United States Office of Solid Waste EPA/530-SW-87-026
Environmental Protection and Emergency Response October
Agency Washington DC 20460 1987
Solid Waste
WasteMmimization
-------
This booklet focuses on EPA's waste minimization
program under the 1984 RCRA amendments. It also
describes genera! waste minimization practices and
lists Federal and State offices that can assist generators
in initiating or expanding their programs,
Other EFA Waste Minimizattom Materials
Waste Minimization Bibliography (computer format)
JPeMiegriions
Guidance Manual for Performing Waste Minimization Reviews
Belter Operating Practices
Metal Parts Cleaning
V/aste Exchanges
Waste Minimization Techniques (18 specific industries)
Paint Application Processes
Economic Benefits of Waste Minimization
This booklet was published h\ the Waste Treatment Branch of HPA's
Office ol Solid Waste. The work was prepared under the guidance of
Angela Wilkes. It was written by Michael Aliord, Heidi Sennit/.
Angela Wilkes, Robert Bellinger, and Roger Sehecter; it was
designed b\ Stephen Gibson. The booklet was re\ie\\ed b\ the
U.S. EPA and approved for publication. Major re\ ie\\ers were
Mareia Williams. Joseph C'arra, Ham Freeman. Pat Fo\. Elaine Hb\,
Susan Bullard, and James O'Learv.
E!JA is grateful for the materials ant! illustrations pnnided b\ the
State \\aste minimi/ation nnigrams. Sle\e Delanex, and the following
organi/ations: E.I. DuFont lie Nemours & Conipain; EMPH, Inc.;
idnish Engineering. Inc.; Lanc\ International, Inc.; 3\1 Corporation;
IVleTighe Industries, Inc.; Pfaudler, Inc.; Stanadxne, Inc.: Tui'ts
I'niversitv; and the I'.S. Department of Deiense.
-------
Environmental Quality
with Economic Benefits
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
Washington, D.C., 1987
-------
1976
During the 1970s, the seriousness of the
hazardous waste problem became
apparent. In 1976, Congress passed the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act—the first law to deal on the national
level with hazardous waste.
1980
By 1980, EPA had established a regula-
tory program requiring "cradle-to-grave"
management of hazardous waste. The
program set forth design requirements for
hazardous waste landfills, including liners
and leak detection systems.
By 1984, it had become clear that even
well-regulated land disposal could cause
environmental damage. Landfill liners can
leak, possibly creating future cleanup
problems. Treatment methods such as
incineration will reduce but not eliminate
the need for land disposal.
-------
The Congress hereby declares it to be the national policy
of the United-States that, wherever feasible, the generation
of hazardous waste is to be reduced or eliminated as
expeditiously..:as.possible. .'
The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA),
as amended, 1984
Over the past decade, we have learned that the nation's
hazardous waste problems cannot be cured by simply
burying waste in the land. In recent years, Congress
and EPA have emphasized effective treatment of haz-
ardous waste prior to its land disposal. Treatment
alone, however, will not necessarily remedy our hazard-
ous waste problems.: It is essential that we first mini-
mize the generation and subsequent need for treatment,
storage, and disposal of hazardous waste. This concept,
called ''waste minimization," is essential for ensuring a
healthful environment for us all.
1986
Relying on treatment and establishing strict
controls on land disposal cannot fully solve
our hazardous waste problems. We also
must strive to minimize the amount of
hazardous waste generated in the first
place. This silver recovery unit both.
reduces the amount of waste that must be
treated or disposed of and enables photo
processors to turn a profit on the recovered
silver.
-------
Waste
Minimization
A leading chemical company established
a program in 1987 that reduced waste
generated at the company's facilities by
more than 100,000 tons. This has saved
an estimated $250 million through sav-
ings on reformulated products, conserved
materials and energy, and the ability to
delay or completely eliminate the pur-
chase of pollution control equipment.
Waste minimization means the reduction, to the extent
feasible, of any solid or hazardous waste that is gener-
ated or subsequently treated, stored, or disposed of. In
addition to waste regulated under RCRA, EPA encour-
ages the minimization of all wastes that pose risks to
human health and the environment. Waste minimiza-
tion techniques focus on source reduction or recycling
activities that reduce either the volume or the toxicity of
hazardous waste generated. Unlike many waste treat-
ment methods, waste minimization can be practiced at
several stages in most industrial processes. Like all in-
novative solutions to waste management problems,
waste minimization requires careful planning, creative
problem solving, changes in attitude, sometimes capital
investment, and, most important, a real commitment.
The payoffs for this commitment, however, can be
great. Waste minimization can save money—often
substantial amounts—through more efficient use of
valuable resources and reduced waste treatment and
disposal costs. Waste minimization also can reduce a
generator's hazardous-waste-
related financial liabilities: the
less waste generated, the lower
the potential for negative envi-
ronmental effects. Finally, tak-
ing the initiative to reduce haz-
ardous waste is good policy.
Polls show that reducing toxic
chemical risk is the public's pri-
mary environmental concern.
Waste minimization can pay off
tangibly when local residents are
confident that industry is
making every effort to handle its
wastes responsibly.
Incentives and Obstacles
Industries and other hazardous waste generators across
the country are making progress toward reducing and
recycling wastes, but much more could be done. The in-
centives are great, but, too often, so are the obstacles.
-------
This vapor recovery unit traps escaping fumes from
a printing press area in the adjoining plant. The
trapped vapors then condense, forming reclaimed
solvent, which is stored in a tank until it is reused.
By far the biggest incentive for
generators to reduce their hazardous
waste volume is the high and
escalating cost of other forms of
hazardous waste management. Land
disposal, which once cost as little as
$10 per ton of waste, now costs at
least $240 per ton. Disposal sites
are in short supply, and prices keep
rising. Another important incentive
is that Congress has directed EPA to
phase out the land disposal of certain
types of untreated wastes. Under the
Agency's land disposal restrictions
program, mandated in the 1984
RCRA amendments, many untreated
wastes that were previously sent to
landfills will now be incinerated or
otherwise treated at costs many
times higher than those for land dis-
posal. And these costs are only part
of the overall picture. Other costs
include waste storage expenses,
transportation fees, administrative
and reporting burdens, potential fi-
nancial liabilities from accidental
releases, and insurance (which, for
many generators, may not even be
available).
Working against these strong incentives are a number of
practical obstacles that must be removed before waste
minimization can reach its potential. Eliminating these
impediments will be a high priority for the Agency over
the next several years.
Information Is Scarce
Many companies that genuinely want to reduce their
wastes do not have access to the information they need
to make appropriate decisions. Identifying waste mini-
mization opportunities can demand specialized engi-
neering knowledge that many small- or medium-sized
-------
companies do not have and may not be able to obtain
independently. Companies of all sizes need access to
current information, especially data on the cost-effec-
tiveness of various waste minimization techniques. Im-
proved information dissemination is one of the most
important steps to encouraging waste minimization.
Product Quality Must Not Suffer
Reducing waste at the source may mean changing the
way that products are made. Care must be taken not to
risk the quality of established products.
A Texas chemical manufacturer of adlponitrile, a nylon intermediate, recently developed
a new process that improves product yield while reducing by 50 percent the amount of
aqueous waste generated. The company's original process generated 800 gallons of
wastewater per minute, along with nonchlorinated waste solvents that had to be
incinerated. The new process enables the firm not only to reduce the amount of
wastewater that must be treated* but also to burn the waste solvents in the company's
powerhouse. Steam generated by the burning of the waste solvents is used in the
manufacturing process, thereby saving the company more than $10 million per year in
fuel oil.
Competing Pressures
Waste generators are struggling to keep up with emerg-
ing hazardous waste regulations. Over the next few
years, many generators will be making long-term
commitments to phase out land disposal and to adopt
waste treatment processes. For many managers, waste
minimization may not seem as urgent as meeting these
regulatory deadlines. Because information is not al-
ways readily accessible and because process changes
may be required, action is too easy to postpone. For
waste minimization to gain acceptance among manag-
ers, they must realize how it can help meet their regula-
tory obligations, pay off in economic benefits, and im-
prove their image with the public by demonstrating a
commitment to environmental quality.
-------
A Pennsylvania die manufacturer uses 1,1,1-trichlo-
roethane to clean and degrease machine parts. Prior
to installing this solvent recovery unit, the company
shipped the contaminated solvent offsite for reclama-
tion and then purchased reclaimed solvent at $.80 per
gallon and virgin 1,1,1-trichloroethane at $4.50 per
gallon.
EPA9s Report to Congress on
Waste Minimization
The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
emphasizes the preeminence of source reduction and
recycling as a strategy for managing solid waste. As
early as 1976, the year RCRA was passed by Congress,
EPA developed a formal hierarchy for
waste management that listed source
reduction as the preferred manage-
ment option, followed, in order of
preference, by onsite and offsite recy-
cling, treatment, and, last, land dis-
posal.
In 1984, reflecting increased national
concern over the hazardous waste
problem, Congress directed EPA to
report on whether it might be desir-
able or feasible to develop mandatory
requirements, such as national
regulations, to compel adoption of
waste minimization techniques. In
1986, EPA responded with its report
to Congress on waste minimization.
Using this solvent recovery unit, the company now
reclaims solvent onsite at a cost of $.04-$. 10 per
gallon. In addition, the company's purchase of virgin
1,1,1-trichloroethane has dropped from two 55-gallon
drums each month to two 55-gallon drums every 6
months, a savings of nearly $5,000 per year.
This report explored various techni-
cal, economic, and policy issues
pertinent to hazardous waste source
reduction and recycling, and con-
cluded that mandatory programs
would not be desirable or feasible at
this time. EPA is continuing to collect
and analyze data from generators and
other sources to assess further the
need for statutory authority on waste
minimization. These findings will
provide the basis for a followup re-
port to Congress in 1990. In this
report EPA will evaluate whether ex-
isting incentives have been sufficient
to promote waste minimization, or
whether some form of mandatory
program is seen as necessary to im-
plement the national waste minimiza-
tion policy.
-------
The conclusion in EPA's 1986 report to Congress that a
mandatory program is not desirable at this time was
based on three key factors. First, mandatory programs
would second-guess industry's production decisions,
quite possibly leading to counterproductive results.
Second, mandatory programs would be difficult and ex-
pensive to design and administer. Third, generators al-
ready face strong economic incentives to reduce their
wastes. A regulatory program would take time to de-
velop, and many industries might postpone any action
until mandatory requirements were spelled out. The
time for making constructive source reduction and
recycling decisions is now, while industry is making
long-term decisions on how to respond to the land
disposal restrictions program and other revisions in the
hazardous waste law.
^
One of the largest -chemical manufacturers In the
Netherlands uses waste segregation, removal of
solvents in water solutions by distillation, and other
source reduction measures to reduce the
company's annual wastewater output by 80 per-
cent.
In Sweden, a major pharmaceutical producer initi-
ated a program to recycle approximately 10,000
tons of hazardous waste solvents per year through
the company's onsite distillation plant, thereby re-
ducing by 60 percent the amount of solvent waste
that was shipped offsite for disposal.
EPA's report to Congress stressed that the most con-
structive role government can assume is to promote
voluntary waste minimization by providing information,
technology transfer, and assistance to waste generators.
Since the States deal firsthand with generators, EPA
believes the States should play the central role in
fostering knowledge about waste minimization.
Through waste minimization outreach programs, EPA
will provide technical materials and guidance as well as
information resulting from research efforts and other
sources. EPA is also developing a nonbinding waste
minimization policy statement to provide guidance to
generators who must certify and report information to
EPA on their waste minimization activities.
Waste Minimization in
Other Countries
EPA's waste minimization strat-
egy parallels those in Europe and
Japan. All of them rely on coop-
erative, voluntary efforts. All of
them stress the importance of low-
pollution source reduction and
recycling technologies, waste
exchange (one company's waste
being used as another's feed-
stock), and information sharing.
As in the United States, these
countries operate on a two-tier
system: states, provinces, or pre-
fectures deal directly with waste
-------
generators, while central governments provide direction
and support. All countries surveyed in an EPA study of
foreign waste reduction practices have rejected the
notion of mandatory performance standards or other
regulatory approaches. Several countries have commit-
ted significant resources toward working with genera-
tors to reduce waste volumes.
Waste Minimization Practices in Other Countries
TAX INCENTIVES
Waste End Taxes
Tax Incentives
ECONOMICS
Price Support System for Recycling
Government Grants as Subsidies
Low Interest Loans
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
Information and Referral Service
Site Consultation
Training Seminars
R&D ASSISTANCE
Technical Development Labs
Demonstration Projects
Industrial Research
PERMITS AND PLANS
National Waste Management Plans
Waste Reduction Agreements
Waste Reduction as a Part of Permits
WASTE EXCHANGE
Regional Waste Exchanges
PUBLIC INFORMATION
Focus on Corporate Image
Focus on Consumer Practices
JAPAN
m
®
®
®
®
®
®
®
®
CANADA
®
®
8
@
®
GERMANY
:
:
m
®
®
®
®
®
SWEDEN
m
®
®
®
NETHERLANDS
®
m
®
0
®
@
®
DENMARK
®
®
®
m
m
®
Source: Foreign Practices in Hazardous Waste Minimization (Medford, Mass.: Center for Environ-
mental Management, Tufts University, 1986).
-------
Setting up
an Industry
Program
Prepare background material
fof the assessment.
Conduct a preassessment visit
to identify candidate wast©
streams.
Select waste streams tor de-
tailed analysis.
Conduct a detailed site visit to
Collect data on selected waste
streams and controls and re-
lated process data.
Develop a series of potential
waste minimization options.
Undertake preliminary option
evaluations (including devel-
opment of preliminary cost es-
timates).
Rank options by:
— waste reduction
effectiveness;
-extent of current use
in tne industry;
— potential for future
application at the facility.
Present preliminary results to
plant personnel along with a
ranking of options.
Prepare a final report, includ-
ing recommendations to plant
management.
Develop an Implementation
plan and schedule.
Conduct periodic reviews and
updates of assessments.
Establishing an aggressive source reduction and
recycling program is not difficult, but it does require
commitment on the part of any organization's manage-
ment. Each company should adopt its own general
program for waste minimization, and, wherever
possible, define that program formally in a written
document. It should also develop an implementation
plan for each of its facilities or subunits and periodically
review, revise, and update its program to reflect chang-
ing conditions. While a waste minimization program
can target regulated hazardous waste, it can also easily
incorporate effective reductions of other types of
pollution.
Conducting Waste Minimization
Assessments
An effective first step in setting up a waste reduction
program is to perform a waste minimization assessment,
sometimes referred to as a "waste minimization audit."
Conducted by in-house staff or an independent outside
expert, a waste minimization assessment is simply a
structured review of a facility's potential opportunities
Waste minimization assessments are an effective means of
identifying opportunities for source reduction and recycling.
-------
to reduce or recycle its waste. Its focus can be broad or
narrow. EPA has found that it is usually most effective
to select a few waste streams or processes for intensive
assessment rather than to attempt
to cover all waste streams and
processes at once.
In 1986, EPA sponsored a waste minimization
assessment at an electric arc furnace steel-mak-
ing facility. The assessment team examined
waste minimization options, including source re-
duction and resource recovery, for the company's
corrosive and heavy metal wastes. The assess-
ment revealed that calcium fluoride (fluorspar) in
the sludge generated during neutralization of the
pickling line wastewater could be economically re-
covered. Previously, the company had disposed
of the sludge and purchased 1,000 tons of
fluorspar per year as flux material for the steel-
making process. The waste minimization option
identified by the assessment team will save the
company $100,000 per year in costs avoided to
purchase fluorspar, and a further $70,000 per year
because of a 30 percent reduction in the volume of
sludge to be disposed of.
Many State programs promote and
support waste minimization assess-
ments as a central element of their
waste minimization programs. All
facilities that generate hazardous
waste can benefit, and operations
that generate large volumes of
waste and/or highly toxic waste
can benefit greatly. Substantial
and continuing waste reductions
have also been achieved through
the information gained from con-
ducting waste assessments. Waste
minimization assessments identify
and characterize waste streams, the
production processes that are re-
sponsible for generating each par-
ticular stream, and the amount of
waste generated by each.
The results of a waste minimization assessment enable
companies to identify cost-effective approaches to re-
duce the volume and toxicity of waste generated. They
can then make more informed decisions on how to
allocate resources to source reduction and recycling
programs. While some capital investment may be re-
quired, returns can be analyzed in terms of payback pe-
riods and opportunity costs.
Involving Production Staff
The key difference between waste minimization and
other environmental programs is that the essential deci-
sionmakers are often on the production rather than on
the environmental compliance side of the organization.
While many environmental controls can be simply
added to existing production processes, waste minimi-
zation usually happens within the production process
itself. For example, recycling decisions require input
from production staff, since waste often must be
pretreated or otherwise modified to permit in-house
-------
recycling or to make it more attractive to outside pur-
chasers as part of a waste exchange. Top management
can play a significant role by urging employees to
identify source reduction techniques and recycling op-
portunities.
Integrating Costs
Hazardous waste disposal costs have increased rapidly
and will continue to do so in the foreseeable future as
generators compete for scarce treatment and disposal
capacity. Because process engineers in many industrial
plants are not required to consider "fully loaded" waste
management expenses (such as treatment and disposal,
transportation, tracking, management overhead, insur-
ance, and energy and raw material expenses) as part of
their production costs, they may be making process
design and operation decisions that seem cost-effective
within a discrete process, but that are actually ineffi-
cient from the company's overall financial perspective.
Keeping Accurate Records
An important step in setting up waste minimization pro-
grams is to maintain accurate records on existing waste
generation rates and management costs, particularly for
the major hazardous waste streams that will be targets
for source reduction or recycling and that may have
been subject to waste minimization assessments as part
of the company's overall waste minimization program.
Working with State Programs
Some States have already instituted waste minimization
technical assistance and outreach programs; others are
initiating or expanding their efforts. States can help
generators of all types, private and public, by providing
technical guidance, helping to find qualified engineers
to conduct waste assessments, serving as conduits for
obtaining the latest information on waste minimization
techniques, and putting companies with similar needs in
contact with each other. Although companies must
protect the confidentiality of their business information,
they may, in many instances, benefit from sharing or
trading expertise or experience with State waste mini-
mization programs as intermediaries. States can also
help publicize a company's waste minimization efforts.
10
-------
Additional State support may include loan and bond as-
sistance, grants, and award programs. A few States
have economic incentive programs, such as encouraging
waste minimization through tax preferences. In some
States, waste minimization programs are administered
by nongovernmental groups such as universities and
nonprofit organizations. Some of these programs are
listed in this pamphlet.
An electronics plant installed
this electrolytic metal
recovery cell to recover
copper from waste generated
in the production of telephone
switching equipment. The
process produces a better
quality copper deposit on the
cell's cathode plates, where
the copper collects in half-
inch-thick sheets. The cell
recovers 75 pounds of copper
per week, which is sold for
$.50 per pound—a total of
about $2,000 per year. The
use of the cell also has
eliminated 1 drum of sludge
per week, saving an
additional $4,000 per year.
11
-------
Waste
Minimization
Approaches
and
Techniques
Reduction and recycling of waste are inevitably site-
and plant-specific, but a number of generic approaches
and techniques have been used successfully across the
country to reduce many kinds of industrial wastes.
Generally, waste minimization techniques can be
grouped into four major categories: inventory manage-
ment and improved operations, modification of equip-
ment, production process changes, and recycling and
reuse. Such techniques can have applications across a
range of industries and manufacturing processes, and
can apply to hazardous as well as nonhazardous waste.
Many of these techniques involve source reduction—
the preferred option on EPA's hierarchy of waste man-
agement. Others deal with on- and off-site recycling.
The best way to determine how these general ap-
proaches can fit a particular company's needs is to
conduct a waste minimization assessment, as discussed
above. In practice, waste minimization opportunities
are limited only by the ingenuity of the generator. In
the end, a company looking carefully at bottom-line
returns may conclude that the most feasible strategy
would be a combination of source reduction and
recycling projects.
The approaches discussed and illustrated below provide
waste minimization examples for generic and specific
processes. Several of these will be the subject of EPA
technology transfer documents (see inside front cover).
jixQ^
v]:l'^^^
By improving tie methods for analyzing raw materials and products, a textile fibers plant in
Tennessee reduced the amount of waste solvent generated from 7,000 gallons to 2,400 gallons
per year.
Changing the reactor rinse and cleaning procedures on its truck-loading strainers has enabled
a California chemical plant to reduce by 93 percent the amount of prganics m its resin-
manufacluring operation. Instead of allowing the phenol used in the manufacturing process to
drip into the plant's sewage treatment system as a hose drains It from trucks, the company now
flushes the hose with water, and the water-phenol mixture is recovered for reuse in a separate
treatment system.
12
-------
^illllliliiii!!!^
Inventory Management and Improved
Operations
* Inventory and trace all raw materials.
• Purchase fewer toxic and more nontoxic
production materials.
* Implement employee training and man-
agement feedback.
;* Improve material receiving, storage, and
handling practices.
Modification of Equipment
* Install equipment that produces minimal
or no waste.
* Modify equipment to enhance recovery
or recycling options,
* Redesign equipment or production lines
to produce less waste.
« Improve operating efficiency of equip-
ment
* Maintain strict preventive maintenance
program.
Production Process Changes
* Substitute nonhazardous for hazardous
raw materials.
• Segregate wastes by type for recovery,
• Eliminate sources of leaks and spills.
* Separate hazardous from nonhazardous
wastes.
• Redesign or reformulate end products to
be less hazardous.
• Optimize reactions and raw material use.
Recycling and' -Reuse-. ' '- •"
•• Install closed-loop systems.
• Becycle bristle for reuse.
• Recycle offslte for reuse.
• Exchange wastes.
Better Operating Practices
One of the best means of reducing wastes is through
better operating or housekeeping practices—that is,
ways to make existing processes work more efficiently,
and thereby generate less waste. Better operating prac-
tices can involve anything from finding a more efficient
way to handle a particular hazardous waste to making
fundamental changes in the way a company thinks
about waste management.
Better operating practices are specific to each facility
and to each waste-generating process, but general
themes include the following:
Personnel Practices
Heightened awareness by employees of the need for
waste minimization is essential. Training programs, for
example, are ways to generate ideas and establish em-
ployees' commitment.
13
-------
Evaporative recovery
systems can minimize the
volume of waste from metal-
plating baths and recycle
plating solutions by recover-
ing 90-95 percent of the
plating solution lost through
dragout. The operating cost
of the recovery system is only
$.08 per gallon, while the
dragout sludge hauling and
disposal costs are close to
$1.00 per gallon. With only
5-10 percent of the dragout
requiring waste treatment,
waste handling and disposal
costs have been reduced
significantly.
Waste Segregation
Many wastes are actually mixtures of hazardous and
nonhazardous waste. Much of their content may even
be water. By segregating key toxic constituents, isolat-
ing liquid fractions, or keeping hazardous streams from
nonhazardous waste, generators can sometimes save
substantial amounts of money on disposal or find new
opportunities for recycling and reuse.
Better Standard Procedures
Large quantities of hazardous waste may be generated
through spills, improper storage practices, inefficient
production startup or shutdown, scheduling problems,
lack of emergency procedures and preventive mainte-
nance, or poorly calibrated pollution control devices.
New standard procedures manuals, better inventory
control, and routine training and retraining sessions can
help eliminate this inadvertent waste generation and
provide significant companywide source reduction
benefits.
During standard equipment-cleaning operations, hospitals,
universities, and research centers, as well as many small- and
medium-sized businesses, such as metal finishers and furniture
manufacturers, generate small amounts of waste solvents.
These waste solvents can be recycled for reuse in cleaning
operations using small, commercially available recovery units.
Depending on the commercial value and amount of solvent
recovered, the pay-back time for recycling equipment can be as
short as 1 year. Since transportation costs can be very high,
even businesses that use only low volumes of solvents may
find it more economical to recycle their waste solvents onsite
rather than ship the wastes offsite for recovery or disposal.
14
-------
Improved Paint Application Processes
Paint application processes are integral to many indus-
trial operations. Not only are many leftover waste
paints hazardous, but also waste generated through
surface treatment (such as abrasion) and equipment
cleaning can be hazardous.
One of the most direct means of reducing paint-related
hazardous waste is to use low-toxicity paints, such as
those that are water-based products or do not contain
heavy metals. Changing to water-based paints helps to
reduce the use of organic solvents that later must be
managed as hazardous waste and that also can be a
source of air pollution.
The Department of Defense has developed a
new technique called Plastics Media Blasting
to strip paint from military aircraft. In this
process, small plastic beads are air blasted at
the aircraft's surface, removing the paint by
abrasion. This method requires less time and
generates less hazardous waste than
traditional wet paint stripping. On the basis of
a test, the DOD estimates that the time
required to strip an F-4 fighter has been
reduced from 340 to 40 hours and that the
amount of hazardous waste has been reduced
from 10,000 pounds of wet sludge per aircraft
to 320 pounds of dry paint chips and decom-
posed plastic media per aircraft.
Another approach to reducing waste from
painting operations is to employ mechani-
cal paint stripping. Companies that
substitute such processes as bead blasting
or cryogenic coating removal can avoid
the use of hazardous caustics and solvents.
15
-------
As stain is sprayed onto a
piece of furniture, the water
curtain in the booth traps the
excess stain and solvent
residue. The water is
recycled back to the wet
booth and reused.
Paint application can also be improved through various
approaches—segregating halogenated from nonhaloge-
nated solvents, segregating paint and solvent waste from
other trash, purchasing paints only in quantities needed
(to avoid discard), reducing overspray, controlling paint
quality to avoid defective batches that require stripping
and repainting, and scheduling and sequencing paint
operations more efficiently to reduce cleanup fre-
quency.
An-electric company uses a "water-based electrostatic
paint system instead of a conventional organic solvent
paint system. This has resulted in improved quality of
application, decrease of downtime from 3 percent to i
percent, reduction in the generation of aromatic waste
solvent by 95 percent, reduction in paint sludge by 97
percent, and increase of efficiency with up to 95 percent
recovery and reuse of paint. The new system reduced
hazardous wastedisposai costs and decreased personnel
and maintenance costs by 40 percent.
An automobile manufacturer modified its paint storage
and transfer system to be totally enclosed with full reclrcu-
lation, resulting in less frequent and easier cleanups and
improvement in paint quality.
More Effective Metal Parts Cleaning
Metal parts cleaning is an essential process for many
large and small industries as well as a wide variety of
businesses involved in the manufacture, repair, and
maintenance of metal parts and equipment. Potentially
hazardous substances used in metal parts cleaning can
be minimized by reducing the volume or the toxicity of
the cleaning agents used. Either method can save
money as well as reduce hazardous waste. Generic ap-
proaches to minimize waste from metal parts cleaning
include source control and substitution of cleaning
agents.
16
-------
In the case of source control, lids, sideboards, and
chillers can be added to solvent tanks to reduce product
loss and spillage. Improved solvent-handling practices
can reduce cross-contamination, sludge buildup, and
dragout.
Substitute cleaning processes can
include using abrasives in grease-
less or water-based binders, thus
eliminating the need for subsequent
caustic-based cleaning to remove
the binder. Plants can also substi-
tute abrasive-free, water-based
cleaning compounds for solvent
cleaners in many processes, thereby
reducing air emissions from
solvents.
Ion exchange metal-recovery
units are used to remove heavy
metals from aqueous residues
generated by electroplating,
metal-finishing, electronics
manufacturing, and metal-
refining processes. Ion
exchange systems are
commercially available, are
relatively compact, and use little
energy.
A high-efficiency vapor degreaser removes lubricants and oil
substances in this metal parts cleaning operation. This totally
enclosed system, which collects solvent vapors and recycles
them back to the cleaning operation, also reduces potential
solvent air emissions.
17
-------
Improved Process Equipment Cleaning
Virtually all manufacturers must clean their process
equipment to maintain efficiency, extend the life of the
equipment, remove deposits to allow for inspection and
repair, and prevent product contamination. This often
generates hazardous waste, especially in chemical-
processing-related industries.
Two approaches to minimizing waste from process
equipment cleaning are reducing the frequency of clean-
ups and reducing the quantity and toxicity of waste.
For example, to reduce the frequency of cleanups, spe-
cialty chemical plants might schedule their batch proc-
esses to make a full year's run
: of a single chemical all at
i once, rather than interspersing
it with batches of other prod-
: ucts. Other plants might
install more corrosion-
resistant pipes and vats that
; can tolerate less frequent
: washing without risking
; product quality.
Acetone is used at this Ohio fiber glass manufacturing plant to clean and rinse molds and finished
fiber glass panels for use on mass transit buses. A cost of $225 per gallon for acetone coupled with
high disposal costs for the waste solvent caused the company to turn to onsite solvent recovery.
The plant now uses two solvent recovery units that reclaim 45 gallons of acetone per day at a cost
of $.04 to $.10 per gallon. The recovery units, which have a typical pay-back period of 1 year, allow
the reclaimed solvent to be reused immediately. Not only has the company reduced its waste
volume by 90 percent, it has also substantially decreased the amount of virgin acetone it must
purchase.
Oil-water separators can be
sized to accommodate
different types of pollutant
discharges from petroleum-
and nonpetroleum-based
industries. As oily influent
flows into the separator, oil is
removed and recovered and
clean effluent is discharged.
The heavy solids settle to the
bottom and are periodically
removed.
18
-------
To reduce the quantity or toxicity of waste in each
cleanup, some manufacturers have installed high-
pressure spray nozzles for tank rinsing. These work
more efficiently than low-pressure hoses and, therefore,
generate less aqueous waste. To reduce the toxicity of
waste, one company rinses its reactor vessels in two
steps—the first rinse generates a small quantity of
highly concentrated waste that can be recycled for
additional rinsing, while the second, full-volume rinse
finishes the cleaning and generates a much lower
toxicity waste than before.
l||||||j||i^
Chemical Plant Reduces Add Disposal Problem
The chemical and pigments department of a major chemical company in Kentucky manufac-
tures freon. Low-quality hydrochloric acid, generated as a manufacturing byproduct, was
previously disposed of in injection wells. The company recently installed a new freon
manufacturing process that produces high-quality hydrochloric acid. By installing the new
process and building an additional acid storage .facility, the company now is able to sell
approximately 22 million pounds per year of acid that was previously discarded.
. Reverse "Osmosis Removes Cfart We from' "RSrsse Water -.-_'•
A polymer products operation in Arizona uses reverse osmosis to eliminate the discharge of
cyanide-containing rinse water from one of the company^ four plating unite. The process,
which concentrates the cyanideand separates It from the rinse water, reduces the environ-
mental impactof the discharge and conserves valuable plating materials and water treatment
chemicals.
Use of Waste Exchanges
A waste exchange is a matchmaking operation based on
the idea that one company's waste may be another
company's feedstock. Waste exchanges are private- or
government-funded organizations that can help bring
together generators of hazardous waste with companies
that can use the waste as feedstocks or substitute
materials in their operations. The goal of waste ex-
changes is to minimize waste disposal expenses and to
maximize the value of reusable manufacturing bypro-
ducts.
19
-------
There are two basic types of waste exchanges: informa-
tion exchanges and material exchanges. Information
exchanges act as clearinghouses for information on the
wastes that are wanted. They put generators in touch
with waste users for the purpose of recycling waste
materials back into manufacturing processes. They are
usually nonprofit organizations that receive most of
their funds from governmental agencies. Material
exchanges, unlike information exchanges, take actual
physical possession of the waste and may initiate or
actively participate in the transfer of wastes to the users.
They are usually privately owned companies that
operate for profit.
Forniatctehyde^Suiplus. Formaldehyde solution. Potential Use: embalming fluid. Type
1: Contains 25% formaldehyde with 10% glycerine, 10% alcohols (ethanol, isopropanol,
methane!) and distilled water by wet wt. Type 2: Contains 25% formaldehyde with 25%-
35% alcohols (ethanol, isopropanol, methanol) and distilled water by wet wt 165,000
gals, in 15 gal, drums/plastic carboys in steel drums, One time. Independent analysis
(specification) available, PA
1,1,1»frichloroethane. 1,1,1-trichloroefhane from asphalt extractions. Contains 90%
1,1,1-trichloroethane with 10% asphalt and 1% oil. 220 gals, in drums available.
Quantities vary. Thereafter 220 gal/yr. Sample available. PA
Paraffin Wax. Paraffin wax from clean-out of chewing gum base mixers. Fully refined.
Potential use: firelogs, crayons, etc. Contains traces of gum base and calcium carbonate,
80,000 Ibs. in 50 gal. drums. Quantities continuous. Thereafter 40,000 Ibs/qtr.
While any type of waste can be listed in a waste
exchange, certain materials are more likely than others
to be recycled. Most transactions involve relatively
"pure" wastes that can be used directly with minimal
processing. Solvents, organics, acids, and alkalies are
most frequently recycled. Metals from metal-bearing
wastes, sludges, and solutions also may be recovered
economically.
Waste exchanges are located throughout the country,
but computerized central listing services are now the
best first step in finding the most convenient one (see
inside back cover).
20
-------
Looking to
the Future
Waste minimization is an essential element of the
nation's immediate and long-term strategy to manage
hazardous waste. Land disposal will continue to play a
role, but that role is diminishing. EPA's land disposal
restrictions program, established in response to the 1984
amendments to RCRA, will ban the land disposal of
many untreated hazardous wastes, forcing generators to
explore other options. Treatment technologies can as-
sume much of the waste management burden from land
disposal, but treatment is expensive, and, at least in the
near term, capacity is limited. EPA's strategy to
minimize the generation of hazardous waste will help
reduce or eliminate regulated wastes that are now
managed by treatment or land disposal as well as other
wastes that pose risks to human health and the environ-
ment.
Waste minimization is one of the few areas where
national environmental goals and industry's economic
interests clearly coincide. For generators, the benefits
include reduced costs, liabilities, and regulatory burdens
associated with hazardous waste management. For the
general public, waste minimization pays off in an im-
proved environment.
Because of these shared interests, EPA is promoting
voluntary action on the part of industry. The only for-
mal waste minimization requirement under RCRA is
that industries certify that they have waste minimization
programs of their own design in place. To support this,
EPA will publish a non-
binding waste minimi-
zation policy statement
reflecting the Agency's
ideas on what an effec-
tive voluntary program
might include. EPA is
also revising its
biennial reporting re-
quirements to provide
generators with
checklists with which
to describe their
activities and report
their progress.
Waste minimization promotes environmental quality.
-------
In framing the recommendations in its 1986 report to
Congress, EPA stated that it "believes that waste mini-
mization must be implemented as a general policy
throughout the hazardous waste management system
and, ultimately, more broadly throughout all of EPA's
pollution control programs." Consequently, EPA's
waste minimization program will initially focus on
RCRA hazardous waste. The overall Agency strategy
will, however, address multimedia opportunities and
will include an information clearinghouse, a national
data base, research and technology transfer, and support
for State programs.
EPA's technology transfer program will provide infor-
mation to industry on methods to prevent waste
generation by changing industrial processes, materials,
and operations. One of the Agency's first projects is to
issue a detailed manual on how to conduct a waste
minimization assessment. This will be followed by a
15-minute videotape illustrating the step-by-step proc-
ess, with examples of how different firms have profited
from these assessments. EPA is also producing a com-
puterized bibliography on waste minimization and a
series of technology transfer documents on a variety of
subjects. In addition, the Agency is developing a series
of guidance materials for 18 different types of industries
that tend to generate small quantities of hazardous
waste. All of these materials will be available through
State waste minimization programs.
Waste minimization clearly provides opportunities to
deal more efficiently and effectively with wastes that
are hazardous to human health and the environment.
These opportunities are unique in that they provide im-
mediate financial rewards to industry, increased waste
management flexibility to generators, and reduced pres-
sures on the nation's existing treatment and land
disposal capacity. Now is the time to investigate and
take practical steps toward waste minimization, before
major commitments are made for treatment and disposal
options. Over the longer term, the benefits of source re-
duction and recycling will be key incentives for genera-
tors to integrate waste minimization techniques into
their overall hazardous waste management programs.
22
-------
State Waste Minimization Programs
Alabama Hazardous Material Management and Illinois
Resource Recovery Program
University of Alabama
P.O. Box 6373
Tuscaloosa, AL 35487-6373
(205) 348-8401
Alaska Alaska Health Project
Waste Reduction Assistance Program
431 West Seventh Avenue
Anchorage, AK 99501
(907) 276-2864
Arkansas Arkansas Industrial Development
Commission
One State Capitol Mall
Little Rock, AR 72201
(501)371-1370
Indiana
Iowa
California Alternative Technology Section
Toxic Substances Control Division
California Department of Health
Services
714/744 p Street
Sacramento, CA 94234-7320
(916) 322-5347
Connecticut Connecticut Hazardous Waste
Management Service
Suite 360
900 Asylum Avenue
Hartford, CT 06105
(203) 244-2007
Connecticut Department of Economic
Development
210 Washington Street
Hartford, CT 06106
(203) 566-7196
Georgia Hazardous Waste Technical
Assistance Program
Georgia Institute of Technology
Georgia Technical Research Institute
Environmental Health and Safety Division
O'Keefe Building, Room 027
Atlanta, GA 30332
(404) 894-3806 Kansas
Environmental Protection Division
Georgia Department of Natural
Resources
Floyd Towers East, Suite 1154
205 Butler Street Kentucky
Atlanta, GA 30334
(404) 656-2833
Hazardous Waste Research and
Information Center
Illinois Department of Energy and
Natural Resources
1808 Woodfield Drive
Savoy, IL 61874
(217) 333-8940
Industrial Waste Elimination
Research Center
Pritzker Department of Environmental
Engineering
Alumni Building, Room 102
Illinois Institute of Technology
3200 South Federal Street
Chicago, IL 60616
(312)567-3535
Environmental Management and Education
Program
Young Graduate House, Room 120
Purdue University
West Lafayette, IN 47907
(317)494-5036
Indiana Department of Environmental
Management
Office of Technical Assistance
P.O. Box 6015
105 South Meridian Street
Indianapolis, IN 46206-6015
(317)232-8172
Iowa Department of Natural Resources
Air Quality and Solid Waste Protection
Bureau
Wallace State Office Building
900 East Grand Avenue
DesMoines, IA 50319-0034
(515)281-8690
Center for Industrial Research and Service
205 Engineering Annex
Iowa State University
Ames, IA 50011
(515)294-3420
Bureau of Waste Management
Department of Health and Environment
Forbes Field, Building 730
Topeka, KS 66620
(913) 296-1607
Division of Waste Management
Natural Resources and Environmental
Protection Cabinet
ISReillyRoad
Frankfort, KY 40601
(502) 564-6716
23
-------
Maryland Maryland Hazardous Waste Facilities
Siting Board
60 West Street, Suite 200A
Annapolis, MD 21401
(301) 974-3432
Maryland Environmental Service
2020 Industrial Drive
Annapolis, MD 21401
(301) 269-3291
(800) 492-9188 (in Maryland)
Massachu- Office of Safe Waste Management
setts Department of Environmental Management
100 Cambridge Street, Room 1904
Boston, MA 02202
(617) 727-3260
Source Reduction Program
Massachusetts Department of
Environmental Quality Engineering
1 Winter Street
Boston, MA 02108
(617) 292-5982
Michigan Resource Recovery Section
Department of Natural Resources
P.O. Box 30028
Lansing, MI 48909
(517)373-0540
Minnesota Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
Solid and Hazardous Waste Division
520 Lafayette Road
St. Paul, MN 55155
(612) 296-6300
Minnesota Technical Assistance Program
W-140 Boynton Health Service
University of Minnesota
Minneapolis, MN 55455
(612) 625-9677
(800) 247-0015 (in Minnesota)
Minnesota Waste Management Board
123 Thorson Center
7323 Fifty-Eighth Avenue North
Crystal, MN 55428
(612)536-0816
Missouri State Environmental Improvement and
Energy Resources Authority
P.O. Box 744
Jefferson City, MO 65102
(314)751-4919
New Jersey New Jersey Hazardous Waste Facilities
Siting Commission
Room 614
28 West State Street
Trenton, NJ 08608
(609) 292-1459 or 292-1026
Hazardous Waste Advisement Program
Bureau of Regulation and Classification
New Jersey Department of Environmental
Protection
401 East State Street
Trenton, NJ 08625
(609) 292-8341
Risk Reduction Unit
Office of Science and Research
New Jersey Department of Environmental
Protection
40 East State Street
Trenton, NJ 08625
(609) 633-1378
New York New York State Environmental
Facilities Corporation
50 Wolf Road
Albany, NY 12205
(518)457-4139
Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste
New York Department of Environmental
Conservation
50 Wolf Road
Albany, NY 12233
(518)457-3273
North Pollution Prevention Pays Program
Carolina Department of Natural Resources and
Community Development
P.O. Box 27687
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27611
(919) 733-7015
Governor's Waste Management Board
325 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27611
(919) 733-9020
Technical Assistance Unit
Solid and Hazardous Waste Management
Branch
North Carolina Department of Human
Resources
P.O. Box 2091
306 North Wilmington Street
Raleigh, NC 27602
(919) 733-2178
Ohio Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste
Management
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
P.O. Box 1049
1800 WaterMark Drive
Columbus, OH 43266-1049
(614)481-7200
Ohio Technology Transfer Organization
Suite 200
65 East State Street
Columbus, OH 43266-0330
(614) 466-4286
24
-------
Oklahoma Industrial Waste Elimination Program
Oklahoma State Department of Health
P.O. Box 53551
Oklahoma City, OK 73152
(405) 271-7353
Oregon Oregon Hazardous Waste Reduction
Program
Department of Environmental Quality
811 Southwest Sixth Avenue
Portland, OR 97204
(503) 229-5913
Pennsylvania Pennsylvania Technical Assistance Program
501 F. Orvis Keller Building
University Park, PA 16802
(814)865-0427
Bureau of Waste Management
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental
Resources
P.O. Box 2063
Fulton Building
3rd and Locust Streets
Harrisburg, PA 17120
(717)787-6239
Center for Hazardous Materials Research
320 William Pitt Way
Pittsburgh, PA 15238
(412) 826-5320
Rhode Island Ocean State Cleanup and Recycling Program
Rhode Island Department of Environmental
Management
9 Hayes Street
Providence, RI 02908-5003
(401) 277-3434
(800) 253-2674 (in Rhode Island)
Center for Environmental Studies
Brown University
P.O. Box 1943
135 Angell Street
Providence, RI 02912
(401) 863-3449
Tennessee Center for Industrial Services
Suite 401
226 Capitol Boulevard Building
University of Tennessee
Nashville, TN 37219-1804
(615) 242-2456
Virginia Office of Policy and Planning
Virginia Department of Waste Management
11th Floor, Monroe Building
101 North 14th Street
Richmond, VA 23219
(804) 225-2667
Washington Hazardous Waste Section
Mail Stop PV-11
Washington Department of Ecology
Olympia, WA 98504-8711
(206) 459-6322
Wisconsin Bureau of Solid Waste Management
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
P.O. Box 7921
101 South Webster Street
Madison, WI 53707
(608) 266-2699
Wyoming Solid Waste Management Program
Wyoming Department of Environmental
Quality
Herschler Building, 4th Floor, West Wing
122 West 25th Street
Cheyenne, WY 82002
(307) 777-7752
25
-------
Further Information on Waste Minimization
Computerized Waste Exchanges
Northeast Industrial Waste Exchange
90 Presidential Plaza, Syracuse, NY 13202
(315)422-6572
Southern Waste Information Exchange
P.O. Box 6487, Tallahassee, FL 32313
(904)644-5516
Great Lakes Regional Waste Exchange
470 Market Street, Grand Rapids, MI 49503
(616)451-8992
EPA Reports on Waste Minimization
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. "Waste Minimization
Audit Report: Case Studies of Corrosive and Heavy Metal
Waste Minimization Audit at a Specialty Steel Manufacturing
Complex." Executive Summary.*
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. "Waste Minimization
Audit Report: Case Studies of Minimization of Solvent Waste
for Parts Cleaning and from Electronic Capacitor Manufactur-
ing Operations." Executive Summary.*
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. "Waste Minimization
Audit Report: Case Studies of Minimization of Cyanide
Wastes from Electroplating Operations." Executive Sum-
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Report to Congress:
Waste Minimization, Vols. I and II. EPA/ 530-SW-86-033 and
-034. (Washington, B.C.: U.S. EPA, 1986).t
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Waste Minimization
- Issues and Options, Vols. I - III. EPA/530-SW-86-041
through -043. (Washington, B.C.: U.S. EPA, 1986).t
*Executive Summary available from EPA, ATD, HWERL,
26 West St. Clair Street, Cincinnati, OH, 45268; full report
available from the National Technical Information Service
(NTIS), U.S. Department of Commerce, Springfield, VA
22161.
tAvailable from the National Technical Information Service
as a five-volume set, NTIS No. PB-87-114-328.
26
-------
U.S. EPA Regional Offices
Region 1
John F. Kennedy Federal Building
Boston, MA 02203
(617)565-3715
Region 2
26 Federal Plaza
New York, NY 10278
(212) 264-2525
Region 3
841 Chestnut Street
Philadelphia, PA 19107
(215)597-9800
Region 4
345 Courtland Street, NE
Atlanta, GA 30365
(404) 347-4727
Region 5
230 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, IL 60604
(312)353-2000
Region 6
1445 Ross Avenue
Dallas, TX 75202
(214) 655-6444
Region 7
726 Minnesota Avenue
Kansas City, KS 66101
(913) 236-2800
Region 8
999 18th Street
Denver, CO 80202-2405
(303) 293-1603
Region 9
215 Fremont Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
(415) 974-8071
Region 10
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
(206)442-5810
U.S. EPA
Office of Solid Waste
401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460
RCRA/Snperfund
Hotline
(800) 424-9346
(in Washington, DC,
382-3000)
------- |