United States
                Environmental Protection
                Agency
 Risk Reduction Engineering
 Laboratory
 Cincinnati OH 45268
                Research and Development
 EPA/600/S2-90/046 Feb. 1991
EPA       Project  Summary
                Waste  Minimization  Opportunity
                Assessment:  Philadelphia  Naval
                Shipyard
               George C. Cushnie and Barry Langer
                 The Waste Reduction Evaluation at
               Federal Sites (WREAFS) Program con-
               sists of a series of demonstration and
               evaluation projects for waste reduction
               conducted cooperatively by the U.S.
               Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
               and various parts of other federal agen-
               cies.  The objectives of the WREAFS
               Program include: (1) conducting waste
               minimization (WM) workshops; (2) per-
               forming WM opportunity assessments;
               (3) demonstrating  WM techniques  or
               technologies at federal facilities; and (4)
               enhancing WM benefits within the federal
               community.
                 An assessment was made of several
               operations at the Philadelphia Naval
               Shipyard (PNSY), afederal facility which
               specializes in revitalizing and repairing
               ships already in fleet. A wide range of
               industrial processes  are done at the
               PNSY, and many  of them generate
               wastes.  This project focused on the
               processes and wastes of operations re-
               lated to aluminum cleaning, spray
               painting, and bilge cleaning.  Seven WM
               options-were evaluated during  this
               project with the use  of EPA's Waste
               Minimization Opportunity Assessment
               Manual.*
                 This Project Summary was developed
               by EPA's Risk Reduction Engineering
               Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH, to announce
               key findings of the research project that
               * Waste Minimization Opportunity Assessment Manual
               (EPA/625/7-88/003), Hazardous Waste Engineering
               Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Devel-
               opment, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cin-
               cinnati, Ohio 45268, 1988.
 Is fully documented In a separate report
 of the same title (see Project Report
 ordering information at back).

 Purpose of the Project
  The purpose of this project was to de-
 velop WM plans for the PNSY with the use
 of EPA's Waste Minimization Opportunity
 Assessment Manual. This manual provides
 a systematic, planned procedure for identi-
 fying ways to reduce or eliminate waste.
 The project was conducted in cooperation
 with  PNSY's Environmental Safety and
 Health Office. The Shipyard has an ongo-
 ing program for WM.  With their guidance,
 several industrial operations were selected
 for application of the new WM procedures.
 Results from this project will be used as a
 guidance tool for evaluating WM opportu-
 nities at their other industrial activities, par-
 ticularly at facilities operating  aqueous
 cleaning and spray painting processes. The
 procedures employed to identify and evalu-
 ate WM alternatives are, however, appli-
 cable to most industrial operations.

 The Waste Minimization
 Assessment Procedure
  The WM assessment procedures consist
 of four major steps (Figure 1). This project
 completed the first three steps of the proce-
 dures for several selected industrial activi-
 ties.
  The WM Manual contains a set of 19
 worksheets which are designed to facilitate
the WM assessment procedure (Table 1).
Worksheets 2 through 16 were completed
for the assigned areas during this project.
  The following three industrial areas at the
 PNSY were selected for evaluation during

         kgg>  Printed on Recycled Paper

-------
              The recognized need to minimize waste
                            i
                       Planning and Organization
              ' Get management commitment
               Set overall assessment program goals
               Organize assessment program task force
  Assessment organization
  and commitment to proceed
                      Assessment Phase
              Collect process and facility data
             > Prioritize and select assessment targets
              Select people for assessment teams
             ' Review data and inspect site
              Generate options
              Screen and select options for further study
                Select new
            assessment targets
              and reevaluata
              previous options
  Assessment report of
    selected options
                 Feasibility Analysis Phase
              Technical evaluation
              Economic evaluation
              Select options for implementation
   Final report, including
   recommended options
         Repeat the process
                        Implementation
              Justify projects and obtain funding
              Installation (equipment)
             ' Implementation (procedure)
              Evaluate performance	
                   Successfully implemented
                   waste minimization projects

   Figure 1. The waste minimization assessment procedure.
this project: Building 990 - aluminum clean-
ing and spray  painting;  Building 1028 -
spray painting of steel parts including struc-
tural columns; and citric acid bilge cleaning
operations conducted in drydock.
  A 3-day assessment phase survey fo-
cused on collecting process and waste data
and identifying procedures for waste man-
agement.  Many sections for Worksheets 2
through 9 were completed atthis time. After
completing the survey, additional data and
information were collected and verified; the
assessment and feasibility analyses phases
of the WM assessment  (Worksheets  10
through 16) were then completed.
Description of Areas Selected
for WM Assessment
  The PNSY generates a wide range  of
wastes. In termsof volume, the most signifi-
cant wastes include alkaline liquid wastes,
paint  and paint products, and waste acid.
The  industrial activities selected for this
project included those in Building 990 where
aluminum products are fabricated and sur-
face coated and those in Building  1028
where steel parts are spray painted.  Also,
included in the study was the citric acid
derusting operation located al thedrydocks.
Building 990
  An aluminum cleaning operation is per-
formed to remove oil and other materials
from the surfaces of aluminum sheets be-
fore tungsten inert gas welding. This pro-
cess is critical because the welding opera-
tions cannot be done unless the metal sur-
faces are properly cleaned. The cleaning
line consists of two process tanks contain-
ing a proprietary cleaning solution and two
rinse tanks containing tap water. One pro-
cess tank is  heated (steam coil) and the
other is at ambient temperature; both rinse
tanks are heated. The cleaning procedure
consists of loading aluminum sheets into a
metal basket, hoisting the basket  into a
processtankforS min.followed by rinsing in
one of the rinse tanks.
  The process tanks become diluted after
repeated operation due to dragout  losses
and tap water replenishment.  These tanks
also collect floating oil, and  the solution
becomes  contaminated with  suspended
solids. After approximately 3 mo operation,
the process tanks are pumped to  a tank
truck and disposed of by a contractor.
  The  rinse tanks  are  operated  as
nonflowing rinses because of the low pH of
the rinse water and the lack of neutralization
facilities. The rinse tanks are disposed of in
the same manner as the process tanks but
more frequently, usually every 2 wk.
  This project evaluated drag-out reduction
methods and an alternative rinsing proce-
dure that would reduce the frequency of
discharge for these wastestreams.
   Small and medium sized aluminum parts
are spray painted in Building 990.  Rags
dipped into xylene are used to degrease the
aluminum parts. The parts are then spray
painted in a water curtain booth  (which
collects the paint overspray): typically, a
zinc chromate primer, air drying,  a final
enamel paint coating, and air drying. A new
booth water chemical system  was used for
the first time during the survey.
   The new  process consists of several
steps. Initially, a booth-cleaning chemical
(SW-3*) is used to remove overspray and
paint sludgefrom the booth surfaces. These
paint solids  are removed and drummed,
and the booth water is discharged to the
sewer. This cleaning process will be sched-
uled every 6 mo. After cleaning, the booth is
refilled with fresh water and a detackif ication
chemical (Surround*) is added along with a
  Mention of trade names or commercial products does
  not constitute endorsement or recommendation for

-------
 Table 1. List of Waste Minimization Assessment Worksheets

 Phase                                Number and Title
                                                                                       Purpose/Remarks
 Step 1 -
 Planning and Organization
 (Section 2)
 Step 2-
 Assessment Phase
 Step 3 -
 Feasibility Analysis Phase
Step 4-
Implementation
  1.  Assessment Overview

 2.  Program Organization

 3.  Assessment Team Make-up


 4.  Site Description

 5.  Personnel


 6.  Process Information

 7.  Input Materials Summary


 8.  Products Summary

 9.  Individual Waste Stream
     Characterization
10.  Waste Stream Summary

11.  Option Generation

12.  Option Description

13.  Options Evaluation  by
     Weighted Sum Method

14.  Technical Feasibility



15.  Cost Information

16.  Profitability Worksheet
     #7 Payback Period
17.  Profitability Worksheet
     #2 Cash Flow for NPVand IRR

18.  Project Summary



19.  Option Performance
 Summarizes the overall assessment procedure.

 Records key members in the WM assessment program task force and
 assessment teams. Also records the relevant organization.
 Lists names of assessment team members as well as duties.  Includes a
 list of potential departments to consider when selecting the teams.

 Lists background information about the facility, including location,
 products, and operations.
 Records information about the personnel who work in the area to be
 assessed.

 Providesachecklistofusefulprocessinformationtolookforbeforestarting
 the assessment.

 Records input material information for a specific production or process
 area. This includes name, supplier, hazardous component or properties,
 cost, delivery and shelf-life information, and possible substitutes.
 Identifies hazardous components, production rate, revenues, and other
 information about products.
 Records source, hazard, generation rate, disposal cost, and method
 of treatment or disposal for each waste stream.
 Summarizes all of the information collected for each waste stream.  This
 sheet is also used to prioritize waste streams to assess.
 Records options proposed during brainstorming or nominal group tech-
 nique sessions.  Includes the rationale for proposing each option.
 Describes and summarizes information about a proposed option. Also
 notes approval of promising options.

 Evaluates for screening options using the weighted sum method.


 Provides detailed checklist for performing a technical evaluation of a WM
 option.  This worksheet is divided into sections for equipment-related
 options, personnel/procedural-related options, and materials-related op-
 tions.

 Providesdetailedlistofcapitalandoperatingcostinformationforuseinthe
 economic evaluation of an option.
 Calculates the payback period, based on the  capital and operating cost
 information developed from Worksheet 15.
 Develops cashflows for calculating net present value (NPV) or
 internal rate of return (IRR).

 Summarizes important tasks to be performed during the implementation
 of an option. This includes deliverable, responsible person, budget, and
 schedule.

 Records material balance information for evaluating the performance of an
implemented option.
buffer. Surround is an organic polymer that
causes the paint overspray to form a fine
colloidal precipitant, which  is dispersed
throughout the booth. The buffer maintains
the optimal pH for precipitant formation.  In
this form, paint particles do not clog the
booth's water recycle spray nozzles or pip-
ing system and tend not to adhere to booth
surfaces. After operating approximately 2
wk, a second organic polymer (Unite*)  is
added; this coagulates the dispersed paint
into a floating mass or sludge. This sludge
is removed by screening and drummed for
disposal.  The booth water can be  reused
              after adding more Surround. After approxi-
              mately 6 mo, the system is cleaned using
              the SW-3 procedure.
                 The economics of the new booth mainte-
              nance system were evaluated during this
              project, and optional dewatering equipment,
              currently underconsideration by PNS Y, was
              evaluated. The dewatering equipment will
              reduce the volume of paint sludge gener-
              ated by the maintenance system.

              Building 1028
                 Steel parts and columns are spray painted
              at various areas in Building 1028: (1) a
                    large, shot blasting/painting booth with a
                    dry airfiltration system, (2) ashape abraider/
                    spray booth for blasting and painting steel
                    columns, and (3) a water curtain booth.
                    Each system is used for epoxy spray paint-
                    ing of steel surfaces.  The water curtain
                    booth consists of two large water curtains
                    (each approximately  18 ft long),  one of
                    which was inoperable at the time of the
                    survey. A booth water deflocculant, Booth
                    Compound 702*, is employed for booth
                    water maintenance.  The new booth chemi-
                    cal system described for Building 990 is
                    being considered for Building 1028.  The

-------
economics of this application were evalu-
ated during the project.

Citric Add Bilge Cleaning
  PNSY employs a citric-acid, chemical
cleaning process for ships' tanks, bilges,
and void spaces. It is generally done while
ships are in drydock.  This relatively new
(1976) process replaces mechanical meth-
ods of cleaning and derusting metal sur-
faces.   After  a citric acid/triethanolamine
(TEA) solution is used to remove the oxides
from the metal surfaces, the surfaces are
neutralized and rinsed with dilute solutions.
  At PNSY, the citric acid process employs
atreatment rig housed in a 40-ft trailer that
Is lowered into the drydock.  The trailer
contains the process solutions, pumps, and
controls. To remove grease and oil from the
metal surfaces inside the ship's bilges, a
degreaser is applied using hand-held, gar-
den-type sprayers. This solution is washed
down  with a  high-pressure water spray.
Then, existing paint is  stripped.  After a
second rinse, a hot, concentrated citric acid/
TEA solution  (10% citric acid, 7% TEA) is
applied with hydroblast (high pressure) guns
to remove rust.  The solution run-off is
collected and pumped back to the rig for
recycling.  After treatment is complete, the
solution is pumped to a waste container for
disposal.  Following derusting, a hot neu-
tralizer(<1%c'rtricacid, 4%TEA) is sprayed
on the metal surfaces.  Run-off is pumped to
a waste tank.  As a final rinse, a 1% TEA
solution is sprayed on the steel surfaces.
Any run-off is again pumped to a waste
tank.
  The volume of spent solutions from a
derusting/neutralization/rinse operation is
typically about 3,000 gal (1,000 gal of each
solution). This solution generally has a pH
below 4.0 and contains toxic metals.  It is
contractor hauled for treatment and  dis-
posal.

Waste Minimization Options

Option 1 - KRC-7X Dragout
Reduction and Bath
Maintenance
  In Option 1, a hand-held spray rinse is
applied  over the process tanks.  After im-
pacting the basket and parts, the rinse wa-
ter drips into the process tank. The spray
rinse is expected to return 90% of thedragout
back to  the process tank. The amount of
rinse water used depends on the evapora-
tion rate of the  process tanks, which is
expected to be in the range of 4 to 8 gph per
tank.
  The acid baths accumulate oil from the
parts and solids from the parts and sur-
rounding air.  Because  dragout losses re-
turn to  the process tanks,  contaminants
accumulate at af aster pace - contaminants
that may interfere with the cleaning pro-
cess. A bath maintenance system is, there-
fore, recommended. This system includes
an oil skimmer for floating oil and grease
removal and acartridgefilterforsuspended
solids removal.
  The dragout reduction and bath mainte-
nance systems are expected to extend the
usable life of the baths to  1  yr.  Small
additions of KRC-7X may be necessary to
make up for dragout not returned to the
bath.

Option 2 - KRC-7X Two-Stage
Rinse
  Rinsing is presently done in  stagnant
tanks that are pu mped and contractor hau led
every 2 wk.  The proposed system would
employ a two-stage rinse. From the right
side of the line, the basket would exit the
KRC-7X tank, be rinsed in Rinse #1, and
then be rinsed in Rinse #2. After Rinse # 1
becomes contaminated, its contents would
be disposed of and the tank would be re-
filled with water.  The sequence of rinsing
would then be changed. Rinse # 2 would
serve as the initial rinse and Rinse #1 as the
final rinse (i.e., the cleaner  rinse would
always be the final rinse).

Option 3 - Booth Guard System
  The 3-phase Booth  Guard System (a
biannual cleaning,  normal operation, and
biweekly paint removal) is currently being
tried in the Building  990 Paint Spray Booth.
This option involves permanently adopting
the process in Buildings 990 and 1028.
  Although this option  requires different
raw materials and instruction  of booth op-
erators in their use, no new equipment is
required.  Savings will result from less
downtime for the paint spray booth, less
operator maintenance time for the booth,
and less cleaning  wear and tear on the
booth.

Option 4 - Paint Sludge
Dewatering
  The paint spray booth generates a paint
sludge that is disposed of as waste during
routine maintenance - paint sludge com-
posed of a high percentage of water. If this
water can be extracted and recycled to the
booth, the volume of disposed of waste is
decreased.
  Paint sludge can be dewatered  mechani-
cally with the use of a bag filter, roll bed filter,
filter press, or hydrocyclones.   Here the
quantity of sludge makes the hydrocyclone
the most economical method of dewatering.
Centrifugal force separates paint solids from
the booth water, paint solids drop into a
waste receptacle (bag or drum),  and clear
water is pumped back to the booth.  The
process is used continuously while the booth
is in operation.  When the volume of paint
overspray is  bw, a  single  hydrocyclone
could be moved (depending on the equip-
ment selected) and used at other booths.
  This option requires the purchase of the
hydrocyclone unit and the piping to connect
itto the paint spray booth. The unit would be
turned on when the booth is started for the
day  and  shut down at the end of the first
shift, just before shutting down the paint
spray booth. Routine maintenance requires
removing the waste receptacle when it is full
and lubricating moving parts within the unit.
This option eliminates the need forthe booth
.operator to manually remove  paint booth
sludge; the use of the chemical, Unite, as a
flocculant; and downtime of the booth for
biweekly cleaning.


Option 5 - High-Volume/Low-
Pressure Painting
  Currently, common, compressed-air-type
equipment  is used  for  spray painting  in
Buildings 990 and 1028.  This type of spray
painting  has a  relatively low transfer effi-
ciency (i.e., the amount of the coating ap-
plied to the surface, divided by the amount
of coating sprayed from the gun, expressed
as a percentage).
  A new paint spraying technique, which
may be applicable to these operations is the
high-volume/low-pressure (HVLP) method.
The transfer efficiency of HVLP is between
65% and 90%; that of compressed air
equipment, 25%. Other methods of spray
painting  such as airless, air-assisted air-
less, and electrostatic spray painting have
transfer efficiencies from 35% to 65%, with
electrostatic spray painting having the high-
est. Electrostatic spray painting, however,
costs significantly more to retrofit than does
HVLP and therefore is not considered as
attractive as HVLP for the PNSY.
  To retrofit a HVLP system,  a regulator/
filter assembly, air hose, control valve, quick
disconnect,  and HVLP spray  gun are
needed.  The existing air compressors, ex-
pected to be adequate, need not be re-
placed.


 Option 6 - Operator Training
and Awareness
  Paint and paint wastes comprise the sec-
ond largest hazardous waste stream gener-
ated at PNSY. A program that encourages
operator involvement and responsibility can
reduce the amount of waste paint by con-
trolling the amount of paint overspray, the
amount of unused paint left in the can, and
the amount of unusable paint resulting from
partial solidification.


-------
  By outlining the waste minimization goals
of the PNSY and distributing this informa-
tion, supervisors and operators become
aware of the goals as well as waste quanti-
ties generated, disposal costs, and current
waste minimization efforts. The supervisors
and operators are the key to the success of
waste minimization programs.
  When each operator is properly trained in
the procedures and the use of equipment,
waste caused by careless operating prac-
tices is avoided and material costs are re-
duced. Certain details of the waste minimi-
zation program can be written into process
specifications.
  Finally, feedback should be solicited from
the operators to assess the effectiveness of
the waste minimization  efforts and to iden-
tify areas where further waste minimization
is possible.  New options that appear fea-
sible should be explored.
  Option 6 relates strictly to personnel and
procedural changes. No new equipment or
materials are necessary. Training can be
done in-house and on-site by existing Naval
personnel knowledgeable in the areas of
waste minimization, general painting op-
erations, and booth operating procedures.
Applying Option 6 base-wide can reduce
wastes generated in every painting depart-
ment.
Option 7 - Recovery of
Concentrated Citric Add
Solution
   This batch process for recovering spent
concentrated citric acid/TEA solution from
derusting operations employs equipment
used for similar processes but not specifi-
cally for citric acid derusting wastewaters.
   The proposed recovery process includes
three main  removal operations:  oil and
grease (O&G), suspended solids, and dis-
solved metal. For O&G removal, the equip-
ment, specifically designed for removal of
oils from shipboard bilge waters, employs
enhanced gravity separation and coalescer
beds of polypropylene. It has  a modular
design  that includes all necessary pumps
and controls.
   For removing suspended solids, afloat-
ing ceramic media backwash filter with an
upflow service, downflow backwash design
is recommended. Suspended solids with a
size greater than 5 microns can be re-
moved.  The backwash cycle can be auto-
matically initiated with a pressure differen-
tial switch, and the backwash (1 % to 5% of
treated volume) from  the  filter could be
recycled to the storage tank or drummed for
disposal.
   The discharge from  the filter collects in
the recovery tank. A level control senses
when  a sufficient volume  has been col-
lected and shuts off the feed pump on the oil
removal system. The electrodialysis (ED)
unit is then energized.  The proposed ED
unit is a technology specifically designed to
remove cations (e.g., iron,  lead, trivalent
chromium, cadmium) from acid baths. Al-
though most often used to  maintain hard
chrome plating solutions, the ED unit has
been successfully tested inthe laboratory to
maintain citric acid/TEA  solutions.  This
technology consists of an electrochemical
cell  (cylindrical  unit placed into recovery
tank) and a cathode tank. The cell is de-
signed with a set of anodes that contact the
acid solution, a cation specific membrane,
and  a cathode within the membrane com-
partment.
  During operation, the catholyte solution
(caustic solution) is continuously circulated
to the membrane compartment. The metal
ions present in the spent citric acid/TEA
solution are electrically driven through the
membrane and are precipitated as hydrox-
ides in the catholyte. Since the membrane
is cation specific, anions are unable to pass
through. The process is relatively slow (on
the order of 2 to 4 wk), but it can be operated
unattended. After the process is complete
(determined by concentration of iron in citric
acid/TEA solution), the ED unit is shut off.
The solution is then tested to determine the
concentration of citric acid and TEA; ad-
justed, as necessary; and recycled to the
derusting operation.

Ranking of Options
  The assessment phase includes collect-
ing data, selecting target areas, reviewing
data, and generating and screening options
(Table 2).
  The WM screening process consists of
comparing WM options (WM options de-
scribed on Worksheet  12) using standard
criteria presented in the WM Assessment
Manual. The criteria include various mea-
sures of the effect of WM on safety, cost,
ease of implementation, and other relevant
factors.  Scores for individual WM options
are determined by multiplying a weight fac-
tor, W (1 to 10), for each criteria by a score
(1 to 10) or measure (termed R-value) for
how well each  WM option satisfies each
criteria (Score = R x W). Then, the scores
for each WM option are summed over  all
criteria to produce a single score for each
WM option. As indicated in Table 2, the
scores for the identified options range from
288 to 396.
  The weighted values (W) for each criteria
were set through an iterative process for an
initial "first-cut," which was reviewed and
modified by PNSY.  The measures for each
option (R) were estimated and where pos-
sible, these estimates were quantified (e.g.,
costs) and converted to R-values. For other
measures, which could not be quantified,
the R-values were estimated by the Sci-
ence Applications  International  Corpora-
tion (SAIC) project members through data
review and discussion.
  Based on the results of the assessment
phase, all identified options were consid-
ered to be within a narrow range and were,
therefore, selected for further evaluation in
the feasibility analysis phase.

Feasibility Analysis
  The purpose of the feasibility analysis
phase is to prepare a (1) technical and (2)
economic evaluation of the WM options and
to select options for implementation. The
technical feasibility evaluation initially de-
termines the nature of the WM option, either
equipment-related, personnel/procedure-
related, or materials-related. The economic
feasibility evaluation includes a cost analy-
sis of both capital and operating costs. The
WM options  evaluated during this project
include five equipment-related options, one
personnel/procedure-related option,  and
one materials-related option.
  The technical and economic results of the
feasibility analysis phase are summarized
in Table 3.  This table indicates for each
option, the total capital investment, the net
operating cost savings and the payback
period (total capital investment/net operat-
ing cost savings).
  To further evaluate the relative benefits of
each option, the options were ranked (1 for
the best to 7forthe worst) with respectto the
net operating cost savings and the payback
period. These rankings were then summed
for each option and  compared among all
options and a final ranking was determined
(1 for the best to 7 for the worst). These
comparisons are shown in the final column
in Table 3.  Using savings and payback
heavily weighs the evaluation in terms of
annual cost savings since both criteria con-
tain annual costs factors. Other techniques
for comparing options may also be  valid.
Worksheet 17 is  an alternative method,
which calculates profitability based on cash
flow.

Conclusions
   The assessment of several WM opportu-
nities at the PNSY yielded seven possible
options.  The relative comparison used in
this study indicates  that the best options
appear to be: Option 6 - Awareness and
Training; Option 1 -  KRC-7X Dragout Re-
duction and Bath Maintenance; and Option
2-Two-Stage Rinsing. Implementing these
three options would cost $39,560 and result
in an annual savings of $158,680.  Imple-
menting all  seven  options would cost

-------
 $144,982 and result in an annual savings of
 $246,180.
   Option 7 involving the implementation of
 equipment for the recovery of citric acid/
 TEA solution, appears to be a viable candi-
 date for research, development, and dem-
 onstration.
 Table 2. Summary of WM Assessment Phase
                  It is important to note that the PNSY is not
                a commercial production facility but rather a
                government facility that is operated for revi-
                talizing and repairing ships. As such, the
                payback period of the evaluated WM op-
                tions may be different than that for commer-
                cial operations. Also, other WM options that
                             were not evaluated in this study may be
                             applicable to commercial operations.
                               Thefull report was submitted in fulfillment
                             of Contract No. 68-C8-0061 by  Science
                             Applications International Corporation un-
                             der the sponsorship of the U.S.  Environ-
                             mental Protection Agency.
Location/Process
Waste Stream
Volume
GPY
Hazardous
Characteristics
Disposal
Cost, $/yr
Raw Mat.
Costs, $/yc'
WM Options
WM Option
Screening
Score
 Building 990
 Aluminum Cleaning
    Spent KRC-TX(WS-I)
    Spent Rinse Water (WS-2)
 Spray Painting of Aluminum
    Paint Sludge (WS-3)

    Used Paint Thinner (WS-4)
    Unused Paint (WS-S)

 Building 1028
 Spray Painting of Steel
    Paint Sludge (WS-6)

    Used Paint Thinner (WS-7)
    Unused Paint (WS-8)
 7,040         LowpH         $14,010  $46,120  Dragout Reduction and Bath Maintenance (OP-1)    383
45,760        LowpH         $70,928    $0               Two Stage Rinse (OP-2)              396

 2,000   Toxic Metals/lgnitable   $3,760   $2,800   Booth Guard(OP-3), Sludge Dewatering (OP-4),  308,288
 cnn         .                                        and HVLP Spray Painting (OP-5)           339
 520   TM/lgmVToxic Organics   $978    $1,680          Awareness and Training (OP-6)           393
 Unk.    Toxic Metals/lgnitable  $350,000f  Unk.           Awareness and Training (OP-6)           393



 3,600   Toxic Metals/lgnitable   $6,768   $2,800   Booth Guard (OP-3), Sludge Dewatering (OP-4),  308,288
             .                                        and HVLP Spray Painting (OP-5)      '    339
 520   TM/lgmVToxic Organics   $978    $1,680          Awareness and Training (OP-6)           393
 Unk.    Toxic Metals/lgnitable   Included   Unk.           Awareness and Training (OP-6)           393
                             Above
 Drydocks
 Citric Acid Demisting
   Cone. Citric Add/TEA (WS-9) 15,000   LowpH, Toxic Metals
                             $45,750   $26,994      Bectrodialysis Recovery System (OP-7)
 'Raw material costs are only given for materials considered to be at least partially recoverable
 Includes entire shipyard.
 T*bla 3. Summary of WM Feasibility Analysis Phase
Location/Process/
Waste Stream (WS)
Building 990
Aluminum Cleaning
Spent KRC-TX(WS-I)
Spent Rinse Water (WS-2)
Waste Minimization Options
Bath Maintenance (OP-1)
Two State Rinse (OP-2)
Nature of WM
Option
Equipment
Equipment
Capital
Investment,
$
$12,220
$3,116
Net Op.
Cost Savings,
$/yr
$44,190
$34,592
Payback
Period,
yr"
0.3
0.1
Rank
Low to High
(1-7)
2
2
Spray Painting of Aluminum
 Paint Sludge (WS-3)
 Used Paint Thinner (WS-4)
 Unused Paint (WS-5)

Building 1028
Spray Painting of Steel
 Paint Sludge (WS-6)
 Usod Paint Thinner (WS-7)
 Unused Paint (WS-8)

Drydocks
Citric Acid Derusting
  Cone. Citric Add/TEA (WS-9)
      Booth Guard (OP-3)
  Paint Sludge Dewater. (OP-4)
  HVLP Spray Painting (OP-5)
  Awareness & Training (OP-6)
  Awareness & Training (OP-6)
      Booth Guard (OP-3)
  Paint Sludge Dewater. (OP-4)
  HVLP Spray Painting (OP-5)
  Awareness & Training (OP-6)
  Awareness & Training (OP-6)
  ED Recovery System (OP-7)
    Materials
   Equipment
   Equipment
Personnel/Proced.
Personnel/Proced.
    Materials
   Equipment
   Equipment
Personnel/Proced
Personnel/Proced.
   Equipment
 $12,190
  $9,550
  $7,630
 $24,226
See WS-3
See WS-3
See WS-3
See WS-3
See WS-3
                                                                               $76,050
 $10,890
  $7,720
  $8,170
 $79,900
See WS-3'
See WS-3'
See WS-3'
See WS-4'
SeeWS-4'
              $60,720
    1.4
    1.2

    0.3
See WS-3'
See WS-3'

See WS-4'
See WS-4'
                                                                               1.3
6
6
5
1
'Includes entire shipyard.
'Options 3 and 4 include both Build. 990 and 1028.

-------

-------
George C. Cushnie and Barry Langer are with Science Applications International
  Corp., McLean, VA 22102.     .*
James S. Bridges is the EPA Project Officer (see below).
The complete report, entitled "Waste Minimization Opportunity Assessment: Philadel-
  phia Naval Shipyard," (Order No. PB91-125 690/AS; Cost: $31.00, subject to
  change) will be available only from:
        National Technical Information Service
        5285 Port Royal Road
        Springfield, VA 22161
        Telephone: 703-487-4650
The EPA Project Officer can be contacted at:
        Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
        U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
        Cincinnati, OH 45268
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Center for Environmental Research
Information
Cincinnati, OH 45268
BULK RATE
POSTAGE & FEES PAID
EPA PERMIT NO. G-35
  Official Business
  Penalty for Private Use $300

  EPA/600/S2-90/046

-------