&EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory Cincinnati OH 45268 Research and Development EPA600/S-92/014 April 1992 ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH BRIEF Waste Minimization Assessment for a Manufacturer of Can-Manufacturing Equipment F. William Kirsch and Gwen P. Looby* Abstract The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has funded a pilot project to assist small- and medium-size manufacturers who want to minimize their generation of hazardous waste but who lack the expertise to do so. Waste Minimization Assess- ment Centers (WMACs) were established at selected universi- ties and procedures were adapted from the EPA Waste Minimi- zation Opportunity Assessment Manual (EPA/625/7-88/003, July 1988). The WMAC team at Colorado State University per- formed an assessment for a plant that produces equipment for manufacturing and decorating aluminum beverage cans. Each component manufactured undergoes a unique series of opera- tions including cutting, machining, welding, and painting. The team's report, detailing findings and recommendations, indi- cated that spent cutting fluid and contaminated hydraulic fluid are the largest wastes generated by the plant and that signifi- cant savings could result from instituting a recycling program for the waste cutting fluid. This Research Brief was developed by the principal investiga- tors and EPA's Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory, Cincin- nati, OH, to announce key findings of an ongoing research project that is fully documented in a separate report of the same title available from the authors. Introduction The amount of hazardous waste generated by industrial plants has become an increasingly costly problem for manufacturers and an additional stress on the environment. One solution to the problem of hazardous waste is to reduce or eliminate the waste at its source. ' University City Science Center, Philadelphia, PA 19104 University City Science Center (Philadelphia, PA) has begun a pilot project to assist small- and medium-size manufacturers who want to minimize their formation of hazardous waste but who lack the in-house expertise to do so. Under agreement with EPA's Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory, the Sci- ence Center has established three WMACs. This assessment was done by engineering faculty and students at Colorado State University's (Fort Collins) WMAC. The assessment teams have considerable direct experience with process operations in manufacturing plants and also have the knowledge and skills needed to minimize hazardous waste generation. The waste minimization assessments are done for small- and medium-size manufacturers at no out-of-pocket cost to the client. To qualify for the assessment, each client must fall within Standard Industrial Classification Code 20-39, have gross annual sales not exceeding $50 million, employ no more than 500 persons, and lack in-house expertise in waste minimiza- tion. The potential benefits of the pilot project include minimization of the amount of waste generated by manufacturers, reduced waste treatment and disposal costs for participating plants, valuable experience for. graduate and undergraduate students who participate in the program, and a cleaner environment without more regulations and higher costs for manufacturers. Methodology of Assessments The waste minimization assessments require several site visits to each client served. In general, the WMACs follow the procedures outlined in the EPA Waste Minimization Opportu- nity Assessment Manual (EPA/625/7-88/003, July 1988). The OĢ9 Printed on Recycled Paper ------- WMAC staff locates the sources of hazardous waste in the plant and identifies the current disposal or treatment methods and their associated costs. They then identify and analyze a variety of ways to reduce or eliminate the waste. Specific measures to achieve that goal are recommended and the essential supporting technological and economic information is developed. Finally, a confidential report that details the WMAC's findings and recommendations (including cost savings, imple- mentation costs, and payback times) is prepared for each client. Plant Background This plant produces equipment for the manufacture and deco- ration of aluminum beverage containers. Over 60 units of equipment are produced each year by the plant's 225 employ- ees. Manufacturing Process Large main frames and a variety of small internal components are manufactured by the plant and assembled into the final product. Each Internal component manufactured undergoes a unique series of operations; the general production sequence is de- scribed below: * Bar stock, sheet steel, and aluminum castings are cut to the appropriate size. The cut metal undergoes milling, drilling, grinding, and boring operations as needed to form the components. * Some components are welded and then shipped offsite for stress-relief treatment. * Residual cutting fluid is removed from the parts using petroleum naphtha. * Components are painted and then sent either to the assembly area or directly to customers for use as spare parts. Tha large frames undergo the following operations: * Bar stock, sheet steel, and aluminum castings are cut to size and milled, drilled, ground, and bored. The metal is welded to form the frames. The frames are sent offsite for abrasive cleaning and stress-relief treatment. Frames are painted and sent to the assembly area. The manufacturing and decorating machines are assembled, inspected, tested, and shipped to customers. Existing Waste Management Practices Spent solvent resulting from component cleaning is removed by a vendor and recycled. The plant plans to switch to paints that will reduce the emission of volatile organic compounds. Waste Minimization Opportunities The type of waste currently generated by the plant, the source of the waste, the current management method, the quantity of the waste, and the annual waste management costs are given in Table 1. Table 2 shows the opportunities for waste minimization and cost savings that the WMAC recommended to the plant; The type of waste, the minimization opportunity, the possible waste reduction and associated savings, and the implementation cost along with the payback time are given in the table. The quantities of waste currently generated by the plant and pos- sible waste reduction depend on the production level of the plant. All values should be considered in that context. It should be noted that the economic savings of the minimiza- tion opportunity, in most cases, results from the need for less raw material and from reduced present and future costs asso- ciated with waste treatment and disposal. Other savings not quantifiable by this study include possible future costs related to changing emissions standards, liability, and employee health. It should also be noted that the savings given for each opportu- nity reflect the savings achievable when implementing each waste minimization opportunity independently and do not re- flect duplication of savings that would result when the opportu- nities are implemented in a package. This research brief summarizes a part of the work.done under Cooperative Agreement No. CR-814903 by the University City Science Center under the sponsorship of the U.S. Environmen- tal Protection Agency. The EPA Project Officer was Emma Lou George. Tablo 1. Summary of Currant Waste Generation Waste Generated Spent water-based cutting fluid and wastomter Contaminated hydraulic fluid Spent petroleum naphtha Spent point and thinner Paint ovorspmy Source of Waste Machining and grinding operations Machining operations Cleaning of internal components Painting operation Painting operation Annual Quantity Management Method Generated, gal Blended into cement at a nonhazardous waste disposal facility Shipped offsite for incineration Removed by vendor and recycled offsite Shipped offsite for incineration Conventional disposal 6,160 1,465 519 1,350 1,672 Annual Waste Management Cost 13,570' 13,860' 2,020 23,430' 28,950' ' Includes savings on purchased materials &U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1992 - 648-080/40254 ------- ------- Table 2, Summary of Recommended Waste Minimization Opportunities Waste Generated Minimization Opportunity Annual Waste Reduction Quantity Percent Net Annual Implementation Payback Savings Cost Years Paint overspray Waste cutting fluid Spent thinner Replace the conventional spray gun 1,048 gal with a High Volume Low Pressure (HVLP) spray gun to reduce overspray waste. Institute a program to recycle cutting 2,075 gal fluid. Remove metal chips and paniculate matter from the sump using a portable filtration unit. Provide continuous filtration of the cutting fluid when the proposed unit is not being used in conjunction with the sump. In addition, treat spent cutting fluid with acid and neutralize the resulting aqueous phase prior to sewering. The organic phase (a smaller volume) can continue to be shipped offsite for disposal. Install a solvent recovery unit to distill 510 solvent waste to generate reusable solvent. 63 18,140' 6.1401 590 11,750 0.03 1.9 5,400' 4,360 0.8 Hydraulic fluid Ship waste hydraulic oil to an oil recycler rather than to a disposal facility for incineration. Spent petroleum naphtha Replace the petroleum naphtha used for cleaning with an aqueous cleaner. 470 3,520 1,140 2,050 1.8 ' Includes savings on purchased materials. 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/S-92/014 ------- |