&EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Pollution
Prevention and Toxics
7409
EPA/742/96/002
April 1996
Pollution Prevention
Success Stories
Transpor
nforcement
Governme
-------
-------
Table of Contents
Foreword
EPA Programs
• 33/50 Program: Reducing Risks Through Voluntary Actions
• Green Lights' Successes Shine Through
Agriculture
• "Bootstraps" Promotes Cattle Profitability With Environmental Protection
• Cheese Corporation Reduces Waste Generation 75 Percent; Dollar Savings
Began in Two Months
• Pollution Prevention Engineering Increases Fertilizer Production
Consumer Goods
• Dry Cleaning Firm Shows 80% Waste Reduction
• Dydee Diaper Service Achieves Pollution Prevention Through Customer
Outreach
Energy
• NICE3 Promotes Energy Efficiency and Clean Production Technologies
Enforcement
• EPA Encourages Pollution Prevention Through Compliance and Enforcement
Settlements
Federal Facility
• Kelly Air Force Base Soars With Pollution Prevention
• Navy Pollution Prevention Results in Quick Payback
Industry
• Furniture Manufacturer Assembles More With Lower Emissions
• Newspaper Recycles Waste Ink
• Mine Finds Gold in Pollution Prevention Measures
• Motorola Goes Solder-less
• Parker Pen Reduces Hazardous Waste
-------
Local Government
• Los Angeles Takes Innovative Pollution Prevention Approaches
• School District Gets A Lesson in Pollution Prevention
• Tastes Better - Costs Less
POTWs
» Septic Facility Reduces Odors While Increasing Capacity
State Government
• Connecticut Initiative Encourages Pollution Prevention
• Ohio Promotes Pollution Prevention Goals
• Techniques and Technologies for Toxic Use Reduction
Transportation
• Biodiesel: "Not Blowing Smoke"
• Cleaner Bus Operations and Maintenance
• Pollution Prevention Takes Off
Appendix A
-------
FOREWORD
POLLUTION PREVENTION—
THE FUTURE LOOK OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
Since the environmental movement began growing in the 1960s, people have been looking for the
best and most cost effective methods to prevent pollutants from entering the environment. For over 20
years, the generally accepted approach was through regulation and then control of waste materials
through chemical, physical, mechanical, or even electrical treatment and collection (for disposal), trans-
formation, and/or destruction of pollutants after they were generated. In the 1990s, there is a growing
emphasis on "pollution prevention," looking at ways to prevent the generation of the waste itself. This
approach reduces the need to control the wastes, because they are not produced to begin with.
Pollution prevention takes many forms. It involves simple efforts, such as buying the correct amount
of raw material so that no excess material needs to be discarded (for example, paints that have a speci-
fied shelf life), or producing less wastewater by better controlling the amount of water used in cleaning
or manufacturing. Or, it may mean substituting nontoxic chemicals for the hazardous or toxic materi-
als currently used in the process. It may even involve re-engineering and redesigning a manufacturing
line to take advantage of newer, cleaner process equipment.
Pollution prevention applies well beyond the manufacturing sector. Creative ways to minimize
waste generation abound in a variety of economic sectors and institutional settings. Many organiza-
tions, institutions, and industry sectors, in addition to manufacturers, can institute pollution prevention
ideas and reduce or even eliminate the generation of waste materials.
It is from the perspective that more creative approaches to pollution prevention should be shared and
others developed that the idea for this document was born. Considerable progress and success have
been made in attaining pollution prevention in various sectors of the economy. It is the purpose of this
document to provide pollution prevention success story examples that demonstrate cost-effective, envi-
ronmentally preferable solutions to waste problems. Generally, the success stories illustrate that ap-
proaches based on reduction at the source can be implemented successfully by nearly everyone.
In selecting success stories for inclusion in this presentation, the Environmental Protection Agency
used several criteria. First, the actions taken involve true prevention of pollution (source reduction).
Second, the solutions are relatively simple and yield benefits exceeding the investment cost. Third, the
actions are instructive to a relatively large audience, demonstrating a new application, innovative ap-
proach, or creative solution to a pollution problem. In several cases, it is the process, not the prevention
action itself, that is worth noting.
This document highlights 26 success stories, spread over a wide spectrum. The studies include
pollution prevention on farms, in schools, and within government organizations, as well as in the more
traditional areas of manufacturing and operations.
-------
-------
Pollution Prevention
Success Stories -
EPA Programs
33/50 Program: Reducing Risks
Through Voluntary Actions
The 33/50 Program is a voluntary pollution
prevention initiative of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and derives its name
from its overall goals. An interim goal was 33
percent reduction in 1992, and an ultimate goal
is of 50 percent reduction by 1995 in releases
and transfers to off site waste management facili-
ties of 17 high-priority toxic chemicals. (See
Table 1 on the next page.) The 1988 Toxics Re-
lease Inventory (TRI) reporting is used as a
baseline. During 1988, 1.49-billion pounds of
the targeted chemicals were either released to the
environment onsite or transferred to offsite waste
management facilities. The aim of the 33/50 Pro-
gram is to reduce this amount by at least 50 per-
cent (i.e., 744-million pounds) by 1995. The in-
terim reduction target was more than 491-mil-
lion pounds by 1992.
The program encourages pollution prevention
as the best means of achieving reductions in toxic
chemical emissions, and seeks to instill a pollu-
tion prevention ethic at the highest echelons of
American business by directing program com-
munications to the Chief Executive Officers
(CEOs) of corporations that own manufacturing
installations throughout the United States.
Implementing 33/50
In 1990, the EPA directed initial communica-
tions about the 33/50 Program to the CEOs of
the parent companies of the more than 16,000
industrial facilities that had reported TRI emis-
sions for the Program's 17 tar-
get chemicals. At the close of
the Program's fourth year in
February 1995, nearly 8,000
companies had been contacted
by EPA to participate in the pro-
gram. Of these, 1,272 companies had enrolled,
pledging to reduce voluntarily more than 368-
million pounds of pollution.
The 'Top 600" companies with the greatest
amounts of releases and transfers were the first
to be contacted and have been the focus of greater
outreach followup from the Program's headquar-
ters and regional office staffs. More than 60
percent of the larger companies have chosen to
participate in the Program, while less than 13
percent of 7,500 smaller companies contacted
by EPA since 1991 have chosen to enroll in the
Program.
More than 1,000 participating companies have
provided release/transfer reduction targets for the
33/50 Program chemicals totalling 368-million
pounds. For these companies, whose base year
amounts accounted for 53 percent of the releases
and transfers reported by all Program partici-
pants, this reduction commitment represents
slightly less than 50 percent per company.
Operating Results
Releases and transfers of 33/50 Program
chemicals were reduced significantly between
1992 and 1993, bringing total reductions just shy
&EPA
-------
33/50 Program: Reducing Risks
Through Voluntary Actions
Table 1.
17 Priority Chemicals Targeted by
the 33/50 Program
Benzene
Cadmium & Compounds
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chloroform
Chromium & Compounds
Cyanides
Dichloromethane
Lead & Compounds
Mercury & Compounds
Methyl Ethyl Ketone
Methyl Isoburyl Ketone
Nickel & Compounds
Tetrachloroefhylene
Toluene
Trichloroethane
Trichloroethylene
Xylenes
of the program's ultimate reduction goal of 50
percent by 1995.
• Releases and transfers of the 33/50 Program
chemicals were reduced by 100-million pounds
(11 percent) between 1992 and 1993, bring-
ing total reductions since 1988 to 46 percent
(685-million pounds), just shy of the Program's
1995 50 percent reduction goal.
• Facilities are projecting continual reductions
in their release and transfers of 33/50 Program
chemicals in 1994 arid 1995, suggesting that
the Program's ultimate reduction goal of 744-
million pounds may be achieved a year ahead
of schedule.
• Between 1992 and 1993, facilities owned by
Program participants reduced releases and
transfers of the 17 Program chemicals by 20
percent. The rate of reduction achieved by fa-
cilities owned by non-participating companies.
was just 0.6 percent.
• Since 1988, facilitiesjowned by participating
companies have more than halved their releases
and transfers of the 33/50 Program chemicals,
achieving a 57 percent reduction.
• Participating companies accounted for 98 per-
. cent of the reduction in, 33/50 Program chemi-
cal releases and transfers in the last year.
vvEPA
-------
33/50 Program: Reducing Risks
Through Voluntary Actions
As evidenced in both the TRI reporting data,
actual reductions being achieved by companies
in the Program's 17 target chemicals are exceed-
ing significantly the EPA's conservative inter-
pretation of companies' reduction pledges. The
685-million pounds of 33/50 Program chemicals
releases and transfers reduced between 1988 and
1993 are nearly twice the 368-million pounds
pledged by participating companies to be reduced
by 1995.
Figure 1
1750
1500
1992 Goal:
997-million
pounds
1995 Goal:
744-miliion
pounds
1988 1989 1990 1991
1992
1993
vxEPA
-------
33/50 Program: Reducing Risks
Through Voluntary Actions
Contact For Further
Information
Mail Code 7408
Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics
U.S. EPA
401 M Street, SW
Washington, D.C. 20460
33/50 Program Director
Telephone: (202) 260-6907
And, by:
(1) Contacting the 33/50 Program
Coordinators in EPA Regional Offices, or
(2) Calling EPA's TSCA Assistance
Hotline at (202) 554-1404
&EPA
-------
Pollution Prevention
Success Stories -
EPA Programs
Green Lights' Successes Shine Through
About 75 percent of the electricity produced
in the United States involve the burning of fossil
fuels such as coal, oil, or natural gas. Fossil fuel
combustion results in the emission of air
pollutants such as carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide,
and nitrogen oxides into the Earth's atmosphere.
In addition, the demand for electricity continues
to grow. Through the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency's Green Lights Program,
companies throughout the United States are
trying to reduce electricity demand and the
associated pollution as much as possible.
Lighting accounts for 20-25 percent of all
electricity consumed in the United States.
Nonresidential lighting (i.e., for industry, stores,
offices, and warehouses) represents 80-90 percent
of total lighting electricity use. The Green Lights
Program seeks to cut the Nation's demand for
electricity by more than 10 percent by introducing
energy-efficient lighting where it is practical and
cost-effective.
Approach Selected
Through the use of various media, EPA has
introduced the concept of using low life-cycle
cost lighting systems, rather than the lowest first
cost lighting systems. Inter-
ested organizations join the
program by signing the
Green Lights Memoran-
dum of Understanding,
made available through
their local EPA representa-
tive. The memorandum
represents a commitment to put energy-efficient
lighting as one of the company's priorities.
Participants in the Green Lights Program fall
into one of three categories: Green Lights
Partners, Green Lights Allies, and Green Lights
Endorsers. Green Lights Partners are
corporations and organizations that team with
EPA to upgrade their lighting and use less
electricity. Green Lights Allies are lighting
manufacturers and electric utilities that assist
EPA in surveying domestic facilities and
providing guidance as to the types of lighting
upgrades that would be the most beneficial for a
given facility. Allies also work with EPA to
encourage the development of new lighting
technologies. Green Lights Endorsers assist EPA
in promoting the benefits of energy-efficient
lighting and endorsing the Green Lights Program.
As of September 1993, there were 572 Green
Lights Partners, 455 Green Lights Allies, and 122
Green Lights Endorsers. (See Figure 1.)
Approach Implemented
Pollution prevention implementation activities
include: establishing project leadership;
communicating and coordinating pollution
prevention activities within a Green Lights team;
identifying financing needs and resources;
drawing up a 5-year action plan;'and determining
the best approach to specifying lighting upgrades.
Typically, actions and approaches include
reducing wattage per square foot, changing from
incandescent to fluorescent bulbs, changing
ballast materials, using sodium and mercury-
vapor lamps, and installing motion detectors to
detect when an area is occupied. Table 1 provides
&EPA
-------
Green Lights' Successes Shine Through
Figure 1. Green Lights Participants
a representative list of organizations participating
in the Green Lights Program and steps they have
taken to reduce the demand for electricity from
lighting equipment.
Operating Results
As of March 1993, over 200 participants hi
the Green Lights Program had reported
significant progress on lighting upgrades. Table
2 shows the interim pollution reduction
achievements of the representative companies
listed in Table 1. On the average, companies were
able (through decreases in electricity demand)
to reduce CO2 emissions by 826 metric tons (kkg)
per year, their SO2 emissions by 6.5 kkg per year;
and NOx emissions by 2.7 kkg per year. This is
equivalent to not burning over 2,100 barrels of
oil per year. As of December 1993, participants
in the Green Lights Program had reduced air
pollution by 200,000 kkg of CO , 1,500 kkg of
SO2, and 700 kkg of NOx.
It has been estimated that the Green Lights
Program will reduce air pollutants and carbon
dioxide emissions in the United States to 1990
levels by the year 2000. Green Lights
participants are already saving over 371-million
kilowatt-hours annually. This is enough
electricity to run 42,000 American household for
a full year.
Cost, Savings, and Tradeoffs
The cost outlay and savings for the
representative group of companies participating
in the Green Lights Program can be seen in Table
2. The average cost of the Green Lights Program
per company was $245,550, and the average
x>EPA
-------
Green Lights' Successes Shine Through
Table 1. Organizational Participation
Company
Equipment Before
Lighting Upgrade
Equipment After
Lighting Upgrade
Square
Footage
American Express i 31,000 T-12 lamps ! 31,000 T-8 lamps j 1.500,000
Shearson Lehman i 17,000 magnetic ballasts i 17,000 electronic ballasts j
Brothers I 158 incandescent lamps i 158 compact fluorescents j
manual switches I 239 occupancy sensors j
Browning Ferris i 10,000 T-12 lamps ! 6,700 T-8 lamps 545,000
Industries i 3,300 magnetic ballasts i 3,300 electronic ballasts
| 350 incandescent lamps | 350 compact fluorescents
Dresser Rand • I 12,200 T-12 lamps I 6,600 T-8 lamps 1,000,000
3,300 magnetic ballasts j 1,850 electronic ballasts
i reflectors
*•••:
Elkhard General 7-,OOOT-12lamps ! 3,200 T-8 lamps 430,000
Hospital 2,700 magnetic ballasts i 1,600 electronic ballasts
97 manual switches i 82 occupancy sensors
: 15 timed switches
The Gillette Co. 4,300 T-12 lamps I 496 metal halide lamps 150,000
' 10 manual switches j 10 daylight switches
Hasbro 260 metal halide lamps I 260 high-pressure 340,000
i sodium lamps
HoechstCelanese 650 Tr120 VHO lamps I 650 T-12 VHO lamps 220,000
450 T-12 lamps i 450 T-8 lamps
1,100 magnetic ballasts i 1,100 electronic ballasts
31 incandescent spotlights I 31 compact fluorescents
Mobil Corporate 22,000 T-12 lamps I 22,000 T-8 lamps 2,400,000
HQs 11,000 magnetic ballasts i 11,000 electronic ballasts
496 incandescent ! 408 halogen lamps
downlights i 78 compact fluorescents
350 incandescent exit signs j 350 fluorescents exit signs
State of Maryland 10,600 T-12 lamps j 5,600 T-8 lamps 180,000
DepL of Education 5,300 magnetic ballasts i 2,800 electronic ballasts
HQs 68 incandescent exit signs i 68 fluorescents exit signs
28 incandescent lamps j 28 compact fluorescents
Union Camp 7,000 T-12 lamps ! 3,600 T-12 lamps 150,000
' 3,500 magnetic ballasts I 1,500 electronic tandem
1,000incandescents i wired electronic ballasts
i reflectors and lenses
! 1,000 compact fluorescents
m _ _ i...... ...- •"-- —
Westin Hotels 1,600 incandescent lamps | 1,600 compact fluorescents 1,500,000
and Resorts
_ __
-------
Green Lights' Successes Shine Through
annual savings was $113,431 per company.
Payback periods ranged from less than 1 year to
over 4 years. The Green Lights Program provides
various financial incentives to participants in the
form of rebates and grants, and many
organizations are able to recoup their investment
within 1 year.
Environmental Benefits
Not only has the Green Lights Program
reduced pollution and increased profitability, the
Program has also heightened public awareness
about the ties between energy conservation and
pollution prevention. The Green Lights Program
is now being introduced to residential users as
well as corporate organizations. Electric utilities,
in cooperation with EPA, are promoting the
benefits of energy-efficient lighting to their
customers.
Momentum from the Green Lights Program
has also spawned a new family of programs
designed to reduce energy consumption. These
include the:
• Energy Star Buildings program, designed to
target energy consuming heating and air-
conditioning systems;
• Energy Star Computer program, whose goal
is to increase market penetration of new,
energy-efficient computers; and
• "Golden Carrot"TM Super-Efficient
Refrigerator program, which challenges
refrigerator manufacturers to produce the most
efficient, chlorofluorocarbon (CFC)-free
refrigerators quickly and cheap.
Contact For Further
Information
Maria Tikoff, Director of Marketing, U.S. EPA
6202J, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC
20460. Telephone: (202) 775-6650
Table 2. Pollution Prevented and Cost Analysis
American Express
$710,000
$210,000
$280,000
$107,000
Browning Ferns industries
1,034,280
1,201,008
$230^000
$85,446
$78,800
$102,150
Elkhart General Hospital
5,107,480
4,018,988
The Gillette Co.
$186,000
$146,000
Hoecnst Celanese
Mobil
$77,472
$125,000
State of Maryland
$280,000
$75,915
245,550
$100,000
$85,200
113,431
Westin Hotels and Resorts
Average
867,792
1,836,111
1,446,320
2,736,665
&EPA
-------
Pollution Prevention
Success Stories -
Agriculture
"Bootstraps" Promotes Cattle
Profitability With Environmental
Protection
In the cattle raising industry, "pollution" can
be any activity that destroys the ecosystem, hin-
ders a ranch's ability to support cattle, or causes
the ranch to operate inefficiently. On a cattle
ranch, the chief resources are grass and water.
Therefore, activities that maintain the efficiency
of a ranch by preventing pollution or degrada-
tion of land and water resources are pollution pre-
vention activities. These activities can include
vegetation growth, erosion control, and surface
water management
The Bootstraps "Ranching for the 90s" man-
agement program successfully de-
creased pollution on over 100,000
acres of land in Todd and Mellette
Counties in south central South Da-
kota, Also, over 250,000 acres of land
have been positively affected by imple-
menting mangement practices that use
pollution prevention techniques. The
loss of topsoil, onsite and offsite sedi-
ment deposits, and the use of pesticides and fer-
tilizers have decreased on many ranches that have
incorporated environmentally friendly resource
management strategies.
The Problem
Allowing cattle to graze too long in one por-
tion of a field may damage the ability of the plants
in that field to recover properly, leading to inad-
equate vegetation cover later in the season which
can eventually increase runoff and erosion.
Sometimes family-run
ranches face financial diffi-
culties because of improper
field maintenance and use of
vegetation (e.g., grass).
Approach Selected
"Bootstraps" is a program developed by the
Todd and Mellette Conservation Districts in
South Dakota to help farmers and ranchers in-
crease, among other things, the financial stabil-
ity of their operations. The program's goal is to
teach people "to wisely use natural resources to
stabilize agriculture, the economy and the com-
munity." The program uses a Holistic (interde-
pendent) Resource Management (HRM) ap-
proach to ranching and "capitalizes on harvest-
ing grass resources without hurting the range."
"Bootstraps" began with a series of meetings
and studies to identify concepts, consider sug-
gestions, and determine stock rates that would
not degrade the natural resources. Recommen-
dations on watering and fencing techniques were
also made. Some of the program factors recog-
nized as essential to financial success included:
addressing all resources; family teamwork; good
recordkeeping on all aspects; long-range plan-
ning; knowledge of marketing options; and land
management practices that improve or maintain
soil and water quality.
&EPA
-------
"Bootstraps" Promotes Cattle
Profitability With Environmental
Approach Implemented
The Bootstraps program began in 1991 in-
cluded 26 families and 23 ranches. The second
group of participants included 30 families and
ranches. Expansion of the original program in-
cluded ranch families who live on or near the
Ogalala Aquifer, Little White River, Rock Creek,
Keyapaha River, and several large dams. The pol-
lution prevention management practices imple-
mented by ranchers participating Bootstraps di-
rectly benefited those water sources. Bi-weekly
classes, resource inventories, and one-on-one
technical assistance enhanced life-long learning
skills. Awareness of all environmental concerns
and methods of prevention were accentuated
throughout the program.
Planning is crucial to the success of a ranch. A
ranch plan includes: short- and long-term goals,
and activities necessary to attain those goals; in-
ventories, including land, livestock, machinery,
etc.; natural resource information, such as climatic
condition patterns, pasture records, and water
quality inventory checklist; livestock production
records, crop production records, and soil loss and
erosion control plans; financial records for all en-
terprises of ranch operation; and best management
practices to protect the environment while increas-
ing ranch production. A ranch plan has been com-
pleted by 29 .percent of the local Bootstraps par-
ticipants.
The major "cost" of implementing an HRM ap-
proach at a ranch is time. The 2-year Bootstraps
program was successful in creating more interest
in grass replenishment and its response to vari-
ous treatments. In this regard, staff members and
ranchers installed a transect at each ranch. The
transect allows for uniform clipping and weigh-
ing of grass production. The clipping and weigh-
ing provide an ongoing charting of production and
analysis of planned grazing systems outcomes.
By tracking all aspects of ranch management (in-
ventory, seeding requirements, grass production,
etc.), the rancher can measure the success of
implementing best management practices. Suc-
cess is generally based on how many cattle the
rancher can produce per acre of land, and the
weight of cattle sold.
Results
Of the participants involved in the Bootstraps
Program, 80 percent have implemented one or
more best management practices; 60 percent have
implemented several. The local Bootstraps par-
ticipants instituted: cross fencing (a procedure
that allows for uniform distribution of grazing),
native grass seeding, changing calving dates for
better utilization of pastures, improved grazing
systems, weighing cattle to access pounds per
acre, purchasing hay instead of cutting hayland,
reducing cattle numbers, and increasing studies
of grasses and the benefits of grasses. These prac-
tices generally yielded less runoff and erosion,
which in turn, decreased nonpoint source pollu-
tion.
Future ranch- plans include 39 percent of the
Bootstraps participants developing improved
grazing systems to reduce runoff and gully ero-
sion; 28 percent changing cattle numbers to match
ranch potential; 11 percent installing new wells
to evenly distribute watering locations, thereby,
decreasing over grazing and gully erosion; and
44 percent adding more cross fencing to ensure
proper use of available grass. Followup services
will continue to be provided to the ranchers in
Todd and Mellette County by local and State agen-
cies.
Cost, Savings, and Tradeoffs
The Bootstraps program was funded by a 2-year,
$50,000 EPA and the South Dakota Department
of Environment and Natural Resources grant,
starting in 1992. In addition, money from the Con-
servation Commission and other sources funded
a significant portion of the project.
vvEPA
-------
"Bootstraps" Promotes Cattle
Profitability With Environmental
Protection
In regard to the success of the program on a
ranch-specific basis, at least 75 farms and
ranches in South Dakota now know that using
practices that maintain or improve the environ-
mental health of their range and crop lands are
essential to sustain a profitable operation. One
ranch family that turned to HRM went from a
situation of having unmanageable debt and fac-
ing the possibility of losing their ranch, to a prof-
itable operation with the projection of paying
off their land debt seven years ahead of sched-
ule. Another participant discovered that their
herd size could be increased by 20 percent with-
out affecting the surrounding ecosystem.
Contact For Further Information
U.S. Department of Agriculture
Natural Resources Conservation Service
White River, SD 57579-0709
Telephone: (605) 259-3252
Sources
"Water and Environment Today." Summer 1994,
Issue. Volume 8, Number 2: 6-7.
"Bootstraps; Ranching For The 90's; Final Re-
port (with attachments)." Todd County Conser-
vation District, undated.
dEPA
-------
Pollution Prevention
Success Stories -
Agriculture
Cheese Corporation Reduces
Waste Generation 75 Percent; Dollar
Savings Began in Two Months
Cheese production is a biochemical process
in which milk is converted to a
solid intermediate product
known as curd. After the liquid
by-product, whey, is drained
from the curd, salt is added to re-
move additional whey. Because
of its saltiness, this salt whey
cannot be used as a food grade
additive and is treated as a waste.
Frigo Cheese Corporation manufactured a
wide variety of cheese at its Morgan, Wiscon-
sin, plant. Approximately 2,000 gallons per day
of salt whey were generated at the facility.
For some time, Frigo Cheese spread the salt
whey on nearby agricultural land. This was a
common practice for plants that could not dis-
charge their high strength wastewater to a pub-
licly-owned treatment works (POTW). This
method of waste disposal, however, increased
the level of chlorides in the soil and could result
in crop damage if the salt whey was applied in-
correctly. In addition, the Wisconsin Department
of Natural Resources (DNR) had recently placed
limitations on chlorine land loadings.
Approach Selected
Frigo Cheese Corporation investigated better
methods of salt whey disposal to reduce the
amount of chlorine in its discharge. Some alter-
natives that were available included process
modifications, offsite disposal of the salt whey,
and onsite treatment (e.g., reverse osmosis) of
the salt whey with subsequent discharge to a
POTW. After considering its options, Frigo
Cheese decided to modify the processes involved
to recover salt from the salt whey and reuse it in
production.
P2 Approach Implemented
The salt recovery process involved modify-
ing an evaporator previously used for recover-
ing edible whey. A stainless steel process pipe-
line was installed from the salting tanks to the
evaporator.
The evaporation recovery process signifi-
cantly reduced the salt whey waste by separat-
ing the pumpable salt whey from water. The
salt whey was then recycled in the production
process (i.e., a "partially" closed-loop system),
while the recovered water was used for cleaning
and other purposes that do not require potable
water.
Operating Results
As a result of the "partially" closed-loop re-
cycling process, Frigo Cheese reduced its waste
generation by 75 percent to 500 gallons of salt
whey per day. Fresh salt usage was cut in half,
from 1,000 to 500 pounds per day. Water con-
sumption also was reduced.
v>EPA
-------
Cheese Corporation Reduces
Waste Generation 75 Percent; Dollar
Savings Began in Two Months
Cost, Savings, and Tradeoffs
The capital costs for the purchase
and installation of additional stain-
less steel piping was approximately
$2,000. The operating and mainte-
nance cost for the recovery process
was $0.03-per-pound of salt recov-
ered. The payback period was approximately 2
months, based upon the capital cost and an an-
nual salt purchasing savings of $12,500.
Other Benefits
Initially, concern existed that the recovered salt
would adversely affect the flavor and shelf life
of the cheese. However, almost the opposite has
occurred; the recovered salt whey enhanced the
flavor of the cheese and did not affect the cheese
composition shelf life.
The United States Department of Agriculture
(USDA) prohibited Frigo Cheese from reusing
any salt whey that has contacted a wooden con-
tainer due to sanitation concerns. The company
hoped to eventually replacing wooden contain-
ers with plastic ones, thus allowing the recovery
of all the salt whey.
The salt whey that cannot be reused is still
spread over agricultural areas. However, the
quantity of waste, along with the level of chlo-
rides in the soil and the risk of crop damage, hve
been greatly reduced.
Contact For Further
information
Greg Sevener, District Office, Wisconsin DNR
Telephone: (715) 732-5525
Source
Pollution Prevention Case Study: Frigo Cheese,
Wisconsin DNR.
Basic Cheese Manufacturing Process
Salt
Wh«y
Curt
Formation
Cooling Vat
ProcM* Watar
Salt Wh«y Recycle
&EPA
-------
Pollution Prevention
Success Stories -
Agriculture
Pollution Prevention Engineering
Increases Fertilizer Production
Here's how one company lowered its
fuel and other costs by using a Pollution
Prevention Engineering Approach. Pro-
ducing ammonia for fertilizer utilizes
water for steam generation and natural
gas as fuel. Burning of natural gas pro-
duces carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide,
and oxides of nitrogen as air pollutants.
These "greenhouse gases" are released
to the atmosphere. Process condensate
is generated as a wastewater stream. The waste-
water is managed by a holding pond and injec-
tion wells.
Approach Selected
Cominco America Incorporated retained the
engineering services of M.W. Kellogg Company
to provide a re-engineered design of its ammo-
nia plant that would lower fuel and make-up
water usage. Such re-engineering aimed at re-
ducing fuel and water requirements would re-
duce the wastewater and air emissions from am-
monia production.
Re-engineering to reduce waste generation is
the modification of an existing process to take
advantage of pollution prevention without sacri-
ficing production. The re-engineering at
Cominco America Incorporated was an innova-
tive application of existing technologies.
Approach Implemented
Fuel consumption per ton of ammonia pro-
duced was reduced by replacing
existing plant parts with newer
material that improved the heat
transfer. The original convec-
tion section and heating coil
modules were replaced with
more efficient units that resulted
in reduced heat and improved heat transfer. This
reduced nitrogen oxide emissions and lowered
fuel consumption. The original ammonia con-
verter reactor was modified, and a new, more
efficient equipment was installed to lower steam
consumption. The new designs reduced fuel
consumption and raised the ammonia production
rate. Finally, additional new equipment was in-
stalled as part of the new convection section.
Wastewater is now recovered for conversion to
steam, reducing make-up water and fuel con-
sumption.
Operating Results
The pollution prevention measures took by
Cominco significantly reduced greenhouse and
acid gas emissions and wastewater generation.
Fuel consumption was lowered by 22 percent,
and emission rates of oxides of nitrogen were
reduced by 35 percent. Fresh make-up water
consumption was reduced with 95 percent recov-
ery of the process condensate.
Overall, the re-engineering resulted in im-
provements in production efficiency and reduced
energy consumption, disposal costs, and environ-
mental pollution.
&EPA
-------
Pollution Prevention Engineering
Increases Fertilizer Production
Cost, Savings, and Tradeoffs
Actual and estimated cost savings
for the pollution prevention re-engi-
neering measures included:
Reductions in annual natural gas
usage equivalent to 1-billion cubic
feet per year, for a savings of over $1.7 mil-
lion;
An average reduction of water for steam pro-
duction of over 110-million gallons per year,
saving $65,000; and
Other savings realized through reduced disposal
costs of wastewater into injection wells.
The capital costs for the project were approxi-
mately $16 million. The plant anticipates
payback in approximately 6 years from the plant
restart date.
Other Benefits
Re-engineering has produced greater plant re-
liability. Ammonia production has been much
higher on an annual basis than any time in the
plant's history.
Contact For Further
Information
Larry E. Wood, (806) 274-5204
Ammonia Production
Ammonia
C02. H2
CO.,
N,
Scrubbing
Liquid
(Aqueous or
Organic)
&EPA
-------
Pollution Prevention
Success Stories -
Consumer Goods
Dry Cleaning Firm Shows 80%
Waste Reduction
The Problem
Perchloroethylene (PERC) is used as a clean-
ing solvent in the dry cleaning industry. In the
1980s, PERC was considered to be a potential
cancer-causing agent. (The carcinogenic effects
of PERC are currently being studied). The dry
cleaning industry made operational changes to
reduce environmental discharges and employee
exposures. Then the Clean Air Act Amendments
of 1990 required the industry to develop pollu-
tion prevention plans to reduce emissions by
1995, to strictly monitor current consumption,
and to report PERC emissions to the air and
transfers to hazardous waste landfills (adsorbed
on filters from dry cleaning machines).
Approach Selected
Rather than just plan for future pollution pre-
vention, Leff-Marvins Cleaners took a proactive
approach and looked to immediately replace all
its old dry cleaning machines with new equip-
ment that could condense, distill, filter, and re-
cycle the PERC within a self-contained unit. By
reducing its emissions earlier than required,
Leff-Marvins Cleaners realized that it would
have to deal with less stringent control require-
ments and less recordkeeping than would be
imposed in 1995.
Approach Implemented
Leff-Marvins Cleaners
spoke with a number of
equipment vendors to find
machines that could provide
closed-loop handling of
PERC. They sought to re-
place a transfer dry cleaning
unit and two reclaimer units that handled 150
pounds of dry cleaning. The units had signifi-
cant PERC fugitive emissions and generated two
disposable filters that were treated as hazardous
wastes because of the nearly 200 gallons (per
month) of trapped PERC.
The old equipment was replaced with two new
dry cleaning units that had a combined capacity
of 110 pounds of dry cleaning. The new units
used a cold water, closed loop, chiller process to
capture and recycle the PERC. Nylon, reusable
filters for capturing lint replaced the disposable
hazardous waste filters. The permanent filters
were stripped of lint by distillation through the
system, reducing the hazardous wastestream to
35 gallons per month of still bottoms. Four dye-
clarifying, activated carbon filters are replaced
annually and disposed as hazardous waste.
Operating Results
Since installation of the new equipment,
Leff-Marvins' purchases of PERC have dropped
from 200 gallons per month to less than 40 gal-
&EPA
-------
Dry Cleaning Firm Shows 80%
Waste Reduction
Ions per month, a reduction of 80 percent. An-
nual hazardous waste disposal volumes have
dropped from 1,600 gallons of spent PERC and
lint to 420 gallons of still residues (also an 80
percent decrease) plus the number of hazardous
waste filters requiring disposal was reduced to
four from 24 per year.
Cost, Savings, and Tradeoffs
The changeover to new equipment
produced a net annual savings of about
$ 17,000. The environmental and haz-
ardous material savings were actually
$2,000 per month, but this was offset
by an increase in the electric power
bill of $500. The additional power requirements
reflected electrical needs for condensation/distil-
lation and an increase in business. Leff-Marvins
Cleaners estimated that payback of the $81,400
in new equipment would be achieved in 4 years
through reduced PERC purchases, waste disposal
savings, and fewer returns of clothing-for reclean-
ing, because the new equipment proved to clean
better than the old dry cleaning machines. In ad-
dition, the new equipment had lower maintenance
costs.
Environmental Benefits
Leff-Marvins Cleaners achieved other benefits
in addition to decreasing PERC emissions well
before the mandated deadline and reducing waste
disposal by 80 percent. The new equipment
brought an increase in business, a reduction in
clothing returns for recleaning, and lower down-
time with less maintenance. Also, employees ex-
pressed a greater satisfaction with their working
environment.
Contact For Further
Information
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental
Resources, P.O. Box 8472, Harrisburg, PA
17105-8472. Telephone: (717) 787-7382
Pollution Prevention
Advantages and Disadvantages
Pollution Prevention
k Advantages, ,
Pollution Prevention/
Disadvantages
4 Deduced PERC emissions
Reduced waste disposal volumes
More efficient cleaning '
Less downtime
."less hazardous material purchases/
Less stringent air control requirements
Less recordkeeping ,\,^
Increase in business
roved worker satisfaction ™7
Increased electric bills
:C<3pltal cost of new equipment-^>
oEPA
-------
Pollution Prevention
Success Stories -
Consumer Goods
Dydee Diaper Service Achieves
Pollution Prevention Through
Customer Outreach
The Problem
After 59 years in business,
the Dydee Diaper Service
Co. is New England's largest
diaper service. The 85-
employee Dorchester-based
firm washes about 200,000
pounds of linen and diapers per week in its 18-
chamber, continuous batch tunnel washer, which
consumes only a fourth to a fifth of the water
used by conventional washers. This type of
system, however, tends to concentrate wastewater
contaminants, leading to potential compliance
difficulties. For Dydee, the problem contaminant
was zinc. In January 1992, the Massachusetts
Water Resources Authority (MWRA) cited
Dydee for violating zinc discharge limits,
resulting in adverse publicity and loss of
customers.
Approach Selected
Dydee was aware in 1991 that its zinc discharges
were likely to lead to compliance
problems, but the source of the
problem remained a mystery
because the company does not
use zinc. After extensive tests
on its cleaning chemicals and
water supply, Dydee determined
the zinc had to be entering
the facility on the diapers
themselves, primarily in the form of zinc oxide,
an ointment used to treat diaper rash.
Officials considered three alternatives to
address the zinc problem. The first alternative
was to install a conventional pretreatment system.
This option was expensive and required a
licensed operator. The second altenative was to
invest in a closed-loop, ozone-activated
laundering system. Research indicated that this
type of system was still developmental and might
not be available commercially for another 5 to
10 years. The third alternative was to avoid use
of zinc oxide by changing the habits of the
customers through a customer education
program.
Approach Implemented
Although not a technological "fix" like the
pretreatment or the ozone washing system,
Dydee's customer education program had its own
set of challenges. The fundamental question
facing Dydee was, "After being informed of the
problem, would customers be willing to change
their habits and make the program work?"
In the spring of 1992, Dydee sent a letter to its
customers explaining the problem and asking that
they use zinc-free ointments. In the letter, Dydee
offered to (1) purchase zinc oxide-based ointment
from its customers for $1 per container, and (2)
sell zinc-free products at approximately half of
their retail cost All customers were sent multiple
samples of the zinc-free products.
Operating Results
Dydee has received positive feedback since
&EPA
-------
Dydee Diaper Service Achieves Polluction
Prevention Through Customer Outreach
the very beginning of the "no zinc" campaign.
Dydee has bought back more than 900 containers
of zinc oxide-based ointments, sold more than
2,000 containers of zinc-free creams and
ointments, and distributed about 20,000 sample-
sized containers of these same products.
More importantly, zinc discharges have been
significantly reduced. Prior to the education
campaign in March 1992, zinc concentrations in
the wastewater discharges ranged from 2 to 4.5
parts per million (ppm) versus the zinc discharge
limit of 1 ppm in the permit. Since July 1992,
zinc discharges have not reached the discharge
limit of 1 ppm, except on very rare occasions.
(See Figure below.) In fact, there have been no
violations of the zinc discharge limit in the past 2
years.
Cost, Savings, and Tradeoffs
Capital costs for the conventional
pretreatment system considered as
alternative 1 ranged from $150,000 to
$200,000, with an annual operating cost
of $25,000 to $35,000. Increased salary
and/or training fees would also have
been necessary to ensure a certified operator was
available to manage the system.
Dydee spent approximately $1,000 buying old
tubes of zinc-oxide based ointments from
customers, and about $7,000 more giving out free
samples of zinc-free ointments and creams.
Dydee continues to sell larger containers of the
zinc-free creams at a small loss.
The Dydee Diaper Service, Co. estimates the
company has saved $250,000 in correcting its zinc
problem.
Environmental Benefits
In addition to the cost savings achieved, Dydee
has been able to help protect the environment and
satisfy those customers who had chosen cloth
diapers as a way to save the environment.
In fact, Dydee recognized that many of its
customers use the linen diaper service because
they believe it is more environmentally friendly
than throw-away diapers. The no-zinc campaign
was viewed as consistent with its customers'
values. Presently, Dydee continues to remind
customers of its "no zinc" campaign in its
monthly newsletter, "Bottoms Up."
Contact For Further Information
Office of Techical Assistance, Executive Office
of Environmental Affairs, Suite 2109, 100
Cambridge Street, Boston, MA 02202
Telephone: (617) 727-3827
Comparison of Zinc Concentrations in Dydee's Wastewater
5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
Before (March to Dec., 1991)
5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
After (May to July, 1992)
&EPA
-------
Pollution Prevention
Success Stories -
Energy
NICE3 Promotes Energy Efficiency
and Clean Production Technologies
The U.S. Department of En-
ergy (DOE) and the U.S. Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency
(EPA) have combined to sponsor
an innovative, cost-sharing pro-
gram to promote energy effi-
ciency, clean production, and
economic competitiveness in in-
dustry. The grant program,
known as NICE3, provides fund-
ing for projects that develop and
demonstrate advances in energy efficiency and
clean production technologies. From 1991 to
1994, NICE3 sponsored 26 projects, totaling $7.8
million of government funding.
The program requires an industry applicant
to submit project proposals through a State en-
ergy, pollution prevention, or business develop-
ment office. Funds are awarded to State/indus-
try partnerships that can.match the DOE/EPA
Federal funds at least dollar-for-dollar. Awardees
receive a one-time grant of up to $400,000 for
the proposed project. After the initial funding,
the awardee is expected to commercialize the
process or technology. NICE3 project proposals
are evaluated on the following criteria: concept
description, innovation, cost efficiency, applicant
capabilities, energy savings, waste reduction,
economic competitiveness, commercialization/
marketing plan, and impact on jobs. The fol-
lowing example illustrates just one of the suc-
cessful NICE3 Projects.
Case Study:
Carpet Manufacturers Reduce
Pollution via Automated
Dyebath Reuse
In a conventional batch dyeing process, water
is pumped into a dyeing machine, and fabric is
placed in a bath and saturated with water. Chemi-
cals and dye are then added to the water. The
bath is heated to dyeing temperature and held at
that temperature until dyeing is complete. When
complete, the dyebath is emptied, the machine
is refilled, and the process is repeated for the next
load. When a dyebath is emptied, large quanti-
ties of energy, water, and useful chemicals are
sent to treatment and subsequently discharged.
A more efficient procedure would be to ana-
lyze the spent dyebath for remaining dye, add
make-up chemicals to the bath to bring it to the
required strength, and then reuse it for subsequent
dyeings (i.e., closed loop recycling). The tech-
nical and economic viability of reusing dyebaths
has been demonstrated in the past; however, ap-
plying the process requires skills that were not
always available to the textile manufacturer. For
example, this procedure usually requires chemi-
cal analysis of the dyebath to determine what
chemicals need to be added for reuse. If a chemist
is not available to analyze each bath, automation
of the process can be accomplished with an ana-
lytical system that will simply, accurately, and
economically determine the concentration of the
remaining dyebath, and add the proper amount
of make-up chemicals.
&EPA
-------
NICE3 Promotes Energy Efficienoy
and Clean Production Technologies
Implemented Approach
Through a grant from the NICE3 program, sev-
eral innovative techniques were investigated and
evaluated that could allow full automation of the
dyeing process. With a fully automated process,
low-cost precision pumping systems allow a
small volume of dyebath chemicals to be used
for numerous dyeing operations. Using innova-
tive monitoring insturments, a system is being
developed that can analyze the dyebath and com-
municate the results to a computer for calcula-
tion of what chemicals need to be added for the
next dyeing operation.
Operating Results
The waste reduction in the automated dyebath
reuse process is straightforward; approximately
6 percent of the dyes, 60 percent of the auxiliary
chemicals, and 42 percent of the water are di-
rectly reused in the manufacturing process and
removed from the wastestream. Nationwide,
waste would be reduced by 36-million pounds
(16.3-million kg) of chemicals each year.
Widespread implementation of the automated
dyebath reuse process would enhance U.S. in-
dustrial competitiveness by lowering costs. In
addition to applications in the carpet industry,
this technology could prove useful in the dyeing
and finishing sectors of the textile industry.
Cost, Savings, and Tradeoffs
The cost to implement the program
was $832,741 (Industry share:
$432,741). By implementing this pro-
gram, the savings at the test facility
(Shaw Industries) were $1.6-million
per year. Based on the industry share
of $432,741, the payback period for this project
was less than 3 months. Cost projects indicated
that implementation of the dyebath reuse pro-
cess could save money in terms of carpet pro-
duction at almost all carpet plants.
Energy Benefits
The project has energy savings that are derived
from three sources: (1) the reduction in direct
thermal and electrical energy to heat dyebaths;
(2) the elimination of energy to produce addi-
tional dyes, auxiliary chemicals, and water; all
of which are reused with the new technology;
and (3) reduction in energy associated with treat-
ment of wastewater. If fully implemented
throughout the carpet industry, dyebath reuse
technology could save up to 3.6-trillion Btu per
year. On a national scale, and including the tex-
tile industry, full implementation would produce
energy savings of up to 7-trillion Btu (7.4-qua-
drillion joules) each year by the year 2010.
Based on the national average, residential energy
consumption of 7-trillion Btu could supply all
of the energy needs for about 70,000 homes for
1 year.
Contact For Further
Information
Eric Hass, (MATEC), U.S. Department of
Energy, Golden Field Office
Telephone: (303) 275-4728
Charlie Pike, State of California,
Telephone: (916) 327-1649
Greg Andrews, State of Georgia,
Telephone: (404) 651 -5120
Sources
NICE3 Project Summary: "Automated Reuse of
Dyebaths in Carpet Manufacturing." (DOE/
CH10093-235; DE93017075) Revised Septem-
ber 1994.
NICE3 Program Summary: "Wouldn't it be
NICE ..." (DOE/CH10093-349; DE94011821)
September 1994.
&EPA
-------
Pollution Prevention
Success Stories -
Enforcement
EPA Encourages Pollution Prevention Through
Compliance and Enforcement Settlements
EPA's Pollution
Prevention Approach
The U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA)
encourages pollution pre-
vention when negotiating
enforcement settlements
with industrial facilities
that have violated environ-
mental laws or regulations.
In most settlements with pollution prevention
conditions, the pollution prevention activities are
negotiated as supplemental environmental
projects (SEPs); the prevention activity is in-
cluded in exchange for some degree of penalty
mitigation. Promoting pollution prevention
within the enforcement context gives EPA the
ability to pursue a settlement that optimizes en-
vironmental performance, rather than a settle-
ment aimed only at achieving compliance with
the regulations.
When implementing pollution prevention in
enforcement settlements, the Office of
Enforcement (OE) suggests the following
strategies: maintain flexibility when creating
settlements; use pollution prevention SEPs/
injunctive relief cases to develop new
technologies; provide an avenue for EPA to
verify that pollution prevention activities are
being successfully implemented at the facility;
design demonstration projects; and use
multimedia inspections to promote multimedia
pollution prevention SEPs/injunctive relief
outcomes. During the settlement process, EPA's
compliance and enforcement programs have two
basic avenues for promoting pollution prevention
within the regulated community. The first avenue
is to use the settlement conditions to require the
respondent/defendant to use pollution prevention
methods to redress the original violation and to
achieve compliance. In the absence of statutory,
regulatory, or permit language, members of the
regulated community are free to choose how to
comply. However, once a civil or administrative
action has been initiated, the specific means of
returning to compliance are subject to mutual
agreement between EPA and the respondent/
defendant. Therefore, under the mutual
agreement process, EPA can establish pollution
prevention compliance methods in place of more
traditional end-of-pipe compliance methods.
The second important avenue is the inclusion
of SEPs in settlement agreements. As part of a
settlement agreement, a respondent/defendant
will agree to conduct a project(s) that reduces
risks posed to human health and the environment
beyond what would be required by law. Unlike
settlement conditions, SEPs are not designed to
redress the original violation(s); instead, the SEP
serves to mitigate the size or gravity component
of an assessed penalty. The voluntary and flexible
nature of SEPs allows companies to explore
various of options to both mitigate their penalties
and benefit the environment. These options may
include more traditional methods, or new,
innovative pollution prevention approaches.
-------
EPA Encourages Pollution Prevention Through
Compliance and Enforcement Settlements
Approach Implemented
Enforcement of environmental acts (in
particular the Emergency Planning and
Community Right-to-Know Act or EPCRA) has
been successful in requiring violators to
undertake SEPs to reduce penalties. Examples
of how pollution prevention was successfully
incorporated into settlement agreements are
presented on the next page.
Cost, Savings, and
Tradeoffs
In this program, two types of costs
require consideration. The first is the
cost to the facility, and the second, is
the cost to EPA to implement a program to
encourage the use of pollution prevention.
Obviously, the cost for a facility to implement a
pollution prevention project will vary, depending
on project size and complexity. And, although
the examples presented here only cover a small
price range, facility pollution prevention
implementation costs can vary from under
$ 10,000 to millions of dollars. Payback time can
range from immediately to many years.
Regarding EPA costs, sufficient resources
must be available to accommodate the increased
time and attention that pollution prevention
enforcement activities require. In June 1990,
various EPA offices received funds to develop
regulatory, compliance, and analytical pollution
prevention projects. The Office of Enforcement
is providing technical support to help incorporate
pollution prevention conditions in regional
enforcement cases, as well as to conduct analyses
of the environmental, institutional, and
(innovative) technological impacts of pollution
prevention settlements.
Pollution prevention injunctive relief offers the
opportunity for both EPA and the respondent/
defendant to reduce or eliminate an environmental
problem at the source, without cross-media
transfer of pollutants. Pollution prevention SEPs,
and injunctive relief, in some cases, offer the
possibility of reducing environmental impacts in
excess of that which is required by regulation.
Significant "indirect" environmental, health,
and economic benefits can be achieved through
the transfer of pollution prevention technology
to other processes in the subject plant or to other
plants owned by the company; organizational
changes that lead to improved environmental
practices; and further implementation of other
pollution prevention technology. Furthermore,
particularly in the case of SEPs (where penalty
relief is granted), the option to include a pollution
prevention project creates an opportunity to turn
a negative situation into a better or positive
situation for the facility and to improve the
relationship between the company and EPA.
Contact for Further
Information
Pete Rosenberg
Office of Enforcement
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Telephone: (202) 260-8869
Sources
"Recent Experience in Encouraging the Use of
Pollution Prevention in Enforcement Settlements;
Report Summary" prepared for the USEPA,
Office of Enforcement by the MIT Center for
Technology, Policy and Industrial Development;
February 1994.
"Pollution Prevention Through Compliance and
Enforcement; A Review of OPTS
Accomplishments." USEPA, Office of Pesticides
and Toxic Substances, January 1993.
vvEPA
-------
EPA Encourages Pollution Prevention Through
Compliance and Enforcement Settlements
Settlement Agreements That Successfully
Incorporated Pollution Prevention
An industrial coaler was fined $50,000 for not submitting reports on toluene and
methyl ethyl ketone (MEK) (both high-priority toxic chemicals) under the Emergency
Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA). This fine was reduced to
$30,000, and the facility implemented a project to reformulate its coating material
and change its coaler equipment. By using ultraviolet and infrared radiation to aid
In the application of scratch-resistant coatings to polyester film, the company
reduced its use of the toxic chemicals (toluene by 90 percent and MEK by 50
percent). The project cost $54,000 to implement, and the payback time was
estimated to be between 6 months and 2 years.
A casted metal products manufacturer was fined $95,000 for Clean Water Act (CWA)
violations. The penalty was reduced to $30,000, and the facility implemented a
project to redesign its rinse system on several coating and cleaning process lines to
reduce the amount of water used and the amount of wastewater generated. Also,
the facility substituted organic solvents and Freon with aqueous and semi-aqueous
cleaners. The project cost was not available; however, the payback time was
estimated at 5 to 8 years (excluding the $65,000 "savings" in the fines).
A pump service and sales company was fined $ 17,000 for not reporting emissions of
Freon 113 under EPCRA. This fine was reduced to $8,500, and the facility imple-
mented a project to make process changes and material substitutions at multiple
facilities. The company replaced its freon-based cleaning systems with water-
based systems that eliminate emissions of toxic chemicals into the environment.
The project cost $54,000 to implement, and the payback time was estimated to be
between 6 months and 2 years.
A powder metallurgy manufacturing company was fined $76,000 for EPCRA
violations. This was reduced to $30,550, and the facility had a waste minimization
opportunity assessment performed at the site. The facility instituted product substitu-
tion (blended hydrogen/nitrogen sintering atmosphere for anhydrous ammonia);
eliminated a trichioroethylene (TCE) vapor degreaser by switching to an aqueous
tapping fluid; and installed a closed loop cooling system. The project cost $78,300,
and the payback time was estimated at 3 to 7 years, with a savings of $1,000 per
month in energy costs. If the "savings" for a reduced fine are included, the payback
is reduced to 2.5 years.
-------
Pollution Prevention
Success Stories -
Federal Facility
Kelly Air Force Base Soars With
Pollution Prevention
The problem
The daily ground operations of
an Air Force base involve many
sources of environmental
contaminants. Airborne
emissions occur as a result of
painting, degreasing, and
maintenance operations. Plating
and metal refinishing operations generate large
quantities of metal-contaminated wastewater.
De-painting can produce large quantities of
hazardous wastes. In the past, these individual
pollution problems were typically dealt with by
"end-of-pipe" controls. That is, wastewaters
were conveyed to wastewater treatment plants,
air emissions were controlled in the stack or
vent, and solid wastes were disposed of in
landfills.
Approach Selected
In 1992, the U.S. Air Force embarked upon
an ambitious program to reduce hazardous
wastes, ozone-depleting chemicals, and
particularly, the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency's 17 33/50 Program toxic chemicals.
This program is aimed at determining whether
voluntary reduction programs can achieve
targeted reductions more quickly than the EPA's
traditional command-and-control approach to
environmental protection regulations.
The 33/50 program derived its name from
its goals. The goals are to have a 33 percent
reduction by 1992 of releases and off site
transfers of the 17 33/50 program chemicals
using the 1988 Toxic Release Inventory (TRI)
report as a baseline. A 50 percent reduction is
the goal for 1995. The 33/50 program encourages
pollution prevention as the best means of
achieving these goals.
At Kelly Air Force Base, the approach was to
target individual operations for development of
pollution prevention and waste management
techniques that would reduce or eliminate
targeted wastestreams. Overall pollution
prevention and waste generation reduction goals
were set by the Air Force Materiels Command
(AFMC) and implemented at the base.
Approach Implemented
In order to implement the overall pollution
prevention and waste generation reduction goals
set by AFMC, the following pollution prevention
measures were adopted:
• Replaced a chromated deoxidizer with a
phosphoric acid deoxidizer in the bonding
shop anodizing line;
• Changed from a manual, labor-intensive
method of cleaning paint guns to totally
enclosed paint gun washers;
• Replaced all cyanide metal strippers with
noncyanide metal strippers for nickel and
silver strippers;
• Constructed and uses a plastic media blasting
(facility large enough to enclose a C-5A
transport aircraft. The process replaced
chemical-based (methylene chloride) paint
&EPA
-------
Kelly Air Force Base Soars With
Pollution Prevention
removers with physical, dry, abrasive paint
removal;
• Replaced vapor degreasers with 13 small, more
efficient and compliant vapor degreasers that
reduce the use of perchoroethylene up to 90
percent; and
• Upgraded the aluminum oxide blasting system
in the plating shop and improving wastestream
segregation to improve reclamation efficiency
and reduce the generation of hazardous waste.
Operating Results
In only 2 years, these pollution prevention
measures cited produced significant reductions
in ozone-depleting substances (88 percent), EPA
17 chemicals (59 percent), and hazardous waste
generation (24 percent). Specific successes
include:
• Reducing perchloroethylene use by 47 percent
in 2 years by using aqueous cleaners and
degreasers for parts washing, with a projected
reduction of 88 percent by 1996;
• Eliminating use of methylene chloride as a
paint stripper, resulting in a 20 percent
reduction in base-wide EPA 17 chemical use,
a 50 percent reduction in waste generation from
paint removal operations, and a decrease in
water consumption of about 20-million gallons
per year;
• Cutting cyanide use by about 75 percent in
metal stripping operations;
• Eliminating over 1,000 pounds per year of
sodium dichromate, thereby reducing the
chromium discharged to the base industrial
waste treatment plant; and
• Realizing a 55 percent reduction in aluminum
oxide blast media purchases (150,000 pounds
per year) and a 60 percent reduction in
hazardous waste disposal.
Cost, Savings, and
Tradeoffs
Actual and estimated cost savings for
the implemented pollution prevention
measures included:
• Eliminating the use of sodium dichromate in
the anodizing process generated cost savings
of approximately $1,100 per year.
• Increasing the efficiency of the
degreasing operations yielded an annual
savings of $31,000 per year in material
purchase and approximately $18,000 per year
in waste disposal.
• Replacing nickel and silver cyanide metal
strippers with noncyanide strippers saved over
$100,000 per year in disposal costs alone.
• Converting from methylene chloride to a dry
abrasive paint removal process saved
approximately $343,000 per aircraft; and cut
the time required to strip the paint from an
aircraft from 14 to 7 days.
• Upgrading the efficiency of the aluminum
oxide blasting process generated a savings of
$75,000 per year in blast media purchases and
$ 16,000 per year in hazardous waste disposal.
• Realizing cost savings from the process
change in paint gun washing of at least
$13,000 per year in chemical purchases and
waste disposal costs, and labor savings of
approximately 215 hours each year in cleaning
time.
The above reflect a combined annual savings
of over $500,000 per year, excluding other
associated costs, such as recordkeeping,
reporting, and liability.
Contact for Further
Information
Greg Vallery, Paul Hughes, and Dave Leeson,
Pollution Prevention Division, Kelly Air Force
Base. Telephone: (210) 925-3100
&EPA
-------
Pollution Prevention
Success Stories -
Federal Facilities
Navy Pollution Prevention Results
in Quick Payback
The Naval Aviation Depot (NADEP) in
Jacksonville, Florida, is an industrial facility
commissioned by the Navy to perform rework,
repair, and modification of aircraft, engines, and
aeronautical components. Due to the nature of
the depot's operations, large quantities of waste
were generated daily. A series of Executive
Orders, Department of Defense directives, and
policy announcements directing military
operations to initiate pollution prevention
activities were followed the Federal Facilities
Compliance Act of 1992. The NADEP response
to these directives was rapid and effective.
In 1992, a special State of Florida waste
reduction task force assisted NADEP with
categorizing industrial processes used at the Jack-
sonville station. The group developed short-, me-
dium-, and long-term strategies to identify
various pollution prevention objectives and the
corresponding timeframe in which to achieve
them.
The short-term strategy encompassed
objectives to be achieved within 1 to 3 years.
Such tasks included properly .managing
hazardous materials, implementing off-the-shelf
pollution prevention technologies, and investing
in low-risk, high-payback pollution prevention
alternatives. Medium-range strategies, those to
be achieved within 3 to 8 years, included setting
standards for pollution prevention development,
and fostering long-term partnerships between the
DOD and the various defense contractors and
tenants working at NADEP. Long-range
strategies, which are those to be achieved within
9 to 15 years, included communicating new
design criteria to the defense
industry, identifying emerging
regulations and waste
management requirements, and
developing new approaches to
acquisition and maintenance
which incorporate pollution
prevention techniques at the outset.
Approach Implemented
NADEP's pollution prevention plan called for
translating its strategy into waste minimization
actions. NADEP implemented 13 waste
reduction projects at its Jacksonville station, that
addressed:
• Substituting nonhazardous materials and
processes for hazardous:
- paint strippers;
- chromic acid strippers;
- corrosion inhibitors;
- carbon removers;
- degreasing agents; and
- miscellaneous wipe solvents;
• Changing to more efficient and nonhazardous
plating and metal deposition processes;
• Centralizing control management of hazardous
materials; and
• Constructing a closed-loop treatment plant.
Operating Results
Although NADEP's operations continued at
the same level of activity in 1992 and 1993, raw
material purchases decreased, as well as
procedures that generated hazardous waste.
&EPA
-------
Navy Pollution Prevention Results
in Quick Payback
NADEP's 13 short-term pollution prevention
projects led to reductions of approximately 1.5-
million pounds of waste in 1 year. Table 1
provides a more detailed breakdown of the
project's results.
Cost, Savings, and Tradeoffs
Table 1 shows the cost for NADEP's major
projects has totaled almost $19
million. Savings are exceeding $5
million annually, resulting in a total
payback period of approximately 3.5
years. Nine pollution prevention
projects paid for themselves in less
than a year. Only two pollution prevention
activities had payback periods greater than 5
years. The median payback period was 4 months.
Other Benefits
Chemical substitution and process changes
have prevented the release of hazardous air
pollutants and improved the quality of the working
conditions at NADEP. The waste reduction
meansures have been so successful that the DOD
plans to incorporate these same methods at five
other naval depots throughtout the country.
Contact For Further
Information
M.G. Linn, NADEP, Jacksonville, FL
Telephone: (904) 772-2457
Sources
Success Story, US Naval Air Station Jacksonville.
Florida Waste Reduction Assistance Program.
December 21,1992.
Briefing Presentation. NADEP Pollution
Prevention: The 90's Margin for Corporate
Survival. EPA Region 4 Pollution Prevention
Conference. December 15,1994.
Table 1. Pollution Prevention Results
Pollution Prevention
Category
Total Pollution Cost Payback
Investment Reduction Avoided Period
($) (Ibs/yr) ($/yr) (yr)
Ion Vapor Deposition (IVD)
Aluminum (Process Change)
Two Buss Bar (Metal Rating Operation)
Noncyanide Stripper (Substitution)
High Velocity Oxygen Rame (HVOF) Metal
Deposition (Process Change)
Aqueous Cleaning, Parts Washer (Substitution)
Wipe Solvent (Substitution)
Ultrasonic Cleaner (Substitution)
Metal Treating (Corrosion Inhibitor Substitution)
Paint Stripping (Substitution)
VOC Compliant Paint Usage (Substitution)
Environmental Control Center
(Chemical Consolidation)
Closed-Loop Treatment Rant
Nonhazardous Air Pollutant (HAP) Paint Stripper
Usage (Substitution)
900,000
130,000
0
50,000
249,200
0
0
900,000
1,310,000
0
409,000
14,700,000
23,000
13,000
' 500
| 3,200
1,000
99,200
26,500
9,800
75,900
124,000
45,000
72,000
1,000,000
66,000
140,000
205,000
23,700
193,000
| 453,000
I 116,000
J 159,000
| 275,000
| 264,000
\ 200,000
| 3,670,000
I 300,000
| 93,000
I
6.4
ore ~
Immediate
0.3
0.5
Immediate
Immediate
3.3
5.0
Immediate
0.1
49.0
0.2
3-EPA
-------
Pollution Prevention
Success Stories -
^_ Industry .
Furniture Manufacturer Assembles
More With Lower Emissions
New England Woodcraft, Inc. manufactures
household and institutional furniture at its fac-
tory in Forestdale, Vermont. The plant deter-
mined that it was emitting significant amounts
of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) on the or-
der of 6 to 7 pounds per gallon of finish. (VOCs
can result in the formulation of smog in reaction
to ozone.) The nitrocellulose coatings being used
contained toxic and carcinogenic ingredients such
as formaldehyde. Significant amounts of solid
and hazardous waste were generated at the plant
as well.
Nitrocellulose coatings have been used by
many furniture manufacturers to produce high
quality coatings. However, New England Wood-
craft sought to reduce worker exposure to toxics
and reduce the emissions and hazardous waste
generated from the use of nitrocellulose coatings.
Approach Implemented
In 1988, this company, began testing water-based
coatings as a replacement for the traditional ni-
trocellulose coatings. In 1990, New England
Woodcraft, in a joint effort with C.E. Bradley
Laboratories, formulated a successful water-
based coating and the necessary application
equipment to replace the old nitrocellulose coat-
ings.
Operating Results
The pre-mixed water-based emulsion finishes
now used at New England Woodcraft contain only
1.67 pounds of VOCs per gallon of finish, a 75
percent reduction when compared to nitrocellu-
lose finishes. Also, the new formulation contains
no formaldehyde. Moreover, the high solids, wa-
ter-based finish covers more area with less ma-
terial. These factors have combined to reduce
VOC emissions at the facility from 90 tons to 9
tons annually (90 percent reduction). Also, haz-
ardous waste generation was reduced by over 90
percent, from greater than 2,200 pounds per
month to less than 220 pounds per month.
Cost, Savings, and Tradeoffs
Significant cost reductions were realized in
waste management, waste disposal, and taxes as-
sociated with hazardous waste generation. As a
result of a 90 percent decrease in hazardous waste
generation, the facility's regulatory status
changed from a large quantity generator to a
small quantity generator. Hence, the facility is
conditionally exempt from some reporting and
regulatory requirements under the Resource Con-
servation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Addition-
ally, the facility received a 25 percent decrease
in insurance rates due to decreased fire hazards.
Other Benefits
Reduced employee exposure to toxics and haz-
ardous waste has improved the employee's work
environment and subsequently their health and
safety.
Contact For Further
Information
Mr. Harmon Thurston
New England Woodcraft, Inc.
Route 53, Box 165
Forestdale, VT 05745
Telephone: (802) 247-8211
vvEPA
-------
Pollution Prevention
Success Stories -
Industry
Newspaper Recycles Waste Ink
The Hartford Courant is a regional newspaper
with a daily circulation of
225,000 and a Sunday
circulation of 320,000.
Approximately 175 gallons
of waste ink are generated
each week. The lithographic
presses produce waste ink
that is a mixture of mosfly black ink blended with
other colors and press cleaning solvents. During
printing, excess ink contaminated with the blanket
wash solvent, fountain solution (mostly water), and
paper dust is collected in trays under the presses.
In general, the ink and solvent wastestreams
generated by a printing operation are considered
hazardous wastes, especially if they contain
chromium or lead or have a low flash point Prior
to implementing pollution prevention actions, the
waste is shipped offsite for reuse as a supplemental
fuel.
Approach Selected
The newspaper set out to essentially eliminate
the generation of hazardous waste inks by cleaning
and recycling waste ink. A study was performed
under the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's
(EPA) Waste Reduction and Innovative Technology
Evaluation (WRITE) Program to evaluate a
technology that could be used to recycle waste
printing ink for reuse in lithographic printing
operations.
Approach Implemented
The Hartford Courant now collects the waste,
recycles the solvent, and blends the waste ink back
into virgin black ink for reuse. The facility has
decreased both the toxicity and quantity of its
hazardous waste from 9,100 gallons of waste ink
and solvent to 46 gallons of paper dust and 3,050
gallons of water, a significant reduction that has
allowed the facility to report its emissions as a small
quantity generator.
The major components of the
recycling unit at the The Hartford
Courant were purchased on a
skid, and other equipment was
added as required. The waste ink
goes to a large waste ink storage
tank; when enough ink is collected in this tank, a
batch is processed through a recycling unit back
into a reusable black ink product. The recycling
process primarily involves vacuum distillation,
filtration, and blending.
After solvent and water from the waste ink are
separated tests are performed to determine the
amount of virgin black ink required for blending.
The ratio of virgin ink to processed ink can vary
from about 3:1 to 5:1. The virgin ink is added to
improve the color, consistency, and other functional
properties of the processed ink to an acceptable
range. After blending, the recycled ink is
transferred to a clean holding tank. The recycled
ink is then drawn by a pump through a final filter
to the presses.
Operating Results
Product quality of the spent, recycled, and virgin
inks was evaluated by conducting selected
performance tests and comparisons of the printed
material by qualified professionals. The recycled
ink fared well in laboratory performance tests such
as viscosity, grind, residue, tinting strength, water
content, and water pickup. In addition, there was
-------
Newspaper Recycles Waste Ink
no significant difference in print quality between
the virgin and recycled inks in the opinion of
experienced readers.
The waste volume reduction potential of this
technology involves the amount of waste ink
prevented from being disposed into the
environment (by landfilling, waste incineration, or
as a supplemental fuel). The facility generates
approximately 175 gallons per week or 9,100
gallons per year of waste ink. The waste ink
contains about 40 percent water and solvent (mostly
water) and 60 percent ink. By recycling, the ink is
recovered. The recycling wastestreams consist of
water (wastewater) from the separator and the
paper-dust paste residue from the filters. Any
solvent that distills off is reused in the printing
process. The facility plans to discharge the
wastewater to the municipal sewer, but is
considering installing an activated carbon filter for
removing organics in the wastewater, so that the
water can be reused. The paper-dust residue (about
1 gallon for every 200 gallons of waste ink
processed) is disposed of by an offsite contractor
for incineration or use as a supplemental fuel.
Cost, Savings, and Tradeoffs
• The company has eliminated the disposal costs
for the hazardous waste that they no longer
generate. The disposal cost was $38,000/year. The
major cost of the recycling option is for utilities
(energy), labor, and disposal of wastewater and
paper-dust residue, which is $7,100/year. The value
of the recycled product is almost $20,000/year.
When this is added to the difference in operating
costs, the total "savings" are $50,000/year. With a
purchase and installation cost of $318,000, a rough
estimate of the payback period is about 6.25 years,
based upon the current rates of items such as labor
and utilities. When inflation and taxation are taken
into account, the payback period is more accurately
calculated as 10 years.
Environmental Benefits
By recycling virtually all of the potential
pollutants in the waste ink (chromium, lead,
barium, organics, etc.) are reused and, thus,
prevented from entering the environment. In
addition, the recycling unit was easy to install and
operate. At The Hartford Courant, no additional
labor was needed to operate the recycling
equipment. Current employees were utilized to
perform tasks similar to their previous job
descriptions.
Contact For Further
Information
The Hartford Courant; 285 Broad Street, Hartford,
CT 061.15
Telephone: (203) 275-1917
Sources
Final Report; On-site Waste Ink Recycling.
Technology Evaluation Report; WRITE Program.
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory, Office of
Research and Development, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. Cincinnati, Ohio. August 1992.
"Connecticut WRITE Today" ConnTAP Quarterly,
1993, 6(1);4.
Waste Ink & Solvent
Paper
Dust
By implementing its recycling process, The Hartford Courant was able to
reduce hazardous waste generation from 9,100 to 46 gallons/year.
«EPA
-------
Pollution Prevention
Success Stories -
Industry
Mine Finds Gold In Pollution
Prevention Measures
The daily operations of the Echo Bay/Cove
Mine near Battle Mountain, Nevada, generated
a considerable variety and significant quantity
of hazardous wastes. The greatest volume of
waste was halogenated solvents used in parts
washing. In addition, the high volume of wastes
resulted in the mine's classification as a Large
Quantity Generator (LQG) under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). So,
in addition to the costs associated with the use
of solvents and management and disposal of
waste solvent as a RCRA hazardous waste,
additional costs were annually incurred for
training to comply with RCRA requirements.
The Echo Bay/Cove Mine also realized the
liability associated with its continued use and
disposal of halogenated parts washing solvents.
Approach Selected
Echo Bay/Cove Mine formed a Corrective Ac-
tion Team (CAT) com-
posed of one member of
each affected department
in the Company. The goal
of CAT was to identify
courses of action to reduce
the mine's liability associ-
ated with the use of halo-
genated solvents and shipping large volumes of
hazardous waste offsite for disposal. CAT held
14 meetings over an 8-month period. During
the course of these meetings, CAT added the goal
of attaining Small Quantity Generator (SQG) sta-
tus.
To achieve its goals, CAT
began its study of solvent use
by identifying actual needs.
Discussions were held with the
solvent vendor on its supply
and disposal service as well as
on solvent use and options.
Cabinet hot water washers were
also evaluated onsite as a possible replacement
for some solvent washers.
A list of products (i.e., solvents) in use was
compiled. Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS)
were obtained and compared to the list of EPA's
Toxicity Characteristic (TC) chemicals. Products
containing TC-listed constituents were targeted
either for replacement or elimination. CAT
members reviewed regulations pertaining to the
use, handling, and disposal of hazardous
chemicals.
CAT members also evaluated processes to
extend the useful life of solvents. Data from
manufacturers and industry organizations were
collected and studied. Solvents were rated using
a system that evaluated hazard ratings (i.e.,
toxicity, reactivity, etc.), flash point, relative
cleanability, user comments, and cost. A
particular product was considered unacceptable
if it did a poor job of cleaning, had a flash point
lower than 140°F (and, therefore, was a fire
hazard) and a RCRA hazardous waste code (i.e.,
D001 Ignitable), oxidized parts; was not
amenable to onsite filtration; was too costly; or
was difficult to handle. A suitable product both
&EPA
-------
Mine Finds Gold In Pollution
Measures
met these criteria and did not contain halogenated
compounds or EPA TC constituents.
Due to the higher cost of a suitable replacement
solvent, i.e., $11.957
gallon versus $3.507
gallon for the replaced
product, the team
examined methods for
extending the useful
life of the replacement
solvent. Distillation
and microfiltration were evaluated as ways to
implement closed-loop recycling by separating
the solvent from metallic particles. Distillation
was eliminated as too manpower intensive and
too costly. Several filter systems were
investigated. The one selected utilized a high flow
pump, stainless steel screens, and a paper media
filter. Removal efficiency was down to the 0.05-
micron particle size. The paper filter also could
absorb and reduce the heavy oils suspended in
the solvent.
Operating Results
The results of implementing the pollution
prevention measures cited above have had a
significant impact on reducing the amount of
waste produced at the Mine. The reductions
include:
• Elimination of halogenated parts washing
solvent and replacement with a nonhazardous
solvent. This hazardous wastestream was
being generated at a rate of approximately
12,000 Ibs./yr. The total generation of the
nonhazardous replacement solvent waste is
now less than 1,500 lbs./yr.
• Elimination of the mill open gear lubricant
wastestream, which accounted for
approximately 4,500 lbs./yr. of RCRA
hazardous waste, was accomplished by
replacing the halogenated open gear lubricant
with a nonhazardous, environmentally safer
alternative.
• Change in status from Large Quantity
Generator to Conditionally Exempt Small
Quantity Generator, with greatly reduced
regulatory requirements and overall
environmental liability.
Approach Implemented
Six different pollution prevention measures adopted by the mine included:
Minimizing solvent use;
Using environmentally
acceptable solvents;
Extending solvent use onsite;
Controlling products that could
contaminate wastestreams or
constitute personnel hazards;
Replacing aerosols with reusable,
rechargeable sprayers and bulk
products; and
Using an environmentally
acceptable cleaner in hot-water
washers to replace solvent washers
when effective soil removal has
been demonstrated.
xvEPA
-------
Mine Finds Gold In Pollution
Prevention Measures
Figure 1.
Monthly RCRA Wastes Quantities
s.
1992
1993
Cost, Savings, and Tradeoffs
The initial investment in the
replacement solvent filtration
equipment and replacement solvent
was $11,400. After accounting for
this investment, the mine realized a
154 percent return on its investment
with a payback period of 14.7 months and an
annual savings of $9,300. This was based on the
elimination of the $ 18,000 annual expense related
to the vendor service for the halogenated solvent
and incurring an annual operating cost of $8,700
for the replacement solvent filtration system.
Significant savings were also realized in other
areas. Replacing the halogenated mill gear lube
with a nonhalogenated lube grease at
approximately the same purchase price resulted
in a $6,600 savings in disposal costs. The used
grease was re-refined instead of incinerated.
Changing of the regulatory status from large
quantity generator to conditionally exempt
created generated an additional savings of
$16,000 per year in reduced training costs.
-------
Mine Finds Gold In Pollution
Prevention Measures
Figure 2.
1992 Lbs and Percents
Hydro Oil Oil&Solv
2% 6%
500 Ibs 1,500 Ibs
Mill Gear Lube
19%
4,5001
Ban Ice
2%
500Ibs
PERC Spill
17%
,000 Ibs
'Antifreeze
2%
500 Ibs
Solvent Waste
51%
11,976Ibs
Environmental Benefits
The work of the CAT members has resulted
in an increased environmental and pollution
prevention awareness among individual
departments and employees. For example, the
purchasing department now researches MSDSs
to identify environmentally friendly products
before purchase. Cleaners, sealants, penetrating
fluids, and lubricants that do not contain EPA
listed toxic ingredients are specified.
Employees receive regular updates and training
in the use and management of hazardous
materials.
Contact For Further
Information
University of Nevada, Reno, NV
Nevada Small Business Development Center/032
Business Environmental Program
Reno, NV 89557-0100
Telephone: (800) 882-3233
-------
Pollution Prevention
Success Stories -
Industry
Motorola Goes Solder-less
Traditionally, soldering methods use chemical
fluxes to remove
oxides from metal
surfaces prior to
soldering.
Unfortunately,
these fluxes leave corrosive residues, which must
be removed with chemical rinses. Freon 113
and trichloroethane (TCA), both known ozone
depleting chemicals (ODCs), were commonly
used as part of these chemical rinse activities.
Approach Selected
Motorola Government Systems and
Technology Group, in an effort to eliminate
ODCs from its manufacturing processes, entered
into a Cooperative Research and Development
Agreement (CRADA) with the Department of
Energy's National Laboratories at Sandia and
Los Alamos. Motorola provided manufacturing
technology while the labs provided analytical
expertise and reliability predictions. Successful
approaches were likely to either eliminate
production of oxides or eliminate corrosive
residues requiring rinses. Ultimately, the team
developed a soldering process that is so clean
that no chemical rinses are needed.
Approach Implemented
The new soldering process replaces flux with
a preparation fluid that is lightly sprayed onto
the bottom side of circuit boards. The fluid is a
2 percent mixture of adipic acid in isopropyl
alcohol. Adipic acid is a safe, nontoxic, organic
acid that is used in various commercial food
products as a neutralizer and flavoring agent.
The circuit boards travel into an inert gas
section of a wave soldering machine. The inert
atmosphere in the chamber prevents oxide
formation while the board is heated to soldering
temperatures. When the board passes onto the
liquid wave of solder metal, the adipic acid breaks
down to scavenge oxides from the metal surfaces
being soldered. A small amount of formic acid
can be introduced into the atmosphere to assist
in oxide removal. The acid is almost totally
decomposed to carbon dioxide and water vapor.
The boards do not require cleaning. Residues
left after soldering were noncorrosive in the
normal life cycle of electronics hardware.
Operating Results
Typical old-style soldering machines use up
to 8,000 pounds of cleaners per month, or 48 tons
of cleaners per year. The use of the new soldering
process has eliminated the need for a rinsing stage
and, therefore, has eliminated the use of Freon
113 and TCA cleaners and their associated air
emissions.
Cost, Savings, and Tradeoffs
Costs for the cleaning solvents
ranged from 52 cents to $2.55 a pound.
Each machine that employs the new
soldering process now saves between
$50,000 and $245,000 per year in
chemical use alone. The machines
used in the development effort cost
from $300,000 to $400,000 each. However,
conventional wave solder machines can be
&EPA
-------
Motorola Goes Solder-less
retrofitted with nitrogen inert capability for
$40,000 to $100,000, depending on the degree
of mechanical and computer control modification
required.
Environmental Benefits
As a result of the new soldering process,
Motorola has helped eliminate the chemical air
emissions of Freon 113 and TCA. For its efforts,
Motorola has received the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency's Stratospheric Ozone
Protection Award for the second time in 3 years.
Contact For Further
Information
Jim Landers, Motorola Government Space and
Technology Group, Scottsdale, AZ
Telephone: (602) 441-3600
Source
Arizona Pollution Prevention, Arizona
Department of Environmental Quality APPLE+
Newsletter.
Process Change
48 Tons
in Waste Reduction
©EPA
-------
Pollution Prevention
Success Stories -
Industry
Parker Pen Reduces
Hazardous Waste
Trichloroethylene (TCE) is used as a solvent
in manufacturing refillable writing instruments.
Industry-wide use of TCE was growing yearly,
based on the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)
emissions data, with apparently little or no at-
tempt to reduce consumption.
To enhance the quality of its products, includ-
ing reducing emissions to all media, Parker Pen
USA adopted quality management teams and sta-
tistical process control analyses. The Parker Pen
program was referred to as the Voluntary Im-
provement Process (VIP). A VIP team was
formed to attack the TCE problem. This inte-
grated Team consisted of three degreaser opera-
tors, a maintenance technician, an engineer, a
solvents buyer, and the plant engineer.
Implemented Approach
The VIP Team initially approached Dow
Chemical, the TCE pro-
vider, for advice and assis-
tance. Dow responded by
reviewing solvent use op-
erations and equipment
maintenance procedures for
each of the plant's
degreaser/distillation units.
Working with the Dow rep-
resentative, the Team identified a number of new
procedures for reducing TCE vapor production
while improving operation of the degreasing
units. The new procedures included:
• Reducing heat input to the boiling sumps to
reduce TCE volatilization,
• Reducing contaminants from upstream opera-
tions to prolong TCE lifetimes in the
degreasers, and
• Improving distillation/recovery of used TCE.
The latter action increased the contaminant
level in the spent solvent by up to 350 percent,
thereby reducing the amount of solvent needing
to go offsite for reclamation.
A programmable logic controller was added
to the degreaser control circuit to alert operators
when the solvent was becoming ineffective and
needed to be distilled. The controller then auto-
matically transferred the TCE to the distiller, re-
ducing the risk to operators, reducing potential
operating errors, and improving process consis-
tency.
While studying degreasing operations, the VIP
Team identified wire coil stock as a problem part
that used excessive amounts of TCE. The VIP
Team then calculated the cost for cleaning coil
stock and discovered that the department requir-
ing coil cleaning was being allocated (internally)
less than full cost for the service. A change in
accounting allocations transferred the full costs
of cleanup to the responsible department. Faced
with this cost increase, the affected department
formed its own VIP Team which recommended
purchase of a specialty parts washer exclusively
designed for efficient cleaning of wire coil stock.
Operating Results
Within 6 months, monthly usage of TCE
dropped 40 percent, from 25 drums per month
&EPA
-------
Parker Pen Reduces TCE
to 15 drums, while annual usage (over a 3-year
period) averaged a 54 percent decrease.
Cost, Savings, and Tradeoffs
The waste reduction of 36,000
pounds per year translates into an an-
nual savings of $23,000 ($70,000
over a 3-year period). The capital cost
was $14,500: $10,000 for the new
(design) coil coating degreasers and
$4,500 for the programmable control- lers.
That represents a payback in 7.5 months. There
has been no adverse effect on pen manufacturing
operations.
Environmental Benefits
Annual hazardous waste volume transported
for reclamation and disposal decreased by 36,000
pounds. In 1991, Parker Pen received a Business
Friend to the Environment Award from the Wis-
consin Environmental Working Group and the
Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce Group.
Contact For Further
Information
John Houseman, Plant Engineering Manager
Parker Pen USA, Ltd.
1400 Parker Drive
Janesville, WI53545
Telephone: (608) 755-7000
Reduction in TCE Use
January 1989 - June 1991
£•
a
i
&EPA
-------
Pollution Prevention
Success Stories -
Local Government
Los Angeles Takes Innovative
Pollution Prevention Approaches
A large metropolitan government with many
agencies and internal organizations may find it
difficult to plan and implement waste
minimization activities. Yet, the Pollution
Prevention Act of 1990, Federal and State orders,
and fiscal shortages have forced municipalities
to face the issue of adopting pollution prevention
within their own operations. In addition, small
commercial and industrial concerns often request
help from municipalities. The City of Los
Angeles has taken several innovative approaches
to addressing these problems.
Approach Selected
One of the first steps Los Angeles took in
setting up its pollution prevention program was
to form the Mayor's Advisory Committee on
Hazardous Waste Reduction. The committee was
comprised of industry experts, researchers,
environmental scientists, engineers, and
government regulators. Subsequently, Los
Angeles established the Hazardous and Toxic
Materials (HTM) Project. The HTM Project is a
nonregulatory initiative that provides assistance
to small- and medium-sized businesses
concerned with waste minimization. Its goal is
to ensure that the City of Los Angeles conforms
to and promotes the national hazardous waste
minimization policy. The Project provides direct
regulatory and waste minimization assistance to
city departments, industry, and businesses that
use hazardous materials and generate hazardous
waste, using new and existing city resources to
accomplish its objectives.
The City of Los Angeles Environmental
Affairs Department is a participant in the U.S.
EPA Region 9 Merit Partnership for Pollution
Prevention. This program brings the business
community together with Federal, State, and
regional regulatory agencies to facilitate adoption
of pollution prevention methods that reduce
environmental impacts and enhance industrial
efficiency.
Approach Implemented
Under the HTM Project, the supervisors of all
city departments are required to participate in an
interdepartmental Hazardous Waste Management
Task Force and to adopt the city-wide policy.
The Project conducts training programs and
conferences for businesses, trade associations,
and city employees; and provides free technical
assistance to industry through education and
outreach programs. Every city facility has been
inspected and audited to determine where and
how much waste is being generated by city
operations. The city also makes use of the Bureau
of Sanitation's water pollution control inspectors
to help enforce hazardous waste control laws and
encourage hazardous waste minimization.
Operating Results
The HTM Project provides the following
services to assist with pollution prevention
efforts:
• Onsite Technical Assistance. Provides
assistance in identifying and implementing
vvEPA
-------
Los Angeles Takes Innovative
Pollution Prevention Approaches
pollution prevention methods and process
technologies. The HTM Office acts as a
facilitator between business and enforcement
agencies on waste minimization regulations.
• Industry Outreach. Provides onsite training,
public workshops, and trade shows
presentations.
• Vendor Data Base. Provides information on
environmental consulting services, hazardous
waste treaters, disposers, and manufacturing
equipment.
• Technical Library. Provides cost effective
pollution prevention case studies and free
publications on financial resources, hazardous
waste regulations, industry specific fact sheets,
waste reduction, and compliance checklists and
videos.
The USEPA Merit Partnership for Pollution
Prevention Program has several pollution
prevention projects in progress, which include:
• Formation of a roundtable of major California
refiners, regulatory agencies, and pollution
prevention experts to share information;
• Creation of a Distribution Spill Prevention
Group with Dow Chemical leading the effort
to strengthen industry standards for safe
transportation of chemicals;
• Information Sharing by Northrop and other
corporations on cost-effective manufacturing
processes that reduce pollutant releases;
• Development by Xerox Corporation of a new
soldering process to replace pollutant-forming
compounds with water-based fluxes; and,
• Conduct waste minimization workshops for
small metal plating companies, sponsored by
the Metal Finishers Association of Southern
California.
Environmental Benefits
Information from numerous case studies
provided by the HTM Office shows that pollution
prevention efforts effectively reduce air emissions,
wastewater discharges, and hazardous waste
generation, as well as improved the operation of
businesses in the Los Angeles area
Los Angeles provides a leading example of how
waste reduction can be an integral part of city
business. The HTM Office's innovations and
successes have caught the attention of cities
around the world. Some have expressed interest
in replicating the office activities in their own
government structure. For example, officials from
Rio de Janeiro met with Los Angeles Mayor Tom
Bradley, officials from the Los Angeles Board of
Public Works, and members of the Mega-Cities
Project to sign an agreement that marked the
beginning Of cooperation and information
exchange on pollution reduction methods between
the two cities. Currently, other cities such as
Bangkok, Jakarta, Buenos Aires, Manila, and San
Paulo have contacted the HTM Office to set up
similar exchange agreements.
Contact For Further
Information
The Hazardous & Toxic Materials Office
200 North Spring Street, Room 353
Los Angeles, CA 90012
Ms. Donna Toy Chen (Director)
Telephone: (213) 237-1209
The Merit Partnership Program
U.S. EPA Region 9
75 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, CA 94105-3901
Mr. Dan Reich (Co-Chair)
Telephone: (415) 744-1336
oEPA
-------
Pollution Prevention
Success Stories -
Local Government
School District Gets A Lesson in
Pollution Prevention
School districts have a range of activities with
the potential to generate waste. Vehicle
maintenance and repair, building cleaning and
maintenance, grounds keeping, and instructional
and specialized programs such as science
laboratories and art classes are just some of the
areas that produce waste. As of the 1993-1994
school year, approximately 595 school districts
operated in the State of New Jersey. The New
Jersey Institute of Technology (NJIT), with
funding from the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency and the New Jersey Department of
Environmental Protection (NJDEP), assessed
one school district's administration activities and
high schools for appropriate pollution prevention
opportunities.
The district operates from a common
administration building which includes a supply
warehouse, facilities for maintenance and repair
of 56 assorted vehicles, and a wood shop for
building and repairing furniture. There is also a
high school, a middle school, and six elementary
schools. The pollution prevention opportunity
assessment by the State officials focused on the
administration building and the high school.
Selected pollution prevention opportunities are
listed in Table 1.
Some pollution prevention practices were
already in place at the school district: ordering
only the amount of materials that could be used
in a single year; stocking materials near the point
of use; converting solvent-based copiers with dry
copier systems; replacing solvent-based paint
products with water-based paints and cleaners;
and recycling cutting oil used in the industrial
arts metal shop. Laboratory wastes, solvents, and
spent anitfreeze were treated as hazardous wastes
and collected by a contractor for off site treatment.
Operating Results
Upon implementation of pollution prevention
opportunities, a significant amount of waste was
reduced. Hundreds of empty paint cans that
required some form of waste disposal were
eliminated. An estimated 67 percent reduction
in cleaning solvent wastes would occur if spilled
chemicals and leaking containers were stored
properly and inspected regularly. Antifreeze
waste was completely eliminated and
approximately 50 percent of the hazardous waste
from laboratory experiments were no longer
generated. In summary, over 600 gallons of waste
were (potentially) prevented for this one high
school and administration building.
Extrapolating this number to the 595 operating
school districts in New Jersey, over 360,000
gallons of waste could be reduced.
Cost, Savings, and Tradeoffs
The following table outlines the various costs
and savings achieved in implementing the
pollution prevention opportunities mentioned
above:
&EPA
-------
School District Gets A Lesson in
Pollution Prevetion
Table 1. Pollution Prevention Opportunities
Waste
Generated
Pollution Prevention Opportunity
Empty Paint Cans
1. Purchase paint in returnable containers.
2. Reduce varieties of paint purchased by consolidation of uses. Consider acquisition
of equipment for tinting and purchasing large containers of base color paint and
tinting to standard colors.
Spilled Chemical and
Leaking Containers
1. Store containers to allow for visual inspection.
2. Maintain appropriate distance between reactive or incompatible chemicals,
store chemicals in separate sections to minimize cross contamination.
3. Store materials near point of use.
Sawdust and Wood
Scraps
Use residues from woodworking for composting or for mulch.
Solvent-based
Coatings
Continue to seek water-based substitutes with needed performance."
Degreasing Solvents
Use contracted solvent supply and recycling service.
Waste Oil
Install collection/drip pans to recover spills.
Antifreeze Solution
Utilize technology for recovery, reconditioning, and reuse.
Laboratory Waste
1. Modify student experiments to use smaller amounts of hazardous chemicals.
Extend use of video material.
2. Decline industrial gifts of chemicals that include materials that will not be
used or quantities of materials larger than can be used within a reasonable time.
3. Develop central inventory of chemicals to encourage sharing among high school
laboratory and middle and elementary schools.
Art Projects Wastes
Select and encourage use of nontoxic and nonhazardous materials for art projects.*
Primary pollution prevention advantage would be reduced levels of solvent emissions.
vvEPA
-------
School District Gets A Lesson in
Pollution Prevention
Cost, Savings, and Tradeoffs
The replacement of solvent-based
coatings with water-based coatings and
the pollution prevention measures
implemented for art project wastes
were designed to reduce the level of
atmospheric emissions resulting from
solvent evaporation. Therefore, a complete cost
analysis of these pollution prevention methods
was not completed. However, annual savings of
at least $3,000 were identified for this school
district. Extrapolated to the 595 active school
districts in New Jersey, the annual savings are
approximately $1.8 million.
Environmental Benefits
In addition to the potential cost savings,
fugitive emissions to the atmosphere would be
greatly reduced. The potential of exposing
students and school officials to hazardous
chemicals is also greatly reduced.
Table 2. Various Costs and Savings
Waste- Annual||, An™al-Savin8s
Stream i
Cost to Payback
Pollution Prevention
Empty Paint Cans
Spilled Chemical
Sawdust and Wood
Scraps
Decreasing Solvents
Waste Oil
Antifreeze Solution
Laboratory Waste
1.$500
2. $0
$750
Unknown
$150
$195
$600
$700
$500 I $0
$450 ] $750
:
$500 I $0
$200 $0
$150 $2,000
$30 $50
$900 . $5,000
$350 0
0
1.5
Immediate
Immediate
14
1.6
5.5
Immediate
Contact For Further
Information
Mary Ann Curran, Pollution Prevention
Research Branch, Risk Reduction Engineering
Laboratory, USEPA, Cincinnati, OH 45268
Sources
Pollution Prevention Successes: A Compendium
of Case Studies from the Northeast States.
Northeast Waste Management Officials'
Association. December 1993.
vvEPA
-------
Pollution Prevention
Success Stories -
Local Government
Tastes Better - Costs Less
The Village of LeRoy is
a rural community located
in western New York State
with a population of
approximately 5,000.
LeRoy depends on two
village-owned reservoirs, Lake LeRoy and Lake
LaGrange, for its water supply. For a number of
years, the village experienced serious taste, odor,
and color problems with its water supply. As a
result, the village installed a new water filtration
plant in 1983. Improvements were immediate,
but brief. Within 2 years, the problems
reoccurred.
In 1986, officials from Kent State University
identified the source of the water quality
problems to be algal blooms and weed growth
resulting from nutrient runoff into the lakes from
nearby farms. Traditionally, the village would
remove the weed overgrowth, select source water
for the village from higher lake elevations to
avoid the anoxic zones in the lakes, and aerate
the water using lake circulators. However, the
farmers in the surrounding area realized that a
long-term watershed management program was
necessary to recover the lakes and prevent further
degradation. In 1988, these farmers initiated the
reservoir and watershed management program
and created the LeRoy Watershed Advisory
Committee (LeWAC).
LeWAC, in cooperation with the Cornell
Cooperative Extension from Genesee County,
aimed to improve the water quality, abate nitrate
contamination, and enhance agricultural and
recreational activities in the watershed. To
accomplish this, LeWAC developed programs
focused on fertilizer use and controlling nutrient
runoff.
Approach Implemented
To control the amount of nutrients leaching to
the lakes, a survey of the farmers in the watershed
area was initiated. The survey focused on
existing land use and farming practices. Soil
sampling kits were provided to the farmers, who
in turn were responsible for testing the nitrogen
content of their soil and decreasing fertilizer use
if the nitrogen content was shown to be excessive.
LeWAC members met with individual fanners
to review proper fertilizer and manure
management practices and the need to control
land erosion through the use of filter strips.
LeWAC also developed an education program
to better inform the surrounding community, to
increase cooperation with the landowners and
residents, and to provide a forum to demonstrate
the equipment used for lake monitoring and
testing.
Operating Results
Since the inception of LeWAC, the public
water supply no longer has taste, odor, or color
problems. In addition, the following conservation
practices have also been implemented:
• Installation of diversion ditches, open ditches,
grass waterways, terraces and tile drains;
• Initiation of permanent hayland planting, tree
planting, and forest management; and
• Introduction of pasture management,
rotational grazing, and no-till and conservation
management.
vvEPA
-------
Tastes Better - Costs Less
Cost, Savings, and Tradeoffs
Initially, funding for the LeRoy
watershed management program was
not available. However, the Village
of LeRoy pursued the development
of the program and sought to increase
awareness with the resources it had
available. Eventually, funding for the
$206,000 project was obtained through a series
of grants and loans from the New York State Cost-
Share Aquatics, the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, the Cooperative Extension and Soil
Conservation Service, and the village landowners.
Financially, the Village of LeRoy was able to
decrease the use of chemicals in the area at an
estimated savings of $9,000 per year. Additional
capital improvements have also been eliminated
that would have been necessary to comply with
the safe drinking water requirements for the public
water supply system. Detailed information on
these capital improvements was not available.
Environmental Benefits
The Village of LeRoy is an example of how a
rural community with a population under 25,000
can successfully implement a reservoir and
watershed management program. Not only did
the program improve the quality of the water and
abate nitrate contamination, it also enhanced the
agricultural and recreational activities in the
watershed.
Contact For Further
Information
Administrator for the Village of LeRoy,
Telephone: (716) 768-2527
The Great Lakes Pollution Prevention Centre,
Telephone: (800) 667-979.
Source
Pollution Prevention Case Study, Watershed
Management. Village of LeRoy, New York. Great
Lakes Pollution Prevention Centre.
oEPA
-------
Pollution Prevention
Success Stories -
Publically Owned Treatment Works
Septic Facility Reduces Odors
While Increasing Capacity
The Greater Lawrence Sanitary District
(GLSD) has a 52-million gallon per day, acti-
vated sludge, wastewater treatment plant to serve
approximately 168,000 residents on the local
system. In addition to piped wastes from homes
and businesses, GLSD provides septic disposal
for communities
throughout the
Merrimack Valley and
sourthern New Hamp-
shire. When the sew-
age receiving facility
operated in excess of
40,000-gallons per day
(gpd), unacceptable
odors escaped into the
surrounding commu-
nity. This problem
seemed to occur most
frequently during the
warmer months. The
available pollution
(i.e., odor) control
technologies were
only effective up to
40,000 gpd. As a re-
sult, GLSD was losing
sewage revenue by op-
erating below its ap-
proved sewage receiv-
ing capacity of
100,000 gpd.
Figure 1. Hydro-Vac® Unit Schematic
_^ To the Influent Channel
(
1
\
i
i
-^ •
,....,, Original Subsurface Discharge
jV$gjgg!.~~.^JZ~«...^ «
! SEPTIC TANK
j (52,000 Gal Ca
Centrifugal Pneumatic j
Himps Ejectors ,.- , i
L:
i
r ^
i I
[II
^1 * * :
z * $ ^ i -
| HI
/'\/"S/"H /
mists' L
Vj/ V,-: '••-./
L * : ' & '
• %
\ f
»w» Origin*! Equip.
— Upgraded Equip.
[ i
'DRO-VA
)
' ^
L i
fc^ "^ ^"
\
i
I
P.) |
:
b l
r
i
k 1 ifc
71 — ••*•
Approach Selected
In early 1992, State officials recommended us-
ing an aeration system that would both oxygenr
ate the sewage and completely eliminate genera-
tion of hydrogen sulfide (H2S) during handling
and storage. This was a radical departure from
typical wastewater treat-
ment plants that use me-
chanical stirrers or
bubble diffusers to
bubble air or oxygen
through the liquid waste
as part of the sewage
handling process. This
activity results in the re-
lease of H2S, a principal
cause of noxious odors.
Traditional end-of-pipe
use of oxidation chemi-
cals such as potassium
permanganate and hy-
drogen peroxide sue*
cessfully control the
odorous H2S, but only
for limited quantities of
waste. These types of
chemicals also pose fire
and explosion hazards,
and in high concentra-
tions, can themselves be
highly toxic.
vvEPA
-------
Facility Reduces Odors
While Increasing Capacity
Approach Implemented
In July 1992, GLSD was the first wastewater
treatment plant to put into operation a wastewa-
ter conditioner unit to oxygenate and condition
sewage. (See Figure 1.) The conditioner pumps
wastewater or sewage through a high velocity
nozzle into a low velocity mixing chamber where
the material is mixed with aspirated air and the
solids are reduced to macroscopic levels. This
releases the embedded grease and gas bubbles
trapped within the organic solids. If enough oxy-
gen is introduced into the liquid to combine with
all the available hydrogen (produced by the
anaerobic digestive process), then no hydrogen
ions are available to form H2S.
Cost, Savings, and Tradeoffs
Since installation of the conditioner unit, GLSD
has been able to increase its sew-
age receiving volume to well be-
yond 40,000 gpd without creating
offensive odors and without use of
chemical conditioners. (See Table
1.) GLSD experienced no mechani-
cal or process problems with the new method of
septage handling after 15 months of operation.
Prior to installation of the unit, GLSD was
spending $2,000 per month on odor-reducing
chemicals. More significantly, the plant was los-
ing up to $2,700 per day in operating revenue be-
cause the facility was receiving less than its ap-
proved sewage receiving capacity of 100,000 gpd.
A capital investment of $77,000 was required
for the conditioner system and its installation.
This investment was paid back within 4 months
of system installation due primarily to increases
in the volume received and the elimination of the
$2,000 per month cost for odor reducing chemi-
cals. The system installation payback calcula-
tion is shown in Table 1.
Environmental Benefits
In addition to reducing noxious odors, GLSD
has also eliminated storage of odor-controlling,
but hazardous, agents at the facility. Also, prior
to installation of the unit, sewage had to be deliv-
ered during both day and night shifts to handle
the maximum capacity of 40,000 gpd. Now, due
to the increase in sewage receiving capabilities,
all sewage receiving can be accomplished during
the day shift where more operating and labora-
tory personnel are available to handle and test it.
Contact For Further
Information
Office of Techical Assistance, Executive Office
of Environmental Affairs, Suite 2109, 100
Cambridge Street, Boston, MA, 02202
Telephone: (617) 727-3827
Table 1. Wastewater Conditioner Installation Payback
Average Monthly
_ Daily _ || Revenue Monthly Capital
140,000 gpd 11 Sewage
Savings Remaining
July (23) i
Aug(21)i
Sep(21) i
Oct(21) |
Nov (20) i
Dec (22) i
57,467
56.552
66,188
70,669
66,598
51,714
17,467
16,552
26,188
30,669
26,598
11,714
! $18,078
! $15,642
! $24,748
| $28,982
I $23,938
| $11,597
$2,000
$2,000
$2,666
$2,666
$2,666
$2,666
! ($56,922)
i ($39,280)
! ($12,532)
j +$18,450
j +$44,388
i +$57,985
The figures in parenthesis in the "Month"
of days that sewage was received; the facility is open Monday thru Friday.
vvEPA
-------
Pollution Prevention
Success Stories -
State Government
Connecticut Initiative Encourages
Pollution Prevention
Hazardous waste management in the United
States is dynamic. The last 10 years have seen
major shifts in hazardous waste generation,
increased demand for waste management
services, and sporadic shortfalls in available
capacity. While commercial capacity is generally
sufficient in the near term, States must remain
aware of national trends in hazardous waste
management because of the nature of the industry
and the changing regulations that govern
hazardous waste. A program that encourages
facilities to properly manage and reduce their
hazardous waste generation is important in any
State to ensure that management capacity
remains available to industries that rely on it.
Connecticut has developed such a program to
provide information about pollution prevention
initiatives at other facilities, and to provide
expertise to help facilities identify and implement
pollution prevention techniques within their own
facilities.
In 1983, the Connecticut
Hazardous Waste Management
Service (Service) was
established as an independent,
nonregulatory entity, with
statutory responsibility to
promote and encourage
appropriate management of hazardous waste in
the State. The Service's Hazardous Waste
Program, through the Connecticut Technical
Assistance Program (ConnTAP), contributes to
successful waste minimization efforts by
generators throughout the State. ConnTAP
encourages waste reduction, recycling, and sound
hazardous waste management practices by
providing Connecticut businesses with free,
technical and financial assistance. The program
focuses on multimedia pollution prevention (i.e.,
minimizing air emissions, wastewater discharges,
and hazardous waste requiring land disposal).
Approach Implemented
Some of the services provided by ConnTAP
include: site visits that bring retired industry
professionals to businesses to offer customized
pollution prevention solutions and an information
and referral hotline to answer requests for
publications, technical information, referrals to
State and Federal agencies, and information on
ConnTAP programs. It also provides a library
with over 1,000 documents on hazardous waste
management, waste minimization, and pollution
prevention; videotapes on pollution prevention
and hazardous waste management, and access to
EPA computerized data bases that provide the
latest technical information; a free quarterly
newsletter that features waste minimization case
studies and articles on pollution prevention; and
workshops and seminars on pollution prevention
that promote technology transfer and pollution
prevention training.
In 1988, ConnTAP established its ongoing
Matching Challenge Grant Program to help
recipients identify opportunities for pollution
prevention to evaluate the feasibility of specific
methods and technologies for preventing
pollution and to generally improve waste
management. Also, through the Connecticut
&EPA
-------
Connecticut Initiative Encourages
Pollution Prevention
Development Authority, small Connecticut
businesses can receive loans up to $250,000 to
implement pollution prevention projects that are
approved by ConnTAP.
The Matching Challenge Grant Program
demonstrates that a relatively small amount of
money can go far toward minimizing or
eliminating hazardous waste and encouraging
pollution prevention. From its inception through
1994, the grant program has awarded about
$100,000 to 22 Connecticut organizations.
Environmental Results
As a result of this program, the Service
anticipates a total annual reduction of almost
1,000 tons of hazardous metal hydroxide sludge.
Over 560-million gallons of water can also be
saved annually as a result of the grant program
projects. Further projections of the grant
program's impact include an annual 177-ton
reduction in other hazardous waste and hazardous
air emissions. In addition ConnTAP has been
selected by EPA to participate as one of six
Location of ConnTAP and WRITE Project Cases
Source: ConnTAP Quarterly, Fall 1993
vvEPA
-------
Connecticut Initiative Encourages
Pollution Prevention
technical assistance programs in the Waste
Reduction Through Innovative Technology
Evaluation (WRITE) project. The WRITE
project evaluates, in typical workplace
environments, examples of innovative or
prototype commercial technologies for pollution
prevention. The success of the project is
dramatically illustrated in the following
examples:
• Automatic Plating of Bridgeport, Inc. invited
ConnTAP to help evaluate the use of
electrodialysis technology in its nickel plating
process. Electrodialysis allows recovery and
reuse of both nickel and rinsewater and
removes as much as 90 percent of the nickel
so that acceptably clean water is recycled back
to the process. This recirculation reduced
wastewater generation by more than 1-million
gallons each year. Automatic Plating also
found that almost 30,000 pounds of nickel
could be recovered and reused each year. The
capital cost of the equipment, for purchase and
installation, was $110,000, with an estimated
payback time of 1 year. The system has
relatively high operating costs due to its high
energy and maintenance requirements.
However, these costs are offset by the value
of the recovered nickel and the savings from
elimination of wastewater treatment.
• Quality Rolling and Deburring Company, Inc.
(QRD) in Thomaston wanted ConnTAP to
evaluate the recovery system that it had been
operating for a year on its chromating line.
ConnTAP concluded that the recovery system
had potential use in many other manufacturing
applications that generate wastewater. The
fully-automated recovery system unit
combined vacuum evaporation and flash
distillation, in conjunction with a patented
liquid/vapor separation system to remove
chromate, zinc, and other dissolved solids from
the wastewater. The system provided a
continuous supply of good quality rinsewater
back to the chromating line. The closed-loop
recirculation unit prevented nearly 450,000
gallons of wastewater from being generated
each year. The contaminant stream is
concentrated to 200 gallons per year, and
disposed of offsite. QRD realized a $22,000
savings in annual operating costs for
wastewater treatment alone. The capital cost
of the equipment was $87,000, with an
estimated payback time of 4 years.
Contact For Further
Information
Connecticut Hazardous Waste Management
Service
900 Asylum Avenue, Suite 360
Hartford, CT 06150-1904
Sources
"1993 Status Report on Connecticut Hazardous
Waste Generation and Management."
Connecticut Hazardous Waste Management
Service. June 30,1993.
"ConnTAP Quarterly." Volume 7, Number 3.
1994. Connecticut Technical Assistance
Program.
vvEPA
-------
Pollution Prevention
Success Stories -
State Government
Ohio Promotes Pollution
Prevention Goals
Ohio's pollution prevention goal is to reduce
solid and hazardous waste generation statewide
by 50 percent and toxic chemical releases by 75
percent by the year 2000 from 1987 levels. Ohio
defines pollution prevention as the use of source
reduction techniques to reduce risk to public
health, safety, welfare, and the environment. As
a second preference, Ohio encourages the use of
environmentally sound recycling. Ohio believes
that pollution prevention avoids cross-media
transfers of waste and/or pollutants and is
multimedia in scope.
On September 20, 1991, Ohio's Governor
George V. Voinovich announced the formation
of the Pollution Prevention Development
Workgroup (PPDW). The purpose of the
workgroup was to develop and coordinate
pollution prevention initiatives throughout State
government, businesses, and consumers in Ohio
for implementation of pollution prevention
activities. PPDW developed a pollution
prevention strategy for Ohio that proposes 121
initiatives to promote pollution prevention
throughout all sectors of Ohio.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Prevention is integrating pollution prevention into
every program and operation activity of the
Agency. Ohio EPA is making a parallel transition
toward an environmental protection program that
more strongly promotes pollution prevention.
Approach Implemented
The Ohio Prevention First Program
A major initiative by the State of Ohio is the
Ohio Prevention First Program, which involves
voluntary pollution prevention and pollution
reduction planning. It has three primary
objectives. The first requires the 'Top 100" toxic
chemical reporters (based on the 1991 Toxic
Release Inventory (TRI)
reports) to prepare
comprehensive pollution
prevention plans. The second to
encourages facilities to initiate
or expand existing pollution
prevention or pollution
reduction practices through development of
comprehensive pollution prevention plans. The
third publicizes the exemplary pollution
prevention or pollution reduction efforts being
made by these organizations. Currently, 82 of the
"top 100" toxic chemical reporters, and 150
companies overall, are participating in this
program.
The Ohio Prevention Loan Program
On November 21, 1994, Ohio's Governor
announced creation of the $10-million Ohio
Pollution Prevention Loan Program to provide
low interest capital improvement loans for the
construction and/or purchase of equipment to
complete pollution prevention activities at small-
and medium-sized facilities throughout Ohio.
Loan amounts range from $25,000 to $200,000
per facility and have a fixed interest rate currently
set at 2/3 the prime rate. The program is jointly
administered by the Ohio Department of
Development and the Ohio EPA Office of
Pollution Prevention.
vvEPA
-------
Pollution Prevention Activities in Ohio
33/50 Program
Ohio EPA is involved with U.S. EPA's 33/50
Program which is a voluntary initiative seeking
a 50 percent reduction of 17 targeted chemicals
by 1995. There are 490 Ohio facilities
associated with parent companies participating
hi the 33/50 program.
Waste Minimization Measurement
Pilot Project
The Ohio EPA Waste Minimization
Measurement Pilot Project is a joint U.S. EPA/
Ohio EPA pilot project to determine effective
measures in. waste minimization and pollution
prevention (i.e., assessment of the benefits and
shortcomings of pollution prevention projects).
Lake Erie Basin Pollution Prevention
Activities
Ohio EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention
activities in the Lake Erie Basin include projects
that dealt with the following:
1991 -1995 Achievements
Technical Assistance
• Development of Pollution Prevention Fact Sheets (18).
• Development of Pollution Prevention Information Packages (6).
• Development of a Guidance Manual for Waste Minimization Plan-
ning Guidance for Ohio Hazardous Waste Treatment, Storage, and
Disposal Facilities in the Lake Erie Basin.
• Provided Technical Assistance to 15 Waste Generators focusing on
the Lake Erie Basin portion of Ohio.
• Provided Technical Assistance for Preparing and Implementing
Waste Minimization and Pollution Prevention Facility Plans. (Informa-
tion available on OPP bulletin board)
Regulatory Integration
• Review and Analysis of Waste Management Alternative Plans Re-
quired Through Ohio's Waste Profile Review System.
• Compiled Series of Recommendations for Improving the U.S. EPA's
Great Lakes Pollution Prevention Strategy.
• Review of Waste Generator Survey to Identify Barriers to Pollution
Prevention.
• Analysis of Ohio EPA's Efforts to Integrate Pollution Prevention into the
Agency's Regulatory Programs.
• Investigation of the Extent to Which Laboratory Waste Contribute to
the Generation of Hazardous Waste.
• Revision of the Ohio EPA Pollution Prevention Strategy.
Pollution Prevention Data Management
• Analysis of Hazardous Waste Generation and Management Data in
Order to Provide Foundation for Future Pollution Prevention Activities.
• Assessment of Hazardous Waste Minimization and Toxic Release
Inventory Information.
xvEPA
-------
Pollution Prevention Activities in Ohio
Green Lights Program
Ohio EPA is a member of the Green Lights
voluntary program sponsored by the U.S. EPA.
This program challenges businesses and
government agencies to reduce air pollution
associated with the production of electricity by
using energy efficient lighting.
Pollution Prevention Roundtable
Participation
Ohio EPA is a member of the National
Pollution Prevention Roundtable (NPPR) and the
Great Lakes Pollution Prevention Roundtable
(GLPPR) and serves on the Board of Directors
for the NPPR and on the Steering Committee for
the GLPPR. These organizations share
information from State, local, and Federal
programs throughout the United States (NPPR)
and the Great Lakes Region (GLPPR).
Tri-State Geographic Initiative
Ohio took part in the Tri-State Geographic
initiative that is concerned with identifying risk
reduction efforts in the Ohio River Valley.
Governor's Awards
Since 1986, Ohio EPA has coordinated the
Annual Governor's Awards for Outstanding
Achievement in Pollution Prevention. These
awards recognize companies, organizations or
individuals who have made outstanding efforts
to reduce waste.
Operating Results
Based on the Ohio Toxic Release Inventory
from 1988 through 1993, Ohio facilities
participating hi the 33/50 Program have achieved
a 24 percent reduction in the 17 chemicals
targeted in the program. Overall, a 55 percent
decrease in the 17 chemicals targeted in the 33/
50 Program has been achieved in Ohio when
facilities not participating in the program are
included.
On July 9, 1992, the State of Ohio signed the
U.S. EPA Green Lights Program Memorandum
of Understanding officially marking Ohio's
participation as a partner in the Green Lights
Program. The State of Ohio expects to save
approximately $4 million annually in energy
costs, in addition to saving natural resources and
reducing emissions from power plants.
Contact for Further
Information
Mike Kelley, Ohio EPA
Office of Pollution Prevention
1800 WaterMark Drive
Columbus, OH 43215-1099
Telephone: (614) 644-3469
&EPA
-------
Pollution Prevention
Success Stories -
State Government
Techniques and Technologies for
Toxic Use Reduction
Within the Commonwealth of Massachusetts
there are few facilities and little capacity to
dispose of hazardous wastes. Historically, there
has been major public resistance against siting
new hazardous waste facilities. Therefore, a
program to motivate facilities in the
Commonwealth to reduce its hazardous waste
generation was essential.
In July 1989, the Massachusetts Legislature
enacted the Toxics Use Reduction Act (TURA)
by a unanimous vote. The Act establishes a goal
of 50 percent reduction in the Commonwealth's
toxic waste generation by
1997, and addresses this
issue by promoting toxics
use reduction achieved
through: process
modification, substitution,
improved operation and
maintenance, product
reformulation, and recycling. The Act focuses
on reducing or eliminating the use of toxic
substances and by-products in the production
process itself.
The facilities covered under the Act include
those that employ the equivalent of 10 or more
full-time employees, and are primarily engaged
in one of the following activities: mining;
manufacturing; transportation, communications,
gas, electric, and sanitary services; wholesale
trade; and certain service industries. The
Massachusetts Department of Environmental
Protection (DEP) has a specific list of chemicals
that are covered and usage thresholds for these
chemicals that trigger planning and reporting
requirements for the covered facilities. DEP can
also require the submission of information from
a facility even if it does not use these chemicals
in quantities above the threshold amounts.
The Act requires that covered facilities
establish a baseline year to
measure future pollution
reduction progress and submit
reports containing information
on emissions annually.
However, the core of the Act is
the development, by industry, of
toxic material use reduction
plans for each facility covered
under the Act. Covered facilities
must declare 2- and 5-year goals for toxics
reduction and develop plans to meet those goals.
The plans must cover: current and projected
toxics use; economic impacts of each chemical
used; appropriate technologies for meeting
reduction goals; training, technologies, and
procedures to be implemented; anticipated
savings; and an implementation schedule for the
planned program.
Under the Act, the Office of Technical
Assistance (OTA) was formed to provide
industries with a nonregulatory resource base to
assist in the use reduction planning process. OTA
offers a variety of free services to Massachusetts
businesses. The Act provides funding for the
implementation of the program through a scaled
fee structure. Each facility is charged a fee based
upon the number of employees at the facility and
the number of chemicals that are used above the
thresholds, with maximum fees established.
Approach Implemented
There have been a number of instances where
simple process changes and other pollution
prevention techniques have been successfully
implemented at Massachusetts facilities. Two
examples involving implementing simple
changes that improve operating practices through
process modifications follow.
vvEPA
-------
Techniques and Technologies for
Toxic Use Reduction
• The Kilmartin Tool Company in southeastern
Massachusetts used 300 gallons of ozone
depletion chemical (chlorofluorocarbons or
CFCs) per year as degreasers for a stamping
operation that was performed six times per
year. Although the facility employed good
management practices with its degreasing unit,
the rising cost and eventual phaseout of CFCs
prompted further conservation. The facility
decided that to reduce evaporative losses, it
would pump the CFCs from the degreaser
when it was not being used into capped 55-
gallon drums. The procedure reduced the CFC
purchases from 300 to 50 gallons per year, with
the corresponding purchase cost reduced from
$6,000 to $1,000 per year.
• The Lowell Corporation of Worcester, Massa-
chusetts, is a rachet manufacturer that uses zinc
phosphate to improve the corrosion resistance of
its products. Its phosphating process was dis-
charging wastewaters containing zinc at concen-
trations exceeding the limits specified in its per-
mit. If this process was shut down, the facility
would have had to send the parts out to a vendor
tobephosphated. There-
fore, the facility invited
OTA to visit the plant
and explore use reduc-
tion options. OTA pro-
posed the addition of a
dead rinse tank after the
phosphate tank to de-
crease zinc drag-out.
Past experience had
shown that a dead rinse
tank can reduce drag-out
by 50 percent. The tank
took 10 minutes to in-
stall, and the concentra-
tion of zinc in the dis-
charge dropped (over 60
percent) from 4.77 parts
per million (ppm) to 1.55
ppm (Lowell's permit
discharge limit is 2.61
ppm). The company es-
timates that the savings
for not having to contract
out the phosphating pro-
cess to a vendor at roughly $26,000 annually.
As examples show, the implementation of even
simple pollution prevention activities at facilities
can have multiple benefits. As an initial motivator,
cost savings are derived from reduced raw material
purchase costs and reduced reporting fees. Other
benefits include reduced waste disposal costs and
the reduction or elimination of potential fines for
violating a permit discharge limit. OTA also
sponsored the Central-Mass Pilot Project, which
culminated a progression of pollution prevention
efforts by expanding and coordinating the
Commonwealth's technical assistance program
with regulatory source reduction efforts. The
focus of the project was one industrial sector,
metal-using industries, in central Massachusetts,
centered around the Upper Blackstone River
Watershed. A 73 percent reduction in toxics use
was documented from interviews with facilities
that participated in the Central-Mass project.
Overall toxics use reduction for 18 selected
facilities in the Commonwealth can be seen in the
Figure 1.
Toxics Use Reductions
(18 companies, 24 chemicals)
Reduction
Remaining
Total input before TUR
1,717,523 Ibs
Total pounds reduced
1,239,178 Ibs
Media
Pounds
Red
uced
Percent
Reduced
11* induct
| Mr
| Waste Water
j Miscellaneous
I Hazwaste
47,401 Ibs
526,434 Ibs
400,511 Ibs
3,097 Ibs
171,736 Ibs
4
42
40
Ne|
14
Source: The Central Massachusetts Pollution Prevention Project Summary
Report, Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Office of Technical Assistance
Contact For
Further
Information
Office of Technical
Assistance, Suite 1904
100 Cambridge Street
Boston, MA 02202
Telephone: (617) 727-
3260
Source
Fact Sheet: "Mass Re-
duction; Techniques And
Technologies For Toxics
Use Reduction." Massa-
chusetts Department of
Environmental Protec-
tion, Office of Technical
Assistance. Boston, Mas-
sachusetts.
&EPA
-------
Pollution Prevention
Success Stories -
Transportation
Biodiesel: "Not Blowing Smoke"
The combustion of diesel fuel in mass transit
vehicles generates emissions such as paniculate
matter (PM), hydrocarbons (HC), carbon mon-
oxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and sulfur
oxides (SOx). The Clean Air Act Amendments
of 1990 (CAAA) and the corresponding U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regu-
lations specify the reduction of these pollutants
by imposing requirements such as stricter emis-
sion standards for newer vehicles and limiting
the sulfur content in the fuels.
To meet the requirements of the new CAAA,
and potential, tougher diesel regulations in the
future, transit authorities across the country have
begun to consider the use of alternate fuels for
their mass transit vehicles. In 1993, more than
30 transit authorities participated in a program,
sponsored by the biodiesel industry, to evaluate
biodiesel as an alternative fuel. Biodiesel (me-
thyl esters) is a cleaner-burning fuel made from
natural, renewable resources such as vegetable
oils.
Approach Implemented
In 1993, the biodiesel industry distributed
enough fuel to log nearly 7-million road miles in
more than 100 demonstrations involving more
than 1,500 vehicles. During that time, transit
authorities and school districts recorded infor-
mation on emissions, performance, and oil con-
taminants. The practical road demonstrations in-
cluded million-mile tests with transit authorities
in Baltimore, Cincinnati, and Oakland, as well
as more than 30 50,000-mile tests. For this pro-
gram, mass transit authorities used a mix of 20
percent biodiesel and 80 percent petroleum die-
sel. However, some municipalities have used a
blend of up to 40 percent biodiesel without ex-
periencing any operational problems.
Operating Results
When biodiesel was used in place of conven-
tional diesel fuel, transit managers noticed a re-
duction in smoke, odor, and diesel engine emis-
sions. Some operators reported a 20 to 30 per-
cent reduction of smoke. In tests conducted by
independent researchers comparing emissions
from vehicles using biodiesel vs. conventional
diesel fuel, PM was reduced by 31 percent, HC
was reduced by 47 percent, CO was reduced by
21 percent, and NOx was reduced by 3 percent.
SOx emissions were not quantified, but would
also be reduced, compared to conventional fu-
els, because biodiesel contains no sulfur, while
diesel fuel contains about 0.05'percent sulfur.
Biodiesel performs similarily'to petroleum die-
sel in terms of torque, horsepower, and miles per
gallon but provides about 2 percent fewer Btus/
gallon than conventional diesel. Also, mainte-
nance shop supervisors have noted that biodiesel
appears to provide slightly better lubrication to
engine parts than standard diesel fuel.
Cost, Savings, and Tradeoffs
The cost of biodiesel depends on the
cost of its components, diesel, and veg-
etable oil. In general, a 20/80 blend can
cost up to 40 cents per gallon more than
petroleum diesel. However, not all of
the costs of meeting tougher emission
standards have been quantified. Therefore, an
vvEPA
-------
Biodiesel: "Not Blowing Smoke
99
emission management system based on biodiesel
could be an inexpensive option for meeting these
standards. According to an April 1994 study com-
missioned by the National SoyDiesel Develop-
ment Board, the cost of biodiesel can range from
about 18 cents per mile for a commercial me-
dium-duty truck fleet to 28 cents per mile for a
transit fleet. The study also found that a truck or
bus fleet using 20 percent biodiesel blended with
conventional diesel would experience lower to-
tal annual costs than with other alternatives.
Other Benefits
Biodiesel is made from natural, renewable re-
sources such as soybean and vegetable oils.
(Based on the Institute for Local Self-Reliance,
one unit of energy used to produce biodiesel can
supply a minimum of 2.5 units of fuel energy.)
The primary by-product of the biodiesel produc-
tion process is glycerine, which has more than
1,600 commercial applications. A principal feed-
stock source of biodiesel is soybeans, amajorcrop
produced by nearly 400,000 farmers in 29 States
across the Nation. The supply (equivalent) of 40-
million gallons/year is nearly equal to projected
demand if biodiesel use is implemented in all ur-
ban transportation buses.
The use of biodiesel requires no expensive en-
gine modifications. Because it has a higher flash
point, offers low-pressure storage at ambient tem-
peratures, handles like diesel, and is nontoxic and
biodegradable, biodiesel is safer to transport and
safer for the environment than conventional die-
sel fuel.
Contact For Further
Information
National SoyDiesel Development Board
1907 Williams Street
P.O. Box 104898
Jefferson City, MO 65110-4898
Telephone: (800) 769-3437
Sources
Passenger Transport, APTA, May 16,1994.
Excerpt from April 1994 issue of "Bus Ride."
Biodiesel Information Kit, National SoyDiesel
Development Board, July 1994.
xvEPA
-------
Pollution Prevention
Success Stories -
Transportation
Cleaner Bus Operations and
Maintenance
Bus (and rail) transportation companies rec-
ognize the need to keep their revenue-generat-
ing equipment constantly serviced with the goal
of maximizing the longevity of the equipment.
Operations in bus servicing include refueling,
fluids check and replenishing, interior and exte-
rior cleaning, and washing. Principal mainte-
nance operations are engine and under chassis
washing, minor repairs, tune-ups, and chassis lu-
brication. Both bus servicing and maintenance
generate significant amounts of oily wastes and
wastewaters.
The Washington Metropolitan Area Transit
Authority (WMATA) Four Mile Run bus main-
tenance facility in Virginia received a Notice of
Violation of its pretreatment permit for effluent
violations of lead, cadmium, and total petroleum
hydrocarbons. All sanitary sewers from the fa-
cility discharge to the Arlington County Pollu-
tion Control Treatment Plant located across the
street from the plant. The facility had no central
treatment system, and most oily wastes were con-
veyed to oil-water separators located near the
discharge points to the sanitary sewer.
The discharge problems appeared to result
from several sources that, when combined, were
overloading the oil-water separators and adding
emulsifiers to the oily wastestreams that ad-
versely affected oil-water separation. In addi-
tion, the only onsite control for metals was set-
tling in sumps and separators prior to discharge.
There was no system for removing dissolved
metals in the wastewaters.
In response to the Notice of Violation,
WMATA told the Arlington County Department
of Environmental Services that rather than at-
tempt to upgrade the oil-water separators or put
in expensive metals removal systems, that the Au-
thority would conduct a pollution prevention
study that would significantly reduce all dis-
charges to the sanitary sewer. The pollution pre-
vention approach concentrated on two major
waste generating operations: bus refueling at the
bus service building and repair operations in the
bus maintenance facility. The approach would
classify all pollution prevention options into
short-term (implemented within 1 month), mod-
erate-term (implementable within 6 months), and
long-term (1 year or longer required for imple-
mentation). The 1-month pollution .prevention
study resulted in identification of 24 actions that
could reduce the quantity and improve the qual-
ity of the discharge.
Approach Implemented
Some pollution prevention measures that are
scheduled for implementation at WMATA for
both the bus service building and the bus. main-
tenance building are shown below and are iden-
tified as either short-term (S), medium-term (M),
or long-term (L) solutions.
Bus Service Building
• Reduce fuel and oil spills to the pavement and
surrounding soil by:
1. Retraining employees to discontinue the
practice of "topping off" or milking fuel into
buses; (S)
2. Using absorbent materials (S) and
purchasing explosion- proof portable
vvEPA
-------
Cleaner Bus Operations and
Maintenance
vacuums to immediately collect spilled
diesel fuel/oil/
hazardous materials; (L)
3. Installing new efficient refueling nozzles;
(M)
4. Using oil catchment canisters under parked
buses and adding secondary pans under bus
engines during servicing. (M)
Construct an internal trench drain system to
separate the runoff from the refueling opera-
tions and the external paved area. (L)
Increase environmental awareness by provid-
ing training; and review maintenance/repair
techniques to minimize waste generation and
contamination to the environment. (S)
Bus Maintenance Building
Clean the oil/water separators of the excess
sludge to eliminate the source of leaching
metals and oils. (S)
Discontinue use of detergent in engine wash
water and replace the engine wash system with
a medium pressure steam cleaner to eliminate
dissolving small quantities of the metal sub-
strate from the bus engine. (S)
Purchase an explosion-proof, portable vacuum
for spills of fuel/oil/hazardous materials. (M)
Disconnect the washrack from the oil/water
separator and connect it to a holding tank to
eliminate contamination to the sanitary sewer
system. (L)
Install a self-contained recycling wash system
to the wash rack to reduce the cost of liquid
disposal. (L)
Install a cabinet-type parts washer to preclude
personnel from washing bus components out-
side the building and contaminating the out-
side pavement with metals and oil. (L)
Purchase an antifreeze reclamation unit. (M)
Purchase a recycling floor scrubber (M), and
discontinue washing down the maintenance
bay areas to reduce metal and oil loading to
the oil/water separator. (S)
Operating Results
The short-term pollution prevention initiatives
were implemented quickly at the Four Mile Run
facility. Visible improvement were immediate
in the facility's discharge. The facility now ex-
pects to more effectively comply with its pre-
treatment effluent limitations, thereby reducing
Notices of Violations. Generation of solid and
hazardous waste requiring disposal has decreased
significantly.
Cost, Savings, and Tradeoffs
The waste minimization initiatives discussed
above include a combination of source reduc-
tion or elimination, recycling/ reclamation, and
wastestream reduction. The cost of implement-
ing the pollution prevention initiatives range from
negligible to approximately $145,000. A num-
ber of highly effective short-term initiatives were
implemented at a minimal cost either by chang-
ing operational procedures or through the pur-
chase of relatively inexpensive equipment.
In addition, the list of recommendations was
sent to all 15 bus and rail facilities throughout
the entire system. It is anticipated that many of
the pollution prevention activities could be imple-
mented system-wide, resulting in significant re-
ductions in discharges for the Authority and a
concomitant reduction, if not elimination, of
Notices of Violations for WMATA facilities.
Contact For Further
Information
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit
Authority
2131 Eisenhower Avenue
Alexander, VA 22319
Ms. Joan LeLacheur
Manager of Environmental Service
Telephone (202) 962-5113
xvEPA
-------
Pollution Prevention
Success Stories -
Transportation
Pollution Prevention Takes Off
The Problem
The day-to-day operations of an airport pro-
vide a multitude of pollution-related emissions.
From air discharges associated with the aircraft
and support vehicles, to the organic solvents and
deicing agents used in airline maintenance, to the
tons of daily waste generated by the restaurants,
gift shops, rest rooms, etc., pollution sources
abound at an airport. Each individual pollution
problem can be dealt with by "end-of-pipe" con-
trols, as has been done at most airports in the past.
That is, wastewaters can be conveyed to onsite
wastewater treatment plants, engine or boiler, air
emissions can be controlled after generation, and
waste can be disposed of in landfills.
At the new Denver International Airport (DIA),
the solution to airport
waste generation was to
develop pollution preven-
tion and waste manage-
ment techniques before
the waste was generated.
And, because the airport
had more than a 10-year
horizon for design and construction, the U.S. En-
vironmental Protection Agency's regional office
in Denver had the opportunity to work with the
City and DIA designers to incorporate pollution
prevention into the airport operations before it
opened its doors.
EPA assigned a full-time staff scientist and
other Agency resources to provide regulatory and
technical assistance to the new airport. Of sig-
nificance, EPA used a "multimedia" rather than
single media approach in the development of
pollution prevention strategies for DIA. In addi-
tion, the Region worked in cooperative partner-
ship with the City of Denver and County person-
nel to prevent pollution and provide a win-win
situation for all participants. By working out-
side of its traditional enforcement role, EPA Re-
gion 8 proved to be influential in the design, con-
struction, operation, and maintenance activities,
ensuring the airport minimized its impact on the
surrounding environment.
Approach Implemented
Some of the pollution prevention measures
implemented at DIA include:
• Aircraft servicing area recycling systems, in-
cluding deicing pads that reduce the release
of glycol deicing fluids to the environment;
• Wastewater volume reduction by using ultra-
low flow toilets, reclaiming wastewater for ir-
rigating outside vegetation, landscaping with
water-stingy plants, and requiring accountabil-
ity for stormwater management by onsite ten-
ant;
• A central heating and cooling plant that uses
boilers with low NOx burners and flue gas re-
circulation;
• Above ground storage tanks with floating roofs
to prevent ground-water contamination from
corrosion-produced leaks (a major problem
at airports);
• Use of fly ash from nearby power plants as
additive for 180,000 tons of concrete;
• Development of a solid waste management,
xvEPA
-------
Pollution Prevention Takes Off
plan by EPA's onsite cordinator to reduce solid
waste generation by 30 percent; and
• Addressing energy conservation through
efficient lighting consistent with the EPA's
Green Lights Program, designing a fiberglass
roof to take advantage of natural lighting, in-
cluding air intakes for terminal cooling in the
winter months, and developing an alternative
fuels policy for DIA tenants.
Operating Results
The pollution prevention measures cited above
are expected to produce impressive reductions in
various emissions and releases resulting in sig-
nificantly less impact than comparable airport
facilities. The reductions include:
• Recovery of 95 percent of the glycol deicing
agents that are applied to the aircraft. This re-
sults hi an annual savings in glycol purchases
of 760 tons per year.
• Use of low flow restroom facilities and appli-
cation of reclaimed, nonpotable wastewaters for
plant irrigation. As a result, DIA will save 700-
million gallons of water per year; enough wa-
ter to supply almost 7,500 households annually.
• New designs for automobile parking facilities,
staggered employee shifts, compressed work-
weeks, use of natural gas-fueled fleet and shuttle
vehicles, and operation of special burners and
flue gas recirculation, all contribute to reduc-
ing nitrogen oxide and carbon monox-
ide emissions by almost 100 tons per
year.
• Floating roof tanks and fuel transfer
equipment that capture and recover vapors.
This new design will eliminate over 50 tons per
year of volatile organic emissions.
Cost, Savings, and
Tradeoffs
Actual cost savings are difficult to
calculate until after the airport has been
fully operational, with the new pollu-
tion prevention activities in place. However, sav-
ings of chemicals (i.e., glycol), water, and waste
disposal can be quantified with associated annual
savings, as follows:
• Reduced glycol purchases of $650,000;
• Water consumption savings of about $1.5 mil-
lion; and
• Solid waste disposal savings of $32,000.
Because DIA is the Nation's largest airport,
there will still be a net increase in pollution over
the current conditions. However, the impacts
from additional pollution were outweighed by the
need for more efficient and modern airport
facilities, and the anticipated growth in the area's
economy with improved transportation systems.
In addition, DIA provided positive examples of
both pollution prevention by design and EPA
contributions that involve partnerships rather than
controls and oversight.
Contact For Further
Information
Dave Duster, EPA Region 8, or Jim Piatt, New
Denver Airport Office
Telephone: (303) 270-1992
dEPA
-------
Appendix A
Sources Used to Identify Pollution Prevention Success Stories
U.S. EPA and Other Federal Agencies
Biologically Integrated Orchard Systems (BIOS) Project. USEPA Region 9. 1994.
Case Study: Clairol Inc. Jocelyn Woodman. USEPA.
Chemicals In Progress Bulletin. USEPA, OPPT. Fall 1994.
Case Studies from the Pollution Prevention Information Clearinghouse, Electroplating. USEPA.
November 1989.
Design for the Environment Cleaner Technologies Substitute Assessment Outline with Examples.
USEPA. March 1993.
Design for the Environment Case Study, Printing Industry. USEPA, EPA 744-K-93-001. 1993.
Design for the Environment Case Study, Screen Printing. USEPA, EPA 744-F-93-015. 1993.
DuPont Chambers Works Waste Minimization Project. USEPA, EPA/600/R-93/203. November
1993.
EPA Announces Pollution Prevention Effort in Los Angeles. USEPA Region 9. October 1993.
EPA Pollution Prevention Grant Application. Three Affiliated Tribes. Natural Resource Department,
Environmental Division. 1994.
EPA Pollution Prevention Accomplishments: 1993. USEPA, EPA 100-R-94-002. Spring 1994.
Environmental Protection Agency's Pollution Prevention Strategy. USEPA. January 1991.
Federal Register Volume 58, Number 241. EPA Effluent Limitations Guidelines, Pretreatment
Standards, and Paperboard Category: National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for
Source Category: Pulp and Paper Production, December 1993.
Green Lights: An Enlightened Approach to Energy Efficiency and Pollution Prevention, USEPA,
EPA430-K-93-001. July 1993.
Guides to Pollution Prevention: Metal Casting and Heat Treating Industry. USEPA, EPA/625/R-92/
009. September 1992. ,
Guides to Pollution Prevention: Wood Preserving Industry. USEPA, EPA/625/R-93/014. November
1993.
-------
Guides to Pollution Prevention: The Mechanical Equipment Repair Industry. USEPA, EPA/625/R-
92/008. September 1992.
Guides to Pollution Prevention: The Metal Finishing Industry. USEPA, EPA/625/R-92/011. October
1992.
Industrial Pollution Prevention: A Critical Review. Pollution Prevention Research Branch, Risk
Reduction Engineering Laboratory. 1992.
Innovative Clean Technologies Case Studies. USEPA, EPA/600/R-93/175. August 1993.
Measuring Pollution Prevention Program Proceedings. USEPA, EPA/600/R-93/151. April 1993.
Multiprocess Wet Cleaning. USEPA, EPA 744-R-93-004. September 1993.
On-Site Waste Ink Recycling. USEPA, Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory, Office of Research
and Development. August 1992.
Presentation Notes, Federal Government Sector Pollution Prevention Strategy. USEPA, OPPT.
Pollution Prevention Accomplishments in Region 9. USEPA. Summer 1992-Fall 1993.
Pollution Prevention Information Clearinghouse.
Pollution Prevention, EPA Region 8 Inventory of Projects and Activities. USEPA Region 8. 1994.
*.
Pollution Prevention Fact Sheets. USEPA. 1991.
Pollution Prevention Through Compliance and Enforcement. USEPA. January 1992.
Pollution Prevention Incentives for States. USEPA, OPPT, EPA 742-R-93-001. 1994.
Pollution Prevention Case Studies Compendium. USEPA. March 1995.
Pollution Prevention in the Federal Government. USEPA, EPA 300-B-94-007. April 1994.
Pollution Prevention 1991, Progress on Reducing Industrial Pollutants. USEPA, EPA 21P-3003.
October 1991. -
Pollution Prevention Case Studies Compendium. USEPA, EPA/600/R-92/046. April 1992.
Promoting Pollution Prevention by Voluntary Initiatives. National Conference. USEPA. June 1994.
Quarterly Project Status Report, NICE3 Program. U.S. Department of Energy. October 1994.
Recent Experience in Encouraging the Use of Pollution Prevention in Enforcement Settlements.
-------
USEPA, Office of Enforcement. February 1994.
Report on the Environmental Protection Agency's Pollution Prevention Program. USEPA, Office of
Policy, Planning, and Evaluation and the Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics. September
1991.
Results of SARE and ACE Projects Having Implications for Pollution Prevention, Excerpts from
1994 Regional Reports to Congress. April 1994.
State Pollution Prevention Initiatives Utilizing Media-program Grant Flexibility. USEPA, EPA 100-
R-94-001. March 1994.
Summary of Pollution Prevention Case Studies with Economic Data (By SIC Codes). USEPA, EPA
742-S-94-001. January 1994.
Total Quality Management: A Framework for Pollution Prevention. President's Commission on
Environmental Quality. January 1993.
Pollution Prevention News (various articles). USEPA, OPPT. 1991-1994.
State Agencies
Case Studies from the Arizona Pollution Prevention Newsletter. Arizona Department of Environ-
mental Quality.
Summary of Arizona Pollution Prevention Plans: Goals, Methods, and Target Chemicals. Arizona
Department of Environmental Quality. 1994.
Arkansas' VIP2 and Scrapmatch Programs. 1994 Brochures.
Case Study Writeups. Colorado Department of Health and Environment. 1994. >
Pollution Prevention Partnership, Cooperating for a Cleaner Colorado. Progress Report. Pollution
Prevention Partnership. February 1993.
1993 Status Report on Connecticut Hazardous Waste Generation and Management. Connecticut
Hazardous Waste Management Service. June 1993.
Pollution Prevention Program Annual Report. Delaware Department of Natural Resources and
Environmental Control. 1993.
Pollution Prevention Success Stories. State of Florida, Department of Environmental Production
1992.
Pollution Prevention Illinois Industry Success Stories. Dlinois Hazardous Waste Research and
Information. May 1994.
-------
Pollution Prevention in Maryland. Maryland Department of the Environment. 1994.
Pollution Prevention in Maryland: A Challenge of Change, State of Maryland Department of the
Environment, September 1993.
The Central Massachusetts Pollution Prevention Project Summary Report. Office of Technical
Assistance, Executive Office of Environmental Affairs, Commonwealth of Massachusetts. 1994.
Pollution Prevention Case Studies. Office of Technical Assistance, Commonwealth of Massachu-
setts. 1994.
The Resource, Perspectives on Minnesota Waste Issues. Minnesota Office of Environmental Assis-
tance, October 1994.
Various Copies of the Nevada Waste Reporter. Nevada Small Business Development Center.
New Jersey Governor's Awards for Outstanding Achievement. New Jersey Department of Environ-
mental Protection and Energy.
Ohio Pollution Prevention Case Studies for Non-Hazardous Industrial and Commercial Waste. Ohio
EPA. October 1993.
Ohio Prevention First, Implementation Strategy. Ohio EPA. March 1994.
Ohio EPA Pollution Prevention Summary of Activities. October 1994.
Case Studies from the Minnesota Technical Assistance Program and the Hazardous Waste Reduction
Program of Oregon. USEPA. November 1989.
Source Reduction Success Stories. Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources, 1994.
Pollution Prevention in Rhode Island Case Studies. Rhode Island Department of Environmental
Management. 1994.
Presentation on Waste Minimization. Department of Environmental and Natural Resources, South
Dakota.
Waste Minimization Program Planning: An Assessment of Industry Needs and Options for the State.
The State of South Dakota. September 1991.
"Pollution Prevention Ideas from Texas Industries." Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commis-
sion, Office of Pollution Prevention and Recycling, Clean Texas 2000. November 1994.
Pollution Prevention Case Studies, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Office of Pollution
Prevention.
-------
Municipalities and Local Government Organizations
"Bootstraps Ranching for the 90's Final Report." Todd County Conservation District
Los Angeles Pollution Prevention Newsletter. Hazardous and Toxic Materials Office, City of Los
Angeles. Summer 1994.
Local Government - Policies of and Guides for Pollution Prevention.
Pollution Prevention: A Guide for Local Government. International City/County Management
Association. 1994.
Sustainability Profile for the City of Cambridge, Massachusetts. Sustainable Cambridge Coalition.
September 1992.
Industry
Automotive Pollution Prevention Project Progress Report. American Automobile Manufacturers
Association. February 1994.
Appliance Recycling Services Brochure. Appliance Recycling Centers of America, Inc., December
1994.
AT&T Environmental Safety Report, 1992 and 1993.
Prevention Pollution in the Chemical Industry, 1982-1990. Chemical Manufacturers Association.
Spring 1992.
DuPont Corporate Environmentalism. Progress Report. 1993.
1 ' ?
Presentation Notes on Ford's "Preventing and Generation of Wastes" Program. July 1993.
General Motors Environmental Report. 1994.
General Motors Corporation Waste Reduction Program Overview. June 1991.
SOCMA Pollution Prevention Study. SOCMA. January 1993.
Pollution Prevention Opportunity Assessment. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority,
Four Mile Run Bus Maintenance Facility. Versar, Inc. December 1994.
Presentation Notes on Xerox Life Cycle Design. July 1993.
-------
Universities and Other Organizations
State Congress Pollution Prevention Proceedings. The Association of State and Interstate Water
Pollution Control Administrators. May 1990.
Facility Level Pollution Prevention Benchmarking Study. The Business Roundtable. November
1993.
Pollution Prevention Review, Issues from 1991-1994. Executive Enterprises.
Pollution Prevention and Waste Minimization Opportunities for the Mining Industry. Front Range
Community College Hazardous Materials Program. October 1993.
Corporate Quality: Environmental Management II: Measurements and Communications Conference.
Global Environmental Management Initiative. March 1992.
Case Studies from the Great Lakes Pollution Prevention Center. 1994.
Environmental Dividends: Cutting More Chemical Wastes. INFORM. 1992.
Pollution Prevention Manual for Lithographic Printers. Iowa Waste Reduction Center, University of
North Iowa. 1995.
BIODIESEL Information Kit. National SoyDiesel Development Board. 1994.
Pollution Prevention Successes: A Compendium of Case Studies From the Northeast States. North-
east Waste Management Officials Association (NEWMOA). December 1993.
Searching for Success. RENEW America. 1990.
Case Histories of Cost Saving Through Waste Reduction by Industries in Tennessee. Tennessee
Valley Authority Industrial Waste Reduction, University of Tennessee and State of Tennessee Depart-
ment of Environment and Conservation. January 1994.
------- |