and the amount of lead entering the scrap

16
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

metal stream in structural steel coatings.  Similarly, the use of lead in building

construction has also declined; however, buildings undergoing demolition today may have

been constructed decades ago when lead was more commonly used in building

construction for roofing materials (e.g., roof flashing and sheeting) and pipe connections.   

One issue identified by ISRI is that certain types of imported steel (e.g., strapping used for

shipping; steel cans) may contain more lead than similar products manufactured in the

U.S.; these materials may not be easily distinguishable from domestically‐produced

materials and would generally not be segregated from the general ferrous‐metal scrap

stream.  Also, such materials would not have sufficient lead content to be processed in

secondary lead smelters; therefore if these materials were to be segregated they would not

become part of the non‐ferrous metal (lead) scrap stream.

Figure 5-1. Flow of Ferrous Scrap to Electric Arc Furnaces and Management of EAF 

Dust 

   

EAFs 

Shredded Steel Scrap 

EAF Dust (K061)

Emerging Metal 

Recovery Tech. 

Zinc Recovery 

(Zinc Nacional / 

Horsehead) 

Treatment 

for Land 

Disposal C&D Material 

Recyclers 

C&D Sites 

(where material 

is generated) 

Other Purchased Scrap Grades

Other Scrap Metal 

Generators 

EAF Steel

Recharge EAF 

Dust to EAF 

Visual Inspection 

Scrap Metal 

Recyclers 

Lead Recovery Stabilized 

Metals 

Landfill 

Disposal 

Magnetic Separation Steel Product 

Manufacturers 

Surface Analysis 

(some EAF sites) 

Prompt Scrap 

Automobile 

Shredders 

Physical Testing 

(some EAF sites) 

Secondary 

Lead Smelters

17
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

5.3. Non-Ferrous Metal Scrap 

Non‐ferrous metal scrap includes lead, aluminum, red metals (e.g., copper, brass) and

other metals.  Lead scrap is processed at secondary lead production facilities into lead

ingots, sheets, and other forms of lead.  The major portion of lead to secondary lead

smelters is from scrap batteries and battery terminals from vehicles.  Approximately 1.4

million metric tons of lead is used in battery manufacturing (2006) and a high percent of

lead used in batteries is recovered and recycled at secondary lead facilities.  Lead used in

vehicle wheel weights is also largely segregated from the ferrous metal scrap stream and

are sent to non‐ferrous metal scrap recyclers.

5.4. Electric Arc Furnace Steel Production 

The approximately 60 million metric tons of ferrous metal scrap (post‐consumer, home,

and prompt scrap) handled by EAF and BOF steel mills annually contain only up to

approximately 20,000 metric tons of lead, according to the Steel Recycling Institute (SRI).

While the lead content of scrap inputs can vary widely, EAF operators mix various grades

in the furnace to improve melting chemistry. Once the scrap is melted, EAF operators

reported that the lead content is closely monitored because only a small amount of lead

(e.g., 15 kilograms) in the scrap fed to an EAF could degrade the quality of the steel batch,

known as a heat, (a typical EAF heat is 100 ‐ 150 metric tons of steel) and result in the steel

produced having to be reprocessed. In other words, only 0.015% of total lead in the heat

may cause quality issues depending on the product being produced. However, EAF

operators also reported that the lead in the scrap feed would primarily end up in the EAF

dust rather than to the steel produced.  Therefore, any lead in the scrap feed would likely

be concentrated in the EAF dust.  This is because lead has a lower melting point than

steel.  Specifically, lead melts at approximately 328 oC; depending upon the alloy, steel

typically melts at approximately 1,400 oC. The lead content of the scrap therefore

volatilizes more quickly than the steel, leading the lead to volatilize into the EAF vapor

recovery system and dust collectors, where the lead becomes incorporated into the EAF

dust.  If the entire 20,000 metric tons of lead in the ferrous metal scrap estimated by the

SRI was incorporated into the approximately 900,000 metric tons of EAF dust produced

annually, this would result in the EAF dust containing approximately 2 percent lead.  This

is in the range of actual EAF dust lead concentrations reported by EAF operators.  

5.5. EAF Furnace Dust Recycling 

EAF furnace dust recycling flows are also shown in Figure 5.1.  There are three methods of

managing the EAF dust produced: recycling the EAF dust back into the EAF, processing

the EAF dust for recovery of zinc and other metals, including lead, and treating the EAF

dust by stabilization for landfill disposal.  Approximately two thirds of the approximately 1

million metric tons of EAF dust produced annually is processed for metals recovery in the

U.S. at Horsehead Corporation facilities; most of the rest is either treated for landfill

18
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

disposal or exported to Mexico for metals recovery at Zinc Nacional facilities. There are

several emerging processes, however, to treat EAF dust for metals recovery, for which

facilities are under construction.  The amount of EAF dust recycled into EAFs is relatively

low, only one of nine EAF operators reported on‐site recycling of K061 into their EAFs.   

There are several proposed new EAF dust metal recovery facilities in the U.S. that are

anticipated to commence operation in 2008 or 2009.

5.6. EAF Dust Characteristics 

Section 1.2 of the EPA protocol for Method 1311 (the TCLP method) indicates that if a

material is 100 percent solid, the maximum leachable TCLP concentration of a constituent

can be calculated by dividing the concentration of the constituent in the solid material by

a factor of 20, as an alternative to subjecting the material to the TCLP test. (Note: This

assumes that all of the lead in the solid material would leach out, which is not likely to

occur.) This factor is derived from the liquid/solid ratio that is inherent in the TCLP

analytical method. 14  Therefore for EAF dust having a total lead concentration of 4,000

mg/Kg, the maximum leachable concentration of lead would be 200 mg/l; for EAF dust

having a total lead concentration of 1,500 mg/Kg, the maximum leachable concentration

of lead would be 75 mg/l.  By comparison, the TCLP leachable concentration for

classification as a hazardous waste is 5 mg/l for lead.  One EAF operator reported that for

EAF dust, the typical TCLP concentration for lead is in the 100 – 200 mg/l range.   

6. Industry Processes for Potential Lead-Bearing Scrap 

This section provides a detailed description of the “key material steps” for the "industry

sectors" that were contacted and how those industry sectors are connected to one another

with respect to potential flows of lead into the ferrous metal scrap stream.   

6.1. Lead and Lead Products 

6.1.1. Primary and Secondary Lead Production 

There is one primary lead production facility in the U.S. and 16 secondary lead smelters in

the U.S. with production capacities greater than 10,000 metric tons per year, including

battery recyclers. 15 All of the secondary lead smelters recycle batteries in addition to other

types of lead scrap. 16 There are also approximately ten small secondary lead smelters

operating in the U.S., with a collective production capacity of less than 10,000 metric tons

per year. 17 These facilities are effectively the same type of facility operation as the larger

secondary lead smelters, but are estimated to be responsible for less than one percent of

U.S. secondary lead production.  There are also “battery breaker” facilities that are

sometimes operated in conjunction with secondary lead smelter facilities.

Secondary lead smelters were traditionally located near lead operations that recycled lead

scrap from lead processing.  Some battery manufacturers operate their own secondary lead

smelters (either a blast furnace or a reverberatory furnace) to recycle off‐spec batteries

and other on‐site generated lead waste.  Some secondary lead smelters reported that their

19
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

facilities handle only scrap batteries, while others reported that their facilities handle

scrap batteries and other lead‐containing scrap (e.g., pipe from non‐ferrous metal

recyclers).

The USGS publishes annual data for U.S. primary and secondary lead consumption. USGS

data for the years 2005 and 2006 are included in Appendix B, Table B‐1 and Table B‐2.18  

Total lead consumption in 2006 was more than 1.5 million metric tons, and, approximately

90 percent of the primary and secondary lead consumed in 2006 was used in the

manufacture of batteries.  The percentage of total lead used in batteries has been

increasing; from 81 percent of total consumption in 2003 to 90 percent in 2006. 19 Of the

remaining 10 percent of lead consumption;

• Approximately 1 percent was “other oxides,” including lead oxides used in glass,

ceramics, and paints and coatings production (a category that includes structural

steel coatings);  

• Approximately 2 percent was used in casting metals, a category that includes cast

motor vehicle parts;    

• Approximately 4 percent was used in the manufacture of ammunition;    

• Sheet lead for building construction and solder for equipment manufacturing

each constituted approximately 0.5 percent of 2006 lead consumption, with solder

used in applications other than electrical equipment (which includes solder used

in motor vehicle production) at approximately 0.02 percent of the total 2006 lead

consumption; and   

• Bearing metals, a category that includes Terne metal and lead used in the bearings

of motor vehicles and other equipment, constituted less than 0.1 percent of lead

consumption in 2006.

6.1.2. Lead Products 

Lead products include various types of products that are primarily lead (up to 99+ percent

lead), as opposed to “leaded steel” products that are primarily steel and contain much

smaller concentrations of lead (less than 1 percent lead – see Section 6.1.3).  Approximately

90 percent of the lead consumed in the U.S. is used in manufacturing battery components,

including automobile batteries and other types of batteries.  One secondary lead

manufacturer reported that 85 percent of their lead scrap is from conventional automobile

batteries and 15 percent is other types of batteries and non‐battery (ancillary) materials.  

These ancillary materials include lead pipe, automotive wheel weights, lead shielding from

hospitals, and ammunition from firing ranges and stockpiles. This manufacturer also

reported that 80 percent of the lead sold is to battery manufacturers. 20  Another secondary

lead smelter operator reported that 90 percent of their lead scrap is from conventional

automobile batteries and that the remainder included leaded glass, radiators, scrap lead

from construction (e.g., lead pipe), x‐ray shielding, ammunition, and miscellaneous

materials (lead cables, lead printer type.) 21

Certain lead product producers manufacture other types of lead products in addition to

battery components.  For example, one lead products manufacturer makes the following

types of lead products:  

20
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

1) Sheet lead –used in roofing (flashing), noise attenuation (casinos, sound studios,

possibly multiplex theaters) and other uses;  

2) Lead brick, used for radiation shielding and other uses;  

3) Interlocking lead brick – same sorts of uses as sheet lead, also for shielding;  

4) Cane lead – used for stained glass windows;  

5) Lead solder – used for electronics, plumbing;  

6) Lead shot – ammunition (99 percent of sales) and ballast, and specialty

shielding applications (1 percent of sales) and;  

7) Lead wool – used for lead fabric and to create seals in cast iron pipe.22   

Lead is also a component of other products that have lower concentrations of lead.  These

include leaded glass, brass, counterweights, and other products.  One lead product

manufacturer reported that conventional leaded glass contains 5 percent lead, and that

brass contains 0.2 to 0.7 percent lead.  Leaded glass used in CRTs (picture tubes, computer

monitors) may contain 3 to 15 percent lead. Radiation shielding glass contains 15 percent

barium in addition to lead.23  Lead in brass is added for cutting and machining properties

of the material. Counterweights may be primarily lead or may be lead‐coated steel. 24  

Lead is also used in manufacturing various types of coatings.  Anti‐rust coatings used on

structural steel, including for maintenance of bridges and highways, can contain lead.  

However, one primary lead manufacturer indicated that lead‐based primers used in

automobile paint have been replaced by non‐lead paint substitutes.25  According to USGS

data (as shown in Appendix B Table B‐1,) lead used in paints and coatings comprised less

than 1 percent of U.S. lead production in 2006.  However, it should be noted that

structural steel entering the ferrous metal scrap stream today may have been in service for

several decades, a time when utilization of lead‐based coatings was more common.  ISRI

reported that coated steel has not been identified as a major issue in shredded ferrous

scrap materials, because lead‐based paint is typically used on structural steel components

that are not shredded.  Coated structural steel material also may be subject to lead

remediation prior to demolition, generally for the purposes of limiting potential

occupational exposure to lead during demolition rather than limiting the amount of lead

in the scrap.  Coated structural steel material is usually sold directly to markets and

sometimes this material goes directly to facilities that make leaded steel. 26

The potential for lead products to enter the ferrous metal scrap stream varies depending

upon how the product is used.  As discussed below in Section 6.4, storage batteries

(primarily motor vehicle batteries) are managed as non‐ferrous metal scrap and form the

major portion of the raw material to secondary lead smelters.  Ferrous metal scrap

recyclers and EAF and BOF operators maintain prohibitions concerning acceptance of

ferrous metal scrap containing batteries.  Therefore, most storage batteries are recycled by

non‐ferrous metal recyclers and enter the secondary lead market. Additionally, batteries

21
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

are more valuable segregated. In most cases, it is in the self‐interest of auto dismantlers to

remove the batteries.  

6.1.3. Leaded Steel Products 

The American Iron and Steel Institute (AISI) has related specifications for leaded steel in

the range of 0.15‐0.35 percent lead, with a target value of 0.20 – 0.25 percent lead.  The EAF

Area Source Rule (40 CFR Part 63 Subpart YYYYY) also contains a regulatory definition of

“leaded steel,” shown in the text box.  

Regulatory Definition of “Leaded Steel”

Leaded steel means steel that must meet a minimum specification for lead

content (typically 0.25 percent or more) and for which lead is a necessary alloy

for that grade of steel.

40 CFR Part 63, Subpart YYYYY, § 63.10692  

According to one EAF operator (i.e., SMA’s member, Company 8), when manufacturing

leaded steel, the lead is not introduced into the EAF itself, but is introduced in the form of

lead shot into the last production (refining) step in the steelmaking process (i.e., prior to

the process of forming and solidifying the steel into a semi‐finished product).  Leaded

steel can be made as a batch process at an EAF facility or at a foundry, and because the

steel melt is at 1,650 oC, and lead vaporizes out of the melt at 980 oC, the lead must be

added after the melt when the temperature has dropped. 27  The amount of lead added in

producing leaded steel is approximately 5.5 pounds of lead per short ton of steel.  One

other EAF operator (Company 7) reported that their facilities manufacture leaded steel

only in response to special orders by customers.  The other six EAF operators that

reported detailed data said their facilities do not manufacture leaded steel.  The SMA

reported that there are only a “handful” of leaded steel suppliers and that leaded steel

manufacturers are a “small market” (i.e., a minor source/product) with respect to overall

iron and steel production.  Detailed statistics concerning production of leaded steel were

not readily available.  However, SMA’s overall assessment of the leaded steel market size is

supported by the primary and secondary lead production statistics published by the USGS

(see Appendix B Table B‐1.)  The primary lead production facility operator indicated that

they were not aware of any leaded steel being used to make motor vehicle bodies; 28

however, leaded steel may be used for various automobile parts, including steering

mechanisms.29  Sources of lead in motor vehicles also include transmission components,

seals, and gaskets.30   

As of 1999, the screw machine industry was consuming 2 to 3 million short tons of free

machining (leaded) steel annually, approximately two percent of total steel production of

98 million short tons during that year. 31 At a nominal average lead content of 0.25 percent

lead, 2 million short tons of leaded steel would contain approximately 5,000 short tons

(4,500 metric tons) of lead. The incidence of leaded steel utilization in vehicles and other

products has been trending down over time. However, structural steel, vehicles and other

22
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

products (e.g., white goods) entering the ferrous metal scrap stream today have likely

been in service for decades when leaded steel use was higher.  

6.1.4. Best Practices for Lead and Lead Products 

Scrap metal suppliers and BOF and EAF operators indicated that lead in scrap metal is

generally widely dispersed in relatively low concentrations among various grades of scrap,

and indicated that they currently have practices and procedures in place to identify and

segregate lead items from the ferrous metal scrap stream (see Section 6.3.5 and Section

6.7.7 for a summary of best practices for scrap metal suppliers and EAF operators).  The

SRI indicated that commodity prices have increased dramatically since 2002 and that this

has been due, in part, to increasing demand from Asia for scrap iron and steel, lead, and

other metals. Commodity prices are subject to variability in domestic scrap metal prices

depending upon seasonal variation in the amount of materials generated, and other issues.

32 33 34 The SRI indicated that the prices of commodities are providing further incentives to

reduce the amount of lead entering the ferrous metal scrap stream.35  Scrap lead is

currently more valuable per ton than steel or zinc, 36 providing scrap metal recyclers and

EAF operators a greater incentive to segregate these materials. 37  

However, where lead is incorporated into components of a product (e.g., solder, surface

coatings, and bearings) it would not be visibly identifiable by scrap metal suppliers or EAF

operators.  Such components do not have sufficient lead content to be of value to non‐

ferrous metal recyclers and are difficult to feasibly remove from the ferrous metal scrap

stream.  Therefore, a principal best practice to reduce the amount of lead entering the

ferrous metal scrap stream is to reduce the amount of lead being incorporated into

products that will eventually enter the ferrous metal scrap stream.   This is similar to the

approach used by EPA in managing mercury in the municipal solid waste stream, by

reducing the use of mercury in products.  

Companies can change purchasing and manufacturing decisions to reduce or eliminate

lead in products.   For example, one global manufacturer of automobile and machinery

parts based in the U.S. indicated that their company, as a whole, reduced or eliminated

the use of lead in their products in response to international standards and guidelines to

reduce the amount of lead in products.  This company also indicated that they build and

operate their U.S. and foreign manufacturing plants to a single set of corporate standards.   

Application of best practices concerning reducing the amount of lead in products would

be more effective if applied to production both within and outside of the U.S., as the SRI

indicated that a significant issue with respect to the lead content of scrap metal relates to

the lead contained in imported materials made from iron and steel.  For example, the lead

content in metal strapping made in Asia is very high.  The metal strapping is used in

transporting freight from Asia to the U.S.  Strapping containing lead is not easily

distinguishable from other strapping, and even if individual shippers change suppliers to

avoid the lead, those selling such strapping will simply find other buyers.  Such material,

even if identified and segregated, has too little lead content to be of interest to non‐

ferrous metal recyclers.  SRI indicated that in 1998, 90% of steel based products were

made in the U.S. and 10% were imported, and that in 2008 the ratio is 50:50.  Strapping is

moving toward non‐steel substitutes and, if this continues, the issue of lead in strapping

23
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

would dissipate.  However, metal cans manufactured in Asia and Eastern Europe may also

contain lead, and there may be other iron and steel products coming from foreign

suppliers that contain lead entering the ferrous metal scrap stream.38   

Barring regulatory import restrictions (even the European Union and its most recent

legislative initiatives to control hazardous materials, REACH [Registration, Evaluation,

Authorisation and Restriction of Chemical substances] do not include lead bearing

materials in general), which have potential associated trade agreement implications,

labeling initiatives may be one of the more effective means of influencing the use—that is

reduction, of lead in products.  

Best practices for the management of lead and lead products include source reduction in

applications in which lead can potentially enter the ferrous scrap metal stream.  For

example, the U.S. EPA recently issued a press release announcing the voluntary phase‐out

of lead wheel weights. 39 The U.S. EPA National Lead‐Free Wheel Weight Initiative

involves tire companies and retail stores that have agreed to phase‐in the use of lead‐free

alternative wheel weights by 2011.  This will reduce the amount of lead released into the

environment through wheel weights lost on roads and will also simplify the management

of scrap wheels by automobile dismantlers, automobile shredders, and scrap metal

recyclers.

6.2. Ferrous Metal Scrap Recycling 

This section provides a compilation of data concerning the amount of ferrous scrap metal

generated and processed, as well as a description of scrap grades and ferrous metal scrap

composition.

6.2.1. Home, Prompt, and Post-consumer Scrap 

Regulatory definitions of “home scrap metal” and “prompt scrap metal” are found in 40

CFR 261.1(c)(11) and (12).  Specifically:

• “Home scrap” is defined as scrap (unsaleable metal product) that is generated

within an iron and steel mill or foundry by the iron and steel making or foundry

process.  Home scrap may include turnings, cuttings, punchings, and borings.

• “Prompt scrap” is defined as scrap that is generated by iron and steel product

producers, including scrap metal generated by the metal working/fabrication

industries.  Prompt scrap may include turnings, cuttings, punchings, and borings.

“Post‐consumer scrap” is defined as scrap that is generated from recycling of products

containing iron and steel.  Post‐consumer scrap includes iron and steel scrap generated

from scrap automobiles, used appliances, construction and demolition materials (e.g.,

rebar, girders, roofing material) and other sources.

6.2.2. Ferrous Metal Scrap Consumption 

24
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

The USGS publishes annual data for scrap iron and steel consumption; data are

summarized in Appendix B, 40  Tables B‐3 through B‐6.   Table B‐3 contains data for

consumption of scrap in pig iron and raw steel production, iron foundries, and other types

of facilities for the years 2002 – 2006, including purchased and home scrap.  Table B‐4 and

Table B‐5 contain data for the utilization of iron and steel scrap by scrap grade for the year

2006.  Table B‐6 identifies the consumption of scrap by facility type, including BOF, EAF,

iron foundry, and other types of facilities.  USGS does not publish more detailed scrap

data for scrap grade utilization by furnace type.41

In 2005, shredded steel scrap (derived primarily from shredding scrap automobiles)

represented the single largest scrap flow for pig iron and raw steel production; however,

shredded steel scrap represented only approximately 19% of the total metal scrap

consumption (including carbon and stainless steel) and approximately 23% of the total

carbon steel scrap consumption. The amount of No. 1 melt heavy scrap and No.2 melt

heavy scrap combined was approximately 24% of the total carbon steel scrap in 2005 (see

Appendix B, Table B‐5.)   Of the total of 54,500 metric tons of scrap consumed in 2006,

41,400 metric tons, or approximately 75 percent, was consumed in EAFs, while 12,800

metric tons, or approximately 23 percent (in 2005), was consumed in BOFs (See Table B‐

6.)

6.2.3. Ferrous and Non-ferrous Metal Scrap Composition 

ISRI publishes specifications for ferrous scrap and non‐ferrous scrap.42  In general, ISRI

scrap specifications do not categorize grades of iron and steel scrap with respect to their

potential lead content.  Shredded steel scrap is the single largest component of the iron

and steel scrap stream, with 11 million metric tons being consumed in 2005; however,

shredded scrap represented only approximately 23% of the total carbon steel scrap

consumed in 2005 and 19% of the total iron and steel scrap consumed in 2005.

Non‐ferrous metal scrap grades, including scrap lead, scrap lead products, scrap “red

metals” (e.g., copper, brass), and scrap aluminum, are categorized with respect to whether

the scrap grade contains lead.  Some scrap specifications, e.g., for machinery and hard

brass borings, specify a certain minimum and maximum percentage of lead.  These non‐

ferrous grades have the potential to enter the ferrous scrap stream.  AISI specifications for

leaded steel are 0.15‐0.35 percent lead, with a target value of 0.20 – 0.25 percent lead.

Rosselot (2007) indicates that the lead content of stainless steel is 0.15 t0 0.35 percent lead

(i.e., on the order of the lead content of “leaded steel.”) 43  Lead is added to various types

of stainless steel to improve machinability, as it is for carbon steels.   Other references

indicate that lead‐containing stainless steel may range from 0.01 percent lead to 0.40

percent lead.44  Stainless steel has a minimum chromium content of approximately 11.5

percent and may also contain nickel and other metals. 45

EAF operators also indicated that zinc galvanized steel coatings used in automobiles

contain 0.0015 ‐ 0.0030 percent lead and that this low concentration would result in

approximately 1 gram of lead in an automobile body.  However, the most common grades

of scrap processed in EAFs ‐ including structural and plate, No. 1 heavy melt steel, No. 2

heavy melt steel, shredded steel scrap, No. 1 and electric furnace bundles, and No. 1

busheling ‐ are not characterized for lead content in the ISRI scrap specifications.   

25
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

In addition, EAF operators indicted that, with some limited exceptions, they do not

routinely use analytical testing methods to test incoming scrap loads for lead content, and

further indicated that such testing would be infeasible.  One EAF operator indicated that

the amount of lead in scrap metal received at the facility has never been quantified using

analytical methods because the facility has had a scrap metal management plan in place

since 1986 that has helped to control the amount of lead contained in the scrap.    

The chemistry of the steel is monitored in‐melt by the EAF operator, and grades of scrap

are mixed according to melting efficiency and chemistry requirements (which is related to

the quantity of residuals, such as lead, in the scrap). According to EAF operators, the lead

content of the scrap feed has not been an important issue for them because of their ability

to control the amount of lead in the scrap feed (through mixing of scrap grades) such that

the amount of lead doesn’t affect the quality of the EAF heats.

EAF operators have generally established specifications for purchasing scrap that specify

non‐ferrous materials are not to be accepted in scrap shipments.  Still, individual scrap

commodities (grades) common to EAF operations are not graded on lead content. In

general, both EAF operator and scrap metal facility contacts indicated that lead‐

containing scrap, “red metal” scrap, and other non‐ferrous metal scrap are being

segregated from the ferrous metal scrap prior to being processed in EAFs because of the

higher monetary value of the non‐ferrous metal scrap. Practices and procedures for the

acceptance, management, and processing of scrap at scrap metal facilities and at EAFs are

discussed in Sections 6.3.5 and 6.7.7.

EAF operators indicated that only limited data, if any, are available concerning the gross

amount of lead in scrap metal processed at EAFs.  The Rosselot Study (2007) identified the

lead content of cast metal as the largest potential stream of lead content in scrap that is

unlikely to be removed by any upstream sorting process.  According to the study, the

amount of lead consumed in the production of casting metals for transportation

equipment (e.g., engine blocks) amounted to about 30,000 metric tons per year between

1997 and 2003. 46  Cast metal is therefore anticipated to contribute to the lead content of

EAF dust. For example, if 100 percent of this 30,000 metric tons was transferred directly

into the approximately one million metric tons of EAF dust generated annually, the EAF

dust would be three percent lead on average; in practice, EAF dust may have on the order

of 1,500 to 15,000 mg/Kg (0.15% ‐ 1.5%) lead based on data provided by EAF operators.  

Scrap metal processors and EAF operators also identified several types [grades] of scrap

that they consider to contain or potentially contain lead, but without having specific

analytical data concerning the actual lead content of these scrap grades.  One of the nine

EAF operators that provided detailed data concerning the management of lead in scrap

metal indicated that lead components are “typically found” in No. 2 heavy melt and that

their facilities do not purchase No. 2 heavy melt.  No. 2 heavy melt is wrought iron and

steel scrap that can contain automobile and appliance scrap.  Other EAF operators did not

identify No. 2 heavy melt as being a potential issue with respect to the management of

lead in scrap metal.  Another EAF operator indicated that No. 1 busheling is a scrap grade

that can contain some terne plate, and several EAF operators identified turnings and

borings (ISRI Grades 219‐222) as scrap grades that potentially contain lead.  Therefore,

26
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

these grades are either not accepted by their facilities or subject to analytical testing for

lead content.  Earlier comments in this section regarded the infeasibility of testing all

incoming scrap and therefore the difficulty of making general conclusions about the

overall lead content of scrap inputs.  However, it is possible to test the lead content of

specific grades from specific generators with the presumption of homogeneity.  One EAF

operator reported that their facilities accept terne plate, but not leaded steel grades.  

Other EAF operators reported that their facilities do not accept either terne plate or

leaded steel grades.  

Shredded or fragmented scrap (principally automobile shred) is the single largest scrap

grade processed at pig iron, raw steel and castings facilities, representing approximately 20

percent of the overall scrap processed according to USGS data (see Appendix B).  

According to EAF operator scrap acceptance criteria, scrap loads are to be free of

identifiable automobile parts, including electrical components, solder, radiators, gasoline

tanks, battery cables, “core parts” (alternators, starters, master cylinders, etc.) and

automotive wheel weights.  Shredder contracts with auto suppliers and EAF operator

contracts with scrap suppliers generally require that such components be removed from

the scrap stream prior to shipment to the EAFs.  However, even with these limitations , it

is anticipated that shredded steel scrap will contain some amount of lead that contributes

to the lead content of EAF dust.  One EAF operator that operates multiple facilities

reported that the lead content of EAF dust is typically about two percent, but is expected

to be lower for facilities that do not purchase shredded steel scrap.  

  

Aside from scrapped automobiles, shredded steel scrap is also generated by shredding

white goods (e.g., appliances), as well as virtually any scrap device composed partially of

steel and partially other materials.  A shredder serves as an efficient mechanism to

separate steel from non ferrous components and depending on the feed stream  into the

shredder, non automotive steel can comprise a significant (80%  is possible) of the feed

stream at one time and at other times very little.  As shred is not readily distinguishable

after processing, it is not practical to assess when feeding it into an EAF, what the source

of the shred was.  Thus a shred feed stream could be comprised of relatively clean steel at

one moment and a few moments later contain residue from electronic components,

undetected lead painted metals, and other small lead bearing component parts.

A general conclusion from the observations provided by suppliers and EAF operators is

that shredded scrap (primarily scrap automobiles) and heavy melt scrap are the principal

contributors to lead in ferrous metal feed to electric arc furnaces.  However, no data

linking certain grades of scrap to higher lead content was provided as most EAF operators

mix grades in forming heats; obtaining dust samples representative of the grades melted

also make this data difficult to obtain.  

6.3. Ferrous Metal Scrap Suppliers 

Ferrous metal scrap suppliers include automobile dismantler and automobile shredder

facilities that primarily process scrap automobiles, scrap metal recycling facilities that

process a wide variety of scrap grades, and construction and demolition sites and C&D

27
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

processing facilities that generate scrap structural steel and other scrap metal grades.

Figure 5.2 illustrates the flow of materials to automobile dismantler and automobile

shredder facilities.  Figure 5.3 illustrates the flow of materials to scrap metal recycling

facilities, and Figure 5.4 illustrates the flow of materials to C&D material recycling

facilities.  

6.3.1. Automobile Dismantlers 

Automobile dismantlers are facilities that remove parts from scrap motor vehicles for

potential resale to customers or recycling.  According to SRI, dismantlers almost always

remove certain items, such as lead‐acid batteries.  (Note:  The USGS reported that 87

percent of all lead‐acid batteries (by weight) are vehicle batteries, and that in 2003, 93

percent of lead‐acid batteries were recovered for recycling.47) Vehicle wheels also are

removed, rims are sold to steel mills, and the lead wheel weights also have value and are

typically recycled to non‐ferrous metal recyclers.  According to SRI, the principal trade

association for automobile dismantlers and shredder operators, automobile dismantlers

remove radiators (which may be 100% copper or aluminum, depending upon the age of

the vehicle), catalytic converters, alternators, and other parts from vehicles.48  Some

dismantlers operate their own shredders to shred the scrap motor vehicles after the parts

are removed.  SRI also noted that the shredded steel sent to the steel mills directly from

dismantlers that operate their own shredders typically has less lead content than if these

operations were separate.49     

Dismantlers tend to remove only motor vehicle parts that are relatively easily accessible

and that have either resale value or recycling (scrap) value.  In general, the labor cost of

removing the part has to conform to the potential value of the part.  Auto dismantling

issues noted by the Automotive Recyclers Association (ARA) include:  50

1) Ball bearings are generally not removed since they are difficult to get to. Ball

bearings occur in motor vehicles anywhere there are joints, including the drive

train, wheels, axles, etc.  There are perhaps a dozen different points, mostly

underneath the chassis;   

2) Gasoline tanks are removed and drained (but then are crushed with the vehicle);  

3) Older gasoline tanks have terne coatings; newer gasoline tanks tend to be made

of plastic;51  

4) Wheel weights are easily removed and are generally removed and recycled;  

5) Radiators and heater cores are removed if they have market value. Radiators in

newer automobiles are more difficult to remove than those in older automobiles;  

6) Batteries are removed and separately recycled;  

7) Catalytic converters are removed and recycled for their precious metal content;i

   

8) Struts are among the many pressurized systems that are difficult to get to and

that therefore are generally not removed.  

 

i

There is an initiative underway to allow the selling of these as “used” catalytic converters rather

than recycling them for their precious metal content.  There are internal industry discussions at

this point to develop testing standards for “used” converters.

28
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

The ARA operates a Certified Automotive Recycler (C.A.R.) Program to which members

can apply.  C.A.R. certified facilities are required to participate in the National Vehicle

Mercury Switch Recovery Program or an equivalent State program.  The C.A.R. manual

also indicates that all batteries are to be removed from vehicles and stored in a manner

that prevents release of battery acid to the environment.52

Some ARA members are solely “dismantler” facilities and range in capacity from 30

vehicles per month to 1,000 vehicles per month.  Approximately 85% of ARA members are

“full service” facilities in which parts are removed from scrap automobiles and warehoused

for future sale.  “You pull it” facilities are facilities in which customers retrieve parts from

the scrap automobiles themselves.  There are fewer “you pull it” facilities as members, but

these tend to have larger volumes of automobiles than the “full service” facilities.  Among

ARA members, 140 are C.A.R. members, 15 are “you pull it” facilities, and others are “full

service” facilities. 53

One primary lead manufacturer indicated that regulations and standards have been

effective in reducing the amount of lead entering the ferrous metal scrap stream, and that

15 years ago lead from batteries was getting into the ferrous metal scrap stream because

automobile dismantler and shredder facility operators did not have the incentive to

remove them.54   

Figure 5-2. Automobile Shredders and Dismantlers Materials Flows 

Automobile 

Dismantlers 

Automobile 

Shredder 

Secondary 

Lead Smelters 

Batteries/Terminals / 

Wheel Weights

Shredder Residue

Solid Waste 

Landfill 

Shredder Aggregate

Scrap Automobiles

White Goods/Other

EAFs/BOFs 

Visual Inspection 

Eddy Current 

(some facilities) 

Shredded Scrap

Non-Ferrous Metal 

Visual Inspection 

6.3.2. Automobile Shredders 

Automobile shredder facilities shred scrap vehicles, after they are crushed, to produce

shredded steel scrap.  Such facilities may also operate as (or be vertically integrated with)

29
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

automobile dismantlers or they may accept scrap vehicles for shredding after the scrap

vehicles have been processed by automobile dismantlers.  Some automobile shredder

facilities accept whole scrap vehicles and remove parts from the vehicles (including

batteries), while other automobile shredder facilities do not remove any parts and accept

scrap vehicles only after parts are removed by automobile dismantlers.  Some automobile

shredder facilities are also integrated with ferrous metal scrap yards that handle other

types of ferrous metal scrap in addition to scrap vehicles.   

A 2002 study of automobile shredder facilities by the California Department of Toxic

Substances Control (DTSC) found that all seven automobile shredder facilities operating

in California apply an “acceptance policy” that identifies specific hazardous substances

that will not be accepted in the scrap loads and that visual inspection is conducted by

“load checkers” to ensure that these visually‐identifiable hazardous substances have been

removed from the scrap loads.  The CA DTSC report indicated that five of the seven

facilities only accepted scrap from automobile dismantlers and “feeder yards” that pre‐

prepare the scrap by removing hazardous substances and that for the other two facilities

more than 90% of the scrap is pre‐prepared offsite. 55  In California (as of 2002),

approximately 47% of shredder feedstock was scrap automobiles and the remaining 53%

was appliances and other steel‐containing scrap.

The CA DTSC study estimated that the “shredder aggregate” produced by the shredders

consists of 10‐20% recoverable non‐ferrous metal and 80‐90% “shredder waste”.  Shredder

waste consists of glass, fiber, rubber, automobile fluids, dirt and plastics found in

automobiles and household appliances that remain after the recyclable metals have been

removed from the shredder aggregate. All seven of the automobile shredders operating in

California apply an eddy current system to separate the non‐ferrous metals from the

“shredder aggregate”; the CA DTSC has estimated that the eddy current technology

increased the efficiency of the non‐ferrous metals recovery process from 70% to 90%, but

that further “in‐line” treatment of the shredder waste is infeasible, resulting in the need

for further processing of the shredder waste (either on‐site at the shredder facility or in

some cases at an offsite location) to further reduce the concentration of non‐ferrous

metals. The CA DTSC also found that shredder waste that was not further processed for

reduction of metals concentration exceeded the California regulatory threshold for soluble

lead of 5.0 mg/liter, but that for treated shredder waste the soluble lead concentration was

below the regulatory threshold.  The total concentration of lead in untreated shredder

residue ranged from 1,600 mg/kg t0 53,000 mg/kg. 56

One automobile shredder facility (outside of California) that is not vertically integrated

with an automobile dismantler operates a crusher.  All scrap vehicles received at the

facility from towing companies, etc., are inspected before crushing to ensure that the

battery has been removed and the gas tank has been punctured and drained.  Crushed

automobiles are shipped to a shredder facility operated by the same company.  No

aftermarket parts are pulled off the vehicles received.  Gas tanks and wheels are not

removed prior to shredding.  Shredded material is visually sorted by “pickers” to remove

any copper and other “red metals” (including brass and bronze). 57   

30
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

Another automobile shredder facility (outside of California) that accepts whole scrap

vehicles described their procedures for acceptance and processing of the scrap vehicles as

follows:58   

1. Inspectors open the vehicle hood and trunk;

2. Batteries and battery terminals are removed;  

3. Fluids are drained (e.g., engine oil, antifreeze, gasoline);  

4. A hole is drilled in the gasoline tank (gasoline tanks are not removed, but vehicles

cannot go through shredder with gasoline in the gasoline tanks);  

5. No tires or wheels are accepted for shredding (the facility purchases wheels

separately from suppliers, but does not shred them);   

6. There is an employee incentive program to remove the catalytic converter;

employees check that the gasoline tank is empty and drilled while they are

removing the catalytic converter;

7. Only steel wheels and aluminum/alloy wheels are sent to the ferrous/non‐ferrous

metal scrap yard facility.  These procedures keep wheel weights from the wheels

and heavy metals found in catalytic converters out of the shredded steel, and lower

processing costs.   

This company also operates a second facility that includes a ferrous and non‐ferrous metal

scrap yard.   

One automobile shredder operator reported that crushed automobile suppliers “mark”

their loads.  The company performs periodic inspections to tear apart a crushed car to

check for prohibited material (e.g., lead battery terminals).  The company can tell from

the marking where the crushed car came from, and, if there is a recurring issue (e.g., they

find lead battery terminals), they can go back to the supplier.  The company has not had

to reject loads yet, but could do so.  This operator indicated that for most of the larger

crushed automobile suppliers, removal of batteries and battery terminals is “habituated”

and now routine.  Contamination incidents may occur, however, in the event that, for

example, the facility hires a new employee in the processing bay who doesn’t follow

procedures and only cuts cables to get the battery out, thus leaving the terminals.  Also,

private parties or “hulk haulers” may bring in vehicles that aren’t crushed, and shipments

may include a couple of vehicles on trailers.  These are easier to inspect and the company

estimated that they inspect 80%‐100% of these shipments.  The company does encounter

batteries, battery terminals, and wheel weights in these inspections, but most vehicles

come in without rims, because rims are more valuable if they are sold separately. 59

ISRI indicated that “white goods” (i.e., large appliances) are also shredded at member

scrap yards and, if a “megashredder” is in operation, “No. 1 grade steel” (i.e., construction

and demolition scrap) can be shredded.  A megashredder typically has an intake that is 10

feet wide and has a high horsepower (e.g., 8,000 HP) motor, enabling the unit to accept

large and heavy scrap pieces. One megashredder operation reported a throughput of 300

tons per hour. There are only approximately six of these units in operation in the U.S.60  

Shredder facilities may also operate shears, balers, and other equipment.  Vehicles are

typically the majority of shredded material at these facilities (e.g., estimated at 70%

vehicles, 30% white goods and other materials).  However, this ratio can shift dramatically

depending on the location of the facility and its customer base (e.g., from 80% 20% to 20%

31
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

80%, according to one facility operator) due to regional differences and other factors.61

One integrated automobile shredder facility indicated that only 30 percent of the scrap

the facility processes is from scrap vehicles, the remainder being white goods, industrial

scrap, post‐consumer ferrous scrap, and a small amount of ferrous metal C&D scrap that is

also shredded.  More typically, facilities receive the major portion of their scrap from baled

automobiles.62

ISRI also described other components potentially containing lead that suppliers might be

required to remove from scrap vehicles, such as vibration dampers, steering columns, and

electronic components.  ISRI noted it is difficult to remove these items before shredding

without hurting the economics of the shredding process.  There is no economic value in

taking these materials out of the vehicle before shredding the vehicle, and therefore the

labor cost of removing them would be unrecoverable.63  ARA added that if the steel mills

receiving the shredded steel scrap are not satisfied with the quality of the product, both

the automobile shredder facility and the automobile dismantlers that are their suppliers

would quickly hear about it and be required to take remedial action.64   

6.3.3. Ferrous and Non-Ferrous Scrap Metal Recycling Facilities 

Several operators of scrap metal recycling facilities (also referred to as scrap yards)

indicated that they operate separate ferrous and non‐ferrous scrap yards.  These facilities

segregate ferrous and non‐ferrous metal in separate operations.  At these facilities,

incoming loads of metal scrap are visually inspected to identify suspect material (i.e.,

material that does not meet the scrap acceptance criteria established by the facility).  One

operator reported that all loads are visually inspected, and that crane operators are trained

to look for non‐ferrous metals, particularly red metals, including copper and brass.65  

Several facility operators also reported that they have established financial incentive

programs for workers to identify and segregate non‐ferrous metals from the ferrous metal

scrap stream, These financial incentives are effective because the non‐ferrous metal scrap

is more valuable per ton than the ferrous metal scrap; less lead in the ferrous metal scrap

also increases the value of the ferrous metal scrap.

Another operator reported that most loads are visually inspected.  This ferrous and non‐

ferrous scrap metal recycling facility also operates shredders and employs “chasers” to

inspect scrap loads as they come in.  The company provides training programs on what to

look for and what to do if suspect material is found.  Suspect material is usually found

when offloading the material. If such material can be recycled, the facility will segregate it,

as they do with lead acid batteries found in scrap motor vehicles.  Scrap either goes

through the shredder or through the “burn line,” where material is torch cut and/or

sheared for size reduction. Non‐ferrous eddy currents, shaker screens, and picker lines are

used to sort out non‐magnetic (non‐ferrous fraction) of the metal scrap.  The company

reported that very little lead‐containing scrap comes out of the picking lines, but mostly

aluminum and red metals.  This operator also reported that more lead‐containing scrap is

being identified by the chasers in front of the shredder rather than downstream of the

shredder, meaning that the scrap metal suppliers are taking the lead‐containing material

out of the loads before they arrive. 66  

32
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

6.3.4. Construction and Demolition Materials 

Construction and Demolition (C&D) materials are generated from building and structural

construction and demolition projects.  During a demolition project, this material is

generally managed initially by the demolition contractor or, in the case of lead, an

environmental (lead) abatement contractor. According to a survey in 2005 by the National

Demolition Association (NDA) ‐ a trade association representing demolition contractors

performing residential demolitions, nonresidential demolitions, and nonresidential

renovations ‐ about 115 million short tons of debris is generated annually in the U.S., of

which about 73 percent is recycled.67  EPA estimated that 84 million tons of demolition

material and 33 million tons of nonresidential renovation material were generated in 2003,

for a total of 117 million tons – close to the NDA’s estimate of 115 million tons.  EPA does

not have an estimate on the amount of material recycled specifically from the demolition

and renovation of buildings, but did estimate the recovery rate for all building‐related

activities (including construction, renovation, and demolition).  Based on information

from eight states that collect C&D material generation, disposal, and/or recovery data,

EPA estimated a 48 percent recovery rate for building‐related C&D materials from all

activities in 2003.68    

Recyclable C&D materials may be sent to recycling facilities for segregation and potential

sale to customers.  The Construction Materials Recycling Association (CMRA), a trade

association representing C&D recycling facility operators, indicated that demolition

contractors, abatement contractors, and C&D material recyclers are generally aware of

issues involving lead.  This is in part because C&D recyclers do not like lead (e.g., lead‐

based painted wood) in the C&D materials stream because it contaminates their recycled

products.  Therefore, demolition contractors are likely separating out lead‐containing

materials prior to sending the material to C&D recyclers.   

The CMRA indicated that given typical market conditions, C&D recyclers do not receive

much metal, such as steel beams and rebar because they are too valuable as scrap metal.  

In some areas (e.g., West Virginia), demolition contractors can sell scrap steel directly to

the steel mill without going through a C&D recycler or a ferrous scrap metal recycling

facility.  The steel mills are not requesting any additional processing of this material from

the demolition contractor because the value of the iron is high. In other areas,

transportation distances to steel mills are such that scrap metal goes through a scrap yard

or recycler. 69   

Demolition contractors are separating as much metal, concrete, etc., at the demolition site

as is economically feasible for them to do.  In many instances, these “mixed” C&D

materials are sent to C&D materials recyclers.  However, in other instances, these

materials are sent directly to the scrap metal recyclers.  This is, in part, because the

contractors cannot afford to move the material twice (i.e., once to the C&D material

recycling facility and again to the scrap metal recycling facility). 70

33
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

Figure 5-3. Scrap Metal Recycler Materials Flows

C&D Sites 

(where 

material is 

generated) 

Structural Steel (inc. 

lead-based paint)

Other Scrap Steel 

Scrap Metal (e.g., cast metal parts)

Generators 

Visual 

Inspection 

EAFs/BOFs 

Non-ferrous Metals Physical 

Testing 

Magnetic 

Separation 

Turnings and Borings

Surface 

Analysis 

Visual 

Inspection 

Non-ferrous 

metal market

Secondary 

Lead Smelters 

34
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

The typical makeup of the C&D materials stream that mixed C&D recyclersii receive

includes:71   

1) Concrete/asphalt pavement, 25%;

2) Wood, 19.5%;  

3) Fines, 17.1%;

4) Metals, 4.5%;

5) Other recycled materials, 5.2%;

6) Materials not recycled,iii 29%.  

C&D fines are the fraction of mixed construction and demolition debris that is screened

during the recycling process. This material typically consists of material that is <1 inch

screen, but may also include larger materials (<3 inch screen).  The C&D fines can include

dirt, gypsum (from wallboard) and other materials.72

Lead in the C&D materials stream usually originates in lead‐based paint.  According to the

NDA, lead‐based paint is being managed well by contractors both with respect to

occupational exposure to lead dust and with respect to the generation and management of

lead‐containing waste (e.g., lead‐based paint chips).73  Loads of drywall, wood, etc. with

lead‐based paint contamination are usually not accepted by the recyclers.  Therefore,

demolition contractors would generally not send such loads to the recyclers, but segregate

the loads so that the lead‐containing material goes into fines, which are then generally

disposed in a landfill.  Painted drywall and wood that end up in the loads received by

recyclers are usually sorted out and disposed in a landfill.

At C&D recycling facilities, a magnet is typically used to pull out ferrous metals.  Copper

and other materials of value are pulled out by hand on a picking line.74  Eddy current

equipment, however, is generally not used by C&D recyclers because of the bulkiness of

C&D materials, the generally low quantity of aluminum in the C&D materials stream, and

the high capital cost of eddy current separators compared to paying pickers.  Scrap yards

receive the segregated materials from the recyclers in designated bins.  As a specific

example, Environmental Alternatives in Maryland operates C&D materials sorting

facilities.  C&D materials typically get put into roll off bins at a demolition site. 75  If

metals are segregated from other materials onsite, lead flashing from roofs would go into

the non‐ferrous metal bin (along with radiators, pipes, etc.), unprepared prior to shipment

to the non‐ferrous metal scrap yard.  Structural steel is generally prepared on site prior to

shipment directly to a ferrous scrap metal recycling facility.76

One ferrous and non‐ferrous scrap metal recycling facility operator indicated that

materials from demolished buildings, elevators, and other sources are usually shipped

whole from the demolition site to the facility, where they are separated.  Specific lead‐

containing items like counterweights, fishing gear, plumbing, x‐ray walls, sound dampers,

and lead sheeting (from hospitals), sheathing, and other materials of value are separated

 

ii “Mixed C&D materials recyclers” are those that receive a mixed C&D materials stream, as opposed

to those that received one material only (such as concrete recyclers or wood recyclers). iii There are many reasons why some materials are not recycled, such as the lack of a recycling

market or contamination problems.

35
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

from other materials in the C&D materials stream and are directed into the “lead bin” for

management as non‐ferrous metal scrap.  This facility receives all types of solid materials

from C&D materials, but typically does not receive much lead flashing.77  Lead flashing is

reportedly commonly used in California and Florida,78 and in some states, including

Florida, Texas, Illinois, roof vents are lined with lead to prevent water in‐leakage.  In New

England, “valleys” in roofs are lined with lead.79

36
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

Figure 5-4. Construction and Demolition Recycler Material Flows

Components (e.g., 

counterweights)

Structural Steel 

(incl. lead-based 

Plumbing/radiators, 

etc (e.g., lead pipe)

Drywall/wood (incl. 

lead-based paints) 

Non-ferrous 

metal market

Lead Paint 

Abatement 

Ferrous Metal 

Recyclers, 

EAFs, BOFs 

Fines (land 

disposal)

On-site or 

C&D Material 

Recycler 

Segregation 

Red metals (brass, 

copper)

Roofing material, 

other metal debris 

Lead paint chips 

sometimes sent 

to smelter 

Secondary 

Lead Smelters

Ferrous metal 

scrap

Lead Paint Chips

Structural Steel (inc. 

lead-based paint)

Land Disposal 

37
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

6.3.5. Best Practices for Scrap Metal Suppliers 

General best practices for scrap metal suppliers, including automobile dismantler

facilities, automobile shredder facilities, ferrous and non‐ferrous scrap metal recycling

facilities, and C&D recyclers include establishing written practices and procedures for

acceptance of incoming scrap shipments that identify acceptable and prohibited materials;

written practices and procedures for identification and segregation of non‐ferrous metals

from the ferrous metal scrap stream, and associated quality assurance procedures,

training, and internal auditing programs for these practices and procedures.  Specific best

practices for the various types of scrap metal suppliers include:

Automobile Dismantlers

• Visual inspection;

• Segregation and separate management of wheels and wheel weights;

• Removal and segregation of batteries and battery terminals;

• Removal and segregation of radiators and heater cores;

• Selected gas tank removal;

Automobile Shredders

• Segregation and separate management of wheels and wheel weights (i.e., wheels

and rims are only accepted separate from scrap vehicle loads and are not

shredded);

• Requiring scrap vehicle suppliers to mark each scrap shipment so that any

shipments identified as having prohibited material (e.g., battery terminals, wheel

weights) can be tracked back to the supplier for purposes of quality assurance;  

• Periodic inspection of incoming crushed scrap vehicle loads, incoming “hulk”

vehicles (non‐crushed vehicles), and other [non‐vehicle] scrap to ensure that

prohibited materials (e.g., batteries and battery terminals) have been removed;

Ferrous and Non‐ferrous Scrap Metal Recycling Facilities

Best practices for scrap metal recycling facilities (both non‐ferrous metal and ferrous

metal operations) include establishing multiple points of inspection for the purposes of

identifying and segregating non‐ferrous metal from the ferrous metal scrap stream.  These

practices can include initial visual inspection of incoming scrap loads followed by

application of equipment, including non‐ferrous eddy currents, shaker screens, and

magnets, as well as picker lines, to identify and segregate non‐ferrous metals from the

ferrous metal scrap stream.  Eddy current separators combined with magnetic separation

can be specifically designed for segregation of non‐ferrous metal from ferrous metal.

Establishing financial incentives for scrap facility operators to identify and segregate non‐

ferrous metal from the ferrous metal scrap steam can also be effective in increasing the

level of segregation achieved.     

38
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

C&D Material Recyclers

Best practices for C&D material generation (at demolition sites) and for C&D recyclers

include initial segregation of ferrous and non‐ferrous metals from non‐metal C&D

materials at the demolition sites.  This includes implementing practices and procedures to

identify, segregate, and separately manage lead‐containing materials (e.g., plumbing,

counterweights, flashing) at the demolition site in separate “lead bins” that would be sent

directly to non‐ferrous scrap metal recycling facilities.  Some metal scrap (e.g., elevators)

generated at demolition sites may also go directly to such facilities, bypassing C&D

material recyclers; in this case, the scrap metal recycling facility operator segregates the

ferrous metals and non‐ferrous metals.  Best practices for segregating ferrous metal and

non‐ferrous metal at C&D recycler facilities includes application of magnets and also

“picker lines” to visually identify and segregate metals from other debris.  C&D material

recyclers can also establish financial incentive programs for identification and segregation

of non‐ferrous metal at demolition sites and recycler facilities.  Under a financial incentive

program, pickers receive all or a portion of the re‐sale value of the residual metals

removed from the C&D material.

6.4. Non-ferrous Metal Scrap Recycling 

6.4.1. Automobile and Industrial Batteries 

Scrap motor vehicle batteries are generated from facilities, such as automotive service

centers or from automobile dismantlers.  Management of batteries from scrap motor

vehicles at automobile shredder facilities is discussed in Section 6.3.2.  Most automotive

service centers operate an exchange program in which customers return old batteries

when purchasing new ones.80  Batteries collected through exchange programs may be

shipped directly to battery manufacturers (some of which operate secondary lead

smelters), to secondary lead smelters, or to non‐ferrous scrap metal recycling facilities,

and would likely not encounter the ferrous metal scrap stream.  The lead produced by the

secondary lead smelters would generally be sold directly to U.S. battery manufacturers or

exported.  Conventional automobile batteries weigh about 35 pounds and are

approximately 50 percent lead, with plastic and ancillary materials comprising the other

50 percent.  Industrial batteries are also subject to exchange programs in which the vendor

removes the old battery when installing the new battery.  Industrial batteries (e.g., used at

cell phone towers and as backup power for computer centers) are a growing segment of

the battery market.81  

Scrap batteries are processed in blast furnaces or reverberatory furnaces.  One secondary

lead manufacturer that operates several blast furnaces reported that batteries delivered to

the facility are tested for lead content, crushed and the plastic and metal are separated.  

Materials are carefully scanned with an ICP‐MS (Inductively coupled plasma mass

spectrometry) and analyzed prior to being charged to the furnace.  Suspect materials

undergo testing in the on‐site analytical laboratory, and suppliers are charged back if

there is any off‐spec material.  Screws and bolts in the raw material feed would not affect

the furnace operations, but any aluminum or magnesium fed to the furnace would cause

39
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

the furnace zone to explode.  82  The lead is charged to the furnace with cast iron,

conventional steel, and limestone.  The iron, limestone, silica and other materials form a

slag that is used to form a mat over the lead to prevent the lead from contacting oxygen in

the air. The lead is removed from the bottom of the furnace, while the slag is removed

from the top of the furnace.  Lead furnace slag from secondary lead smelters is a RCRA‐

listed (K069) waste. 83  

Another secondary lead manufacturer reported that their facilities have an automated

system for processing scrap batteries in which the batteries are palletized and tipped

directly into the furnace receiving hopper.  Lead materials other than batteries bypass the

automated process and furnace and are fed directly to the refining process.   

6.4.2. Construction and Demolition Materials 

As discussed in Section 6.3.4, demolition contractors may segregate C&D materials on site

to separate ferrous metal scrap from non‐ferrous metal scrap.  These materials are put into

separate bins pending transportation to either a C&D materials recycling facility or a scrap

metal recycling facility.  The scrap metals removed from the C&D materials may be

shipped directly to scrap metal recycling facilities rather than first to C&D recycling

facilities if the value of the scrap metal is high and the cost of transporting the material is

also high.

One operator of shredders and both ferrous and non‐ferrous scrap metal recycling

facilities expressed the view that it is more efficient to segregate the non‐ferrous scrap

metal at the recycling facility than at the demolition site.  In this system, the non‐ferrous

metal is sent to the scrap metal recycling facility unprocessed, where the lead scrap is

separated from the other types of non‐ferrous metal scrap. 84  The scrap metal recycling

facility operator indicated that with respect to processing C&D materials, counterweights

and lead sheeting (e.g., from hospitals) are relatively easy to remove from the scrap stream

and that they do not encounter much in the way of lead flashing, perhaps one 20 cubic

yard bin (aka roll‐off) per year.  85

6.4.3. Other Lead and Lead Product Scrap 

According to SRI, conventional brass and bronze (e.g., used in plumbing fixtures,

bearings) have relatively high lead contents and have contributed to the lead content of

K061. 86 Conventional leaded brass may have up to 8 percent lead.87   Since 2002, the value

of metals has increased dramatically.  Therefore, there is now a lot of sorting happening

using magnetic separation and eddy current systems to remove valuable metals prior to

the scrap shredding stage.  Automobile dismantler and shredder facility workers (who

may be paid $10 to $12 per hour) are often given an incentive to remove targeted items

from scrap vehicles in the form of a holiday bonus that is generally equivalent to the resale

value of the material removed. Therefore, the amount of these materials entering the

ferrous metal scrap stream is decreasing. 88   One secondary lead facility manufacturer

concurred with this assessment, and indicated that scrap lead is now more valuable per

ton than scrap steel or zinc, providing increased financial incentives for scrap processors

to segregate these materials.89

40
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

One secondary lead manufacturer expressed the view that the overall steel industry scrap

processing approach (shearing, shredding, etc.) does not lend itself to ready recovery of

lead from scrap, and that incentives should focus on better scrap segregation.  In this

view, EAF operators could do a better job of segregating lead‐containing products; such as

lead in solder, electronics, and non‐removed batteries, which contribute to the lead

content of K061.  However, it should also be noted that lead use in some of these

applications is a relatively small percentage of total U.S. primary and secondary lead

consumption, approximately 90% of which is used in the production of batteries (see

Table B‐5).  Even high estimates of non‐removed batteries do little to increase the lead

content of K061 (see page 15).  In addition, scrap metal recyclers and EAF operators noted

that the lead content of iron and steel scrap is widely distributed in various scrap grades

having relatively low lead concentrations, as opposed to large, easily identifiable items

such as vehicle batteries. Further complicating the EAF operators job is the fact that

processes like shredding, cutting and bailing (essentially, initial processing) of scrap prior

to bulk shipment of scrap to the EAF makes sorting at the EAF site largely impractical.   

Therefore, the primary tool EAF operators have to ensure higher quality scrap is spot

checking of scrap and a graduated payment scale for higher grades of scrap.

6.4.4. Other Lead-Containing Materials 

One secondary lead manufacturer reported that the lead furnace slag (K069) generated by

the secondary lead smelters may be 60 – 70 percent lead, and also has a high iron content

(the iron is needed for slag).  Further, 40% of the K069 is re‐entered back into the furnace

(after it is broken apart).  The remainder is treated with sodium silicate and magnesium

hydroxide to ensure it does not exhibit the toxicity characteristic so it can be disposed of

in an on‐site, Company‐owned, non‐hazardous, Subtitle D monofill.  Dust from the

furnace and bag houses is analyzed daily.  The facility operates a flue dust agglomeration

furnace to process the K069. 90  An agglomeration furnace contacts the flue dust with soda

ash and limestone or iron oxide in a hearth furnace to form a molten product that is

solidified for subsequent disposal.91   

Another secondary lead manufacturer that operates a reverberatory furnace and blast

furnace reported that approximately 50 kilograms of lead furnace slag was generated for

every metric ton of batteries processed by the facility (batteries being approximately 50

percent lead, which corresponds to approximately 1 kilogram of slag per 100 kilograms of

lead produced).  In 2007, 97 percent of the slag tested as non‐hazardous vs. 3 percent

tested as hazardous (i.e., for barium, lead).  Each load of slag is subject to testing using the

toxicity characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP) and the slag is rerun through the

furnace process if high levels of lead are detected (i.e., greater than 3% ‐ 4%).  The normal

lead content range of the slag is 0.5% ‐ 3%.  In addition, barium is very soluble and is very

difficult to get out of the furnace system because it gets into the flue dust and circulates

within the system. 92   

The same secondary lead manufacturer reported that refractory brick removed from the

furnace is subjected to testing using the TCLP.  If the material passes (most of the time), it

goes to an industrial landfill.  If the material fails the test, it goes to a hazardous waste

management facility where it is subject to treatment using a Portland cement stabilization

41
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

mix.  On average, approximately 6.5 tons of bricks (or about 1/2 of a roll‐off container) is

subjected to the testing using the TCLP for every 100,000 tons of batteries processed.93

6.5. Iron Foundries 

One operator of an iron foundry provided information concerning scrap acceptance

procedures.   The foundry operator indicated that it is difficult for scrap dealers to

investigate entire rail cars of scrap.  Therefore, the operator indicated that the foundry

runs each rail car through a radiation detector, and then unloads the rail cars using a

magnet. Anything remaining inside the rail car (i.e., non‐magnetic non‐ferrous metal) is

collected by the operator as a “secondary source of income.” The operator indicated that

they generally receive a bonus equivalent to the resale value of the recovered metals.  Red

metals, including brass are broken from cast iron valves and other articles and segregated

because of the high value of red metals.  The operator also indicated that recyclers are not

very detailed in separating scrap and that there are varying practices and procedures at

scrap metal recycling facilities.  The foundry operator has rejected rail cars of scrap

occasionally because of exceedance of “size limitations” or other scrap specifications (e.g.

oily scrap, etc.); however we are not aware of any rejections due to high lead content.  

While many iron foundries use shredded scrap for its melt, this particular foundry does

not melt shredded scrap, and pays a premium to purchase high grades of non‐shredded

scrap.  Non‐acceptance of shredded scrap results in the foundry producing a better quality

product. 94  

6.6. Integrated Iron and Steel Production 

The BOF steelmaking process uses a combination of pig iron from blast furnace and scrap

metal.  One BOF operator reported an average 28 percent scrap feed to the BOF, with a

range of 26 percent to 30 percent, depending on furnace operating conditions.  

Approximately 60 percent of the scrap is post‐consumer scrap and 40 percent is home

scrap. The average amount of scrap used at this particular BOF is 75,000 short tons per

month.  Scrap suppliers include:  scrap metal recycling facilities, stamping plants, other

company subsidiaries, and demolition contractors.  Scrap grades used include bundles,

shred, plate and structural, heavy melt, tin cans, and miscellaneous grades.   

Another BOF operator identified procedures that they use to identify lead in scrap.  These

include:  inspection of scrap directed into the scrap bin using a crane with a magnet.  

Scrap with high lead levels would be less likely to be picked up by a magnet, and therefore

the lead or other non‐ferrous metals in the scrap (e.g., lead counterweights) could be

identified.  No incoming materials are processed separately from other materials.  The

company specification for scrap quality given to scrap suppliers says (effectively speaking)

“no lead.”  The company reported that their facilities may be using grab samples to test

scrap for non‐ferrous metal content, but these samples would not necessarily be

representative of the whole scrap load.  For quality assurance purposes, “testing” is more

by visual inspection and whether the magnet leaves lead‐containing material in the scrap

bin. 95

42
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

BOF processed furnace wastes are not regulated as a hazardous waste, as these materials

are exempt from RCRA Subtitle C under the Bevill Exemption.  Nevertheless, one BOF

operator reported that the facility conducts testing using the TCLP for furnace wastes

annually for lead, mercury, arsenic, cadmium, chromium, and other metals. 96 These

furnace wastes include BOP (Basic Oxygen Process) Sludge, BF (Blast Furnace) Belt Press

Sludge, BOP Fugitive Baghouse Dust, BOP Slag Fines, BF Classifier Sludge, BF Flue Dust,

and BOP Mixer Baghouse Dust. The company reported that lead in the scrap would

generally come out in the baghouse dust, and that their facilities are not recovering metals

from the baghouse dust as low concentrations make it infeasible.  With the exception of

the BOP Fugitive Baghouse Dust, TCLP results for lead for all BOF process wastes were

reported at less than 0.05 mg/l lead.  The TCLP results for the BOP Fugitive Baghouse

Dust were reported at 36 mg/l lead.  

6.7. Electric Arc Furnace Steel Production 

EAF operators manage the lead content of scrap used in EAF steel production through a

combination of written (contractual) scrap metal acceptance criteria, visual inspection of

incoming scrap loads, and limited analytical testing of scrap.  Practices and procedures for

accepting and processing incoming loads of scrap metal to EAFs were identified through

contacts with EAF steel mill operators.  In general, the EAF operators contacted have

established contract provisions with suppliers for what grades of scrap the EAF steel mill

will and will not accept, procedures for screening and visual inspection of incoming scrap

loads, and procedures for determining that the quality of the incoming scrap load meets

the requirements of established site‐specific contracts with the supplier.  Several EAF

operators indicated that they also conduct limited analytical testing of scrap loads for lead

content.  Scrap metal acceptance, processing, and management procedures implemented

by EAF operators are described in this section.   

6.7.1. EAF Scrap Metal Acceptance and Processing 

Scrap acceptance and processing procedures differed somewhat for each of the nine EAF

operators that provided detailed information concerning their procedures.  Among the

nine EAF operators, eight indicated that their facilities are implementing specific scrap

inspection and/or materials segregation practices related to the management of lead in

scrap metal.  Several EAF operators indicated that their facilities do not accept terne plate

bundles (ISRI Grade 216) or turnings/borings (ISRI Grade 219‐222.) A number of EAF

operators also indicated that their facilities do not accept leaded steel grades.  One EAF

operator said that their facilities do accept turnings, but not if visible borings are mixed in,

and another EAF operator indicated that every shipment of turnings is analyzed for lead

content.  Two EAF operators that provided data indicated that their facilities do accept

turnings/borings subject to inspection.  Turnings/borings represent approximately 5

percent of the overall scrap metal accepted by pig iron and raw steel manufacturers (see

Appendix B, Table B‐5).  In addition to ISRI Scrap Grades 216 and 219‐222 and

turning/borings, one EAF operator said that lead components are also “typically found” in

No. 2 heavy melt, which this particular facility does not purchase.  (No. 2. heavy melt scrap

may contain automobile or appliance scrap.)  One EAF operator said that small amounts

of #1 busheling are accepted by their facilities and that this scrap grade can contain some

43
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

terne plate, potentially increasing the lead content of this scrap grade. No. 2 heavy melt

represents approximately 13 percent and #1 busheling represents approximately 18 percent

of the overall scrap metal accepted by pig iron, raw steel, and casting manufacturers (see

Appendix B, Table B‐5).  The information provided by EAF operators provides an

indication that various grades of scrap are potentially contributing to the lead content of

ferrous metal scrap streams and also that different EAF operators are implementing

different scrap metal acceptance and processing procedures.   

6.7.2. Scrap Acceptance Criteria 

EAF operators indicated that scrap acceptance criteria bans “lead and lead‐containing

materials” from scrap loads.  However, this provision is interpreted and implemented

somewhat differently by the various EAF operators.  EAF operators independently

confirmed/identified tinned steel, batteries and battery cables, leaded steel grades, Babbitt

bearings, solder, wheel weights, “materials with excessive amounts of lead‐based paint,”

terne plate, gasoline tanks, computers/electronics, and lead‐lined containers as “non‐

conforming materials.” The presence of these materials represents grounds for rejection of

the scrap load.  One EAF operator indicated that leaded seals in the “bell” (end connector)

of old sewer pipes is of particular concern as that amount of lead could affect the heat.  

Another indicated that a specific screening method is being implemented at their facility

to detect the presence of radioactive materials in the scrap load, which could also identify

the presence of lead shielding in the scrap load.  Two EAF operators indicated that their

facilities accept galvanized steel (note:  galvanized steel is not a separate grade of scrap).  

However, one of these EAF operators indicated that the amount of galvanized steel

acceptable in an individual scrap load is limited to no more than 10 percent in order to

limit the amount of zinc in the scrap load.   

6.7.3. Visual Inspection Practices and Procedures 

EAF operators indicated that all incoming scrap loads are subject to visual inspection for

the purposes of identifying any “non‐conforming” materials in the scrap loads.  Such “non‐

conforming materials” are typically identified in the scrap supplier contracts.  EAF

operators indicated that there are several levels of inspection conducted for incoming

scrap loads.  One EAF operator (Company No.2) indicated that the yard crane operator,

laborer, and scrap crane operator involved in scrap acceptance are all responsible for

conducting visual inspections of the scrap loads.  This operator indicated that, in the event

that visual inspection conducted on scrap loads identifies suspected lead‐containing

material, the scrap is further analyzed using an X‐Ray Fluorescence (XRF) Gun which can

remotely detect the lead content on metal surfaces.  Another EAF operator (Company No.

8) indicated that, in addition to visual inspection, their facilities employ video cameras to

identify non‐conforming materials.

     

44
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

6.7.4. EAF Scrap Metal Management 

Analytical Testing of Scrap Loads for Lead Content

EAF operators indicted that, with some limited exceptions, they do not routinely use

analytical testing methods to test incoming scrap loads for lead content, and further

indicated that such testing would be infeasible.  One EAF operator, however, said that

every shipment of turnings is analyzed for lead content, and another EAF operator

indicated that laboratory spectrometer testing is conducted on samples of individual

pieces of scrap (e.g., flashing roofing material) to identify lead content, but that other

grades of scrap are not routinely tested for lead content.  As noted above, one EAF

operator (Company No. 2) indicated that their facilities have the capability to conduct

spot tests of incoming scrap loads using an X‐Ray (XRF) Gun. One reason cited by EAF

operators for the infeasibility of such data collection is associated with the difficulty in

obtaining representative samples of scrap feed to the EAF furnace.  Routine collection of

analytical data is not practical because the scrap is high volume, and heterogeneous from

a lead standpoint.

Rather, EAF operators indicated that they rely primarily on facility‐specific scrap metal

acceptance criteria and visual inspection of incoming scrap loads to detect and remove

lead‐containing materials.   

Lead Content of Steel Produced

EAF operators indicated that their facilities test every batch of steel produced for lead

content, and that the lead content of the steel produced is closely controlled.  One EAF

operator (Company 7) reported that there are no lead limits in the specifications for “non‐

leaded” grades of steel.  Company 7 added that the lead content of the “non‐leaded” steel

their facilities produce is controlled to less than 1 percent lead in structural products in

order to prevent surface quality issues.  Other EAF operators reported that the lead

content of the steel produced is less than 1 part per million (1 ppm, or 0.0001 percent,) and

that there are no identifiable trends in the lead content of the steel produced related to

the grades (or lead content) of the scrap processed.   

EAF operators indicated that their facilities do not need to know the lead content of the

EAF dust in order to manage the lead content of the steel product, and do not apply data

for lead content of EAF dust to the management of the lead content of the steel produced.

Because of the low melting point of lead as compared to steel, the majority of the lead in

the feed into an EAF initially flashes off (or volatilizes) and becomes part of the EAF dust

and does not remain in the steel.  However, EAF operators did say that they actively

manage the amount of lead contained in the feed stream indirectly by way of melt

chemistry (not individual feed stream analysis), because a relatively small amount of lead

in the heat (e.g., on the order of 30 pounds) can result in the steel produced having to be

reprocessed.  Tracing the lead back to individual scrap streams is difficult because the lead

content is monitored only after the different grades have been melted together.  These

different grades are typically from different sources as well.  Scrap grades are also usually

mixed in layers (e.g., dense/less dense) to facilitate melting in the furnace.  EAF operators

45
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

did indicate, however, that they use data concerning the amount of lead in EAF dust to

predict TCLP lead concentrations, for Toxic Release Inventory reporting, and for other

waste management reporting purposes.  

6.7.5. Hazardous Air Pollutant Emissions Standards for EAF 

Facilities 

EPA NESHAP regulations (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart YYYYY), concerning the control of air

emissions of hazardous air pollutants from stainless steel‐making and non‐stainless steel‐

making EAFs, establish regulatory requirements for the management of scrap metal at

EAF facilities.97 The Subpart YYYYY Area Source Rule regulations were established

principally to control air emissions of mercury, lead, and other hazardous air pollutants

from EAFs.  The Subpart YYYYY regulations were published and took effect in December

2007.  EAF operators were required to develop implementation plans for the regulations

by June 30, 2008.

Under Subpart YYYYY, control of hazardous air pollutant emissions from EAFs is achieved

by establishing scrap metal management practices.  (Application of air pollution control

devices to EAFs is separately regulated.)  Under Subpart YYYYY, EAF operators are

required to comply with one of the following two options for control of air emissions of

lead and other hazardous air pollutants from EAF operations: 98  

1. Prepare, submit for approval, and implement a pollution prevention plan for

scrap selection and inspection to minimize the amount of chlorinated plastics, free

organic liquids, and lead (except for the production of leaded steel); or

2. Not charge scrap to the EAF that contains scrap from motor vehicle bodies,

engine blocks, oil filters, oily turnings, machine shop borings, transformers or

capacitors containing polychlorinated biphenyls, lead‐containing components

(except for the production of leaded steel), chlorinated plastics, or free organic

liquids.  This restriction does not apply to any post‐consumer engine blocks, post‐

consumer oil filters, or oily turnings that are processed or cleaned to the extent

practicable, such that the materials do not include lead components, chlorinated

plastics, or free organic liquids.

EAF operators may have certain scrap metal subject to one option and other scrap metal

subject to the other option if the scrap remains segregated until it is combined for

charging to the EAF.   

The regulations indicate that under Option 1, the EAF pollution prevention plan is

required to include the following elements:  

(i) Specifications that scrap materials must be depleted (to the extent practicable)

of un‐drained used oil filters, chlorinated plastics, and free organic liquids at the

time of charging to the furnace.

46
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

(ii) A requirement in [the] scrap specifications for removal (to the extent

practicable) of lead‐containing components (such as batteries, battery cables, and

wheel weights) from the scrap, except for scrap used to produce leaded steel.

(iii) Procedures for determining if the requirements and specifications in

paragraph (a)(1) [discusses scope and approval process of plan]99 of this section are

met (such as visual inspection or periodic audits of scrap providers) and

procedures for taking corrective action with vendors whose shipments are not

within specifications.

The Area Source Rule is focused primarily on the management of mercury, not lead, and

the implementation of the Area Source Rule will not affect the RCRA‐hazardous waste

categorization of K061, as K061 is listed as hazardous because of its lead, trivalent

chromium, and cadmium content.  In general, research conducted for this study indicates

that EAFs already have scrap metal management practices and procedures in place to

control the amount of lead contained in scrap processed in EAFs.   

6.7.6. International Standards and Guidelines 

International standards and guidelines can affect the operation of EAFs and result in the

reduction or minimization of the use of lead in products.  For example, one EAF operator

indicated that as a global supplier of steel parts, the company’s global operations fall

under various European Union regulations, including Restriction of Hazardous Substances

(RoHS) directive, 100 Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemical

substances (REACH) directive, 101 and the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment

(WEEE) directive. 102  These EU Standards regulate the management of hazardous

substances, including lead, in various types of products.  In this regard, this EAF operator

has established a single set of corporate standards for their global steel parts production

operations, including reduction or elimination of the use of lead in their products.  This

includes reducing or eliminating the use of lead in solder and welding materials.103    

6.7.7. Best Practices for EAF Operators 

Best practices for the management of lead flows to EAFs include the practices and

procedures established by EAF operators, and described above in this section for

acceptance and processing of various scrap metal grades.  As discussed above, EAF

operators have established scrap grade acceptance criteria that prohibit acceptance of

certain grades of scrap potentially containing lead (e.g., leaded steel scrap) or that require

the segregation and separate management of certain grades of scrap metal potentially

containing lead (e.g., turnings and borings.)  Such prohibitions and restrictions on certain

grades of scrap potentially containing lead by EAFs would drive this scrap towards BOFs

(these scrap grades do not contain sufficient quantity of lead to be processed at secondary

lead smelters).  Lead in scrap fed to BOFs would either be incorporated into the steel slag

from the BOF or be incorporated into particulate air emissions from the BOF.  EAF

operators have also established procedures to identify and segregate visibly identifiable

and magnetically separable non‐ferrous metal scrap, including lead scrap.  These practices

47
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

and procedures are integrated with site‐specific and supplier‐specific specifications

established between EAF operators and suppliers for the quality of ferrous metal scrap

that will be accepted.   EAF operators can identify the source of specific loads of scrap and

can either downgrade the price they pay for the scrap load or reject the scrap load if the

supplier specifications are not met.   

EAF operators have indicated that they have established these specific practices and

procedures for scrap acceptance and processing explicitly to manage the amount of lead

entering the EAF scrap metal feed in order to control the amount of lead in the steel

produced, not for the purposes of the managing the amount of lead in the EAF dust

generated.  EAF dust composition data and operating data provided by EAF operators

indicates that simple non acceptance of shredded steel scrap (or other specific grades of

scrap) is likely not going to be sufficient to reduce the lead concentration of EAF dust to

below TCLP; EAFs that don’t accept shredded steel scrap (there are some) still don’t meet

TCLP for lead in their EAF dust.  EAF operators that accept carefully controlled grades of

home and prompt scrap could potentially reduce the lead content of the EAF dust to

below TCLP; however this would be infeasible to apply across all EAF operators because

this would leave the vast majority of ferrous metal scrap to be processed by the BOFs.  

Lead in scrap feed to BOFs would either be incorporated into the steel slag from the BOF

or incorporated into the particulate air emissions from the BOF.

6.8. EAF Dust 

This section includes a compilation of data concerning the amount of K061 generated/

processed, the range of composition (lead content, zinc content, etc.) and trends (based

on available data.)

6.8.1. Generation 

EAF operators reported, with one exception, that there are no identifiable trends in the

amount of K061 generated per ton of steel produced, and that the amount of K061

generated is generally a function of the loading operation and the amount of steel

produced.   EAF operators, with one exception, also did not report taking any specific

actions to reduce the amount of K061 generated at their facilities. Company No. 6, on the

other hand, indicated that they had noted trends in the amount of K061 generated related

to changes in the mode of mill operation and related to the types of scrap processed. No

additional information was provided by Company No. 6 concerning these changes.

MAX Environmental Technologies (2003) reported that approximately one million metric

tons of EAF dust are generated annually in the U.S.  This corresponds to approximately 20

kg of EAF dust for each metric ton of EAF steel produced.104  Horsehead (2008) reported

that approximately 900,000 metric tons of EAF dust is generated annually in the U.S. of

which 600,000 metric tons is further processed by Horsehead for metals recovery

(primarily zinc), and 300,000 metric tons are either treated prior to disposal or

48
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

exported.105  In 2006, approximately 145,000 metric tons (160,000 short tons) of EAF dust

were exported to Mexico.  Export data for K061 are summarized in Table 6.8.1‐1.106

49
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

Table 6.8.1‐1.  Exports of K061 to Mexico, 1996‐2005 (short tons)

Exporter ID Exporter Name 1996 1999 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

ALD000622852

BIRMINGHAM STEEL

CORPORATION ‐ 

BIRMINGHAM, AL STEEL

DIVISION 8,880 10,700 8,914 8,490 9,481 9,365    10,676

ALD0167123570 SMI STEEL INC. 3,005

ARD053730701

QUANEX CORP ‐ MACSTEEL

DIVISION 1,836 6,870 6,564 7,489    6,689

ARD091691261 ARKANSAS STEEL ASSOCIATES 4,041 3,233 3,063 3,767 4,216 4,534 4,667   

CAD982361404 TAMCO 2,773 6,930 9,920 11,051    9,141 7,283

COD007057961 CF&I STEEL, L.P. 12,085    17,240 14,928 14,423 10,263 9,916

FLD083812537

AMERISTEEL ‐ JACKSONVILLE

STEEL MILL DIVISION 3,866    4,816 6,310 5,826      

GAD030059182 BIRMINGAM SOUTHEAST LLC    5,585 6,517 3,504 5,896 13,725 8,590 9,863

ILD980996862

BIRMINGHAM STEEL

CORPORATION ‐ KANKAKEE,

IL STEEL DIVISION 10,278                     

MO0000031823 GST STEEL COMPANY 16,391 15,148                  

MSD008158685

NUCOR STEEL JACKSON, INC.

(FORMERLY BIRMINGHAM

SOUTHEAST, LLC) 5,181 5,876 5,030 4,073 6,398 7,091    6,504

NJD078873270

NEW JERSEY STEEL

CORPORATION 3,295                     

OKD007219181

SHEFFIELD STEEL

CORPORATION    7,140 6,027 6,510 7,683 8,514 8,037 8,338

ORD045776432

CASCADE STEEL ROLLING

MILLS, INC 1,115 288 170               

SCD003353760

OWEN ELECTRIC STEEL

COMPANY OF S.C., INC. 4,266 6,051             8,773

SCD044940369

NUCOR STEEL COMPANY –

SOUTH CAROLINA FACILITY    10,829    12,492          7,670

TXD008119414

STRUCTURAL METALS

INCORPORATED 9,994 14,720 16,131 16,435 15,161 16,765 16,456

TXD066362559

CHAPARRAL STEEL

MIDLOTHIAN L.P. 7,667 18,680    18,228 17,218 19,046 18,191 20,725

TXD071378582

NUCOR STEEL COMPANY ‐ 

TEXAS FACILITY    10,154    12,560 11,350 10,903 13,560 22,142

VAR000013292 CHAPARRAL VIRGINIA, INC.    1,160 7,763 8,357 8,099 9,654    11,070

WAD988487583

BIRMINGHAM STEEL

CORPORATION ‐ SEATTLE,

WA STEEL DIVISION 10,200 10,537 11,039 10,418 11,880 10,137    10,897

TOTALS   67,050 132,313 78,059 143,376 137,510 135,869 89,214 160,006

50
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

6.8.2. Processing 

There are two primary methods of managing EAF dust in the U.S.: 1) Recovery of metals

(primarily zinc) via High Temperature Metals Recovery (HTMR) processes; and 2) Waste

stabilization/fixation and subsequent landfill disposal. 107  EAF dust may also be briquetted

and then recycled back into the EAF onsite.  One EAF operator (Company No. 7) reported

recycling some of the EAF dust generated on site. Another EAF operator (Company No. 2)

reported that the company is investigating the economic feasibility of on‐site K061

recycling.  Most EAF dust generated is either treated for disposal or used for metals

recovery.

In the past, Horsehead operated the only HTMR facility for processing EAF dust in the

U.S. In June 2008, however, Steel Dust Recycling LLC (SDR) commenced operation of

their new HTMR facility (employing the Waelz Kiln process) in Millport, Alabama.  The

SDR facility is reported to have an EAF dust processing capacity of 110,000 short tons per

year. 108 , 109   A third EAF dust processing facility, using an induction furnace process, is

also under construction in Mississippi.  This operation is being built by Heritage

Environmental Services, and is expected to commence operation in 2009.   This facility is

expected to have an EAF dust processing capacity of 50,000 short tons per year.110

Table 6.8.2‐1 contains EAF dust disposition data reported by the nine reporting EAF

operators.  In general, EAF dust having a relatively high zinc concentration (i.e., on the

order of 20 percent) is processed for metals recovery.  By comparison, EAF dust having

lower concentrations of zinc is generally treated by stabilization and then disposed of in

landfills.  The economics of processing the EAF dust for metals recovery vs. treating the

EAF dust by stabilization for disposal depends in part on the concentration of zinc in the

EAF dust and in part on the market value of zinc (and other metals) that are recovered

from the HTMR process.  Transportation costs is another important factor in decision

making concerning management of EAF dust.  

Table 6.8.2‐1: Disposition of EAF Dust Generated by EAFs (2008)

Company Recycled onsite Offsite treatment for

landfill disposal

Offsite metals (zinc)

recovery process  

1 0% 100% 0%

2 0% 1.3% 98.7%

3 0% 100% 0%

4 0% 100% 0%

5 0% 0% 100%

6 0% 40 – 60% 40 – 60%

7 8% 4% 88%

8 0% 1.6% 98.4%

9 0% 100% 0%

Company No. 2 reported that the facility sends one truckload of K061 for landfill disposal

in order to maintain a disposal contract with the disposal company, while sending the

remainder of the K061 for metals recovery.  Company No. 8 reported that the K061 sent for

landfill disposal is generally material that is contaminated with non‐K061 material (e.g.,

cleanup and housekeeping dust) and therefore unsuitable for metals recovery.  Company

51
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

No. 7 reported that the company prefers to recycle their K061, but sends material having

low zinc concentrations (or high transportation cost) to landfill disposal.  Company No. 5

reported that the facility initiated recycling of K061 for metals recovery in response to a

State Source Reduction Strategy.   

One secondary lead smelter operator that is permitted as a RCRA hazardous waste

treatment, storage, and disposal facility (TSDF) reported that they were approached by an

EAF operator to determine whether their lead smelter could process K061.  The secondary

lead smelter operator indicated that they cannot process K061 because the trace metals in

the K061, including aluminum interfere with the quality of the lead product.  These trace

metals damage the casting process and some materials in the K061 “harden” the lead

product.  No primary or secondary lead smelters contacted for this study reported

handling K061.

6.8.3. Composition 

Rosselot (2007) conducted a study of lead flows in iron and steel production for the year

2003, and estimated that a flow rate of lead contained in furnace dust of 46,000 metric

tons per year, including 30,000 metric tons from EAFs producing steel and 12,000 metric

tons from BOFs producing steel.  Rosselot estimated total EAF dust generation from steel

production of 640,000 metric tons in 2003. 111 This value, combined with the lead flow rate

from steel production using EAFs estimated in this material flow study (30,000 metric

tons Pb), results in an average EAF dust lead concentration of approximately 5 percent.  

Rosselot indicated that this mass‐balance‐based estimate of EAF dust lead content

compared favorably to measured values (citing data from 1999).  This calculation‐based

estimate is higher than the recent direct measurements of lead content (see Tables 6.8.3‐1

and 6.8.3‐2.) but lower than the concentration reported in the delisting petition below.  

The varying lead content of K061 confirms the difficulty of obtaining a representative

concentration given the heterogeneity of the scrap metal stream.

  

A K061 delisting petition filed by MAX Environmental Technologies reported K061

composition data for several EAF operators.112  This delisting petition was submitted by a

K061 treatment facility operator in Pennsylvania.  Delisting petitions are further discussed

in Section 6.8.5 and Appendix C. Data from the MAX Environmental Technologies

delisting petition, shown in Table 6.8.3‐1, indicates that typical EAF dust contains on the

order of 8 percent lead, 113  More detailed data on the lead content of EAF dust and the

TCLP concentration for lead are summarized in Table 6.8.3‐3.  More recent EAF dust

composition data provided by the EAF operators indicate that the lead content of EAF

dust is generally between 0.5 percent and 1.5 percent (See Table 6.8.3‐2).  Horsehead also

reported that the typical range of lead concentration in EAF dust received by Horsehead is

from 0.9 percent to 1.2 percent lead, and that individual shipments of EAF dust with lead

concentrations of 3 percent to 4 percent lead have been received.114

Table 6.8.3‐2 summarizes the recent K061 lead content measurements reported by nine

EAF operators, which ranges from 0.5 percent to 1.5 percent.  These EAF operators

reported that there are no identifiable trends in K061 lead content related to the grades or

characteristics of the scrap metal processed or modes of mill operation, and, with two

52
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

exceptions, reported that the composition of the K061 is relatively consistent from year to

year.   

As shown in Table 6.8.3‐2, Company No. 5 reported trend data for the lead content of EAF

dust that shows a reduction in the average lead content from 1,500 mg/Kg (0.15%) to 800

mg/Kg (0.08%) over a five year period.  Company No. 5 indicated that actions taken by the

company concerning management of lead in scrap were focused on reducing the lead

content of the steel produced, not on reducing the lead content of the EAF dust.  The

company’s scrap metal management practices may have had an additional effect of

reducing the amount of lead in the EAF dust.

Also, as shown in Table 6.8.3‐2, Company 3 reported trend data for the lead content of

EAF dust that shows a reduction in the average lead content from approximately 15,500

mg/Kg to 8,300 mg/Kg over the period of 1997 to 2005.  The company reported that the

only variable that is known to have changed from 1997 to 2005 was the amount of

galvanized scrap material which was annealed (heat treated) with lead that originated

from the mill.  The last lead annealing frame was removed from service in 2001.     

One EAF operator reported both the actual lead content of K061 and the leachable lead

concentration, using the TCLP, in the K061.  The threshold TC concentration for lead is 5

mg/liter, while the reported EAF dust leachable lead concentrations range from 100

mg/liter to 500 mg/liter.  This is an indication that sufficient reduction of lead in scrap

metal to reduce the K061 leachable lead content to below TC levels is unlikely for a typical

EAF operation.  

Liebman (2000) surveyed 73 EAF steel producers in the U.S and Canada and reported data

concerning the lead of EAF dust and the quantity of EAF dust generated.  Liebman

reported that the 73 EAF facilities that were surveyed accounted for approximately

1,070,000 short tons of EAF dust.  This represented 90 percent of the estimated 1.09

million metric tons of EAF dust generated in 1999 in the U.S. and Canada.  Further, eight

of the facilities surveyed in Liebman (2000) accounted for 27 percent of the EAF dust

generated, and 40 facilities accounted for 49 percent of the EAF dust generated. 115  Table

6.8.3‐4 provides a summary of the Liebman survey results.  

Sixty one of the 73 EAF facilities surveyed reported EAF composition data.  Forty percent

(25) of the 61 EAF facilities reported the lead oxide content in the EAF dust at less than

one percent; 31 percent (19) of the facilities reported a lead oxide content between 1 and 2

percent, 16 percent (10) of the facilities reported the lead oxide content as between 2 and 3

percent, 8 percent (5) facilities reported a lead oxide content as between 3 and 4 percent,

and 5 percent (3) reported a lead oxide content as greater than 4 percent. 116  Liebman

(2000) did not report data concerning how (or whether) the types and quantities of scrap

charged to the EAFs or how (or whether) the production capacity of the EAFs relate to the

EAF dust composition.      

53
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

Table 6.8.3‐1: Typical EAF Dust Composition: MAX Environmental Technologies delisting petition

Metal Concentration Metal Concentration

(mg/Kg) Percent (mg/Kg) Percent

Aluminum 3,400 0.34% Manganese 28,400 2.84%

Arsenic 230 0.02% Nickel 340 0.03%

Calcium 34,300 3.43% Phosphorus 1,280 0.13%

Chromium 1,700 0.17% Potassium 16,300 1.63%

Copper 4,200 0.42% Silicon 8,700 0.87%

Iron 248,500 24.85% Sodium 19,800 1.98%

Lead 78,200 7.82% Titanium 480 0.05%

Magnesium 13,100 1.31% Zinc 232,900 23.29%

Source: Delisting Petition For Treated K061, Max Environmental Technologies, Inc. (Hazardous Waste

Management Services), Yukon, PA, CEC Project 210966, 11/2003.

http://www.depweb.state.pa.us/pubpartcenter/lib/pubpartcenter/EQB/2004/yukon_delisting_petition.pdf

Table 6.8.3‐2: EAF Dust Composition reported by EAF operators

Company Actual Lead Concentration(mg/Kg)

Low Average High

TCLP Lead

Conc.(mg/liter)  

Data Year

1 8,500 14,525 39,000 2005‐2008

2 10,900 12,300 15,900 2006

2 8,500 11,900 15,200 2007

3 8,300 2005

3 12,930 15,515 17,940 1997

4 19,700 19,850 20,000 2007

5 800 2007

5 800 2006

5 1,000 2005

5 1,300 2004

5 1,500 2003

6 <4,000 2007

7 <2,000 <4,000 100‐500 a [typical]

8 8,400 10,830 11,800 1992

9,400 10,250 12,000 1993

7,200 8,640 10,200 1998

4,500 5,960 8,500 1999

3,500 4,310 6,400 2000

2,650 4,160 6,190 2001

3,930 4,750 6,620 2002

2,710 3,660 4,660 2003

4,200 5,460 6,620 2004

3,390 6,120 8,970 2005

4,950 5,650 6,090 2006

4,990 6,670 10,900 2007

9 11,300 13,900 16,300 2007 a

The TCLP threshold for classification of EAF dust as K061 hazardous waste is 5 mg/liter

Source: Consolidated data from Steel Manufacturer Association member companies, consolidated by the SMA

June 15, 2008, and data from an additional EAF operator contacted separately.  

54
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

Table 6.8.3‐3: EAF Dust Composition reported in MAX Environmental Technologies  

Delisting Petition

Company Actual Lead Concentration(mg/Kg)

Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3

TCLP Lead

Conc. (mg/liter)  

Data

Year

J&K Steel 10,200 ‐‐  ‐‐  2003

Ellwood

Quality

9,460 9,190 ‐‐  1 2003

Allegheny

Ludlum

4,980 3,590 3,470 17.2 2003

AK Steel   3,460 1,440 ‐‐  2003

Source: Delisting Petition For Treated K061, Max Environmental Technologies, Inc. (Hazardous Waste

Management Services), Yukon, PA, CEC Project 210966, 11/2003.

http://www.depweb.state.pa.us/pubpartcenter/lib/pubpartcenter/EQB/2004/yukon_delisting_petition.pdf

Table 6.8.3‐4: EAF Dust Composition reported by Liebman Survey of EAF Operators

Range of EAF Dust Lead

Concentration

Number of EAF

Facilities Reporting

Percent of EAF Facilities

Reporting

< 1 percent 25 40 percent

1 to 2 percent 19 31 percent

2 to 3 percent 10 16 percent

3 to 4 percent 5 8 percent

> 5 percent 3 5 percent

Total number of EAF

Facilities Reporting

61 100 percent

Source: Liebman, Marc, 2000.  The Current Status of Electric Arc Furnace Dust Recycling in North

America, AIM Market Research, Pittsburgh PA, 2000, Figure 2.

6.8.4. Treatment and Recycling (Zinc Recovery) 

This section provides an overview of EAF dust treatment for disposal and processing for

zinc recovery.  These processes include HTMR for zinc recovery, emerging processes for

zinc recovery, and K061 stabilization and fixation for disposal.

Zinc Recovery/HTMR Process  

Approximately two‐thirds of the EAF dust generated in the U.S. is processed by Horsehead

in their HTMR process located in Pennsylvania.  The quantity of EAF dust processed

equals about 600,000 tons per year.  Steel Dust Recycling LLC’s HTMR facility that

recently began operation in 2008 has an estimated EAF dust throughput capacity of

110,000 short tons per year.117  Air emissions of lead from this facility after application of air

emission controls have the potential to be 4.23 short tons per year, according to

environmental documentation for the facility.  However, the total expected lead emissions

are approximately 1.43 short tons per year.118  This would represent approximately 0.2

percent of the total lead content of the EAF dust processed, assuming 110,000 tons a year

55
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

EAF dust processed and an average of 2 percent lead content in the EAF dust.  It is

anticipated that the lead content of the EAF dust that is not emitted as air emissions

would go either into the Waelz iron product or into the slag produced by the process.

At the Horsehead facility, the EAF dust is first processed through a Waelz Kiln.  This is an

iron separation process.  All of the non‐ferrous metals in the EAF dust generated from the

Waelz Kiln are captured into a single product.  Crude Zinc Oxide (CZO) is created by the

Waelz Kiln process, and is further processed in a calcining kiln into zinc feedstock. The

lead and other metals are separated at this point in the process, and the zinc feedstock is

sent to the Horsehead Monaca, PA Plant for processing into zinc.  Horsehead attempts to

separate the lead from the zinc so it doesn’t go into the zinc recovery operation and

contaminate the equipment.  The lead fraction is shipped to the Horsehead Bartlesville,

OK Plant and processed to separate metals and lead carbonate.  The lead carbonate is sent

to a primary lead smelter.  

The separation of the EAF dust lead from the zinc in the HTMR process is not 100 percent.  

The PW Metal (the zinc product that Horsehead produces) also has lead in it.  Horsehead

estimates that there may be 1.5 percent lead in the zinc product, but that the bulk of the

lead content of the EAF dust is going into the lead residue and ultimately to the primary

lead smelter.   

The SDR facility now under construction would also use a Waelz kiln process to recover

zinc from the EAF dust.  According to the facility process description, the zinc product

produced by the process would be provided to primary zinc smelters.  The Waelz Kiln iron

product could be used in cement and asphalt production (no mention is made of recovery

of lead content or of where the lead content goes in the process). 119   

Emerging Zinc Recovery Processes  

There are several initiatives underway to provide additional U.S. capacity to treat K061 for

metals recovery.  Heritage Environmental Services has developed a new process to process

EAF dust for metals recovery.  The company constructed a “demonstration plant” in

Indiana to process EAF dust for metals recovery using the PIZO Technologies LLC channel

induction furnace process, and is now constructing a full‐scale facility in Arkansas to

process EAF dust from several EAF dust generators.120 121  A minor source construction

permit has been issued by the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality for the

proposed full‐scale facility. 122  The minor source permit for the facility includes a process

description for the PIZO Process. 123

With this process, EAF dust, and potentially other zinc‐containing materials, would be

heated in a molten iron bath and melted and separated into molten metal, volatile metals,

and slag.   The zinc content of the melted material would volatilize into gasses and would

subsequently oxidize in the process vent hood to form crude zinc oxide (CZO).  The CZO

would be collected in baghouses and then conveyed to a storage silo for shipment to zinc

product producers.  The PIZO process would also produce pig iron and slag.  The pig iron,

derived from the iron content of the EAF dust, would be transferred from the melting

furnace in ladles into a pig casting machine to be made into iron pigs.  The slag from the

process would be cooled in steel boxes and crushed and then potentially sold to

56
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

customers.  Air emissions of lead from the proposed facility would be approximately 1

short ton per year according to environmental documentation for the proposed facility,

indicating that most of the lead content of the feed to the process is recovered in the

products of the PIZO process rather than emitted to the atmosphere. 124  

As the full‐scale PIZO process facility is only now under construction, the PIZO process is

not currently considered a proven technology with respect to managing lead in EAF dust.  

While the PIZO process may result in the generation of saleable material streams (CZO,

pig iron, and slag), the process description does not indicate that the lead content of the

EAF dust is recovered/reclaimed (as lead) and separated from the other product streams

from the process.  The minor source permit for the proposed facility indicates that the air

emissions from the PIZO process would be less than one ton per year of lead.  Therefore,

the lead content of the EAF dust would likely be contained in one or more of the product

flows out of the process (i.e., the CZO, the slag, or the pig iron) and could be subject to

potential release to the environment during downstream processing/use of these

materials. The commercially proven HTMR process, by comparison, separates the lead

content of the EAF dust into a saleable lead product that is further processed at a primary

lead smelter.  

The economics of K061 treatment for metals recovery may change with the anticipated

startup of these new facilities in the U.S. to recover zinc from EAF dust.  Currently, EAF

operators are limited to recycling the EAF dust on site, sending the material to one of two

HTMR facility operators (one in the U.S. and one in Mexico) or treating the material for

landfill disposal.  It may be the case that EAF operators that are currently sending their

EAF dust to landfill disposal may instead send the material to one of the proposed metals

recovery facilities.  

K061 Stabilization/Fixation Processes  

Typical stabilization/fixation processes for treatment of EAF dust (K061) are intended to

reduce the leachability of metals from the EAF dust such that the treated material (if

delisted) can be disposed of in a non‐hazardous waste landfill.  One such treatment

process described in a MAX Environmental Technology 2003 delisting petition [see

Appendix C] would treat EAF dust using a combination of chemical fixation and

macroencapsulation and would increase the density of the material from approximately

0.53 g/cm3 (untreated EAF dust) to approximately 0.84 g/cm3 (treated EAF dust residuals).  

The treatment process would also reduce the leachability of metals from the treated

material under acidic, neutral, and alkaline conditions.  According to the delisting

petition, the leachability of lead would be reduced by 99.9 percent as compared to the

untreated EAF dust.  Reductions in the leachability of selected metallic constituents in the

treated EAF dust versus the untreated EAF dust are summarized in Table 6.8.4‐1:

57
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

Table 6.8.4‐1: Reductions in Leachability of Metals in Treated EAF Dust from MAX Environmental

Technology Process

Metallic

Component

TCLP

Concentration

(mg/L)

TCLP

Concen.

(mg/L)

Percent

Reduction

TCLP

Concen.

(mg/L)

TCLP

Concen.

(mg/L)

Percent

Reduction

Untreated Treated Untreated Treated

(AL) (AL‐T2) (EQ) (EQ‐T1)

Antimony ND (0.12) 0.00019 ‐‐  0.038 0.0021 94%

Arsenic 0.093   ND

(0.001)

>99% 0.17 ND (0.001) >99%

Barium 0.13 0.084 35% 0.69 0.38 45%

Beryllium ND (0.005)   ND

(0.001)

‐‐   0.006   ND(0.0010)   >83%

Cadmium ND (0.1)   0.0036   ‐‐   3.1   0.0011   99.96%

Chromium 47.1   ND

(0.002)

>99.9%   0.068   0.031   54%

Lead 17.2   0.00099   99.9%   1   0.00016   99.98%

Mercury 0.0024   ND

(0.0002)

>92%   0.001   ND(.00020)   >80%

Nickel ND (0.04) 0.006 ‐‐  0.11 0.0093 92%

Selenium 0.052 ND

(0.005)

>90% 0.039 0.0011 97%

Silver 0.0042   ND

(0.001)  

>76%   ND(0.05)   ND(0.0010)    ‐‐ 

Thallium ND (2)   0.00072   ‐‐   ND (2)   0.0057 ‐‐ 

Vanadium 0.063   ND

(0.001)  

>98%   0.0037   ND(0.0010)   >73%

Zinc 4.8   0.013   99.7%   170   0.0032   100%

EQ = Elwood Quality Facility data; EQ‐T1 = Treatment Test 1 data

AL = Allegheny Ludlum Facility data; AL‐T2 = Treatment Test 2 data

Source: Delisting Petition For Treated K061, Max Environmental Technologies, Inc. (Hazardous Waste

Management Services), Yukon, PA, CEC Project 210966, 11/2003.

http://www.depweb.state.pa.us/pubpartcenter/lib/pubpartcenter/EQB/2004/yukon_delisting_petition.pdf

6.8.5. Federal K061 Waste Delisting Actions 

In 2002 EPA conducted a Study on RCRA Hazardous Waste Delisting, the study noted 12

federal delisting actions associated with BOFs and Steel Mills.  Of these, 6 were for

delisting K061.  These 6 EPA K061 delisting actions do not include K061 delisting actions

issued by state agencies.  At least 1.5 million tons of K061 derived from steel production at

mills using EAFs had been delisted as of 2002.125   Several additional delisting petitions

have been submitted to U.S. EPA or to state agencies since the 2002 EPA Study was

published.  Federal and state‐agency delisting petitions for K061 are further discussed in

Appendix C.

58
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

Facilities reporting delisting of K061 waste achieved this status through the application of

various treatment methods to the K061.  Data provided by the EAF operators contacted for

this study and from literature searches do not indicate any K061 being delisted solely

through changes to the characteristics of the scrap metal feed to EAFs (i.e., to reduce the

content of lead or other metals in the K061).  ISRI reported that some EAF operators have

been able to delist the K061 generated by their facilities because their facilities only accept

prompt scrap, and not shredded steel or other post‐consumer scrap.126   Prompt scrap

generated from iron and steel manufacturers that are not using leaded steel or stainless

steel would contain very low concentrations of lead.  EAF operators reported that the lead

content of the steel produced in their facilities is on the order of 0.01 percent lead.  By

comparison, leaded steel or stainless steel would contain on the order of 0.25 percent lead.  

In other words, if the lead content of the raw material to the EAF is reduced sufficiently,

the K061 generated can possibly be delisted.  However, utilization of solely prompt scrap

as a raw material to an EAF would not be feasible for EAF operators in general.  As shown

in Table 6.2.2‐3, in 2005, shredded steel scrap (derived primarily from shredding scrap

automobiles) represented the single largest scrap flow for pig iron and raw steel

production.  This scrap stream comprised about 20 percent of the total iron and steel

scrap used in iron and steel production.  Heavy melt grade steel (including structural steel

potentially containing lead‐based coatings) comprises a similar percentage of the total.   

7. Study Findings 

This section provides a summary of study findings concerning management of lead in

scrap metal and management of lead flows to EAFs.   

• There is no apparent statistically verifiable relationship between the lead content

of furnace dust/K061 and the lead content of scrap sources based on available data.  

EAF operators indicated either that data are not collected to a sufficient degree to

enable a correlation between the types or sources of scrap and lead concentrations,

or that the scrap streams are too variable to enable conclusive definitions of the

relative contributions to the lead content of K061.  A correlation between scrap

grade and K061 lead content is more readily made if steel mills use one grade

exclusively, such as prompt scrap. However, this is an atypical condition and

would still need to be verified on a facility‐by‐facility basis.   

• The concentration of lead in the most common grades of scrap, e.g. shredded

scrap, cast metal scrap, is relatively low and widely dispersed, and only a small

amount of lead in scrap feed to an EAF would result in the lead content of the EAF

dust exceeding TC thresholds, since the lead content of the scrap largely ends up

in the EAF dust.  Once lead becomes incorporated into the scrap, it is difficult to

identify and remove.  

• EAF operators indicated that collecting sufficient data to assess trends in the

concentration of lead in K061 would be infeasible, and, even if sufficient data were

to be collected, any trends in lead concentration would likely remain inconclusive.  

59
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

Part of the reason is that EAF operators reported the lead content of scrap overall

is low and the lead is “widely dispersed and in low‐concentration materials” (i.e.,

as opposed to being in relatively large, identifiable articles). Scrap metal suppliers

and EAFs that are implementing “best practices” (see Section 8.0) are removing

lead‐containing materials that are relatively easily identifiable and recoverable,

and are controlling the quality of the scrap that they receive to eliminate known

sources of lead‐containing scrap.   

• Based on the responses from EAF operators, lead in scrap metal is an accepted

operational cost to be managed.  In general, research conducted for this study

indicates that EAFs already have scrap management practices and procedures in

place to control the amount of lead contained in scrap processed at EAFs.  EAF

operators reported that they can control the lead content of their scrap metal

supply to the extent necessary to ensure that lead does not affect the quality of the

produced steel.  One EAF operator indicated that merely 15 kilograms of lead

contained in a heat would ruin the finished product (a typical EAF heat is 100 ‐ 150

metric tons of steel).  EAF operators indicated that they control the lead content of

their produced steel to less than 0.01 percent (or as low as 0.001 percent) and that

most of the lead in scrap ends up in the EAF Dust, not to the produced steel.     

• BOF operators also reported that they have procedures in place to control the

amount of lead in the scrap feed to the BOFs.  One BOF operator reported that a

concentration of 0.03 percent lead by weight in the produced steel would result in

a “missed heat” and would trigger a response from the plant quality control

system.  This BOF operator127 indicated that the plant quality control system could

apply a combination of detailed heat information and video surveillance to narrow

down the source of the lead causing a “missed heat” to within “three or four rail

cars” of scrap metal.

• The Rosselot Study (2007) identified the lead content of cast metal as the largest

potential stream of lead content in scrap that is unlikely to be removed by any

upstream sorting process.  According to the study, the amount of lead consumed

in the production of casting metals for transportation equipment (e.g. engine

blocks) amounted to about 30,000 metric tons per year between 1997 and 2003. 128  

These scrap metals would be utilized at both EAFs and BOFs.  EAF operators [and

the SMA] indicated that, for the most part, there are no restrictions applied to

acceptance of cast metal by EAFs.  Visual inspection of cast metal would not easily

distinguish lead‐containing castings, and castings are a large enough scrap stream

that segregating castings from the general scrap metal stream would be

problematic.  Furthermore, segregating casting metals would not enhance lead

recovery since these metals would still need to be recycled by BOFs or foundries.

The alloyed lead content is too small to make secondary lead smelting a viable

alternative.  

• EAF operators indicated that the lead content of EAF Dust is on the order of 0.5 ‐ 

1.5 percent and that the leachable lead content, using the TCLP, of EAF Dust is

typically on the order of 100 ppm – 500 ppm.  Considering that the lead in scrap is

“widely dispersed and in low‐concentration materials,” EAF operators do not see a

60
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

practical solution to reducing the lead content of the scrap sufficiently to reduce

the lead content of EAF Dust below the TC level; to delist the material, the

leachable lead levels would need to get much lower.  Based on EAF operator

data and other sources of TCLP data for K061, delisting of K061 for an EAF

accepting anything other than uniformly controlled prompt scrap is not realistic,

unless the EAF dust is subsequently treated.

• For low‐concentration lead or alloyed lead in scrap metal streams (i.e., streams

that cannot be easily identified/recovered by visual inspection and grades of scrap

that do not contain identifiably high lead content), removal of lead at the

production level (pollution prevention approach) seems most feasible. This

approach has merit as separation of visually‐identifiable lead in steel and iron is in

large part already a well developed practice and it is likely that the major portion

of visually‐identifiable lead is already being segregated.  While this approach can

be improved, even if all visually‐identifiable lead and certain scrap grades were

eliminated, the bulk of the currently remaining lead in the feed stream to EAFs

would remain in low concentration, widely dispersed alloyed material.

• Scrap metal is being classified under a number of commercial grades.  However,

scrap metal grades are largely not classified based on lead content.  Because lead is

largely an operational cost being managed by the EAFs (i.e., they have procedures

in place to control the lead content of their produced steel), commercial incentives

do not exist to drive scrap classification in this way.  As such, the lead content is

not a primary driver in scrap grading.  

• Lead content in different scrap grades is highly variable.  According to scrap metal

suppliers and EAF and BOF operators, there are certain identifiable grades of

ferrous metal scrap that are known to contain lead.  Examples of grades where lead

is used as an alloy include:  terne plated steel, terne plate bundles, busheling,

Babbitt metal (e.g., bearings), turnings, borings, and galvanized steel.  These

grades are in addition to residual (contaminant or non‐alloyed lead) material, e.g.,

wheel weights, counterweights.  One EAF operator reported that lead components

are found in #2 heavy melt grade scrap, which this particular operator does not

accept.  One BOF operator 129 also identified a “small chance” that heavy melt

grade scrap could contain lead in the form of counterweights, but still accepts

heavy melt grade scrap subject to visual inspection.  In general, the study contacts

indicated that these grades of scrap are already being segregated by scrap metal

recyclers prior to shipment, particularly for mills whose steel products would be

adversely affected by the increased lead content of these grades.  EAF and BOF

operators indicated that contracts with scrap suppliers explicitly prohibit

acceptance of residual lead materials and that inspection procedures are in place

to identify and reject such materials.   

• Both scrap metal suppliers and EAFs have procedures in place to identify and

remove ferrous‐metal components containing lead (e.g., sewer pipe connectors).  

However, visual inspection procedures would not be expected to identify all

“leaded steel” components.  One EAF operator that produces “leaded steel”

indicated that approximately 5.5 pounds of lead are added per short ton of steel to

61
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

produce the leaded steel.  Leaded steel components may contain only 0.15 ‐ 0.35

percent lead according to supplier specifications.  These components are not

necessarily visually identifiable or identifiable by scrap grade, and would need to

be subjected to chemical analysis in order to be identified and segregated from the

general scrap metal stream.  One EAF operator reported applying spectroscopy to

identify and segregate lead‐containing turnings.  Several other EAF operators

reported that their facilities are applying newer technologies (e.g., XRF Gun) to

identify suspected lead‐containing material or anticipate doing so in the future.  

However, according to EAF operators, these technologies are not likely to be

feasible for identifying the lead content of bulk or shredded steel scrap on a

routine basis because these technologies analyze metal surfaces not within the

metal volume.  As with casting metals, segregation of leaded steel would still not

enhance lead recovery as this material would still need to be recycled by ferrous

mills of some variety resulting in the capture of lead by air pollution control

devices.  Minimal lead content makes secondary lead smelting not feasible.

However, XRF‐type technologies may still be useful in indentifying non‐alloyed

residual lead contamination.  

• One company indicated that they consume 150 (22.5‐ton) truckloads and 50 (75‐

ton) railcar loads of scrap every day, and suggested that it would be infeasible to

subject anything, but a small fraction of such volume of material to analytical

testing (i.e., as opposed to visual inspection). The diverse origins of these scrap

metal loads would also make representative sampling infeasible.    

• Continued diligence and knowledge transfer within the scrap industry will ensure

a majority of lead components that are visually identifiable or identifiable by scrap

grade are removed.  These include: items that are primarily lead and are managed

as non‐ferrous metal scrap; items that contain an economically viable level of lead

(or other non‐ferrous metals) that are separated from the ferrous metal scrap

stream; and certain identifiable scrap grades (e.g., turnings.)  Visually‐identifiable

lead‐containing materials include pipe seals, counterweights, roofing materials,

batteries and battery components.   

8. K061 Lead Reduction Strategies 

This section provides a brief description of potential strategies to reduce the lead content

of K061.  It provides recommendations for potential lead reduction and separation

strategies to be investigated, including next steps for EPA and new industry initiatives.

8.1. Future Strategy Considerations 

The following considerations should be kept in mind while pursuing future waste

minimization activities and judging their effectiveness:    

One principal consideration concerning future strategies to reduce the amount of lead in

scrap metal processed at EAFs is that such strategies are not likely to reduce the amount

62
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

of lead in ferrous metal scrap to levels resulting in EAF dust with lead levels lower than

the TC threshold level; indeed the TC value would need to be much lower than the

threshold level to be considered for delisting.  This is because, as discussed above, lead

concentrations of EAF dust are much higher than the TC threshold.  The residual

(contaminant) lead content of ferrous metal scrap that can be controlled by EAF operators

does not contribute to the lead content of K061 as much as the alloyed lead in ferrous

products.  Residual (contaminant) lead is largely controlled by scrap metal recycling

facilities to capture the higher non‐ferrous commodity value and by EAFs to ensure the

quality of their steel product.  Thus, the resources devoted to further reduction of residual

lead should be tempered with this limitation in mind.   

Future reduction and separation strategies would also have to account for the fact that the

lead‐content of materials entering the scrap metal stream is generally at low

concentrations and is dispersed throughout a wide range of materials and scrap grades;

management of the flow of such materials to the EAFs by further controlling the grades of

scrap accepted by EAFs would simply leave a larger fraction of the ferrous metal scrap to

be accepted by BOF operators, since the scrap would likely be recycled in one process or

the other.   Thus, even if these grades were segregated, the lead would still be captured in

the same way – just not as a K061.  Accordingly, strategies based on controlling the

acceptance of specific scrap grades by EAF operators would not solve the broader issue of

minimizing the lead content of ferrous scrap recycling materials.   

Much of the lead‐content of ferrous metal scrap is contained in products that may have

been manufactured years or even decades ago, e.g. structural steel, appliances,

automobiles.  Therefore, strategies based on reducing the amount of lead used in

manufactured products would not be expected to have an immediate effect on the lead

content of scrap entering the ferrous metal scrap stream, considering the inherent lag

between production and when the product reaches the end of its useful life and enters the

scrap metal stream.

8.2. Reduction and Separation Strategies 

With these considerations in mind, prudent next steps for public and private stakeholders

may include:  

• Ensure best management practices identified above for lead and lead products,

scrap metal suppliers (auto dismantlers, shredders, ferrous/non‐ferrous scrap

yards, C&D material recyclers), and EAF operators are being implemented

industry‐wide. This primarily includes efforts to segregate and recover lead

product residuals (as opposed to ferrous products with alloyed lead) from the

scrap metal stream.  The best management practices described in this research

provide a bench mark for industries at various parts of the supply chain and should

help draw attention to this issue that will lead to further improvements.  

63
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

• One best practice of note: some facility operators reported that they have

established financial incentive programs for workers to identify and segregate non‐

ferrous metals from the ferrous metal scrap stream.  Allowing employees to receive

proceeds from the resale of the non‐ferrous metals they remove from incoming

scrap loads is one type of incentive.  These incentives are effective because non‐

ferrous metal scrap is more valuable than ferrous metal scrap; additionally,

removing non‐ferrous metals – including lead – increases the value of ferrous scrap

itself.

• Scrap metal generators, scrap metal recyclers and EAF operators generally

indicated that the most feasible and cost effective method of managing lead in

scrap metal is for manufacturers to reduce the amount of lead in manufactured

products that can potentially enter the ferrous metal scrap stream.  Analysis of

empirical data supports these claims.  Initiatives to reduce the amount of lead used

in products may be the most fruitful avenues for increasing lead recovery.  EPA’s

voluntary initiative to phase out the use of lead wheel weights could be used as a

model for this effort.  Other industry sectors to consider include: cast metal

products, leaded‐steel machined parts, automobile parts, and coatings.

• Application of lead source reduction initiatives would be more effective if applied

to production both within and outside of the U.S.  SRI indicated that a significant

issue with respect to the lead content of scrap metal relates to lead contained in

imported materials made from iron and steel.   

o For example, the lead content in metal strapping made in Asia is very high.  

The metal strapping is used in transporting freight from Asia to the U.S.  

Strapping containing lead is not easily distinguishable from other

strapping.  Even if the strapping is segregated, it has too little lead content

to be of interest to non‐ferrous metal recyclers.  Metal cans manufactured

in Asia and Eastern Europe may also contain lead solder, and there may be

other iron and steel products coming from foreign suppliers that contain

lead entering the ferrous metal scrap stream.  

o SRI indicated that in 1998, 90% of steel based products were made in the

U.S. and 10% were imported; in 2008 the ratio was 50:50.   

o Note: the European Union’s recent regulatory initiatives to control

hazardous materials e.g. Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and

Restriction of Chemical (REACH), does not include lead bearing materials

in general (e.g. leaded steel, cast metals) given their relatively low levels of

lead content.  

64
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

Appendix A: Summary of Contacts 

Table A‐1 includes a summary of trade association and industry contacts for this study.  

Most discussions with the trade association and industry contacts were conducted by

telephone and electronic mail, with the exception of one meeting conducted March 4,

2008 with representatives of the Steel Manufacturers Association (SMA).  Table A‐2

identifies the SMA meeting attendees.   

Table A‐1: Summary of Association and Industry Contacts

Contact Name Organization Date Contact Information

Roy Baggett Sanders Lead Company 4/02/2008 334‐566‐1563

rb@sanderslead.com

John Cabaniss Association of International

Automobile Manufacturers

Director for Environment and

Energy

5/19/2008 703‐525‐7788 General

703‐247‐2107 Direct

http://www.aiam.org/public/aiam/default.aspx

Therese Cirone Quemetco, Inc.  

Vice President

5/05/2008 317‐247‐1303

Mat Cusma Schnitzer Steel   3/10/2008 503‐286‐6944  

http://www.schnitzersteel.com/

mcusma@schn.com

Joseph Hanning U.S. Steel   2/25/2008 412‐273‐7207 Office

412‐952‐0474 Cell

JEHanning@uss.com

Matt Haslett Metro Metals NW 2/27/2008 503‐287‐8861

matth@metrometalsnw.com

Bill Heenan Steel Recycling Institute   4/25/2008 412‐922‐2772 x205

bheenansri@aol.com

Mike Hohman U.S. Steel   2/25/2008 412‐233‐1467

MHohman@uss.com

Scott Horne Institute of Scrap Recycling

Industries,  

2/07/2008 202‐662‐8533

scotthorne@isri.org

Tom Janeck Horsehead Corporation

Vice President EH&S

5/21/2008 724‐773‐2272

TJaneck@horsehead.net

Daniel Lake Timken Company 5/20/2008 330‐470‐3716

Daniel.lake@timken.com

Drew Lammers Cohen Brothers, Inc.   2/11/2008 1‐513‐422‐3696

65
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

Table A‐1: Summary of Association and Industry Contacts

Contact Name Organization Date Contact Information

President of National

Demolition Association

1‐513‐617‐0541

http://www.cohenbrothersinc.com/ferrous.php

Michael Long ArcelorMittal Steel 2/26/2008 503‐287‐8861

michael.long@mittalsteel.com

Joyce Morales Mayco Industries 5/21/2008 205‐942‐4242

joyce@maycoindustries.com

Michael Olvera ABI Foundry  

Environmental Engineering

Manager

3/10/2008 510‐632‐3467  

molvera@abifoundry.com

Jim Reese Horsehead Corporation   5/21/2008 724‐773‐2272 office

724‐561‐9930 cell

JReese@horsehead.net

Jon Sampson Automotive Recyclers

Association

2/06/2008 703‐385‐1001  

Note: Jon Sampson may no longer be at ARA

John Tapper Gopher Resource Corporation 4/07/2008 651 405‐2203

http://www.gopherresource.com/lead_faq.asp

Mike Taylor National Demolition

Association Executive Director

2/04/2008 215‐348‐4949  

800‐541‐2412

Info@demolitionassociation.com

William Turley Construction Materials

Recycling Association (CMRA)  

Executive Director

1/29/2008 630‐585‐7530  

turley@cdrecycling.org

Mike Vail Metro Metals NW 2/27/2008 503‐287‐8861  

mikevail@excite.com

Dan Vornberg Doe Run Company 5/19/2008 314‐453‐7100

636 933‐3187 Direct

http://www.doerun.com/  

David Wagger Institute of Scrap Recycling

Industries  

2/07/2008 202‐662‐8533

davidwagger@isri.org

Steve Yates Gopher Resource Corporation

EHS Manager

4/07/2008 651‐405‐2213

Steve.Yates@grcmn.com

http://www.gopherresource.com/lead_faq.asp

66
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

Table A‐2: SMA Meeting Attendees

Contact Name Organization Contact Information

Eric Stuart Steel Manufacturers

Association

Director Environment and

Energy

202‐296‐1515

stuart@steelnet.org

Dale Harmon Gerdau Ameristeel http://www.gerdauameristeel.com/

Mike Peters CMC

Vice President‐

Environmental Manager

830‐372‐8305

mike.peters@cmc.com

Brad Bredesen CMC

Asst. Vice President‐ 

Environmental Manager

830‐372‐8331  

Steven.Bredesen@cmc.com

Eric Larmore Nucor Steel

Environmental Manager

205‐562‐1132

Eric.Larmore@nucor.com  

Joseph Green Kelly Drye/Collier Shannon 202‐342‐8849

jgreen@kelleydrye.com  

James Kohler U.S. EPA  

Office of Resource

Conservation and Recovery

Environmental Engineer

703‐347‐8953

Kohler.James@epamail.epa.gov

Jonathan Kiser ICF International 703‐431‐1106 (cell)  

jkiser@icfi.com

Michael DeWit ICF International

Senior Manager

905‐274‐0391

mdewit@icfi.com

Robert Lanza ICF International

Senior Chemical Engineer

202‐862‐1118  

rlanza@icfi.com

67
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

Appendix B: Lead Consumption and Scrap Metal 

Consumption Data 

The USGS reports annual data for U.S. primary and secondary lead consumption.  Tables

B‐1 and B‐2 summarize U.S. primary and secondary lead consumption for the years 2005

and 2006.130   

The USGS also reports annual data for U.S. scrap iron and steel consumption.131 Table B‐3

contains data for consumption of scrap in pig iron and raw steel production, foundries,

and other types of facilities for the years 2002 – 2006, including purchased and home

scrap.  Tables B‐4 and B‐5 contain data for on the utilization of iron and steel scrap by

scrap grade for the year 2006.  Table B‐6 identifies consumption of metal scrap by facility

type, including BOF, EAF, iron foundry, and other types of facilities. USGS does not

publish more detailed scrap data for scrap grade utilization by furnace type.132

68
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

TABLE B-1 

U.S. CONSUMPTION OF LEAD, BY PRODUCT1 

(Metric tons, lead content) 

SICcode2 Product 2005 2006 

 Metal products: 

3482 Ammunition, shot and bullets 61,300 65,300 

 Bearing metals: 

35 Machinery except electrical W W 

371 Motor vehicles and equipment3 W W 

37 Other transportation equipment W W 

 Total 1,180 1,240 

3351 Brass and bronze, billets and ingots 2,100 2,620 

36 Cable covering, power and communication (4) (4) 

15 Calking lead, building construction (4) (4) 

 Casting metals: 

36 Electrical machinery and equipment W W 

371 Motor vehicles and equipment W W 

37 Other transportation equipment W W 

3443 Nuclear radiation shielding W W 

 Total 30,400 r 29,900 

 Pipes, traps, other extruded products: 

15 Building construction 1,220 845 

3443 Storage tanks, process vessels, etc. (5) (5) 

 Total 1,220 845 

 Sheet lead: 

15 Building construction 23,200 r 7,710 

3443 Storage tanks, process vessels, etc. W W 

3693 Medical radiation shielding W W 

 Total 29,100 r 8,560 

 Solder: 

15 Building construction W W 

 Metal cans and shipping containers W W 

367 Electronic components, accessories and other electrical equipment 7,720 6,860 

371 Motor vehicles and equipment W W 

 Total 8,370 7,140 

 Storage batteries: 

3691 Storage battery grids, post, etc. 579,000 r 661,000 

3691 Storage battery oxides 705,000 r 735,000 

 Total storage batteries 1,280,000 r 1,400,000 

27 Type metal, printing and allied industries (4) (4) 

34 Other metal products7 22,200 22,600 

 Grand total 1,440,000 r 1,530,000 

 Other oxides: 

285 Paint W W 

32 Glass and ceramics products W W 

28 Other pigments and chemicals W W 

 Total 14,100 16,200 

 Miscellaneous uses 32,900 12,300 

 Grand total 1,490,000 r 1,560,000 

Source: USGS Minerals Yearbook, Lead, 2006 

r Revised. W Withheld to avoid disclosing company proprietary data; included in appropriate totals. 1

Data are rounded to no more than three significant digits; may not add to totals shown. 2

SIC Standard Industrial Classification.

3

Includes "Metal products: Storage batteries: Terne metal, motor vehicles and equipment." 

69
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

4

Included with "Metal products: Grand total." 

5

Included with "Metal products: Sheet lead: Building construction" to avoid disclosing company proprietary data. 6

Included with "Metal products: Storage batteries: Other metal products" to avoid disclosing company proprietary data. 7

Includes lead consumed in foil, collapsible tubes, annealing, galvanizing, plating, electrowinning, and fishing weights. 

TABLE B-2 

U.S. CONSUMPTION OF LEAD, BY PRODUCT1 

(Metric tons, lead content) 

Product 2005 2006 2005 2006 

Ammunition, shot and bullets 61,300 65,300 4.11% 4.19% 

Bearing Metals (1) 1,180 1,240 0.08% 0.08% 

Brass and bronze, billets and ingots 2,100 2,620 0.14% 0.17% 

Casting Metals (2) 30,400 29,900 2.04% 1.92% 

Pipes, traps, other extruded products: 1,220 845 0.08% 0.05% 

Sheet Lead: Building Construction 23,200 7,710 1.56% 0.49% 

Sheet Lead: Storage Tanks/Medical 5,900 850 0.40% 0.05% 

Solder: Electronic components, accessories and other electrical equipment 7,720 6,860 0.56% 0.46% 

Solder: Motor vehicles and equipment, metal cans, building construction 650 280 0.04% 0.02% 

Total storage batteries 1,280,000 1,400,000 85.91% 89.74% 

Other metal products (3) 22,200 22,600 1.49% 1.45% 

Total Pigments, glass, and ceramics 14,100 16,200 0.95% 1.04% 

Miscellaneous uses 32,900 12,300 2.21% 0.79% 

1,482,870 1,566,705 99.57% 100.45% 

Source: USGS Minerals Yearbook, Lead, 2006 

[Numbers in this table do not add up to 100 percent because of rounding.] 

(1) Includes Machinery except electrical, Terne metal, Motor vehicles and equipment, and Other transportation equipment. 

(2) Includes Electrical machinery and equipment, Motor vehicles and equipment, Other transportation equipment, Nuclear radiation shielding 

(3) Includes lead consumed in foil, collapsible tubes, annealing, galvanizing, plating, electrowinning, and fishing weights. 

70
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

TABLE B-3 

U.S. IRON AND STEEL SCRAP, PIG IRON, AND DIRECT-REDUCED IRON STATISTICS1

(Thousand metric tons) 

 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 

Manufacturers of pig iron and raw steel and castings:2

Ferrous scrap consumption 56,400 55,200 57,100 55,000 r 54,500 

Pig iron consumption 42,500 39,700 38,000 36,900 36,700 

Direct-reduced iron consumption 2,230 1,790 1,490 1,740 1,530 

Net receipts of ferrous scrap3 43,600 42,700 45,800 r 43,600 r 45,300 

Home scrap production4 12,700 12,600 11,600 11,400 r 9,120 

Ending stocks of ferrous scrap, December 31 4,360 4,070 4,880 4,430 r 3,880 

Manufacturers of steel castings:5

Ferrous scrap consumption 1,900 1,130 1,310 1,810 1,640 

Pig iron consumption 34 31 94 89 56 

Net receipts of ferrous scrap3 1,160 761 972 1,060 1,320 

Home scrap production4 717 361 326 743 319 

Ending stocks of ferrous scrap, December 31 173 88 80 85 79 

Iron foundries and miscellaneous users:5

Ferrous scrap consumption 11,200 8,720 8,490 8,670 r 9,370 

Pig iron consumption 1,280 1,030 1,020 1,080 r 857 

Direct-reduced iron consumption 13 4 4 3 4 

Net receipts of ferrous scrap3 7,270 6,300 6,320 6,130 r 6,580 

Home scrap production4 3,760 2,430 2,370 2,870 r 3,010 

Ending stocks of ferrous scrap, December 31 401 251 459 585 r 784 

Total, all manufacturing types: 

Ferrous scrap consumption 69,500 65,000 66,900 65,500 r 65,600 

Pig iron consumption 43,800 40,800 39,100 38,100 r 37,600 

Direct-reduced iron consumption 2,250 1,790 1,500 1,750 1,540 

Net receipts of ferrous scrap3 52,100 49,800 53,100 50,800 r 53,200 

Home scrap production4 17,200 15,400 14,300 15,000 r 12,500 

Ending stocks, December 31: 

Ferrous scrap at consumer plants 4,930 4,410 5,420 5,100 r 4,740 

Pig iron at consumer and supplier plants 754 381 722 665 701 

Direct-reduced iron at consumer plants 269 345 136 263 320 

Exports:6

Ferrous scrap (includes tin plate and terne plate):7 8,950 10,800 11,800 13,000 14,900 

Pig iron, all grades: 34 86 48 51 813 

Direct-reduced iron, steelmaking grade: 1 5 13 (8) (8) 

Imports for consumption:6

Ferrous scrap (includes tin plate and terne plate):7 3,130 3,480 4,660 3,840 4,820 

Pig iron, all grades: 4,620 3,890 6,400 6,030 6,730 

Direct-reduced iron, steelmaking grade: 2,010 1,940 2,450 2,170 2,610 

Source: USGS Minerals Yearbook, Iron and Steel Scrap, 2006 r

Revised. 

1

Data are rounded to no more than three significant digits; may not add to totals shown. 2

Includes manufacturers of raw steel that also produce steel castings. 

3

Net receipts of scrap is defined as receipts from brokers, dealers, and other outside sources plus receipts from other company-owned plants minus 

shipments. 

4

Home scrap production includes recirculating scrap that results from current operations and obsolete home scrap. 5

Some consumers in the "Manufacturers of steel castings" category also produce iron castings; some consumers in the "Iron foundries and miscellaneous 

users" category also produce steel castings 

6

Data from U.S. Census Bureau. Export valuation is free alongside ship, and import valuation is customs value. 7

Excludes used rails for rerolling and other uses and ships, boats, and other vessels for scrapping. 

71
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

TABLE B-4 

U.S. CONSUMER RECEIPTS, PRODUCTION, CONSUMPTION, SHIPMENTS, AND STOCKS OF IRON AND STEEL SCRAP IN 2006, BY GRADE1

(Thousand metric tons) 

Receipts of scrap 

 

Production of home scrap 

 

Grade 

From brokers, 

dealers, and other 

outside sources 

From other 

company-owned 

plants 

Recirculating 

scrap from 

current 

operations 

Obsolete 

scrap2

Consumption 

of purchased 

and home 

scrap 

Shipments 

of scrap 

Ending 

stocks, 

December 

31 

Manufacturers of pig iron and raw steel 

and castings: 

Carbon steel: 

Low-phosphorus plate and punchings 354 W 517 -- 698 71 131 

Cut structural and plate 3,430 150 588 -- 4,040 51 247 

No. 1 heavy-melting steel 4,870 113 1,840 20 6,730 203 490 

No. 2 heavy-melting steel 5,710 56 350 W 6,030 24 516 

No. 1 and electric furnace bundles 3,940 57 W -- 4,530 117 280 

No. 2 and all other bundles 867 W W -- 889 (3) 37 

Electric furnace, 1 foot and under 

(not bundles) W -- W -- W W W 

Railroad rails 211 W W -- 273 W 11 

Turnings and borings 1,980 88 59 W 2,190 7 81 

Slag scrap 811 106 1,140 -- 1,610 477 111 

Shredded or fragmentized 10,200 1,350 W W 12,300 -- 611 

No. 1 busheling 4,790 52 217 -- 5,010 5 347 

Steel cans, post consumer 135 -- -- -- 149 W 4 

All other carbon steel scrap 2,770 238 1,530 W 4,380 160 366 

Stainless steel scrap 1,050 65 351 -- 1,500 2 56 

Alloy steel (except stainless) 122 10 431 -- 549 19 19 

Ingot mold and stool scrap 1 -- W 83 61 88 13 

Machinery and cupola cast iron 6 -- W W 5 W W 

Cast-iron borings 343 -- W -- 327 4 24 

Motor blocks 14 -- -- -- 16 -- W 

Other iron scrap 875 70 262 -- 1,130 90 382 

Other mixed scrap 1,710 55 272 -- 2,030 21 144 

Total 44,300 2,440 8,930 195 54,500 1,410 3,880 

Manufacturers of steel castings: 

Carbon steel: 

Low-phosphorus plate and punchings 562 W 68 (3) 629 (3) 30 

Cut structural and plate 163 W 8 W 174 W 3 

No. 1 heavy-melting steel 33 -- W -- 38 -- 3 

No. 2 heavy-melting steel W -- -- -- W -- W 

No. 1 and electric furnace bundles W -- -- -- W -- W 

No. 2 and all other bundles -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

Electric furnace, 1 foot and under 

(not bundles) 6 -- 3 -- 8 -- (3) 

Railroad rails W -- W -- W -- W 

Turnings and borings 30 -- 7 W 38 W 1 

Slag scrap W -- W -- 185 -- (3) 

Shredded or fragmentized 89 -- -- -- 89 -- 1 

No. 1 busheling 38 -- -- -- 38 W 1 

Steel cans, post consumer -- -- -- W -- W -- 

All other carbon steel scrap 47 -- 99 -- 145 W 4 

Stainless steel scrap 23 W 24 W 48 -- 24 

Alloy steel (except stainless) 36 W 32 W 70 -- 6 

Ingot mold and stool scrap W -- W -- W W W 

72
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

Machinery and cupola cast iron -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

Cast-iron borings W -- W -- W -- W 

Motor blocks W -- -- -- W -- -- 

Other iron scrap 1 -- 1 -- 2 -- -- 

Other mixed scrap 35 -- W 14 50 1 W 

Total 1,310 5 305 14 1,640 2 79 

Source: USGS Minerals Yearbook, Iron and Steel Scrap, 2006 

W Withheld to avoid disclosing company proprietary data. -- Zero. 

1

Data are rounded to no more than three significant digits; may not add to totals shown. 

2

Obsolete home scrap includes ingot molds, stools, and scrap from old equipment and buildings.

3

Less than 1⁄2 unit.

73
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

TABLE B-4—Continued 

U.S. CONSUMER RECEIPTS, PRODUCTION, CONSUMPTION, SHIPMENTS, AND STOCKS OF IRON AND STEEL SCRAP IN 2006, BY GRADE1

(Thousand metric tons) 

Receipts of scrap Production of home scrap 

 

Grade 

From brokers, 

dealers, and other 

outside sources 

From other 

company-owned 

plants 

Recirculating 

scrap from 

current 

operations 

Obsolete 

scrap2

Consumption 

of purchased 

and home 

scrap 

Shipments 

of scrap 

Ending 

stocks, 

December 31 

Iron foundries and miscellaneous users: 

Carbon steel: 

Low-phosphorus plate and punchings 696 2 180 3 856 23 114 

Cut structural and plate 915 31 44 W 995 2 27 

No. 1 heavy-melting steel 147 2 W -- 164 -- 56 

No. 2 heavy-melting steel 281 -- W -- 314 -- 2 

No. 1 and electric furnace bundles 92 -- -- -- 59 -- 37 

No. 2 and all other bundles 61 -- W -- 58 W W 

Electric furnace, 1 foot and under 

(not bundles) 93 -- (3) -- 94 -- 1 

Railroad rails 54 W 34 W 83 5 3 

Turnings and borings 122 -- (3) -- 121 1 3 

Slag scrap W -- 13 -- W W W 

Shredded or fragmentized 1,110 -- W -- 1,090 -- 50 

No. 1 busheling 510 W 18 (3) 494 1 44 

Steel cans, post consumer W -- (3) -- W -- (3) 

All other carbon steel scrap 52 -- 57 W 109 (3) 3 

Stainless steel scrap 2 -- -- W 2 -- -- 

Alloy steel (except stainless) 1,290 -- 319 -- 1,610 11 (3) 

Ingot mold and stool scrap 53 W 15 -- 68 W 9 

Machinery and cupola cast iron 507 W 172 W 655 34 217 

Cast-iron borings 47 37 11 W 93 2 1 

Motor blocks 264 W 565 -- 835 W 6 

Other iron scrap 135 23 1,470 3 1,470 13 201 

Other mixed scrap 115 W 46 W 178 1 6 

Total 6,550 124 2,990 16 9,370 102 784 

Grand total, all manufacturing types: 

Carbon steel: 

Low-phosphorus plate and punchings 1,610 5 765 3 2,180 95 275 

Cut structural and plate 4,510 183 640 W 5,210 53 278 

No. 1 heavy-melting steel 5,050 115 1,860 20 6,940 203 548 

No. 2 heavy-melting steel 6,010 56 382 W 6,360 24 519 

No. 1 and electric furnace bundles 4,030 57 W -- 4,590 117 317 

No. 2 and all other bundles 928 W 2 -- 948 3 40 

Electric furnace, 1 foot and under 

(not bundles) 180 -- 103 -- 219 W 4 

Railroad rails 283 W 130 W 428 5 16 

Turnings and borings 2,130 88 67 W 2,350 8 84 

Slag scrap 1,000 106 1,150 -- 1,810 479 112 

Shredded or fragmentized 11,400 1,350 332 W 13,500 (3) 662 

No. 1 busheling 5,340 52 234 (3) 5,540 6 392 

Steel cans, post consumer 137 -- (3) W 152 W 4 

All other carbon steel scrap 2,870 238 1,680 3 4,630 161 373 

Stainless steel scrap 1,080 65 376 W 1,550 3 81 

Alloy steel (except stainless) 1,450 12 782 W 2,230 30 25 

Ingot mold and stool scrap 54 W 93 83 129 88 22 

Machinery and cupola cast iron 513 W 174 9 660 35 220 

74
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

Cast-iron borings 397 37 11 W 426 6 25 

Motor blocks 305 W 565 -- 877 W 8 

Other iron scrap 1,010 93 1,730 3 2,610 103 583 

Other mixed scrap 1,860 75 320 14 2,260 23 153 

Total 52,100 2,570 12,200 225 65,600 1,510 4,740 

Source: USGS Minerals Yearbook, Iron and Steel Scrap, 2006 

W Withheld to avoid disclosing company proprietary data. -- Zero. 1

Data are rounded to no more than three significant digits; may not add to totals shown. 2

Obsolete home scrap includes ingot molds, stools, and scrap from old equipment and buildings. 

3

Less than 1⁄2 unit. 

75
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

TABLE B-5 

U.S. SCRAP CONSUMPTION BY GRADE1

(Thousand metric tons) 

2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 

Low-phosphorus plate and punchings 700 700 600 300 300 

Cut structural and plate 4,800 5,200 5,700 5,500 5,100 

No. 1 heavy-melting steel 6,300 6,800 8,600 9,200 10,000 

No. 2 heavy-melting steel 6,000 6,300 6,400 6,600 6,400 

No. 1 and electric furnace bundles 5,700 6,200 6,900 7,000 7,500 

No. 2 and all other bundles 800 900 1,000 1,000 1.000 

Turnings and borings 2,100 2,200 2,400 2,400 2,400 

Slag scrap 2,000 2,000 2,400 2,300 2,300 

Shredded or fragmentized 11,000 11,200 11,000 12,000 11,000 

No. 1 busheling 5,300 5,100 5,400 5,800 5,700 

Steel cans, post consumer 1,340 1,499 1,562 1,428 1,483 

All other carbon steel scrap 3,700 4,900 5,000 4,600 4,700 

Total Carbon Steel 49,700 53,000 57,000 57,000 58,000 

Stainless Steel 1,100 1,100 1,200 1,200 1,200 

Alloy Steel (ex. Stainless) 600 600 700 800 810 

Iron Scrap 1,400 1,200 900 800 810 

Other grades or types of scrap 2,500 14500 2,000 2,400 2,000 

Total Scrap 55,300 57,300 61,800 62,000 63,000 

Source: American Iron and Steel Institute, 2006 

1

Consumption of both purchased and home scrap by pig iron and raw steel producers 

 Data from U.S. Geological Survey, except steel can scrap data from Steel Recycling Institute

76
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

TABLE B-6 

U.S. CONSUMPTION OF IRON AND STEEL SCRAP, PIG IRON, AND DIRECT-REDUCED IRON IN 2006, BY TYPE OF FURNACE OR OTHER USE1

(Thousand metric tons) 

 Manufacturers of pig iron and 

raw steel and castings 

Manufacturers 

of steel castings 

Iron foundries and 

miscellaneous users 

Total, all 

manufacturing types 

Pig Pig Pig Pig 

Scrap iron DRI2 Scrap iron DRI2 Scrap iron DRI2 Scrap iron DRI2

Blast furnace 2,510 -- 308 -- -- -- 3 -- -- 2,510 -- 308 

Basic oxygen 

process 10,000 33,700 348 -- -- -- -- 2 -- 10,000 33,800 348 

Electric 

furnace 41,800 2,910 875 1,520 37 -- 4,540 434 2 47,800 3,380 877 

Cupola 

furnace 92 -- -- 117 19 -- 4,820 416 3 5,030 435 3 

Other3 W -- -- -- -- -- W W -- W W -- 

Direct 

castings4 -- 36 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 36 -- 

Total 54,500 36,700 1,530 1,640 56 -- 9,370 857 5 65,600 37,600 1,540 

Source: USGS Minerals Yearbook, Iron and Steel Scrap, 2006 

W Withheld to avoid disclosing company proprietary data. -- Zero. 1

Data are rounded to no more than three significant digits; may not add to totals shown. 

2

Direct-reduced iron. 

3

Includes air furnaces. 

4

Includes ingot molds and stools. 

TABLE B-6 

U.S. CONSUMPTION OF IRON AND STEEL SCRAP BY TYPE OF FURNACE OR OTHER USE1

(Thousand metric tons) 

2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 

Basic oxygen furnace 12,800 23.15% 14,100 24.61% 15,900 25.73% 14,300 23.06% 15,400 24.44% 

Electric furnace 41,400 74.86% 41,900 73.12% 44,600 72.17% 46,300 74.68% 45,200 71.75% 

Other 1,100 1.99% 1,300 2.27% 1,300 2.10% 1,400 2.26% 2,400 3.81% 

Total 55,300 57,300 61,800 62,000 63,000 

Source: USGS Minerals Yearbook, Iron and Steel Scrap, 2006 

Other includes blast furnace, cupola furnace, direct casting, and air furnaces 

77
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

Appendix C: Federal Delisting Actions Pursued by K061 

Waste Generators 

U.S. EPA Delisting Report (2002)  

The U.S. EPA reported that, as of 2002, there were at least 12 federal delisting actions

associated with the Blast Furnace and Steel Mill industry.  At least 1.5 million tons of K061

had been delisted, deriving from steel production at mills using EAFs.  There were 6

delistings of K061 reported to be granted by EPA, not including delistings granted by state

agencies. 133  One delisting, granted to [Conversion Systems] in 1995, exempted 306,000

tons of chemically‐stabilized EAF dust from RCRA K061 classification.  134 According to a

1993 industry study cited in the 2002 EPA report, over 85 percent of the EAF dust

generated in the US had been recycled, primarily for zinc recovery. Such recovery

accounted for approximately 30 percent of domestic zinc production, before the delisting

action. This study suggested that the delisting would divert those wastes from resource

recovery into chemical stabilization followed by disposal in Subtitle D landfills. As of

[2002], EPA had not formally assessed the impact of this delisting on zinc recovery from

EAF dust. Although the current database contains information on pre‐delisting and

(planned) post‐delisting waste management, there is no clear indication of other materials

that have been diverted from recycling to waste disposal.  Approximately two thirds of

EAF dust generated in the U.S. is processed for metals recovery.  The remaining one‐third

is either treated for subsequent landfill disposal or exported.  Below is a sample of facilities

that have petitioned to have their K061 delisted:  

Pennsylvania: MAX Environmental Technologies, Yukon PA (2004)

MAX Environmental Technologies offers services to treat K061 for disposal in a RCRA

Subtitle D landfill. 135  MAX Environmental Technologies filed a Petition to Delist the Non‐

Hazardous Treated Residue of Electric Arc Furnace Dust (K061).  Pennsylvania

Environmental Quality Board (EQB) accepted the delisting petition for further study at its

meeting of February 17, 2004.  136 The Final delisting rule was approved by the EQB on

October 18, 2005 and was published in the Pennsylvania Bulletin February 11, 2006. 137  138  

According to the delisting rule, TCLP constituent concentrations may not exceed the

following levels (mg/L): Antimony‐0.206; Arsenic‐0.0094; Barium‐21; Beryllium‐0.416;

Cadmium‐0.11; Chromium‐0.60; Lead‐0.75; Mercury‐0.025; Nickel‐11.0; Selenium‐0.58;

Silver‐0.14; Thallium‐0.088; Vanadium‐21.1; Zinc‐4.3. Total mercury may not exceed 1

mg/kg.

Indiana: Nucor Steel, Crawfordsville, IN (2000)

On May 13, 2000, Heritage Environmental Services, Inc. (Heritage) petitioned the Indiana

Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) to delist a waste listed in 40 CFR

261.32 as “K061: emission control dust” from the primary production of steel in electric

furnaces.” The EAF dust for which the delisting was requested is generated at Nucor Steel

Corporation in Crawfordsville, Indiana.  The delisted waste would be treated by Heritage

using a proprietary treatment process described in the petition and disposed of in a non‐

78
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

hazardous municipal solid waste landfill owned and operated by Heritage in Roachdale,

Putnam County, Indiana. The landfill is permitted under 329 IAC 10. The portions of the

petition describing the proprietary process are protected from release under IC 5‐14‐3 and

329 IAC 6.1. Heritage has applied for a patent on the treatment process. When the patent

is granted, those portions will become public record. The petition requested delisting of

up to thirty thousand (30,000) cubic yards of treated EAF dust annually. 139  IDEM

subsequently issued an amendment of 329 IAC 3.1‐6‐6 to increase the amount of treated

EAF dust generated by Heritage and Nucor Corporation that can be excluded from

regulation as hazardous waste from thirty thousand (30,000) cubic yards to sixty thousand

(60,000) cubic yards per year.  140  As discussed above (in Section 6.8.2), Heritage is now

pursuing implementation of an induction furnace‐based process to recover zinc metal

from EAF dust.  Heritage constructed and operated a demonstration‐scale facility in

Indiana and is now constructing a full‐scale facility in Mississippi.

Texas: American Ecology/US Ecology, Robstown, Texas (2008)

American Ecology holds a Bethlehem Steel patent to treat and delist K061, EAF Dust

captured in EAF steel mill emissions systems and stabilizes over 40,000 tons of steel mill

K061 annually.141  According to American Ecology, the company has historically treated

and disposed of K061 from steel mills from multiple states at their  Grand View, Idaho

facility, and also has established an agreement with Envirosafe Services of Ohio, Inc.

("ESOI") to provide ESOI's K061 "delisting" technology at American Ecology’s Robstown,

Texas facility.  American Ecology submitted delisting petition information to the U.S. EPA

in 2007. 142   

Structural Metals (2008)

EPA issued a final rule adding Structural Metals, Inc. to the exclusion granted to

Conversion Systems Inc. (CSI) on June 13, 1995.  The final rule added the location of U.S.

Ecology, Texas Ecology in Robstown, Texas as the treatment facility and Structural Metals,

Inc. as the steel mill contracting the services of CSI. 143

Bethlehem Steel, Johnstown, Pennsylvania; Steelton, Pennsylvania

Bethlehem Steel obtained a delisting for uncured and cured chemically stabilized electric

arc furnace dust/sludge (CSEAFD) treatment residue (K061) generated from the primary

production of steel at their facilities.  This exclusion was issued conditional upon the data

obtained from Bethlehem's full‐scale CSEAFD treatment facilities. 144

CF&I Steel Corporation, Pueblo, Colorado

CF&I Steel Corporation obtained a delisting for fully‐cured chemically stabilized electric

arc furnace dust/sludge (CSEAFD) treatment residue (EPA Hazardous Waste No. K061)

generated from the primary production of steel at their facility.  The delisting was issued

as conditional upon the data obtained from CF&I's full‐scale CSEAFD treatment facility.145

79
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

Roanoke Electric Steel Corporation, Roanoke, Virginia

Roanoke Electric Steel Corporation obtained a delisting for fully‐cured chemically

stabilized electric arc furnace dust/sludge (CSEAFD) treatment residue (EPA Hazardous

Waste No. K061) generated from the primary production of steel at their facility.  The

delisting was issued as conditioned upon the data obtained from Roanoke's full‐scale

CSEAFD treatment facility.146

USX Steel Corporation, Gary Works, Indiana

USX Steel Corporation obtained a delisting for fully‐cured chemically stabilized electric

arc furnace dust/sludge (CSEAFD) treatment residue (EPA Hazardous Waste No. K061)

generated from the primary production of steel at their facility. This exclusion (for 35,000

tons of CSEAFD per year) was issued as conditional upon the data obtained from USX's

full‐scale CSEAFD treatment facility. 147

Peoria Disposal Company (PDC), Peoria Illinois (2008)

The Illinois Environmental Protection agency conducted public hearings in August 2008

concerning a delisting petition filed by the Peoria Disposal Company (PDC) concerning

disposal of residue from the company’s proprietary K061 dust waste treatment and

stabilization process.  The delisting is needed to enable the treated material to be disposed

of in a local municipal solid waste landfill rather than in the PDC‐operated hazardous

waste landfill where the material is currently disposed of. The PDC hazardous waste

landfill currently receives approximately 72,500 cubic meters per year of K061 from

Keystone Steel and Wire and other steel mills. 148  

80
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

Appendix D: Glossary 

American Iron and Steel Institute (AISI) – AISI is comprised of 27 member companies,

including integrated and electric furnace steel makers, and 138 associate and affiliate

members who are suppliers to customers of the steel industry.  AISI's member companies

represent approximately 75 percent of both U.S. and North American steel capacity.    

Area Source Rule – EPA rule published on 12/28/07 relating to National Emission

Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Area Sources: Electric Arc Furnace Steel

making Facilities.  The final rule establishes mercury emissions control requirements

based on the maximum achievable control technology and requirements for the control of

other hazardous air pollutants (including lead) that are based on generally available

control technology or management practices.

Automotive Recyclers Association (ARA) – Non‐profit trade association representing

the industry dedicated to the efficient removal and reuse of automotive parts, and the safe

disposal of inoperable motor vehicles.

Babbitt Metal ‐ Any of several soft, silvery antifriction alloys composed of tin usually with

small amounts of copper and antimony.

Baghouse – An air emission control device consisting of a series of fabric filters through

which combustion flue gases are passed to remove particulates prior to atmospheric

dispersion.  

Basic Oxygen Furnace (BOF) – A large, tiltable, pear‐shaped vessel used to convert the

molten iron from the blast furnace ‐ with up to 30% steel scrap ‐ into refined steel. High

purity oxygen is blown through the molten bath to lower carbon, silicon, manganese, and

phosphorous content of the iron, while various fluxes are used to reduce the sulfur and

phosphorous levels.

Basic Oxygen Process (BOP) – A steel making process used to produce more than half

the world’s steel, using pure oxygen to convert a charge of liquid blast‐furnace iron and

scrap into steel.  

Bessemer Process – The first inexpensive industrial process for the mass‐production of

steel from molten pig iron.

Best Practices – Generically speaking, techniques or methodologies that, through

experience and research, has been proven to reliably lead to a desired result.

Bevill Amendment – The Bevill Amendment to RCRA required EPA to complete studies

of large volume wastes and report to Congress on the wastes and a Regulatory

Determination as to how the waste will be managed.  BOF processed furnace wastes are

not regulated as a hazardous waste, and such materials are exempt from RCRA waste

classification under the Bevill Exemption.  

81
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

Blast Furnace – A type of metallurgical furnace used for smelting to produce metals,

generally iron.  Fuel and ore are continuously supplied through the top of the furnace,

while air (sometimes with oxygen enrichment) is blown into the bottom of the chamber,

so that the chemical reactions take place throughout the furnace as the material moves

downward. The end products are usually molten metal and slag phases tapped from the

bottom, and flue gases exiting from the top of the furnace.

Borings (Iron) – Clean cast iron or malleable iron borings and drillings, free of steel

turnings, scale, lumps or excessive oil (ISRI Grade 223).

Cast Iron – A hard, brittle, nonmalleable iron‐carbon alloy, cast into shape, containing 2

to 4.5 percent carbon, 0.5 to 3 percent silicon, and lesser amounts of sulfur, manganese,

and phosphorus.

Channel Induction Furnace – An electrically efficient device for the heating and stirring

of liquid metals.

Construction and Demolition (C&D) Materials – Materials such as broken concrete,

wood, asphalt, and rubble resulting from the construction, remodeling, repair or

demolition of buildings, bridges, pavements and other structures.

Construction Materials Recycling Association (CMRA) – The Association represents a

diverse group of member companies and agencies from the many construction and

demolition materials recycling disciplines and industry specialties active in the United

States and other countries.  

Delisting Petition – The process by which a waste generator seeks to obtain from

environmental regulators an exclusion for managing any RCRA listed waste as a hazardous

waste.  This would apply to K061 waste in the case of Electric Arc Furnaces.

Electric Arc Furnace (EAF) ‐ Steel making furnace where electricity is used to melt scrap

to make steel, and for which scrap steel is generally 100% of the charge.

Ferrous Metals – Metals that are derived from iron.  They can be removed using large

magnets at separation facilities.  

Foundry ‐ A factory which produces metal castings from either ferrous or non‐ferrous

alloys. Metals are turned into parts by melting the metal into a liquid, pouring the metal

in a mold, and then removing the mold material or casting. The most common metal

alloys produced are aluminum and cast iron. However, other metals, such as steel,

magnesium, copper, tin, and zinc, can be processed.

Galvanized Steel – Steel coated with a thin layer of zinc to provide corrosion resistance

in underbody auto parts, garbage cans, storage tanks, or fencing wire.

82
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

Heavy Metals – Hazardous elements including cadmium, mercury, and lead which may

be found in the waste stream as part of discarded items such as batteries, lighting fixtures,

colorants and inks.

High Temperature Metals Recovery (HTMR) – A process by which metals, particularly

zinc (but also lead and other metals), are recovered from Electric Arc Furnace dust or

other metal‐containing dust for subsequent recycling.

Home Scrap ‐ Scrap generated at the mill, refinery, or foundry, and is generally remelted

and used again at the same plant. Home scrap never leaves the plant.

Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries (ISRI) ‐ ISRI is the private, non‐profit trade

association that represents more than 1,600 private, for‐profit companies that process,

broker, and industrially consume scrap commodities, including ferrous and nonferrous

metals, paper, electronics, rubber, plastics, glass, and textiles.

Integrated Steel Mills ‐ Plants that produce steel from mostly virgin raw materials.  

Generally, the integrated plants concentrate on higher volume flat products and flat

products with higher quality specifications.

K061 Waste – RCRA listed hazardous waste generated by Electric Arc Furnaces; listed for

lead, cadmium, and trivalent chromium content.  

Leaded Steel – Steel meeting a minimum specification for lead content (typically 0.25

percent or more) and for which lead is a necessary alloy for that grade of steel.  Leaded

steel is used in the manufacture of bearings and machine‐fabricated parts.

Matte – An impure metallic sulfide mixture produced in smelting furnaces by smelting

the sulfide ores of such metals as copper, lead, or nickel.  

Metric Ton – Equals 2,205 pounds, compared to the U.S. Short Ton which is 2,000

pounds, compared to the British Long Ton which is 2,240 pounds.

Minimill – a relatively small type of steel mill using, as raw material, scrap melted in an

Electric Arc Furnace rather than iron ore smelted in a blast furnace.

National Demolition Association (NDA) – Non‐profit trade organization representing

more than 1,000 U.S. and Canadian companies which offer standard demolition services,

as well as a full range of demolition‐related services and products.

No. 1 Busheling – Clean steel scrap, not exceeding 12 inches in any dimension, including

new factory busheling such as sheet clippings and stampings.

No. 2 Heavy Melting Steel – Wrought iron and steel scrap, black and galvanized, 1/8 inch

and over in thickness, varying sizes (ISRI Grades 203 – 206).

Nonferrous Metals – Nonmagnetic metals such as aluminum, lead, and copper. Products

made all or in part from such metals include: containers, packaging, appliances, furniture,

electronic equipment and aluminum foil.  

83
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

Non‐Integrated Steel Mills ‐ Plants that produce steel primarily from steel scrap.  Many

of the non‐integrated mills produce commodity type products such as reinforcing bar,

small structural shapes, low volume specialty alloy, and stainless steels.  

Pig Iron – Crude iron obtained directly from the blast furnace and cast in molds. The

crude ingots, called pigs, are then remelted along with scrap and alloying elements and

recast into molds to produce various iron and steel products.

Post‐Consumer Scrap – Scrap materials such as automobiles, appliances, and C&D

material generated by a business or consumer that have served their intended end use and

have been separated or diverted from the waste stream for the purpose of recycling.

Prompt Scrap – Scrap generated by manufacturers of iron and steel products (e.g.,

turnings from machining operations).   

Red Metals –Per the ISRI Scrap Specifications Circular 2008, include such materials as

copper wire, refinery brass, nickel silver castings, and manganese bronze solids.  

Registration, Evaluation and Authorization of Chemicals (REACH) Directive –

European Union legislation initiated in 2003 and approved in 2005 relating to chemical

safety. It oblige companies producing more than 10 metric tons of a chemical (less in

certain cases) to investigate the potential hazards to human health and to the

environment. It would apply to all chemicals commercially available in the EU

(approximately 30,000 compounds), in contrast to the U.S.‐equivalent Toxic Substances

Control Act (TSCA) which only applies to chemicals newly coming into use.

Resource Conservation Challenge (RCC) – A major national effort created by EPA to

identify methods to conserve and protect natural resources through voluntary

partnerships.  

Restriction of Hazardous Substances (ROHS) Directive – This directive was adopted

in February 2003 by the European Union, and took effect on 1 July 1, 2006.  It restricts the

use of six hazardous materials in the manufacture of various types of electronic and

electrical equipment.

Reverberatory Furnace (direct fired, open hearth design) – The style most often used

for remelt of non‐ferrous metals.  Applications of the reverb furnaces are melting of all

forms of solids, holding of molten metal for temperature adjustment, alloy adjustment or

metal treatment, and delivery of molten metal for casting.   

Scrap Metal – Products made of metal that become worn out (or are off‐specification)

and are recycled to recover their metal content, or metal pieces that are generated from

machine operations (i.e., turnings, stampings, etc.) which are recycled to recover metal.

Short Ton – The U.S. Ton which is 2,000 pounds, compared to the Metric Ton which is

2,205 pounds, compared to the British Long Ton which is 2,240 pounds.

84
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

Slag – A by‐product of the steel‐making process or other metal smelting processes.  Slag

from integrated iron and steel mills in ferrous ore smelting is designed to minimize iron

loss and so mainly contains oxides of calcium, magnesium, and aluminum.

Steel Manufacturers Association (SMA) – SMA consists of 39 North American

companies that operate 125 (mostly electric arc furnace) steel mills and employ

approximately 40,000 people. The SMA also has six international steel company members

in countries outside of North America, comprising a total membership of 45 steel

companies, worldwide.  

Subtitle C – The hazardous waste section of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act

(RCRA).

Subtitle D – The solid, non‐hazardous waste section of RCRA.

Terne Coating (a.k.a., terne plating) – An alloy of lead with about approximately 15%‐

20% tin and 80%‐85% lead. This is the minimum tin content required to obtain an

adherent coating on hot‐dipped iron sheet.  Terne coating is used to coat sheet steel to

inhibit corrosion.  

Terne Plate Bundles – New tern plate sheet scrap, clippings or skeleton scrap,

compressed or hand bundled, to charging box size, and weighing not less than 75 pounds

per cubic foot.

Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) ‐ One of the EPA test methods

that are used to characterize waste as either hazardous or non‐hazardous for the purpose

of disposal.

Turnings (Machine Shop) – Clean steel or wrought iron turnings, free of iron borings,

nonferrous metals in a free state, scale, or excessive oil.  May not include badly rusted or

corroded stock (ISRI Grade 219).

Waelz Kiln Process – This process is a method developed in the early 1900s for zinc

production and for treating steel plant dusts containing zinc and lead.  EAF dust is

converted to an iron‐rich slag as well as a zinc and iron‐rich dust that is recycled to the

kiln.

Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Directive – The European

Community directive 2002/96/EC which, together with the RoHS Directive 2002/95/EC,

became European Law in February 2003, setting collection, recycling and recovery targets

for all types of electrical goods.  

Waste Minimization/Source Reduction – Includes both source reduction and reuse

practices, essentially any activities that minimize the amount of waste destined for

disposal and do not involve material processing.

85
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

White Goods – large domestic electrical appliances like stoves, washing machines, fridges

and freezers.

XRF Gun (a.k.a., X‐Ray Fluorescence Analyzer) – Spectrometer testing device that uses

low‐dose radiation to detect and measure lead and various other metals on surfaces,

objects and in the dust and soil.  

  

86
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

ENDNOTES

 

1

A Mass Balance Accounting of Lead and Mercury in the Iron and Steel Industry for the Year 2003,

Kirsten Sinclair Rosselot, Process Profiles, Calabasas, California, May 2007 2 http://www.zincnacional.com/ingles/laempresa.asp

3 U.S. EPA Office of Solid Waste, Export/Import Database, accessed 07/28/2007. 4 40 CFR Part 261, Appendix VII 5 Pollution Prevention and Abatement Handbook, 1998: Toward Cleaner Production

By United Nations Environment Programme, World Bank Group, United Nations Environment

Programme, World Health Organization, United Nations Industrial Development Organization,

Inc World Book, Published by World Bank Publications, 1999, Page 341 6 Delisting Petition For Treated K061, Max Environmental Technologies, Inc. (Hazardous Waste

Management Services), Yukon, PA, CEC Project 210966, 11/2003.

http://www.depweb.state.pa.us/pubpartcenter/lib/pubpartcenter/EQB/2004/yukon_delisting_petit

ion.pdf\ 7 EPA Method 1311 – http://www.epa.gov/sw‐846/faqs_tclp.html   8 Rosselot, Kirsten Sinclair. “A Mass Balance Accounting of Lead and Mercury in the Iron and Steel

Industry for the Year 2003.” Process Profiles, Calabasas, California. May 2007. Funded by EPA

Region 5 Great Lakes Program Office.   9 Rosselot, Ibid.   10 40 CFR Part 63 Subpart YYYYY—National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for

Area Sources: Electric Arc Furnace Steelmaking Facilities, 72 FR 74111 December 28, 2007. 11 40 CFR Part 63: Subpart ZZZZZ—National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for

Iron and Steel Foundries Area Sources, 73 FR 252, January 2, 2008.

12 Delisting Petition For Treated K061, Max Environmental Technologies, Inc. (Hazardous Waste

Management Services), Yukon, PA, CEC Project 210966, 11/2003.

http://www.depweb.state.pa.us/pubpartcenter/lib/pubpartcenter/EQB/2004/yukon_delisting_petit

ion.pdf  

13 Genaidy, A.M. et al. “An exploratory study of lead recovery in lead‐acid battery lifecycle in U.S.

market: An evidence‐based approach.” Science of the Total Environment. 407, 2008, 7 – 22.   14 EPA Method 1311 – http://www.epa.gov/sw‐846/faqs_tclp.html   15 USGS 2008.  Personal Communication between David E. Guberman of the US Geological Survey

and Charles Cebul of ICF International.  April 15

th, 2008. 16 Roy Baggett, Sanders Lead Company (Secondary Lead Production), 4/02/08. 17 USGS 2008.  Personal Communication between David E. Guberman of the US Geological Survey

and Charles Cebul of ICF International.  April 15

th, 2008. 18 USGS 2007.  Mineral Yearbook Lead 2006, U.S. Geological Survey.  

http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/lead/myb1‐2006‐lead.pdf 19 USGS 2006. Apparent Consumption vs. Total Consumption—A Lead‐Acid Battery Case Study,

U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2006–5155, ONLINE ONLY, By David R.

Wilburn and David A. Buckingham, 2006, Page 2  http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2006/5155/ 20  Roy Baggett, Sanders Lead Company (Secondary Lead Production), 4/02/08. 21  Steve Yates and John Tapper, Gopher Resource Corporation (Secondary Lead Production) ,

4/07/08

22 Joyce Morales, Mayco Industries (Lead Products), 5/21/08. 23 Steve Yates and John Tapper, Gopher Resource Corporation (Secondary Lead Production),

4/07/08.

24 Joyce Morales, Mayco Industries (Lead Products), 5/21/08. 25 Dan Vornberg, Doe Run Company (Lead Recycling & Secondary Lead Production), 5/19/08.

87
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

 26 David Wagger and Scott Horne, Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries (Ferrous & Non‐ferrous

Scrap Metals), 2/07/08. 27 Eric Stuart, et al, Steel Manufacturers Association (Integrated Iron & Steel Production & Ferrous

Metal Foundries), 3/04/08. 28 Dan Vornberg, Doe Run Company (Lead Recycling & Secondary Lead Production), 5/19/08. 29 Modern Metals, 1999. "Green" Steel Eliminates Lead http://www.laurelsteel.com/greensteel.html 30  John Cabaniss, Association of International Automobile Manufacturers (Vehicle Manufacturers

& Equipment Suppliers), 5/19/08. 31 Modern Metals, 1999."Green" Steel Eliminates Lead http://www.laurelsteel.com/greensteel.html 32 William Turley, Construction Materials Recycling Association (CMRA) (Ferrous & Non‐ferrous

Metals), 1/29/2008. 33 David Wagger and Scott Horne, Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries (Ferrous & Non‐ferrous

Scrap Metals), 2/07/08. 34 Mike Taylor, National Demolition Association (Ferrous & Non‐ferrous Metals), 2/04/2008. 35 Bill Heenan, Steel Recycling Institute (Ferrous Metals), 4/25/08.

36 http://www.metalprices.com/ 37 Steve Yates and John Tapper, Gopher Resource Corporation (Secondary Lead Production),

4/07/08.

38 Bill Heenan, Steel Recycling Institute (Ferrous Metals), 4/25/08. 39 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency News Release: Manufacturers and Retailers Balance Tires

and the Environment, August 29, 2008.

http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/bd4379a92ceceeac8525735900400c27/712a156bd2c5ca57

852574b4004bc288!OpenDocument

40 U.S. Geological Survey, Minerals Yearbook, Iron and Steel Scrap, 2006

http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/iron_&_steel_scrap/myb1‐2006‐fescr.pdf 41 Electronic mail message from Michael D Fenton [mfenton@usgs.gov] USGS to Robert Lanza

[rlanza@icfi.com] ICF International, received July 16, 2008. 42 ISRI 2007.  Scrap Specifications Circular, 2007.  Guidelines for Nonferrous Scrap; Ferrous Scrap;

Glass Cullet Paper Stock; Plastic Scrap; Electronics Scrap; Tire Scrap, Effective 11/19/07, Institute of

Scrap Recycling Industries, 2007. 43 A Mass Balance Accounting of Lead and Mercury in the Iron and Steel Industry for the Year 2003,

Kirsten Sinclair Rosselot, Process Profiles, Calabasas, California, May 2007, Note to Reviewers 44 Patent: Austenitic free‐cutting stainless steel: http://www.faqs.org/patents/app/20080240970 45 Stainless Steel Information Center: Chemical and Physical Properties of Stainless Steel

http://www.ssina.com/composition/chemical.html

46 A Mass Balance Accounting of Lead and Mercury in the Iron and Steel Industry for the Year 2003,

Kirsten Sinclair Rosselot, Process Profiles, Calabasas, California, May 2007, Note to Reviewers 47 USGS 2006. Apparent Consumption vs. Total Consumption—A Lead‐Acid Battery Case Study,

U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2006–5155, ONLINE ONLY, By David R.

Wilburn and David A. Buckingham, 2006, Page 2, Page 3  http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2006/5155/

48 Bill Heenan, Steel Recycling Institute (Ferrous Metals), 4/25/08. 49 Bill Heenan, Steel Recycling Institute (Ferrous Metals), 4/25/08. 50  Jon Sampson, Automotive Recyclers Association (Automotive Dismantlers & Shredders),

2/06/08.

51  Bill Heenan, Steel Recycling Institute (Ferrous Metals), 4/25/08. 52 Automotive Recyclers Association, Certified Automotive Recyclers Manual, 2008, http://www.a‐r‐

a.org/files/car_manual_2008_web.pdf   53  Jon Sampson, Automotive Recyclers Association (Automotive Dismantlers & Shredders),

2/06/08.

54 Dan Vornberg, Doe Run Company (Lead Recycling & Secondary Lead Production), 5/19/08.

88
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

 55  CA DTSC, 2002.  California’s Automobile Shredder Waste Initiative, Draft Report, November

2002, California Department of Toxic Substances Control, Hazardous Waste Management Program

http://www.dtsc.ca.gov/HazardousWaste/upload/HWMP_REP_ASW_draft.pdf, page 14.

56 CA DTSC, 2002.  California’s Automobile Shredder Waste Initiative, Draft Report, November

2002, California Department of Toxic Substances Control, Hazardous Waste Management Program

http://www.dtsc.ca.gov/HazardousWaste/upload/HWMP_REP_ASW_draft.pdf, page 15, Table 5. 57 Drew Lammers, Cohen Brothers, Inc. (President of National Demolition Association) (Ferrous &

Non‐ferrous Metals Processing), 2/11/08.

58 Matt Haslett and Mike Vail, Metro Metals NW (Ferrous & Non‐ferrous Scrap Supplier), 2/27/08. 59 Matt Haslett and Mike Vail, Metro Metals NW (Ferrous & Non‐ferrous Scrap Supplier), 2/27/08. 60 Horner & Shrifrin Engineers, 2008. 300 Ton‐Per‐Hour Mega Shredder, St. Louis, Missouri

http://www.hornershifrin.com/ProjectDesc/GrossmanShredder.shtml 61 David Wagger and Scott Horne, Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries (Ferrous & Non‐ferrous

Scrap Metals), 2/07/08. 62 Matt Haslett and Mike Vail, Metro Metals NW (Ferrous & Non‐ferrous Scrap Supplier), 2/27/08.

63 David Wagger and Scott Horne, Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries (Ferrous & Non‐ferrous

Scrap Metals), 2/07/08.

64 Jon Sampson, Automotive Recyclers Association (Automotive Dismantlers & Shredders), 2/06/08.

65 Drew Lammers, Cohen Brothers, Inc. (President of National Demolition Association) (Ferrous &

Non‐ferrous Metals Processing), 2/11/08. 66 Matt Haslett and Mike Vail, Metro Metals NW (Ferrous & Non‐ferrous Scrap Supplier), 2/27/08.

67 Mike Taylor, National Demolition Association (Ferrous & Non‐ferrous Metals), 2/04/2008. 68 USEPA. Estimating 2003 Building‐Related Construction and Demolition Material Amounts.

Accessed on: March 30, 2009. Available at:

http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/conserve/rrr/imr/cdm/pubs/cd‐meas.pdf   69 Mike Taylor, National Demolition Association (Ferrous & Non‐ferrous Metals), 2/04/2008. 70 Mike Taylor, National Demolition Association (Ferrous & Non‐ferrous Metals), 2/04/2008. 71 William Turley, Construction Materials Recycling Association (CMRA) (Ferrous & Non‐ferrous

Metals), 1/29/2008. 72 Blaisdell, J.S., 2006.  A fines challenge: the C&D recycling industry looks for solutions to the

problem of H2S generation in ADC made from C&D fines.  Construction & Demolition

Recycling, March‐April, 2006. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0QMH/is_2_8/ai_n26824102 73 Mike Taylor, National Demolition Association (Ferrous & Non‐ferrous Metals), 2/04/2008. 74 William Turley, Construction Materials Recycling Association (CMRA) (Ferrous & Non‐ferrous

Metals), 1/29/2008. 75 William Turley, Construction Materials Recycling Association (CMRA) (Ferrous & Non‐ferrous

Metals), 1/29/2008.

76 Mike Taylor, National Demolition Association (Ferrous & Non‐ferrous Metals), 2/04/2008. 77 Drew Lammers, Cohen Brothers, Inc. (President of National Demolition Association) (Ferrous &

Non‐ferrous Metals Processing), 2/11/08.

78 Roy Baggett, Sanders Lead Company (Secondary Lead Production), 4/02/08. 79  Joyce Morales, Mayco Industries (Lead Products), 5/21/08. 80 Roy Baggett, Sanders Lead Company (Secondary Lead Production), 4/02/08. 81 Steve Yates and John Tapper, Gopher Resource Corporation (Secondary Lead Production),

4/07/08.

82 Roy Baggett, Sanders Lead Company (Secondary Lead Production), 4/02/08.

83 Roy Baggett, Sanders Lead Company (Secondary Lead Production), 4/02/08.

84 Drew Lammers, Cohen Brothers, Inc. (President of National Demolition Association) (Ferrous &

Non‐ferrous Metals Processing), 2/11/08.

85 Drew Lammers, Cohen Brothers, Inc. (President of National Demolition Association) (Ferrous &

Non‐ferrous Metals Processing), 2/11/08.

89
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

 86 Bill Heenan, Steel Recycling Institute (Ferrous Metals), 4/25/08.

87 The EPH Regulator, Spring 2007.  Re‐defining “lead‐free” in California Law, published by

Underwriters Laboratories (UL).  http://www.ul.com/ephregulator/Spring_2007.pdf   88 Bill Heenan, Steel Recycling Institute (Ferrous Metals), 4/25/08.

89 Steve Yates and John Tapper, Gopher Resource Corporation (Secondary Lead Production),

4/07/08.

90 Roy Baggett, Sanders Lead Company (Secondary Lead Production), 4/02/08. 91 http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/etools/leadsmelter/environmentalcontrols/dustcollectionsystems.html 92 Steve Yates and John Tapper, Gopher Resource Corporation (Secondary Lead Production),

4/07/08.

93 Steve Yates and John Tapper, Gopher Resource Corporation (Secondary Lead Production),

4/07/08.

94 Michael Olvera, ABI Foundry (Ferrous Metal Foundries), 3/10/08. 95 Mike Hohman, U.S. Steel (Integrated Iron & Steel Production), 2/25/08. USS Fairfield Works

96 Mike Hohman, U.S. Steel (Integrated Iron & Steel Production), 2/25/08. USS Fairfield Works 97  40 CFR Part 63 Subpart YYYYY—National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for

Area Sources: Electric Arc Furnace Steelmaking Facilities, 72 FR 74111, December 28, 2007.

98 U.S. EPA Brochure: Summary of Regulations Controlling Air Emissions From Electric Arc

Furnace (EAF) Steelmaking Facilities National Emission Standards For Hazardous Air Pollutants

NESHAP (Subpart YYYYY), U.S. EPA Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards (EI 43‐02), April

2008

99 40 CFR Part 63 Subpart YYYYY Section 10685 Paragraph (a)(1) Discusses pollution prevention

plan scope and approval process.   100 http://www.rohs.eu/english/index.html 101 http://ec.europa.eu/environment/chemicals/reach/reach_intro.htm 102 http://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/weee/index_en.htm 103 Dan Lake, Timken Company (Integrated Iron & Steel Production), 5/20/08.

104http://www.depweb.state.pa.us/pubpartcenter/lib/pubpartcenter/EQB/2004/yukon_delisting_pe

tition.pdf  Delisting Petition For Treated K061, Max Environmental Technologies, Inc. (Hazardous

Waste Management Services), Yukon, PA, CEC Project 210966, 11/2003.

105 Jim Reese and Tom Janeck, Horsehead Corporation (EAF Dust Recycling), 5/21/08. 106 U.S. EPA Office of Solid Waste, Export/Import Database, accessed 07/28/2007. 107 http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/subject/eqb/2004/yukon_delisting_petition.pdf

Delisting Petition For Treated K061, Max Environmental Technologies, Inc. (Hazardous Waste

Management Services), Yukon, PA, CEC Project 210966, 11/2003. 108 http://steeldust.com/facility.htm, accessed March 24, 2009   109 ADEM Public Notice 350: Steel Dust Recycling LLC, June 6, 2007, Alabama Department of

Environmental Management, http://216.226.179.150/publicnotice/june/6steela.htm, accessed July 11,

2008

110 http://pizotech.com/about/facilities.html, accessed July 11, 2008 111 A Mass Balance Accounting of Lead and Mercury in the Iron and Steel Industry for the Year 2003,

Kirsten Sinclair Rosselot, Process Profiles, Calabasas, California, May 2007, Section 3.4.b, Page 26. 112http://www.depweb.state.pa.us/pubpartcenter/lib/pubpartcenter/EQB/2004/yukon_delisting_pet

ition.pdf  Delisting Petition For Treated K061, Max Environmental Technologies, Inc. (Hazardous

Waste Management Services), Yukon, PA, CEC Project 210966, 11/2003. 113 http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/subject/eqb/2004/yukon_delisting_petition.pdf

Delisting Petition For Treated K061, Max Environmental Technologies, Inc. (Hazardous Waste

Management Services), Yukon, PA, CEC Project 210966, 11/2003. 114 Jim Reese and Tom Janeck, Horsehead Corporation (EAF Dust Recycling), 5/21/08. 115 Liebman, Marc, 2000.  The Current Status of Electric Arc Furnace Dust Recycling in North

America, AIM Market Research, Pittsburgh PA, 2000, Figure 2.

90
Assessing the Management of Lead in Scrap Metal and Electric Arc Furnace Dust

 116 Liebman, Marc, 2000.  The Current Status of Electric Arc Furnace Dust Recycling in North

America, AIM Market Research, Pittsburgh PA, 2000, Figure 4. 117 http://steeldust.com/facility.htm, accessed July 11, 2008 118 Engineering Analysis: Steel Dust Recycling, LLC, Document No. 409‐0019,

www.adem.state.al.us/PublicNotice/June/SteelA.pdf , accessed July 11, 2008 119 http://steeldust.com/facility.htm, accessed July 11, 2008   120 http://pizotech.com/about/facilities.html, accessed July 10, 2008 121 http://pizotech.com/about/index.html, accessed July 11, 2008 122 Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality: ADEQ Minor Source Permit: Permit No. 2158‐A,

issued to PIZO Operating Company, LLC, Blytheville, AR 72515, AFIN: 47‐00931 123 Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality: ADEQ Minor Source Permit: Permit No. 2158‐A,

issued to PIZO Operating Company, LLC, Blytheville, AR 72515, AFIN: 47‐00931, Page 5. 124 Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality: ADEQ Minor Source Permit: Permit No. 2158‐A,

issued to PIZO Operating Company, LLC, Blytheville, AR 72515, AFIN: 47‐00931, Page 5. 125 RCRA Hazardous Waste Delisting: The First 20 Years ‐‐ Program Evaluation, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste, June, 2002.

http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/id/delist/report.pdf   126 David Wagger and Scott Horne, Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries (Ferrous & Non‐ferrous

Scrap Metals), 2/07/08. 127 Mike Hohman, U.S. Steel (Integrated Iron & Steel Production), 2/25/08, USS Fairfield Works. 128 A Mass Balance Accounting of Lead and Mercury in the Iron and Steel Industry for the Year

2003, Kirsten Sinclair Rosselot, Process Profiles, Calabasas, California, May 2007, Note to Reviewers 129 Mike Hohman, U.S. Steel (Integrated Iron & Steel Production), 2/25/08, USS Fairfield Works. 130 USGS 2007.  Mineral Yearbook Lead 2006, U.S. Geological Survey.  

http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/lead/myb1‐2006‐lead.pdf 131 U.S. Geological Survey, Minerals Yearbook, Iron and Steel Scrap, 2006

http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/iron_&_steel_scrap/myb1‐2006‐fescr.pdf 132 Electronic mail message from Michael D Fenton [mfenton@usgs.gov] USGS to Robert Lanza

[rlanza@icfi.com] ICF International, received July 16, 2008. 133 U.S. EPA 2002.  RCRA Hazardous Waste Delisting: The First 20 Years ‐‐ Program Evaluation, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste, June, 2002,

http://www.epa.gov/osw/hazard/wastetypes/wasteid/delist/ 134 http://www.epa.gov/EPA‐WASTE/1995/June/Day‐13/pr‐247.html, 60 FR 31107, June 13, 1995 135 http://www.maxenvironmental.com/k061‐electric‐arc.htm

136 http://www.dep.state.pa.us/regulations/pubreports.asp?varreport=7 137 http://www.dep.state.pa.us/regulations/petitionstatus.asp?varID=40   138 http://www.pabulletin.com/secure/data/vol36/36‐6/219.html   139 http://www.in.gov/legislative/iac/xml/old‐ir/Vol24/03Dec/11ID329000255.pdf   140 http://www.in.gov/idem/files/swmb_2005_apr_04‐318_pr.pdf   141 Customer Audit Handbook, US Ecology Nevada, American Ecology Corporation, May 2007.  

http://www.americanecology.com/downloads/beatty_forms/beatty_audit_handbook.pdf   142 10‐K SEC Filing, filed by AMERICAN ECOLOGY CORP on 2/27/2008;  

http://sec.edgar‐online.com/2008/02/27/0000950134‐08‐003590/Section13.asp 143 73 FR 54713, September 23, 2008. http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/E8‐22170.htm 144 40 CFR Part 261, Appendix IX 145 40 CFR Part 261, Appendix IX

146 40 CFR Part 261, Appendix IX 147 40 CFR Part 261, Appendix IX

148 Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, 2008.  RCRA Delisting Adjusted Standard Petition Of

Peoria Disposal Company, August 21, 2008

http://www.watchclintonlandfill.com/images/ILPCBRulingonhearing.pdf

91