United States
                     Environmental Protection
                     Agency
Air and Energy Engineering
Research Laboratory
Research Triangle Park NC 27711
                     Research and Development
EPA/600/S2-90/052 Mar. 1992
'SrEPA       Project Summary
                     Degreaser  System  Pollution
                     Prevention   Evaluation
                     M.F. Szabo and M.T. Nutter
                        The report gives results of an inves-
                     tigation of the capability of various en-
                     gineering changes to an existing vapor
                     degreaser to reduce solvent emissions
                     to the atmosphere while  remaining
                     within the  established U.S. Air Force
                     (USAF)  exposure limits  for 1,1,1-
                     trichloroethane  (TCA). A 1970 vintage
                     vapor degreasing  system, serving a
                     USAF metal fabrication shop, had been
                     converted from trichlorethylene to TCA
                     and fitted with a lip vent exhaust sys-
                     tem to decrease worker exposure. Sol-
                     vent consumption by the bath with this
                     configuration was two to three 55-gal.
                     (208-L) drums weekly, all presumed to
                     be emitted to the atmosphere via the lip
                     vent. In sequence various modifications
                     to the degreaser and  operating proce-
                     dures were instituted to define their ca-
                     pability to reduce emissions and comply
                     with exposure limit requirement. They
                     include decreasing and eliminating lip
                     vent suction, a freeboard extension, an
                     ad-on chiller, and a combined freeboard
                     extension and add-on chiller.
                        Although the lip vent lowered work-
                     place concentrations, it also greatly in-
                     creased TCA emission rates. Eliminating
                     the lip vent with the simultaneous addi-
                     tion of a combined  freeboard exten-
                     sion/add-on chiller  provided about
                     equivalent workplace concentrations of
                     TCA but with a decreased  discharge
                     rate of TCA. The rate of consumption of
                     TCA was reduced by about 75% with
                     this configuration while maintaining the
                     same degree of worker safety as pro-
                     vided by the lip vent.
    This  Project Summary was devel-
 oped by EPA's Air and Energy Engi-
 neering Research Laboratory, Research
 Triangle Park, NC, to announce key find-
 ings of the research project that is fully
 documented in a separate report of the
 same title (see Project Report ordering
 information at back).

 Objective
    The purpose of this project was to in-
 vestigate the technical and economic fea-
 sibility of applying  a range of solvent
 conservation options to a vapor degreaser
 located at Wright Patterson Air Force Base
 (WPAFB-4950 TW/AMFSM) while keeping
 worker breathing zone concentrations at
 U.S. Air Force (USAF) engineering targets
 of 25% of Occupational Safety and Health
 Administration (OSHA) action limits of 43
 ppm for an 8-hour time-weighted average
 (TWA) and  a  short-term  exposure  limit
 (STEL) of 56 ppm for 1,1,1-trichloroethane
 (TCA). The degreaser uses TCA as a sol-
 vent.

 Background
    The U.S. EPA and USAF are involved
 in a joint program to identify methods of
 reducing pollution from USAF depot facili-
 ties throughout the U.S. The vapor
 degreaser  being studied  was inspected
 and chosen as a test candidate for reduc-
 ing emissions of TCA through various pol-
 lution prevention options.  The degreaser
 utilizes a lip vent suction system that re-
 sults in excessive loss of TCA. Since TCA
 may be phased out of use over the next 10
 years, its cost will most certainly rise in the
                                                                       Printed on Recycled Paper

-------
interim period, increasing the incentive for
the implementation of solvent conserva-
tion options.

Scope
   The scope of the project included base-
line degreaser measurements, effects  of
ventilation patterns on solvent loss/worker
exposure, and a series of physical  modifi-
cations to the degreaser system, such as
reducing  exhaust fan  speed,  increasing
freeboard area,  and installing a freeboard
chiller. The physical  modifications were
designed to systematically reduce solvent
consumption at  increasing cost levels.

Methodology
   Solvent loss and worker exposure mea-
surements were taken during each test. A
portable infrared analyzer (Miran 1A) and
charcoal  tubes were used for the solvent
loss/exposure  measurements.  Various
other ancillary parameters such as exhaust
duct  air  flow,  atmospheric  pressure,
degreaser temperature, and solvent level
were measured during each test. Both win-
ter and summer operating conditions were
tested.
Test Description
   Initially, four tests were performed dur-
ing the winter and spring from February to
April 1990. A second series of tests were
conducted in  late May/early June 1990 to
represent summer conditions. Both sets of
tests included baseline testing  at full fan
speed, reduced fan speed, and an increase
in freeboard  height. The summer tests in-
cluded the use of a chiller both  alone and
in conjunction with the freeboard exten-
sion, and ventilation patterns were altered
to isolate the degreaser room.

Results
   Test options controlled worst-case per-
sonal exposure to levels (at degreaser mid-
point) that achieved, or slightly exceeded,
USAF  Engineering Target Levels (ETLs):
(1) baseline, (2) reduced lip vent suction,
(3) fan off with freeboard  extension, (4)
chiller without fan or freeboard extension,
and  (5) chiller with  freeboard extension.
One test option did not reduce worst-case
personal exposure to meet the USAF ETLs:
fan  off with  existing freeboard. Two test
options achieved acceptable control from
a worker comfort standpoint: (1) baseline
operation and (2) chiller with  freeboard
extension. The use of a chiller with free-
board extension resulted in  a  maximum
reduction in solvent consumption of 72%.

Conclusions
   Very significant reductions  in solvent
use  are achievable from  the USAF
degreaser using the chiller-plus-freeboard
option,  while  simultaneously keeping
worker exposure below USAF ETLs, and
with worker acceptance and support of the
physical modifications to  the degreaser.
   Installing the chiller and freeboard  is
technically feasible, requiring only a few
days of down time. The economic payback
for this  degreaser is  less than  1  year,
based on solvent and heat loss  savings.

Recommendations
   The degreaser should be operated per-
manently with the  chiller and  freeboard
extension (no fan). Continued isolation of
the degreaser room with  more permanent
materials is also necessary  to maintain
current levels of worker exposure. Leaks in
the degreaser system should be repaired
and will likely reduce worker exposure even
further.  Keeping better  records  on
degreaser operation and solvent use would
help  identify causes of excessive solvent
consumption.
 M. F. Szabo and M. T. Nutter are with PEI Associates, Inc., Cincinnati, OH 45246.
 Charles H. Darvin is the EPA Project Officer, (see below).
 The complete report, entitled "Degreaser System Pollution Prevention Evaluation,"
   (Order No. ADA 242-110/AS; Cost: $26.00, 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:
         Air and Energy Engineering Research Laboratory
         U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
         Research Triangle Park NC 27711
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/S2-90/052

-------