United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
EPA/530—SW—90—044
Second Edition
April 1990
Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OS-305)
&EPA Waste Minimization
Environmental Quality
with Economic Benefits
Printed on Recycle^ Paper
-------
-------
WASTE MINIMIZATION
Envirorimentcil Quality
with Economic Benefits
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
Second Edition
Washington, D.C. 1990
-------
1976
During the 1970s, the seriousness of the
hazardous waste problem became
apparent. In 1976, Congress passed the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act—the first law to deal on the national
level with hazardous waste.
By 1980, EPA had established a regula-
tory program requiring "cradle-to-grave"
management of hazardous waste. The
program set forth design requirements for
hazardous waste landfills, including liners
and leak detection systems.
By 1984, it had become clear that even
well-regulated land disposal could cause
environmental damage. Landfill liners can
leak, possibly creating future cleanup
problems. Treatment methods such as
incineration will reduce but not eliminate
the need for land disposal.
-------
Over the past decade, we have learned that the nation's
hazardous waste problems cannot be cured by simply
burying waste in the land. In recent years. Congress
and FPA have emphasi/ed effective treatment of haz-
ardous waste prior to its land disposal. Treatment
alone, however, will not necessarily remedy our hazard-
ous waste problems. It is essential that we first mini-
mi/e the generation and subsequent need for treatment,
storage, and disposal of ha/ardous waste. This concept,
called "waste minimization," is essential for ensuring a
healthful environment for us all.
1986
Relying on treatment and establishing strict
controls on land disposal cannot fully solve
our hazardous waste problems. We also
must strive to minimize the amount of
hazardous waste generated in the first
place. This silver recovery unit both
reduces the amount of waste that must be
treated or disposed of and enables photo
processors to turn a profit on the recovered
silver.
-------
Waste
Minimization
Waste Minimization Pays
A leading chemical company established
a program in 1987 that reduced waste
generated at the company's facilities by
more than 100,000 tons. This has saved
an estimated $250 million through sav-
ings on reformulated products, conserved
materials and energy, and the ability to
delay or completely eliminate the pur-
chase of pollution control equipment.
• • • • ••; . • 'i i / -i • i HI•- 'A ;M.- tlhii : N iviu'i
r •• jiu 'it tiva;cd '-Utred. oi disposed ol. In
.Mm >iM'' • isii p-julaird under RC'RA. \-\\\ encour-
!!_vs the minimi/alion ol all \\ asles thai pose risks to
human heahi and the environment. Waste minimiza-
lion techniques locus on source reduction or recycling
activities thai reduce either the volume or the toxicity of
hazardous waste generated. Unlike many waste treat-
ment methods, waste minimization can he practiced at
several stages in most industrial processes. Like all in-
novative solutions to waste management problems,
waste minimization requires careful planning, creative
problem solving, changes in attitude, sometimes capital
investment, and, most important, a real commitment.
The payoffs for this commitment, however, can be
great. Waste minimization can save money—often
substantial amounts—through more efficient use of
valuable resources and reduced waste treatment and
disposal costs. Waste minimization also can reduce a
generator's hazardous-waste-
related financial liabilities: the
less waste generated, the lower
the potential for negative envi-
ronmental effects. Finally, tak-
ing the initiative to reduce haz-
ardous waste is good policy.
Polls show that reducing toxic
chemical risk is the public's pri-
mary environmental concern.
Waste minimization can pay off
tangibly when local residents are
confident that industry is
making every effort to handle its
wastes responsibly.
Incentives and Obstacles
Industries and other hazardous waste generators across
the country are making progress toward reducing and
recycling wastes, but much more could be done. The in-
centives are great, but, too often, so are the obstacles.
-------
This vapor recovery unit traps escaping <-imes fr-jrn
a printing press area in the adjoining plat 1. The
trapped vapors then condense, forming reclaimed
solvent, which is stored in a tank until it /;•• reused.
i'M.\l i.ll 1 I:' (.'list ol i )! Ik1! It M'll is i '!
ha/ardoiis \\aste management. I ami
disposal. \\ Inch once cost as Intlc as
S I 0 per ton ot waste, mm costs at
least S240 per ton. Disposal sites
are in short suppl\. and prices keep
rising. Another important incentive
is that Congress has directed EPA to
phase out the land disposal of certain
types of untreated wastes. Under the
Agency's land disposal restrictions
program, mandated in the 1984
RCRA amendments, many untreated
wastes that were previously sent to
landfills will now be incinerated or
otherwise treated at costs many
times higher than those for land dis-
posal. And these costs are only part
of the overall picture. Other costs
include waste storage expenses,
transportation fees, administrative
and reporting burdens, potential fi-
nancial liabilities from accidental
releases, and insurance (which, for
many generators, may not even be
available).
Working against these strong incentives are a number of
practical obstacles that must be removed before waste
minimization can reach its potential. Eliminating these
impediments will be a high priority for the Agency over
the next several years.
Information Is Scarce
Mam companies that genuinely want to reduce their
wastes do not have access to the information they need
to make appropriate decisions. Identifying waste mini-
mization opportunities can demand specialized engi-
neering knowledge that many small- or medium-sized
-------
i,;' i , ,[ . I.! II , data 01) i lie eost Cl Ice
: , i i - ;, • • iin-i- Aasd1 ID mmi/ation techniques. 1m-
j 'i i !\ i- ; i n t> in nil 11 o! i dissemination is one ol the most
miporant sieps lo eneouiaemg uaste minimi/ation.
Proclm 7 Quality Must Not Suffer
Reducing waste at the source may mean changing the
way that products are made. Care must be taken not to
risk the quality of established products.
Competing Pressures
Waste generators are struggling to keep up with emerg-
ing hazardous waste regulations. Over the next few
years, many generators will be making long-term
commitments to phase out land disposal and to adopt
waste treatment processes. For many managers, waste
minimization may not seem as urgent as meeting these
regulatory deadlines. Because information is not al-
ways readily accessible and because process changes
may be required, action is too easy to postpone. For
waste minimization to gain acceptance among manag-
ers, they must realize how it can help meet their regula-
tory obligations, pay off in economic benefits, and im-
prove their image with the public by demonstrating a
commitment to environmental quality.
-------
on
A Pennsylvania die manufacturer uses 1.1.1 -trichlo-
methane to clean and decrease machine parts. Prior
to installing this solvent recovery unit, the company
shipped the contaminated solvent offsite for reclama-
tion and then purchased reclaimed solvent at $.80 per
gallon and virgin 1,1,1-trichloroethane at $4.50 per
gallon.
Using this solvent recovery unit, the company now
reclaims solvent onsite at a cost of $.04-$. 10 per
gallon. In addition, the company's purchase of virgin
1,1,1-trichloroethane has dropped from two 55-gallon
drums each month to two 55-gallon drums every 6
months, a savings of nearly $5,000 per year
;!ss.T\,ii en and Reco\erv .Act (RCRAi
vemiiK'iKV ol sourte reduction and
itcgy lor managing solid waste. As
year RCRA was passed by Congress.
EPA developed a formal hierarchy for
waste management that listed source
reduction as the preferred manage-
ment option, followed, in order of
preference, by onsite and offsite recy-
cling, treatment, and, last, land dis-
posal.
In 1984, reflecting increased national
concern over the hazardous waste
problem. Congress directed EPA to
report on whether it might be desir-
able or feasible to develop mandatory
requirements, such as national
regulations, to compel adoption of
waste minimization techniques. In
1986. EPA responded with its report
to Congress on waste minimization.
This report explored various techni-
cal, economic, and policy issues
pertinent to hazardous waste source
reduction and recycling, and con-
cluded that mandatory programs
would not be desirable or feasible at
this time. EPA is continuing to collect
and analyze data from generators and
other sources to assess further the
need for statutory authority on waste
minimization. These findings will
provide the basis for a followup re-
port to Congress in 1990. In this
report EPA will evaluate whether ex-
isting incentives have been sufficient
to promote waste minimization, or
whether some form of mandatory
program is seen as necessary to im-
plement the national waste minimiza-
tion policy.
-------
; I I • <
i> i >•i MI . • ki \ t.icio • iixi. niaiKkiioiA programs
,\<'iik: V>A M \.' L'lK'v-. mdu-Ur \ production decisions.
quite I'OssibK leading to counterproductive results.
Second, mandatory programs \\ould he difficult and ex-
pensive to design and administer. Third, generators al-
ready face strong economic incentives to reduce their
wastes. A regulatory program would take time to de-
velop. and many industries might postpone any action
until mandatory requirements were spelled out. The
time for making constructive source reduction and
recycling decisions is now, while industry is making
long-term decisions on how to respond to the land
disposal restrictions program and other revisions in the
ha/ardous waste law.
EPA's report to Congress stressed that the most con-
structive role government can assume is to promote
voluntary waste minimi/.ation by providing information,
technology transfer, and assistance to waste generators.
Since the States deal firsthand with generators, EPA
believes the States should play the central role in
fostering knowledge about waste minimization.
Through waste minimization outreach programs, EPA
will provide technical materials and guidance as well as
information resulting from research efforts and other
sources. EPA is also developing a nonbinding waste
minimization policy statement to provide guidance to
generators who must certify and report information to
EPA on their waste minimization activities.
Examples of Waste Minimization
in Other Countries
One of the largest chemical manufacturers in the
Netherlands uses waste segregation, removal of
solvents in water solutions by distillation, and other
source reduction measures to reduce the
company's annual wastewater output by 80 per-
cent.
In Sweden, a major pharmaceutical producer initi-
ated a program.to recycle approximately 10,000
tons of hazardous waste solvents per year through
the company's onsite distillation plant, thereby re-
ducing by 60 percent the amount of solvent waste
that was shipped offsite for disposal.
Waste Minimization in
Other Countries
EPA's waste minimization strat-
egy parallels those in Europe and
Japan. All of them rely on coop-
erative, voluntary efforts. All of
them stress the importance of low-
pollution source reduction and
recycling technologies, waste
exchange (one company's waste
being used as another's feed-
stock), and information sharing.
As in the United States, these
countries operate on a two-tier
system: states, provinces, or pre-
fectures deal directly with waste
-------
; ' i!i KT i • pi I.K id,1 diicu1 n*-.
. >; : ' • : V:M : '. •- •••ir\C',ed in an [•])\ study .>['
-••IV •-: >•- -ic ei.li.uiiiHi practice^ ha\e rejected the
notMii 0 mandatory neitonnance standards or other
regihatorv ap|M-c:achcs. Several countries have commit-
ted -significant resources toward working with genera-
tors to reduce waste volumes.
Waste Minimization Practices in Other Countries
TAX INCENTIVES
Waste End Taxes
Tax Incentives
ECONOMICS
Price Support System for Recycling
Government Grants as Subsidies
Low Interest Loans
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
Information and Referral Service
Site Consultation
Training Seminars
R&D ASSISTANCE
Technical Development Labs
Demonstration Projects
Industrial Research
PERMITS AND PLANS
National Waste Management Plans
Waste Reduction Agreements
Waste Reduction as a Part of Permits
WASTE EXCHANGE
Regional Waate Exchanges
PUBLIC INFORMATION
Focus on Corporate Image
Focus on Consumer Practices
JAPAN
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
CANADA
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
GERMANY
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
SWEDEN
•
•
•
•
NETHERLANDS
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
DENMARK
•
•
•
•
•
•
Source: Foreign Practices in Hazardous Waste Minimization (Medford, Mass.: Center for Environ-
mental Management, Tufts University, 1986).
-------
Setting up
an Industry
Program
Suggested Steps
of a Waste Minimization
Assessment
apreassessment
waste
Rank options by:
- waste reduction
effectiveness;
- extent of current use
in the industry;
- potential for future
application at the facility.
Present preliminary results to
plant personnel along with a
ranking of options.
Prepare a final report, includ-
ing recommendations to plant
management.
Develop an implementation
plan and schedule.
Conduct periodic reviews and
updates of assessments.
;; ; • i .[. : , s T i! ui i -\ '"ill* : I ;• lopi ll ^ > A II LVIH'I ,1 I
••'.liii,MI i.' \a--u: mimn i/.ilmn. anil, \\heie\ei
.v-ssibk:. define lhat pro^iarn lormally in a urillen
Joe iinicnl. ll should also develop an implementation
plan tor each ol its I'aeilities or suhunits and periodically
revievv. revise, and update its program to reflect chang-
ing conditions. While a waste minimi/.ation program
can target regulated ha/ardous waste, it can also easily
incorporate effective reductions of other types of
pollution.
Conducting Waste Minimization
Assessments
An effective first step in setting up a waste reduction
program is to perform a waste minimi/.ation assessment,
sometimes referred to as a "waste minimization audit."
Conducted by in-house staff or an independent outside
expert, a waste minimization assessment is simply a
structured review of a facility's potential opportunities
Waste minimization assessments are an effective means of
identifying opportunities for source reduction and recycling.
-------
Case Study of a Waste
Minimization Assessment
-WiSte minimization
ftfflSftlWace steel rnak-
ffeam examined
i, Including source re-
,<0r the company's
The assess-
ment revealed that calcium fluoride (fluorspar) in
the sludge generated during neutralization of the
pickling line wastewater could be economically re-
covered. Previously, the company had disposed
of the sludge and purchased 1,000 tons of
fluorspar per year as ftux material for the steel
making process. The waste minimization option
identified by the assessment team will save the
company $100,000 per year in costs avoided to
purchasefluorspar,andafurther$70,coo per year
because of a30percent reduction in the volume of
sludge to be disposed of.
Mam Suite programs promote and
support waste minimi/ation assess-
ments as a central element of their
waste minimi/ation programs. All
facilities that generate ha/.ardous
waste can benefit, and operations
that generate large volumes of
waste and/or highly toxic waste
can benefit greatly. Substantial
and continuing waste reductions
have also been achieved through
the information gained from con-
ducting waste assessments. Waste
minimization assessments identify
and characterize waste streams, the
production processes that are re-
sponsible for generating each par-
ticular stream, and the amount of
waste generated by each.
The result> of a waste minimization assessment enable
companies to identify cost-effective approaches to re-
duo the volume and toxicity of waste generated. They
can then make more informed decisions on how to
allocate resources to source reduction and recycling
programs. While some capital investment may be re-
quired, returns can be analyzed in terms of payback pe-
riods and opportunity costs.
Involving Production Staff
The key difference between waste minimization and
other environmental programs is that the essential deci-
sionmakers are often on the production rather than on
the environmental compliance side of the organization.
While many environmental controls can be simply
added to existing production processes, waste minimi-
zation usually happens within the production process
itself. For example, recycling decisions require input
from production staff, since waste often must be
pretreated or otherwise modified to permit in-house
-------
Ha/ardous uaste disposal costs have increased rapidly
and will continue to do so in the foreseeable future as
generators compete for scarce treatment and disposal
capacity. Because process engineers in many industrial
plants are not required to consider "fully loaded" waste
management expenses (such as treatment and disposal,
transportation, tracking, management overhead, insur-
ance, and energy and raw material expenses) as part of
their production costs, they may be making process
design and operation decisions that seem cost-effective
within a discrete process, but that are actually ineffi-
cient from the company's overall financial perspective.
Keeping Accurate Records
An important step in setting up waste minimi/ation pro-
grams is to maintain accurate records on existing waste
generation rates and management costs, particularly for
the maior ha/ardous waste streams that will be targets
for source reduction or recycling and that may have
been subject to waste minimization assessments as part
of the company's overall waste minimi/ation program.
Working with State Programs
Some States have already instituted waste minimization
technical assistance and outreach programs; others are
initiating or expanding their efforts. States can help
generators of all types, private and public, by providing
technical guidance, helping to find qualified engineers
to conduct waste assessments, serving as conduits for
obtaining the latest information on waste minimization
techniques, and putting companies with similar needs in
contact with each other. Although companies must
protect the confidentiality of their business information.
they may, in many instances, benefit from sharing or
trading expertise or experience with State waste mini-
mization programs as intermediaries. States can also
help publicize a company's waste minimization efforts.
10
-------
IV ,Kllllll Isk'l i.'i
i •. ,'i'ii iK'iilai ;.'!iMip- such as uimcrsitK's and
ii III'L\ ni/alioii->. Sonic ol these [)roi:r;iiiis are
iliis paniplilcl.
An electronics plant installed
this electrolytic metal
recovery cell to recover
copper from waste generated
in the production of telephone
switching equipment. The
process produces a better
quality copper deposit on the
cell's cathode plates, where
the copper collects in half
inch-thick sheets. The cell
recovers 75 pounds of copper
per week, which is sold for
$.50 per pound—a total of
about $2,000 per year. The
use of the cell also has
eliminated 1 drum of sludge
per week, saving an
additional $4,000 per year
-------
Waste
Minimization
Approaches
and
Techniques
•• • i K .-. I • •• .1 -I ; i HUM ; /M• n - u\ >uin |-ics can K1
.IK ui| >ed mil • lour'iui|or jau'L'oi lev m\enlor\ manage
ment and unproved operations, modification ol equip-
ment, production process changes, and recycling and
reuse. Such techniques can have applications across a
range of industries and manufacturing processes, and
can apply to hazardous as well as nonha/ardous waste.
Many of these techniques involve source reduction—
the preferred option on EPA's hierarchy of waste man-
agement. Others deal with on- and off-site recycling.
The best way to determine how these general ap-
proaches can fit a particular company's needs is to
conduct a waste minimisation assessment, as discussed
above. In practice, waste minimization opportunities
are limited only by the ingenuity of the generator. In
the end. a company looking carefully at bottom-line
returns may conclude that the most feasible strategy
would be a combination of source reduction and
recycling projects.
The approaches discussed and illustrated below provide
waste minimization examples for generic and specific
processes. Several of these will be the subject of EPA
technology transfer documents (see inside front cover).
Good Management Practices Mean Different
Things to Different Firms
By improving the methods for analyzing raw materials and products, a textile fibers plant in
Tennessee reduced the amount of waste solvent generated from 7,000 gallons to 2,400 gallons
per year.
Changing the reactor rinse and cleaning procedures on its truck-loading strainers has enabled
a California chemical plant to reduce by 93 percent the amount of organics in its resin-
manufacturing operation. Instead of allowing the phenol used in the manufacturing process to
drip into the plant's sewage treatment system as a hose drains it from trucks, the company now
flushes the hose with water, and the water-phenol mixture is recovered for reuse in a separate
treatment system.
12
-------
Production Process Changes
Substitute nonhazardous for hazardous
ra\/v materials.
Segregate wastes by type for recovery.
Eliminate sources of leaks and spills.
Separate hazardous from nonhazardous
wastes.
Redesign or reformulate end products to
be less hazardous.
Optimize reactions and raw material use.
Recycling and Reuse
Install closed-loop systems.
Recycle onsite for reuse.
Recycle offsite for reuse.
Exchange wastes.
Belter Operating Practices
On • ol tlv best means ol reducing wastes is through
betier operating or housekeeping practices—that is,
ways to make existing processes work more efficiently,
and thereby generate less waste. Better operating prac-
tices can involve anything from finding a more efficient
way to handle a particular hazardous waste to making
fundamental changes in the way a company thinks
about waste management.
Better operating practices are specific to each facility
and to each waste-generating process, but general
themes include the following:
Personnel Practices
Heightened awareness by employees of the need for
waste minimization is essential. Training programs, for
example, are ways to generate ideas and establish em-
ployees' commitment.
13
-------
Evaporative recovery
systems can minimize the
volume of waste from metal-
plating baths and recycle
plating solutions by recover-
ing 90-95 percent of the
plating solution lost through
dragout. The operating cost
of the recovery system is only
$.08 per gallon, while the
dragout sludge hauling and
disposal costs are close to
$1.00 per gallon. With on'y
5-10 percent of the dragout
requiring waste treatment,
waste handling and disposal
costs have been reduced
significantly.
'"' " Ul ' '<• • :'. i-Miii:.1 • i_ '. to\ie d> islllueills. isolal
ii'L! !:v|in.| tiact vi]i,. or (-ccping ha/ardiuis stivanis liom
nonha/ariinus uasic. gcnetators can sometimes save
suhsiantial amounts of money on disposal or find new
opportunities tor recycling and reuse.
Be tier Standard Procedures
Large quantities of ha/.ardous waste may be generated
through spills, improper storage practices, inefficient
production startup or shutdown, scheduling problems,
lack of emergency procedures and preventive mainte-
nance, or poorly calibrated pollution control devices.
New standard procedures manuals, better inventory
control, and routine training and retraining sessions can
help eliminate this inadvertent waste generation and
provide significant companywide source reduction
benefits.
During standard equipment-cleaning operations, hospitals,
universities, and research centers, as well as many small- and
medium-sized businesses, such as metal finishers and furniture
manufacturers, generate small amounts of waste solvents.
These waste solvents can be recycled for reuse in cleaning
operations using small, commercially available recovery units.
Depending on the commercial value and amount of solvent
recovered, the pay-back time for recycling equipment can be as
short as 1 year. Since transportation costs can be very high,
even businesses that use only low volumes of solvents may
find it more economical to recycle their waste solvents onsite
rather than ship the wastes offsite for recovery or disposal.
14
-------
()ii',' ol il <• n u >si d live I means of reducing paint-related
ha/ardotis u.iste is to use low-to\icit\ paints, such as
those th.it are \vater-hased products or do not contain
heavy metals. Changing to water-based paints helps to
reduce the use of organic solvents that later must be
managed as ha/ardous waste and that also can be a
source of air pollution.
The Department of Defense has developed a
new technique called Plastics Media Blasting
to strip paint from military aircraft. In this
process, small plastic beads are air blasted at
the aircraft's surface, removing the paint by
abrasion. This method requires less time and
generates less hazardous waste than
traditional wet paint stripping. On the basis of
a test, the DOD estimates that the time
required to strip an F-4 lighter has been
reduced from 340 to 40 hours and that the
amount of hazardous waste has been reduced
from 10,000 pounds of wet sludge per aircraft
to 320 pounds of dry paint chips and decom-
posed plastic media per aircraft.
Another approach to reducing waste from
painting operations is to employ mechani-
cal paint stripping. Companies that
substitute such processes as bead blasting
or cryogenic coating removal can avoid
the use of ha/ardous caustics and solvents.
15
-------
As stain is sprayed onto a
piece of furniture, the water
curtain in the booth traps the
excess stain and solvent
residue. The water is
recycled back to the wet
booth and reused.
Improved Paint Applications Programs
An electric company uses a water-based electrostatic
paint system instead of a conventional organic solvent
paint system. This has resulted in improved quality of
application, decrease of downtime from 3 percent to 1
percent, reduction in the generation of aromatic waste
solvent by 95 percent, reduction in paint sludge by 97
percent, and increase of efficiency with up to 95 percent
recovery and reuse of paint. The new system reduced
hazardous waste disposal costs and decreased personnel
and maintenance costs by 40 percent.
An automobile manufacturer modified its paint storage
and transfer system to be totally enclosed with full recircu-
lation, resulting in less frequent and easier cleanups and
improvement in paint quality.
More Effective Metal Parts Cleaning
Metal parts cleaning is an essential process for many
large and small industries as well as a wide variety of
businesses involved in the manufacture, repair, and
maintenance of metal parts and equipment. Potentially
ha/.arclous substances used in metal parts cleaning can
be minimi/ed by reducing the volume or the toxicity of
the cleaning agents used. Either method can save
mone\ as well as reduce ha/ardous waste. Generic ap-
proaches to minimi/.e waste from metal parts cleaning
include source control and substitution of cleaning
agents.
16
-------
Ion exchange metal-recovery
units are used to remove heavy
metals from aqueous residues
generated by electroplating,
metal-finishing, electronics
manufacturing, and metal-
refining processes. Ion
exchange systems are
commercially available, are
relatively compact, and use little
energy.
Siivni :( ',''U[];iiL' pi'i >ccsses L an
include usriig abrasives in grease
less or ualer-based hinders, thus
eliminating the need tor subsequent
caustic-based cleaning to remove
the binder. Plants can also substi-
tute abrasive-tree, water-based
cleaning compounds for solvent
cleaners in many processes, thereby
reducing air emissions from
solvents.
A high efficiency vapor degreaser removes lubricants and oil
substances in this metal parts cleaning operation. This totally
enclosed system, which collects solvent vapors and recycles
them back to the cleaning operation, also reduces potential
solvent air emissions.
17
-------
Two approaches to minimi/ing waste from process
equipment cleaning are reducing the frequency of clean-
ups and reducing the quantity and toxicity of waste.
For example, to reduce the frequency of cleanups, spe-
cialty chemical plants might schedule their batch proc-
esses to make a full year's run
of a single chemical all at
once, rather than interspersing
it with batches of other prod-
ucts. Other plants might
install more corrosion-
resistant pipes and vats that
can tolerate less frequent
washing without risking
product quality.
Acetone is used at this Ohio fiber glass manufacturing plant to clean and rinse molds and finished
fiber glass panels for use on mass transit buses. A cost of $225 per gallon for acetone coupled with
high disposal costs for the waste solvent caused the company to turn to onsite solvent recovery.
The plant now uses two solvent recovery units that reclaim 45 gallons of acetone per day at a cost
of $.04 to $. 10 per gallon. The recovery units, which have a typical pay-back period of 1 year, allow
the reclaimed solvent to be reused immediately. Not only has the company reduced its waste
volume by 90 percent, it has also substantially decreased the amount of virgin acetone it must
purchase.
Oil-water separators can be
sized to accommodate
different types of pollutant
discharges from petroleum-
and nonpetroleum-based
industries. As oily influent
flows into the separator, oil is
removed ana recovered and
clean effluent is discharged.
The heavy solids settle to the
bottom and are periodically
removed.
18
-------
'^1' T '• ; hi I I >l I 1 I I ,> H M crates ,1 -,|IKi 1 I i.|liai!t 11 \ it!
hi!-!l)!\ ^<'i cenlratci.l waste that can he recycled lui
additional rinsing, \\hilc the second, \\i\\-\ olnnie rinse
finishes the cleaning and generates a much kmer
toxicilN uasle than he tore.
Examples of Other Waste Minimization Processes
isposal Problem ; n ^. '
ttf a major cNfrfert com^cn^li KemMy mwiutee-
jterio ;^ict, 0enerate<| as a marm^irt?ip t^procfeiot, was
The company reeeritly iNstelW^a new freon
juaBty hyilrocNoric ajtid. By instsWing the n«w
acid storage facility, the company now is able to sell
ytir of acid that was previously $$card«i
Cyanide from Rinse Water
tjuses revers©;bsmosis to^ihtlriaie thf discharge of
[
-------
,ilion> that rccci\ e most ol
at ion exchanges, take actu;
physical possession of the waste and may initiate or
actively participate in the transfer of wastes to the users.
They are usually privately owned companies that
operate for profit.
Actual Examples from a Waste Exchange Catalog
Formaldehyde-Surplus. Formaldehyde solution. Potential Use: embalming fluid. Type
1; Contains 25%formaldehyde with 10% glycerine, 10% alcohols (ethanol, isopropanol,
methanol) and cRstied water by wet wt. Type 2: Contains 25% formaldehyde with 25%-
35% ateotipls (eihanot, isopropanol, methanol) and distilled water by wet wt. 165,000
gate, in 15 gal drums/plastic carboys in steel drums. One time. Independent analysis
(specification) avuiliable. PA
1,1,1-trichloroethane. 1,1,1-trichloroethane from asphalt extractions. Contains 90%
l.t.l-WcWoroethane with 10% asphalt and 1% oil. 220 gals, in drums available.
Quantities vary. Thereafter 220 gal/yr. Sample available. PA
Paraffin Wax. Paraffin wax from clean-out of chewing gum base mixers. Fully refined.
Potential use: firelogs, crayons, etc. Contains traces of gum base and calcium carbonate.
80,000 fes. in 50 gal. drums. Quantities continuous. Thereafter 40,000 Ibs/qtr.
While any type of waste can be listed in a waste
exchange, certain materials are more likely than others
to be recycled. Most transactions involve relatively
"pure" wastes that can be used directly with minimal
processing. Solvents, organics, acids, and alkalies are
most frequently recycled. Metals from metal-bearing
wastes, sludges, and solutions also may be recovered
economically.
Waste exchanges are located throughout the country,
but computerized central listing services are now the
best first step in finding the most convenient one (see
inside back cover).
20
-------
Looking to
the Future
I •. ' H ! I •, ' K ' K , '. 1 I i i.Ill t1 K' iaiH ; i l|xp< )-,,! I: • l|
ii.ii!1. mil! '.Hi'ii ha,jai''!< MIS \\aslcs, toruiiL' Lienerator^ to
'•vpioiv oilier options. I reatmcnt technologies car as-
sunk- much ot the \vask- management burden from land
disposal, hut treatment is expensive, and. at least in the
near term, capacity is limited. EPA's strategy to
minimi/.e the generation of ha/ardous waste will help
reduce or eliminate regulated wastes that are now
managed by treatment or land disposal as well as other
wastes that pose risks to human health and the environ-
ment.
Waste minimization is one of the few areas where
national environmental goals and industry's economic
interests clearly coincide. For generators, the benefits
include reduced costs, liabilities, and regulatory burdens
associated with hazardous waste management. For the
general public, waste minimization pays off in an im-
proved environment.
Because of these shared interests, EPA is promoting
voluntary action on the part of industry. The only for-
mal waste minimization requirement under RCRA is
that industries certify that they have waste minimization
programs of their own design in place. To support this,
EPA will publish a non-
binding waste minimi-
zation policy statement
reflecting the Agency's
ideas on what an effec-
tive voluntary program
might include. EPA is
also revising its
biennial reporting re-
quirements to provide
generators with
checklists with which
to describe their
activities and report
their progress.
Waste minimization promotes environmental quality.
21
-------
ill nl H'\ ,
\. l-.p\\
locus on
RCR.A hazardous waste. I he overall Agency strateg)
will, however, address multimedia opportunities and
will include an information clearinghouse, a national
data base, research and technology transfer, and support
for State programs.
EPA's technology transfer program will provide infor-
mation to industry on methods to prevent waste
generation by changing industrial processes, materials.
and operations. One of the Agency's first projects is to
issue a detailed manual on how to conduct a waste
minimi/.ation assessment. This will be followed by a
15-minute videotape illustrating the step-by-step proc-
ess, w ith examples of how different firms have profited
from ihese assessments. EPA is also producing a com-
puten/.ed bibliography on waste minimization and a
series of technology transfer documents on a variety of
subjects. In addition, the Agency is developing a series
of guidance materials for IS different types of industries
that tend to generate small quantities of hazardous
waste. All of these materials will be available through
State waste minimi/.ation programs.
Waste minimization clearly provides opportunities to
deal more efficiently and effectively with wastes that
are hazardous to human health and the environment.
These opportunities are unique in that they provide im-
mediate financial rewards to industry, increased waste
management flexibility to generators, and reduced pres-
sures on the nation's existing treatment and land
disposal capacity. Now is the time to investigate and
take practical steps toward waste minimization, before
major commitments are made for treatment and disposal
options. Over the longer term, the benefits of source re-
duction and recycling will be key incentives for genera-
tors to integrate waste minimization techniques into
their overall hazardous waste management programs.
-------
State Hazardous Waste Agencies
Alabama Alabama Department of
Environmental Management
1751 Dkkenson Drive
Montgomery, AL 36130
(265) 271-7730
HAMMARR Regulation
Information Service
University of Alabama
P.O. Drawer G, University Station
Tiiscaloosa, AL 35487
(205) 348-6100
Alaska Alaska Health Project
Waste Reduction Assistance
Program
431 West 7th Avenue, Suite 101
Anchorage, AK 99501
(907) 276-2864
Department of Environmental
Conservation
3220 Hospital Drive
P.O. Box O
Juneau, AK 99811-1800
(907) 46.'i-2666
Arizona Department of Environmental Quality
2005 N. Central Avenue
Phoenix, AZ 85004
(602) 257-2318
Arkansas Arkansas; Industrial Development
Commission
No. 1 Capitol Mall
Little Rock, AR 72201
(501) 682-7322
Hazardous Material Training
Center/UAMS
4301 W. Markham St., Mail Stop 638
Little Rock, AR 72205
(501) 661-5766
California Alternative Technology Section
Department of Health Services
P.O. Box 942732
Sacramento, CA 94234
(916) 324-1807
Colorado Department of Health
4210 E. llth Avenue
Denver, CO 80220
(303) 331-4841
Connecticut Connecticut Hazardous Waste
Management Service
900 Asylum Avenue, Suite 360
Hartford, CT 06105
(203) 244-2007
Local Assistance and
Coordination
Connecticut Department of
Environmental Protection
165 Capital Avenue
Hartford, CT 06106
(203) 566-3437
Delaware Hazardous Waste Management Branch
Delaware Department of Natural
Resources and Environmental
Control
P.O. Box 1407
Dover, DE 19903
(302) 736-3689
Florida Waste Reduction Assistance Program
DER/Division of Waste Management
2600 Blair Stone Road
Tallahassee, FL 32399-2400
(904) 488-0300
Georgia Hazardous and Industrial Waste
Management Program
Georgia Institute of Technology
O'Keefe Building
Atlanta, GA 30332
(404) 894-3806
Environmental Protection Division
Georgia Department of Natural
Resources
205 Butler Street, S.E.
Atlanta, GA 30334
(404) 656-2833
Hawaii Hazardous Waste Program
Hawaii Department of Health
P.O. Box 3378
Honolulu, HI 96801
(808) 548-8834
23
-------
Idaho Bureau of Hazardous Materials
450 West State Street
Boise, ID 83720
0208) 334-5878
Illinois Illinois Hazardous Waste Research
and Information Center
1808 Woodfield Drive
Savoy, IL 61874
(217) 333-8940
Waste Reduction Unit
Illinois Environmental Protection
Agency
2200 Churchill Road
P.O. Box 19276
Springfield, IL 62794
(217) 781-6760
Indiana Department of Environmental
Management
Office of Solid and Hazardous Waste
105 South Meridian Street
P.O. Box 6015
Indianapolis, IN 46206-6015
(317) 232-8857
Department of Environmental
Management
Office of Technical Assistance
105 South Meridian Street
P.O. Box 6015
Indianapolis, IN 46206-6015
(317) 232-8172
Environmental Management and
Education Program (EMEP)
Center for Public Policy
Room 120, Young Graduate House
Purdue University
West Lafayette, IN 47906
(317) 494-5036
Iowa Simall Business Assistance Center
112 Latham Hall
University of Northern Iowa
Cedar Falls, IA 50614
(319) 273-2079
Iowa Department of Natural Resources
Afallace State Office Building
Des Moines, IA 50319
(515) 281-8489
Kansas Department of Health and
Environment
Forbes Field
Topeka, KA 66620
(913) 296-1698
Kentucky Department for Environmental
Protection
18 Reilly Road
Frankfort, KY 40601
(502) 564-2150
Kentucky Partners
University of Louisville
Ernst Hall
Louisville, KY 40292
(502) 588-7260
Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality
Solid and Hazardous Waste
625 N. Fourth Street, 6th Floor
Baton Rouge, LA 70804
(504) 342-1216
Department of Environmental Quality
Policy and Planning
625 N. Fourth Street, 5th Floor
Baton Rouge, LA 70804
(504) 342-1255
Maine Department of Environmental
Protection
State House Station 17
Augusta, ME 04333
(207) 289-7838
Maryland Maryland Environmental Services
2020 Industrial Drive
Annapolis, MD 21401
(301) 974-7281
Hazardous Waste Program
Department of the Environment
2500 Broening Highway
Baltimore, MD 21224
(301) 631-3343
Massachusetts Asst. Commissioner for Waste
Reduction
Department of Environmental Quality
and Engineering
One Winter Street, 5th Floor
Boston, MA 02108
(617) 292-5765
Department of Environmental
Management
Office of Safe Waste Management
100 Cambridge Street, Room 1904
Boston, MA 02202
(617) 727-3260
24
-------
Michigan Office of Waste Reduction
Department of Commerce
106 W. Allegan, Suite 111
P.O. Box 30004
Lansing, MI 48909
(517) 335-1178
Department of Natural Resources
P.O. Box 30028
Lansing, MI 48909
(517) 373-4735
Minnesota MnTAP (Minnesota Technical
Assistance Program)
University of Minnesota
Box 197 Mayo
420 Delaware Street, SE
Minnesapolis, MN 55455
(612) 625-4949
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
Hazardous Waste Section
520 Lafayette Road
St. Paul, MN 55155
(612) 296-7284
Mississippi MSU Chemical Engineering
P.O. Drawer CN
Mississippi State, MS 39762
(601) 325-2480
Environmental Protection Council
P.O. Box 10385
Jackson, MS 39209
(601) 961-5276
Missouri Missouri EIERA
P.O. Box 744
Jefferson City, MO 65102
(314) 751-4919
Department of Natural Resources
Waste Management Program
P.O. Box 176
Jefferson City, MO 65102
(314) 751-3176
Montanai Department of Health
Solid and Hazardous Waste Bureau
Cogswell Building
Helena, MT 59620
(406) 444-2821
Nebraska Department of Environmental Control
301 Centennial Mall South
Lincoln, NE 68509
(402) 471-4217
Nevada Department of Conservation and
Natural Resources
Waste Management Division
201 South Fall Street
Carson City, NV 89710
(702) 885-5872
New Department of Environmental Services
Hampshire Waste Management Division
6 Hazen Drive
Concord, NH 03301-6509
(603) 271-3449
New Jersey Department of Environmental
Protection
Division of Hazardous Waste
Advisement
401 East State Street
Trenton, NJ 08625
(609) 633-0737
Department of Environmental
Protection
Office of Science and Research
401 East State Street, CN-409
Trenton, NJ 08627
(609) 984-6072
Hazardous Waste Commission
28 West State Street, Room 614
Trenton, NJ 08608
(609) 292-1459
New Mexico Department of Environmental
Improvement
Hazardous Waste Bureau
1190 St. Francis Drive
Santa Fe, NM 87504
(505) 872-2835
New York Waste Minimization Section
Division of Hazardous Substances
Regulation
Department of Environmental
Conservation
50 Wolf Road
Albany, NY 12233-7253
(518) 485-8400
State Environmental Facilities Corp.
50 Wolf Road
Albany, NY 12205
(518) 457-4132
25
-------
North North Carolina Pollution Prevention
Carolina Program
Department of Environment, Health
and Natural Resources
PD. Box 27687
Raleigh, NC 27611-7687
(919) 733-7015
Hazardous Waste Branch
Division of Health Services
Department of Human Services
P.O. Box 2091
Raleigh, NC 27602
(919) 733-2178
Ohio Diivision of Solid and Hazardous
Waste Management
P.O. Box 1049
Columbus, OH 43266
(614) 644-2956
Ohio Technology Transfer
Organization
65 E. State Street, Suite 200
Columbus, OH 43066
(614) 466-4286
Oklahoma Waste Management Service
Oklahoma State Department of Health
P.O. Box 53551
Oklahoma City, OK 73152
(405) 271-7047
Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
Hazardous and Solid Waste Division
811 S.W. Sixth Avenue
Portland, OR 97204
(503) 229-6165
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental
Resources
Bureau of Waste Management
PD. Box 2063
Harrisburg, PA 17120
(717)787-6239
Center for haxardous Materials
Research
University of Pittsburgh
320 William Pitt Way
Pittsburgh, PA 15238
(412) 826-5320
PENNTAP (Pennsylvania Technical
Assistance Program)
The Pennsylvania State UniversiU
1527 William Street
University Park, PA 16802
(81.4) 865-1914
Rhode Island Office of Environmental Coordination
Department of Environmental
Management
9 Hayes Street
Providence, RI 02903
(401) 277-3434
Center for Environmental Study
Brown University
135 Angell Street
P.O. Box 1943
Providence, RI 02912
(401) 863-3499
South Department of Health and
Carolina Environmental Control
Solid and Hazardous Waste
Management
2600 Bull Street
Columbia, SC 29201
(803) 734-5200
Tennessee Center for Industrial Services
The University of Tennessee
226 Capitol Blvd. Bldg., Suite 401
Nashville, TN 37219-1804
(615) 242-2456
Department of Health and
Environment
150 Ninth Avenue North
Nashville, TN 37219
(615) 741-3657
Texas Hazardous and Solid Waste
Management
Texas Water Commission
1700 North Congress Avenue
P.O. Box 13087, Capital Station
Austin, TX 78711
(512) 463-7761
Vermont Department of Environment and
Conservation
Hazardous Materials Management
103 South Main Street
Waterbury, VT 05676
(802) 244-8702
Virginia Waste Minimization Program
Department of Waste Management
101 North 14th Street
Richmond, VA 23219
(804) 225-2667
Washington Waste Reduction and Recycling
Solid and Hazardous Waste Program
Department of Ecology
Mail Stop PV-11
Olympia, WA 98504
(206) 459-6302
26
-------
West Virginia Department of Natural Resources
Division of Waste Management
1201 Greenbrier Street
Charleston, WV 25311
(304) 348-5935
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
SW/3
P.O. Box 7921
Madison, WI 53707
(608) 267-3763
Wyoming Solid Waste Management Program
Wyoming Department of Environmental
Quality
122 W. 25th Street
Cheyenne, WY 82002
(307) 777-7752
U.S. EPA Region VIII
Hazardous Waste Management Division
Denver Place (8HWM-RI)
999 18th Street, Suite 500
Denver, CO 80202-2405
(303) 293-1795
27
-------
-------
Further Information on Waste Minimization
Hazardous Waste Exchanges
California Waste Exchange
Department of Health Services
Toxic Substances Control Division
Alternative Technology Section
714/744 P Street
P.O. Box 942732
Sacramento, CA 94234-7320
(916) 324-1807 (Robert McCormick)
Enstar Corporation*
P.O. Box 189
Latham, NY 12110
(518) 785-0470 (J.T. Engster)
Great Lakes Waste Exchange
400 Ann Street, N.W, Suite 201-A
Grand Rapids, MI 49504-2054
(616) 363-3262 (Jeffrey Dauphin)
Idaho Waste Exchange
Idaho Department of Environmental Quality
Hazardous Materials Bureau
450 West State Street
Boise, ID 83720
(208) 334-5879 (Vicki Jewell)
Indiana Waste Exchange
Purdue University
School of Civil Engineering
West Lafayette, IN 47907
(317) 494-5063 (Dr. Lynn Corsonam)
Industrial Materials Exchange (IMEX)
Seattle—King County Environmental Health
172 20th Avenue
Seattle, WA 98122
(206) 296-4633 (Jerry Henderson)
Fax: (206) 296-0188
Industrial Material Exchange Service (IMES)
P.O. Box 19276
2200 Churchill Road, #24
Springfield, IL 62794-0276
(217) 782-0450 (Diane Shockey)
Fax: (217) 524-4193
*R)r-profit waste information exchange
29
-------
Industrial Waste Information Exchange
New Jersey Chamber of Commerce
5 Commerce Street
Newark, NJ 07102
(201) 623-7070 (William E. Payne)
Montana Industrial Waste Exchange
Montana Chamber of Commerce
P.O. Box 1730
Helena, MT 59624
(406) 442-2405 (Don Ingles)
Northeast Industrial Waste Exchange (NIWE)
90 Presidential Plaza, Suite 122
Syracuse, NY 13210
(315) 422-6572 (Lewis Cutler)
Fax: (315) 442-9051
Pacific Materials Exchange (PME)
S. 3707 Godfrey Blvd.
Spokane, WA 99204
(509) 623-4244 (Bob Smee)
Resource Exchange Network for
Eliminating Waste (RENEW)
Texas Water Commission
P.O. Box 13087
Austin, TX 78711-3087
(512) 463-7773 (Hope Castillo)
Fax: (512)463-8317
San Francisco Waste Exchange
2524 Benvenue #435
Berkeley, CA 94704
(415) 548-6659 (Portia Sinnot)
Southeast Waste Exchange (SEWE)
Urban Institute
Department of Civil Engineering
University of North Carolina
Charlotte, NC 28223
(704) 547-2307 (Maxie May)
Southern Waste Information Exchange (SWIX)
P.O. Box 960
Tallahassee, FL 32302
(800) 441-7949 (Eugene B. Jones)
(904) 644-5516
Fax: (904) 574-6704
30
-------
Wastelink Division of TENCON, Inc.
140 Wooster Pike
Milford, Ohio 45150
(513) 248-0012 (Mary E. Malotke)
Fax: (513) 248-1094
Canadian Waste Exchanges
Alberta Waste Materials Exchange
Alberta Research Council
P.O. Box 8330, Postal Station F
Edmonton, AB, Canada T6H 5X2
(403) 450-5408 (William C. Kay)
British Columbia Waste Exchange
2150 Maple Street
Vancouver, BC, Canada V6J 3T3
(604) 731-7222 (Lynn Deegan)
Canadian Chemical Exchange*
P.O. Box 1135
Ste-Adele, PQ, Canada JOR 1LO
(514) 229-6511 (Phillipe LaRoche)
Canadian Waste Materials Exchange (CWME)
ORTECH International
Sheridan Park Research Community
2395 Speakman Drive
Mississauga, ON, Canada L5K 1B3
(416) 822-4111 ext. 265 (Bob Laughlin)
Manitoba Waste Exchange
do Biomass Energy Institute, Inc.
1329 Niakwa Road
Winnipeg, MB, Canada R2J 3T4
(204) 257-3891 (James Ferguson)
Ontario Waste Exchange
ORTECH International
Sheridan Park Research Community
2395 Speakman Drive
Mississauga, ON, Canada L5K 1B3
(416) 822-4111 ext. 512 (Linda Varangu)
Peel Regional Waste Exchange
Regional Municipality of Peel
10 Peel Center Drive,
Brampton, ON, Canada L6T 4B9
(419) 791-9400 (Glen Milbury)
31
-------
Other Waste Exchanges
Union Chemical Laboratories
Industrial Technology Research Institute
321, Kuang Fu Road, Sec. 2
Hsinchu, Taiwan (Republic of China) 30042
(Ai-Lun Huang, Assoc. Researcher)
Leads on Possible Exchanges
Tennessee Waste Exchange
Ontario Waste Management Corporation
Waste Exchange
Defunct Exchanges
Alabama Waste Exchange
University of Alabama
P.O. Box 870203
Tuscaloosa, AL 35487-0203
(205) 348-5889 (William J. Herz)
Fax: (205) 348-8573
Western Waste Exchange
Arizona State University
Center for Environmental Studies
Krause Hall
Tempe, AZ 85287-1201
(602) 965-1858 (Dr. Nicholas Hild)
EPA Waste Minimization
Information Sources
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Report to
Congress: Waste Minimization, Vols. I and II. EPA/
530-SW-86-033 and -034. (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
EPA, 1986). t
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Waste
Minimization—Issues and Options, Vols. I and III. EPA/
530-SW-86-041 and -043. (Washington, D.C.: U.S.
EPA, 1986).f
tAvailable from the National Technical Information
Service as a five-volume set, NTIS No.
PB-87-114-328.
32
-------
EPA Pollution Prevention Policy (Federal Register,
January 26, 1989).
EPA Guidance to Hazardous Generators on the
Elements of a Waste Minimization Program (Federal
Register, June 12, 1989).
EPA Pollution Prevention Clearinghouse (call RCRA
Hotline-1-800-424-9346.
EPA Manual on Waste Minimization Opportunity
Assessments, Manual.
EPA Video—"Less is More: Pollution Prevention is
Good Business" (call RCRA Hotline—1-800-624-9346).
-------
0
U.S. EPA REGIONAL OFFICES
EPA REGION 1
John F. Kennedy Building
Boston, MA 02203
(617) 565-3715
EPA REGION 2
26 Federal Plaza
New York, NY 10278
(212) 264-2657
EPA REGION 3
841 Chestnut Street
Philadelphia, PA 19107
(215) 597-9800
EPA REGION 7
726 Minnesota Avenue
Kansas City, KS 66101
(913) 551-7000
EPA REGION 8
999 18th Street
Denver, CO 80202-2405
(303) 293-1603
EPA REGION 9
1235 Mission Street
San Francisco, CA 94103
(415) 556-6322
EPA REGION 4
345 Courtland Street, NE
Atlanta, GA 30365
(404) 347-4727
EPA REGION 5
230 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, IL 60604
(312) 353-2000
EPA REGION 6
1445 Ross Avenue
Dallas, Texas 75202
(214) 655-6444
EPA REGION 10
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
(206) 442-1200
U.S. EPA
Office of Solid Waste
401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460
RCRA/Superfund
Hotline
(800) 424-9346 or
TDD (800) 553-7672
(in Washington, DC,
382-3000 or TDD 475-9652)
34
-------
-------
------- |