WASTE CLEARINGHOUSES AND EXCHANGES: A SUMMARY
NEW WAYS FOR IDENTIFYING AND TRANSFERRING REUSABLE
INDUSTRIAL PROCESS WASTES
This report (SW-lZOc.l) summarises a final report (SW-lZOc),
which described work performed for the Federal solid waste management
program under contract no. 68-01-3241 and which is available
from the National Technical Information Service as PB-261 287.
The following summary is reproduced as received from the contractor.
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
1977
-------
This report has been reviewed by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency and approved for publication. Its publication does not signify
that the contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, nor does mention of commercial
products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use by the
U.S. Government.
An environmental protection publication (SW-130c.l) in the solid
waste management series.
ii
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
List of Tables v1
List of Figures v1i
Acknowledgement viii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - MAJOR FINDINGS AND NEXT STEPS 1
I. INTRODUCTION 11
Problems and the EPA Response 11
Objectives and Focus of This Study 13
The following sections are available from NTIS as report no PB 261-287
PART ONE - BASIC CONCEPTS AND DATA
II TRANSFERRING WASTES: CONCEPTS AND REQUIREMENTS 15
The Concept of Waste Transfer 15
Requirements For a Transfer 18
III. POTENTIAL OPPORTUNITIES FOR WASTE TRANSFER 25
National Waste Stream Data 25
Industries and Wastes Suitable for Transfer Services 29
A Sample Area: Philadelphia 31
IV. TWO TYPES OF TRANSFER ORGANIZATION 37
PART TWO - INFORMATION CLEARINGHOUSES
V. SERVICES AND METHODS 41
Services 41
Operations and Methods 42
iii
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
VI. ORGANIZATION AND FINANCES 47
Staff 47
Finances 48
Organizational and Legal Considerations 51
PART THREE - MATERIALS EXCHANGES
VII. SERVICES AND METHODS 53
Services 53
Methods for Assessing and Transferring Scrap Wastes 55
VIII. OPERATIONS, ORGANIZATION, AND FINANCES 59
Operations 59
Staff 61
Finances 63
Organizational and Legal Considerations 64
APPENDICES
A. IN FORMATION CLEARINGHOUSES 65
European Models 65
U.S. Versions of the European Model 74
Operating Experience 76
Advertising Wastes in Technical Journals 78
Commercial Variations 78
B. MATERIALS EXCHANGES 81
Characteristics 81
Two Samples 81
A New Exchange Concept 84
IV
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Page
C. DATA AND METHODS 87
Identifying Scrap Wastes and Their Uses 87
A Sample Transfer Area: The Philadelphia SMSA 89
D. ECONOMICS OF TRANSFERRING WASTE MATERIALS 109
Economic Feasibility of a Transfer 109
Economics of Transfer by a Materials Exchange 116
E. INSTITUTIONAL ANALYSIS AND OPTIONS 123
Influences on Transfer Agents 123
Institutional Sponsorship 123
F. LEGAL ASPECTS OF TRANSFERRING WASTES 131
The Potential For Legal Liability 131
Other Legal Considerations 135
GLOSSARY OF NAMES AND TERMS 137
REFERENCES 141
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table No. Description Page
11-1 Requirements for a Transfer 20
111-1 Manufacturing Process Wastes from Selected U.S. Industries 26
III-2 Potentially Transferable Wastes from Selected Industries 27
111-3 Wastes Generated and Potentially Transferable, Philadelphia SMSA 32
IV-1 Comparison of Clearinghouses and Exchanges 38
A-1 Waste Information Clearinghouses 66
A-2 Sample of Items Listed by U.K. Clearinghouse 68
A-3 Sample List from German Clearinghouse 71
A-4 First List from St. Louis Clearinghouse 75
A-5 Sample List from French Clearinghouse 79
C-1a Generation and Potential Uses of Selected Chemical Wastes 90
C-1b Generation and Potential Uses of Inorganic Chemical Wastes 91
C-1c Generation and Potential Uses of Organic Chemical Wastes 92
C-2 Range of Plant Employment, Philadelphia SMSA 94
C-3 Summary of Waste Generation by Plant and Industry, Philadelphia SMSA 95
C-4 Summary Information from Telephone Interviews 98
C-5 Summary Information from Plant Visits 102
D-1 Definitions and Units for Economic Analysis 110
E-1 Internal Characteristics of Waste Transfer Organizations 124
E-2 External Conditions Influencing Transfer Organizations 126
E-3 Institutional Sponsorship: Options and Merits 128
VI
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure No. Description Page
11-1 Hierarchy of Purity Requirements 21
V-1 Waste Material Registration Form 45
VI11-1 Punched-Card Format for Waste Material Data File 62
A-1 U.K. Form for Submitting Waste Offers and Requests 68
A-2 U.K. Forms for Inquiring About Waste Offers and Requests 72
C-1 Philadelphia SMSA and Neighboring Industrial Areas 93
D-1 Savings to Generator or to User 114
D-2 Economics of a Materials Exchange 119
D-3 Economics of Transferring Selected Wastes 120
vn
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We were assisted in conducting this study by many persons and organiza-
tions in Europe and the United States. They include industrial firms, industry
and professional associations, and agencies of state and local governments, espe-
cially those concerned with the Philadelphia metropolitan area. Only a few could
be cited in the text, but we are pleased to acknowledge the contributions of all
with thanks.
viu
-------
CONVERSION TO METRIC UNITS
In this report, some units are expressed in U.S. customary units. Conversion
to metric units is easily accomplished by using the following formulae:
Multiply miles by 1.6092 to get kilometers
Multiply tons by 0.9072 to get metric tons (103 kg)
Multiply pounds by 0.4536 to get kilograms
IX
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
MAJOR FINDINGS AND NEXT STEPS
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimated in 1976 that 344 million
metric tons (wet basis) of industrial processing residues are generated annually in the United
States. EPA suggests* that plant managers and engineers consider the following sequence of
steps as they develop their waste management strategies:
(1) Minimize the quantity of waste generated by modifying the industrial
process involved.
(2) Concentrate the waste at the source (using evaporation, precipitation, etc.)
to reduce handling and transport costs.
(3) If possible, transfer the waste "as is", without reprocessing, to another facility
that can use it as a feedstock.
(4) When a transfer "as is" is not possible, reprocess the waste for material
recovery.
(5) When material recovery is not possible,
(a) Incinerate the waste for energy recovery and for destruction of hazardous
components, or,
(b) If the waste cannot be incinerated, detoxify and neutralize it through
chemical treatment.
(6) Use carefully controlled land disposal only for what remains.
EPA commissioned this one-year study both to explore the feasibility of the waste transfer
concept (step 3 and to some extent step 4) and to outline the requirements for a successful
waste transfer organization. The purpose of the transfer approach is to help broaden the
potential markets for both new and apparently-marginal industrial residues, and thus to
reduce the quantity of potentially harmful wastes which require disposal into the natural
environment. Hence, established secondary materials markets were not within the scope of
the study.
*FederalRegister, Vol. 41, No. 161, pp. 35050-1.
-------
This study began by investigating the several existing European "waste exchanges,"
whose purpose is to transfer information about wastes available and wastes sought as feed-
stock. It was soon discovered, however, that a few chemical reclamation companies also
offer to transfer waste materials. This led to the distinction between two types of transfer
agents, the "information clearinghouse" and the "materials exchange": the former transfers
information only, while the latter accepts residues, analyzes them, identifies new uses, treats
them as necessary, and then actively seeks buyers. Both types of organizations were studied.
CONCEPT OF WASTE TRANSFER
Waste transfer is both similar to and different from the purchase and re-use of indus-
trial by-products. In both cases, an industrial process generates, in addition to its principal
product, some material which is not usable by the generating company, but which can
economically be sold for reuse by another company. When the material has a well recognized
value which justifies the costs of recovery, handling, and transportation, it is known as a
by-product. When the material has a value which has not been recognized, it is a potentially
transferrable waste. So long as disposal is easy and inexpensive, disposal is the waste gener-
ator's economically preferred course. Transfer to another plant or industry is economically
attractive only when disposal presents major problems, as will increasingly be the case as
restrictions tighten and costs rise.
While some transfers occur directly through the initiative of either the waste's generator
or its potential user, large-scale realization of the concept requires a third party or "transfer
agent." This is because the possible uses are not well established, generators and potential
users usually do not know about each other, and companies are reluctant to reveal infor-
mation about their processes and materials. A transfer agent is therefore needed to identify
generators and users to each other while at the same time protecting confidential informa-
tion until a promising match is identified. Still more transfers can be made if the transfer
agent is able to offer additional services, such as assistance with negotiations, consultation
about uses and reprocessing requirements, or actual handling of the materials.
The term "waste" has two meanings which are related but distinct. First, it can refer
to damaged, defective, or residual material resulting from an industrial process, retaining
some or much of its original value; this is "scrap waste" or "scrap". Second, in everyday
usage "waste" can refer to any kind of refuse, with no value, which can only be thrown
away; this is "trash waste" or "trash". In common usage of "waste", confusion often arises
because the distinctions between "scrap" and "trash" are not obvious to everyone. What is
considered trash by one person is considered useful by another. This difference between two
values seen in one waste is central to both the economic and the technical viability of waste
transfer, and creates opportunities for transfer agents.
-------
THE TRANSFER AGENT'S FUNCTIONS
Engineers routinely examine their residues to seek further uses as by-products. In recent
years, stricter waste disposal regulations and the scarcity and rising prices of raw materials
have made it more economically attractive for companies to research further uses for the
valuable components of their wastes. Large companies with many processes and skilled
chemical engineers are likely to find those recycling opportunities which exist, particularly
within their own manufacturing facilities.
However, even engineers in large national companies are not likely to recognize all
waste transfer opportunities outside of their own industry. Moreover, technical discoveries
of new ways to find value in scrap do not occur in all companies at once. Also, medium-
sized or small companies typically lack the time and skills to find reuses for their wastes.
Therefore, needs exist which a formal, institutional transfer agent can satisfy. Indeed,
the difficulties which many engineers face in distinguishing between scrap wastes and trash
wastes offer the opportunities for waste transfer agents to provide useful technical and
economic services. The transfer agent works at the fuzzy and shifting boundary between
wastes and by-products. If successful, the transfer agent will gradually identify what can be
described as a "scrap chemicals market," a small but distinct market sector containing
materials which are more valuable than trash but less valuable than established by-products.
The transfer agent may also lift some scrap wastes with uncertain value up into the category
of by-products with well recognized value.
The function of the transfer agent, therefore, is to identify and help bring together
the generator, who views the waste as trash without further value, and the user, who views
it as scrap with re-use value. In this process, the transfer agent identifies scrap materials of
interest to both generators and users.
To be economically and technically useful, a transfer service must recognize the
realistic limits of its business or functions. On the one hand, it cannot afford to accept trash
wastes. On the other, it would serve no unique environmental or public purpose by trying
to deal in regular flows of process by-products with recognized value which are commer-
cially established; and the organization would not be a waste transfer service, but instead
one of many competing industrial or chemical brokerages. A transfer agent can thus offer
useful activities in only a narrow sector of the chemical materials market—the scrap sector.
REQUIREMENTS FOR A TRANSFER
Transfers of scrap can occur only after many conditions have been established for both
generator and user. Each, depending upon his own business and perspective of what is
-------
important, must consider the following:
• Technical feasibility-the matching between the chemical and physical pro-
perties of available waste streams and the specifications of raw materials they
might replace.
• Economic feasibility -balancing of disposal costs foregone and raw materials
costs saved against the administrative and transport costs of implementing a
waste transfer.
• Institutional and marketing feasibility—values at risk, guarantees of supply,
guarantees of anonymity, and mutual confidence among generator, user, and
transfer agent.
• Legal and regulatory—potential transfer must be handled confidentially, be
allowed by law, and be unlikely to lead to liability suits.
POTENTIAL OPPORTUNITIES FOR WASTE TRANSFER
Accurate information about wastes being produced by industrial processes is difficult
and expensive to obtain. The first national estimate was compiled by EPA for Congress in
1973. More detailed national estimates by industry were developed in 1974-1976 by a
series of 14 EPA-commissioned studies, of which 11 were reviewed for this report.8"18
The quantity of manufacturing processing wastes generated in those industries amounts
to about 206 million metric tons/year on a wet weight basis. Those wastes having potential
value for transfer and reuse total about three percent, or about six million metric tons/year
(wet basis). In selected industries, however, the percentage can be much higher: up to 95
percent in Pharmaceuticals (SIC 2831), at least 25 percent in organic chemicals (SIC 286),
at least 10 percent in petroleum refining (SIC 2911), about 40 percent in paints and allied
products (SIC 285), and as much as 20 percent in small industrial machinery (SIC 355).
Wastes generally recognized as having components of potential value include:
• wastes having high concentrations of recoverable metals
• solvents
• alkalis
• concentrated acids
• catalysts
• oils
• combustibles (for fuel)
-------
Available data cover only about one-third of the manufacturing industries which might
participate in waste transfers. But they suggest that significant fractions of wastes from
other industries may have value which is not now being extracted. The easiest method for
testing the hypothesis would be an inexpensive transfer service for an industrial region
having many chemical plants, one or more petroleum refineries, and a mixture of other
industrial plants.
All industries which manufacture chemicals or use chemicals as raw materials are
potential clients of transfer agents. Potential participants in and beneficiaries of waste
transfer are concentrated in five industry groups:
• Pharmaceutical (SIC 2831 and 2833)
• Paints and allied products (SIC 285)
• Organic chemicals (SIC 2865 and 2869)
• Petroleum refining (SIC 2911)
• Small industry machinery (SIC 355)
Their wastes with the highest reuse and transfer potential include solvents, still bottoms,
and spent catalysts. In general, transfer will take place:
• from larger companies using continuous processes to smaller companies
using batch processes;
• from basic chemical manufacturers to formulators; and,
• from industries with high purity requirements (e.g. pharmaceutical) to those
with lower purity requirements (e.g. paints).
In addition, almost any industry which needs fuels or cleaning solvents, for example, machine
shops and boat builders, is a potential user of scrap wastes. Moreover, reclaimers would
naturally become clients of a transfer organization in order to expand their business.
Most potential clients will demand reasonably large amounts of regularly-produced
scrap wastes. There is some potential for transfer of smaller amounts of wastes produced
occasionally, such as spilled or ruined batches of paint or other chemicals. While many
such wastes can be anticipated, their total tonnage, and hence their economic and environ-
mental impact on the area, is not likely to be large.
The economic gains from each potential transfer depend upon the waste generator's
savings on disposal costs and the user's savings on raw materials costs. The total gain must
-------
cover such transfer costs as transportation, administration, and possibly reprocessing.
Generally, scrap wastes valued at less than one cent per pound cannot be transferred eco-
nomically over a distance greater than 50 miles.
A transfer organization which serves several industries has a greater chance of identify-
ing new transfer opportunities than does one serving only one industry. Thus, while the
chemical industry is expected to be the mainstay of any transfer service, participation by
customers of the chemical industries should be expected and encouraged. Such customers
or major users of chemicals include the textile, paper, wood products, printing, rubber
and plastics, leather, ceramics, machinery, and electronics industries.
No government agency, whether federal or state or local, whether a line agency or a
special-purpose authority, should try to operate or sponsor a waste transfer service directly.
The potential conflicts between their promotional and regulatory roles would render the
service unacceptable to its intended industrial clients, and thus largely ineffective. None-
theless, governments retain an indirect interest because of their public health and environ-
mental protection responsibilities. They can provide significant general support, notably
by encouraging waste inventory and market research studies, offering technical assistance
to organizers and sponsors of clearinghouses, encouraging generators to keep wastes separa-
ted and to analyze their characteristics, controlling disposal and thereby raising its costs,
and clarifying the questions and uncertainties which now surround legal liabilities of genera-
tors and handlers of hazardous wastes.
DIFFERENT ROLES OF A CLEARINGHOUSE AND AN EXCHANGE
When generators and users cannot satisfy all requirements for a transfer by them-
selves, they may seek help elsewhere. Their first recourse is to informal networks of colleagues.
The second is to professional societies and advertising columns of technical journals.
The third is to an information clearinghouse, which serves the limited function of
linking interested trading partners. A clearinghouse transfers only information. It plays
only a passive role in the transfer process, because it leaves generators and users to negotiate
directly.
The fourth recourse is to a dealer, reclaimer, or materials exchange equipped to handle,
treat, and certify the characteristics of chemical materials. Such agents play an active role,
because they stand as intermediaries between generator and user. Of course, many companies
reclaim materials with well-recognized reuse value. Only a few small companies in Europe
and the United States now seem to be offering, or interested in offering, the full range of ser-
vices needed to transfer scrap chemicals.
-------
Most existing transfer organizations are operated by the chemical industry associations
or governments of European countries as wholly- or partially-subsidized information clear-
inghouses. Only a few waste transfer agents operate now in the United States; two follow
the European pattern, and two take more active roles in identifying matches and negotiating
transfers, although they do not physically handle the materials. Several small materials
exchanges were identified, one in Europe and the rest in the United States.
Information Clearinghouses
The functions of an information clearinghouse are very limited: to offer a central
point for collecting and displaying information, and to introduce interested potential trad-
ing partners to each other. They do not actively seek customers, negotiate transfers, set
values, process materials, transport materials, or provide legal advice. Any such functions
required to transfer a specific material are performed by generators, users, or middlemen
dealers.
The basic clearinghouse service is to receive offers of waste materials and requests
for scrap materials, list both anonymously, and publish the lists to members and interested
nonmembers of their sponsor association. Interested potential traders then contact the
clearinghouse, which refers them to each other, but takes no further active role in negotia-
tions which may lead to transfers. Most clearinghouses try to learn whether transfers in
fact were completed, but with only limited returns.
All existing information clearinghouses are subsidized by their sponsors. Some charge
nominal listing fees. An information clearinghouse requires little capital investment and can
be operated at an annual cost of between $10,000 and $90,000 per year, depending on
industry response and the degree of active promotion of its service. Financial self-sufficiency
could be achieved once the information transfer service has shown its usefulness to industry,
by building a large circulation and by setting realistic listing and subscription fees. A partici-
pating company could probably recover such fees with one successful transfer a year.
Experience of the older European clearinghouses suggests that about 10 percent of
scrap wastes listed will actually be transferred. Approximately one-half of those wastes
transferred went to waste brokers and reprocessing companies (i.e., solvent recovery, etc.).
The remainder were transferred to manufacturers.
The best sponsor for a clearinghouse is a local or regional industry association, or an
organization equally responsive to industry's needs, for three major reasons. First, to be
successful, clearinghouses must obtain the support of industry, especially plant managers
and engineers faced with waste disposal problems. Second, it is not likely that clearinghouses
-------
will be self-supporting until industry learns about the assistance which clearinghouses offer.
Finally, they must keep identities and waste generation data confidential.
Although information clearinghouses can assist industry, their importance should not
be overemphasized. When clearinghouses began in Europe, they received many listings. The
initial influx of wastes included many continuous waste streams. In most cases after the
first 12-to-18 months of operation, the number of listings declined. Presumably as plant
managers either negotiated transfers or decided that their wastes had no value in the current
market, they discontinued their listings.
However, in addition to facilitating transfers of specific wastes, clearinghouses provide
two useful general services. First, both their existance and listings of available wastes help to
educate industrial engineers about the increased opportunities for transferring and using
scrap wastes. Second, their series of lists can gradually build an inventory, incomplete but
also inexpensive, of industrial processing wastes.
In the next few years, several more clearinghouses may begin in the United States.
Even though subsidized clearinghouses can be operated in areas with a low density of indus-
try, they will facilitate a greater number and higher percentage of transfers in heavily-
industrialized areas, such as Houston, Chicago, and Philadelphia, having a large number and
variety of industries within relatively small geographic regions.
The scope of the typical clearinghouse in Europe is national, and in two cases interna-
tional. The likely American pattern will be a network of regional clearinghouses, with
arrangements to cooperate in cases in which the value of the scrap waste is great enough
to cover costs of transporting it between regions.
Materials Exchanges
The services of exchanges are more complex and expensive than those of clearing-
houses. Exchanges buy or accept wastes, analyze their properties, identify potential uses,
reprocess them as needed, and sell at a profit. They transfer information only as a courtesy
to clients or in the course of paid consulting services. Whereas a clearinghouse needs only a
part-time staff and office space, an exchange needs highly-competent technical, managerial,
and marketing skills, as well as storage and processing facilities.
Financial success depends upon brokering matches to completion. Because of trans-
portation costs, most transfers can occur within about 50 miles only. Exchanges must, for
economic reasons, concentrate on those scrap wastes of most value and most likely to find
buyers. A materials exchange requires a capital investment of from $200,000 to $350,000,
-------
and annual operating costs are expected to fall in the range of $50,000 to $150,000 per
year. Economic analysis indicates that a materials exchange service is not likely to become
profitable, unless offered together with a range of other established services to chemical
industries, such as handling surplus chemicals.
NEXT STEPS NEEDED TO DEVELOP CLEARINGHOUSES
1. Detailed data are needed from one or more operating clearinghouses in
order to guide the creation of clearinghouses elsewhere. Such data should
include listing activity, costs, and manpower used, and should not over-
look the value of contributed volunteer professional time. These operating
data must be collected without impairing the anonymity guaranteed to
listers.
2. Although the role of the public sector must be only indirect, it is nonetheless
important in providing support services, notably by encouraging studies of
operating experience and inventories of available wastes.
3. Emphasis should be given to the needs of potential scrap users. Waste gener-
ators quickly recognize the potential usefulness of the information clearing-
house service. Moreover, success of the waste transfer concept depends
ultimately upon the demands of users of acceptable scrap wastes. Examples
of new recycling technologies and successful new types of transfers should
be brought to the attention of potential scrap users through technical journals
and professional societies.
4. Information about the waste transfer concept and practice should be dissem-
inated widely, to satisfy the interest which is now so evident. Useful techni-
ques include publications, regional conferences, and technical assistance.
Various institutional and legal arrangements for clearinghouses should be
examined and perhaps tested.
5. A definitive study of legal liability issues is needed in order to clarify the
many questions, and to dispel some of the fears, which now present major
barriers to participation in waste transfers by generators and potential users.
Topics addressed should include transfer of title to wastes, residual liability,
variations in law and practice among states, and developing trends both in
legislation and in court decisions.
-------
6. One or more subsidized clearinghouses should be encouraged in order to:
• demonstrate the effectiveness of the transfer concept,
• identify the existence of transfer opportunities,
• generate detailed operating data,
• educate potential transfer participants in industry, and,
• identify the potential for financial self-sufficient clearinghouses.
7. A financially self-sufficient clearinghouse should be designed and demon-
strated over a period of two-to-three years. Various combinations of rela-
ted services and various forms of institutional sponsorship should be examined.
8. Materials exchange services should be offered and operated only by the
private sector. But the public sector should provide general encouragement
through technical and information services.
10
-------
I. INTRODUCTION
PROBLEM AND THE EPA RESPONSE
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimated in 1976 that 344 million
metric tons (wet basis) of industrial processing residues are generated annually in the United
States. This is almost twice the quantity of municipal wastes and more than thirty times
the amount of sewage sludge generated annually.1 *
As ocean dumping is decreased and water pollution and air pollution controls are
tightened, these materials will increasingly be concentrated into solids and sludges for dis-
posal on land. EPA estimates that 25 million tons of hazardous wastes are annually disposed
of on land. Furthermore, EPA projects that this quantity will double during the next
decade.2
Section 212 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act as amended required EPA to investi-
gate the problem of hazardous wastes and study the concept of national disposal sites
for storage and disposal of these materials.3 The EPA did this, but recommended that any
action on a national disposal site system be made part of a larger strategy based on improved
regulatory controls.4
The EPA's report was submitted to the President and the Congress in 1973. It con-
cluded that:
• Current practices of hazardous waste management are inadequate.
• This is because adequate treatment and disposal are expensive and, except
in the case of radioactive wastes, are not mandated by law.
• What is lacking is appropriate legislative authority over land disposal of
non-radioactive materials. Existing authorities are adequate to protect the
air, surface waters, and probably ocean waters from hazardous materials,
but not land and groundwaters.
• The technology of hazardous waste management is generally adequate.
• A national disposal site system would be expensive, requiring investments
of about $940 million and annual operating costs of about $620 million.
'References are listed at the end of the report.
11
-------
• The private sector is capable of assuming most or all of the responsibility
for hazardous waste management, and a small private-sector hazardous waste
management industry has in fact begun to develop.
The strategy recommended in the report is first to establish appropriate regulatory controls,
then to monitor the response of the private sector, and only later to take further govern-
ment action if that is found necessary.5
EPA currently proposes the following order of preference and sequence of steps for
handling industrial waste streams:6
(1) Minimize the amount of waste generated, by modifying the industrial
process involved.
(2) Concentrate the waste (through evaporation, precipitation, etc.) at the
source to reduce handling and transport costs.
(3) If possible transfer the waste as is to another industry which can use it
as a feedstock.
(4) When a transfer "as is" is not possible, reprocess the waste for material
recovery.
(5) When material recovery is not possible,
(a) Incinerate the waste for energy recovery and for destruction of hazard-
ous materials.
(b) If the waste cannot be incinerated, detoxify and neutralize it through
chemical treatment.
(6) Use carefully controlled land disposal only for what remains.
The present study is concerned with Step 3 and to some extent Step 4. It explores the
feasibility of the concept of "waste exchange" and outlines the requirements for success-
ful waste transfer operations.
The study is intended to further the strategy recommended in the 1973 EPA report
by outlining one way in which industry can reduce its waste disposal needs. The study
is also responsive to the goals of the National Academy of Science, whose 1966 study of
waste management identified recovery and re-use of pollutants as the strategy with highest
probable long-term utility in alleviating the nationwide pollution problem.7
12
-------
OBJECTIVES AND FOCUS OF THIS STUDY
This study has two major objectives: (1) to assess the feasibility and potential impact
of transferring wastes in the United States, and (2) to provide guidelines for the organization
and operation of a waste transfer organization. The conclusions are based on a review of the
activities of existing transfer organizations; analysis of the technology, economics, and insti-
tutional aspects of waste transfer; and extensive discussion of the concept with industries
generating and potentially using wastes.
This report will interest primarily existing and potential operators of waste transfer
services. The main questions addressed are:
• How do existing transfer organizations operate, using what procedures,
and with what results?
• Where can such an organization operate best?
• Who are the most likely clients? What are their needs? How do they behave?
• How can clients best be identified, contacted, and attracted?
• Will their demand for transfer services grow, or at least remain stable over
time?
• What proportion of transferable wastes are likely to find exact matches—that
is, find uses without chemical treatment?
• What skills and resources are required to run a transfer organization success-
fully?
• What are the economics of transferring wastes?
• What legal problems may arise?
• What competition might a transfer service face?
Other readers of this report will include potential sponsors or subsidizers of transfer
organizations, generators of wastes, and potential users of wastes having reuse value.
ya!417cR
SW-130C.1
13
-------
MAIL ORDER TO:
NHS
National Technical Information Service
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Springfield, Va. 22161
(703) 557-4650 TELEX 89-9405
For DDC Users Only
DDC User Code
Contract Number
(last 6 characters only)
Tr
D
eas
(
ury Agency Loca
For Government I
who report on SF-
(8 digit)
nnr
Won
Jsers
-224)
Code
in
Date
PURCHASER: Telephone:
SHIP TO:
(Enter if different from address at left)
Name.
Organization
Address
City, State, ZIP
Attention:
METHOD OF PAYMENT
Q Charge my NTIS deposit account no.
n Purchase order no.
Check enclosed for $
Ship & Bill. See reverse (not applicable outside North America).
Charge to my American Express Card account number
Card expiration date.
Signature
Order Options
Normal delivery time takes three to five
weeks. It is vital that you order by number
or your order will be manually filled, in-
suring a delay. You can opt for airmail
delivery for a $2.00 charge per item. Just
check the Airmail Service box. If you're
really pressed for time, call the NTIS Rush
Handling Service (703) 557-4700. For a
$10.00 charge per item your order will be
airmailed within 24 hours. Or, you can
pick up your order in the Washington In-
formation Center & Bookstore or at our
Springfield Operations Center within 24
hours for a $6.00 per item charge.
ITEM NUMBER •••
PB-261 287
USER ROUTING
CODE (see reverse)
Quantity
Paper
Copy
Micro-
fiche
Other
(specify)
° Add $2.00 per item for First Class Delivery in North America:
Add $3.00 for each paper copy Airmail Delivery outside North America;
Add J.75 for each microfiche Airmail Delivery outside North America.
*a ALL PRICES SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
"'• " If ordering by title or if item ordered is a magnetic tape, please see reverse side.
PRICE
AIRMAIL*
SERVICES
TOTAL
PRICE
Enter
Grand $
Total
NTIS-173 (4/77)
-------
USER ROUTING CODE:
NTIS can label each item for routing within your organization. If you want this service put your
routing code in the box marked USER ROUTING CODE (Limit eight characters).
SHIP & BILL SERVICE:
Prepayment helps to expedite your order and can be accomplished through the use of an NTIS
Deposit Account, check, money order, or American Express Card Account Number • For "Ship
and Bill", NTIS charges $5.00 extra for each order (regardless of the number of items); $5.00
extra for each On-line NTISearch; and $2.50 extra for each subscription • NTIS does not "Ship and
Bill" for magnetic tapes, or for orders outside North America.
ORDERING MAGNETIC TAPE:
(check mode)
n 200 BPI
7 track n 556 BPI D odd
soo BPI D even parity
9 track
1600 BPI
800 BPI
(odd parity)
ORDERING BY TITLE:
If ordering without an item number (by title only) allow an additional two weeks.
TITLE #1
Sponsor's Series #
Contract or Grant Number of Report
Originator (Give specific laboratory, or division and location.) Person
Date Published
al Author
Turn toother side. Write "1" in the Item Number block and complete the rest of the line.
TITLE #2
Sponsor's Series *
Contract or Grant Number of Report
Originator (Give specific laboratory, or division and location.) Persor
Date Published
al Author
Turn to other side. Write "2" in the Item Number block and complete the rest of the line.
TITLE #3
Sponsor's Series #
Contract or Grant Number of Report
Originator (Give specific laboratory, or division and location.) Persor
Date Published
lal Author
Turn to other side. Write "3" in the Item Number block and complete the rest of the line.
TITLE #4
Sponsor's Series #
Contract or Grant Number of Report
Originator (Give specific laboratory, or division and location.) Persor
Date Published
lal Author
Turn to other side. Write "4" in the Item Number block and complete the rest of the line.
TITLE #5
Sponsor's Series #
Contract or Grant Number of Report
Originator (Give specific laboratory, or division and location.) Person
Date Published
al Author
Turn to other side. Write "5" in the Item Number block and complete the rest of the line.
* U S GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1978 260-880/16
------- |