United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Research and Development
Risk Reduction
Engineering Laboratory
Cincinnati, OH 45268
EPA/600/S-92/027 Aug 1992
&EPA ENVIRONMENTAL
RESEARCH BRIEF
Waste Reduction Activities and Options for a Local Board of
Education in New Jersey
Patrick Eyraud and Daniel J. Watts'
Abstract
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) funded a
project with the New Jersey Department of Environmental
Protection and Energy, NJDEPE, to assist in conducting waste
minimization assessments at 30 small- to medium-sized busi-
nesses in the state of New Jersey. One of the sites selected
was a local Board of Education. The school's administration
building and the high school were the focus of the assessment.
Located at the administration building are the central warehouse
for building and maintenance supplies, the vehicle repair and
maintenance facility, and a wood shop for building and furni-
ture repair. In the high school, waste is generated in the
science laboratories, art classes, and vocational educational
areas. A site visit was made in 1990 during which several
opportunities for waste minimization were identified. The waste
streams that were evaluated include paint, spilled chemicals
and leaking containers, sawdust and wood scraps, solvent-
based coatings, degreasing solvents, waste oil, antifreeze,
laboratory wastes, and art project wastes. Implementation of
the identified waste minimization opportunities was not part of
the program. Percent waste reduction, net annual savings,
implementation costs and payback periods were estimated.
This Research Brief was developed by the Principal Investiga-
tors and EPA's Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory in Cin-
cinnati, OH, to announce key findings of this completed assign-
ment.
Introduction
The environmental issues facing industry today have expanded
considerably beyond traditional concerns. Wastewater, air
* New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, NJ 07102
emissions, potential soil and groundwater contamination, solid
waste disposal, and employee health and safety have become
increasingly important concerns. The management and dis-
posal of hazardous substances, including both process-related
wastes and residues from waste treatment, receive significant
attention because of regulation and economics.
As environmental issues have become more complex, the
strategies for waste management and control have become
more systematic and integrated. The positive role of waste
minimization and pollution prevention within industrial opera-
tions at each stage of product life is recognized throughout the
world. An ideal goal is to manufacture products while generat-
ing the least amount of waste possible.
The Hazardous Waste Advisement Program (HWAP) of the
Division of Hazardous Waste Management, NJDEPE, is pursu-
ing the goals of waste minimization awareness and program
implementation in the state. HWAP, with the help of an EPA
grant from the Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory, con-
ducted an Assessment of Reduction and Recycling Opportuni-
ties for Hazardous Waste (ARROW) project. ARROW was
designed to assess waste minimization potential across a
broad range of New Jersey industries. The project targeted 30
sites to perform waste minimization assessments following the
approach outlined in EPA's Waste Minimization Opportunity
Assessment Manual (EPA/625/7-88/003). Under contract to
NJDEPE, the Hazardous Substance Management Research
Center at NJIT assisted in conducting the assessments. This
research brief presents an assessment of a Board of Education
(1 of the 30 assessments performed) and provides recom-
mendations for waste minimization options resulting from the
assessment.
^yO Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
Methodology of Assessments
The assessment process was coordinated by a team of techni-
cal staff from NJIT with experience in process operations,
basic chemistry, and environmental concerns and needs. Be-
cause the EPA waste minimization manual is designed to be
primarily applied by the in-house staff of the facility, the degree
of involvement of the NJIT team varied according to the ease
with which the facility staff could apply the manual. In some
cases, NJITs role was to provide advice. In others, NJIT
conducted essentially the entire evaluation.
The goal of the project was to encourage participation in the
assessment process by management and staff at the facility.
To do this, the participants were encouraged to proceed through
the organizational steps outlined in the manual. These steps
can be summarized as follows:
• Obtaining corporate commitment to a waste minimization
initiative
• Organizing a task force or similar group to carry out the
assessment
• Developing a policy statement regarding waste minimiza-
tion for issuance by corporate management
• Establishing tentative waste reduction goals to be achieved
by the program
• Identifying waste-generating sites and processes
• Conducting a detailed site inspection
• Developing a list of options which may lead to the waste
reduction goal
• Formally analyzing the feasibility of the various options
• Measuring the effectiveness of the options and continuing
the assessment.
Not every facility was able to follow these steps as presented.
In each case, however, the identification of waste-generating
sites and processes, detailed site inspections, and develop-
ment of options was carried out. Frequently, it was necessary
for a high degree of involvement by NJIT to accomplish these
steps. Two common reasons for needing outside participation
were a shortage of technical staff within the company and a
need to develop an agenda for technical action before corporate
commitment and policy statements could be obtained.
It was not a goal of the ARROW project to participate in the
feasibility analysis or implementation steps. However, NJIT
offered to provide advice for feasibility analysis if requested.
In each case, the NJIT team made several site visits to the
facility. Initially, visits were made to explain the EPA manual
and to encourage the facility through the organizational stages.
If delays and complications developed, the team offered assis-
tance in the technical review, inspections, and option develop-
ment.
Facility Background
The facility is a school district with a range of activities with
potential for generation of waste which include vehicle mainte-
nance and repair, building cleaning and maintenance, grounds
keeping, instructional programs, and specialized programs such
as science laboratories and art classes. The management was
very cooperative in providing all available information about
types and volume of waste streams generated as well as about
existing activities related to waste reduction. The actual as-
sessment and the development of options for additional pollu-
tion prevention were carried out by NJIT personnel.
Waste Generating Processes
The operations in the district are not centrally located. There is
a common administration building which includes a supply
warehouse and facilities for vehicle maintenance and repair
and a wood shop for constructing equipment. In addition, there
is a high school for about 1000 students, a middle school for
about 500 students, and 6 elementary schools.
The assessment focussed on the administration building and
the high school. Located at the administration building is a
central warehouse for building and maintenance supplies in-
cluding cleaners, floor care products, paints, and similar mate-
rials. The supplies are delivered to the individual buildings
upon request by staff members. Also at the administration
building is the vehicle maintenance and repair facility which is
responsible for preventative maintenance and general repairs
for the district's fleet of 36 school buses and vans, 16 mainte-
nance vans and pickup trucks, and 4 automobiles. Large re-
pairs are carried out by commercial garages. There is also a
wood shop which has responsibility for building and repairing
furniture and related items for use within the district.
At the high school, paper-, computer-, and video-based instruc-
tional activities occur. In addition, hands-on instruction in areas
with potential for waste generation also occurs in science
laboratories, art classes, and vocational educational areas.
Existing Waste Management Activities
The district has already instituted several practices which have
a positive impact on pollution prevention. As a result of the
"Community and Worker Right-to-Know" initiatives, the follow-
ing procedures were emphasized: ordering only the quantity of
materials that can be used in a single year, stocking the
materials near the point of use, conversion to the use of dry
copiers replacing the former solvent-based systems. In addi-
tion, there has been a concerted effort to change to water-
based paints and cleaners from solvent-based products where
possible and to identify and use other products with reduced
potential toxicity factors in all areas. Moreover, in keeping with
municipal initiatives encouraging recycling, cardboard, white
paper, aluminum cans, glass containers, and used motor oil
are collected and put into the recycling stream. In the industrial
arts metal shop at the high school, cutting oil is recovered by
allowing the metal fragments to settle and then filtering the
decanted oil. No new oil for this purpose has been purchased
since 1966.
Wastes such as laboratory wastes are treated as hazardous
wastes and collected by a contractor for offsite treatment, as
are other currently generated hazardous wastes such as sol-
vents and spent antifreeze.
Waste Minimization Opportunities
The type of waste currently generated by the district, the
source of the waste, the quantity of the waste, and the annual
treatment and disposal costs (where known and available) are
given in Table 1.
Table 2 presents the opportunities for pollution prevention
which were identified during the assessment. The type of
-------
Table 1. Summary of Generated Wastes
Waste Generated Source of Waste
Empty Paint Cans
Cleaning Products
Solvent Wastes
Used Motor Oil
Antifreeze Solution
Painting and Coating
Spills and Breakage
Parts Cleaning and Degreasing
Vehicle Maintenance
Vehicle Maintenance
Annual Quantity
Generated
Hundreds
3 drums
5 gal
650 gal
165 gal of concentrate purchases
Annual
Costs
$500
$750
$150
$195
$600
Paper, Cardboard
Aluminum Cans and
Glass Bottles
Waste Chemicals
Office, teaching and unpacking activities
Food Service
Science Laboratories
annually for replacement
Variable
Variable
2 drums
none, except handling costs
none, except handling costs
$700
Table 2. Summary of Waste Minimization Options Identified
Waste Generated Minimization Opportunity
Empty Paint Cans Purchase Paint in Returnable Containers
Reduce varieties of paint purchased
by consolidation of uses. Consider acqui-
sition of equipment for tinting and pur-
chasing large containers of base colored
paint and tinting to standard colors.
Spilled Chemicals Store containers to allow for visual inspection,
and Leaking maintain appropriate distance between
Containers reactive or incompatible chemicals, store
in separate sections to minimize cross con-
tamination. Store materials near point of use.
Sawdust and Residues from woodworking can be used for
Wood Scraps composting or for mulch.
Solvent-based Continue to seek water-based substitutes
Coatings * with needed performance
Degreasing Use contracted solvent supply and recycling
Solvents service or consider acquisition of a
distillation apparatus
Waste Oil Install collection/drip pans to recover spills
Antifreeze Utilize technology for recovery,
Solution reconditioning, and reuse.
Laboratory Wastes " Modify student experiments to use smaller
amounts of hazardous chemicals. Extend
use of video material including interactive
video disc laboratory materials.
Decline industrial gifts of chemicals which
include materials which will not be used
or quantities of materials larger than can
be used within a reasonable time.
Develop a central inventory of chemicals
to encourage sharing among high school
laboratories and with elementary and
middle school classes where appropriate.
Art Project Wastes Select and encourage use of non-toxic and
hazardous materials to carry out art projects.**
Annual Waste Reduction Net Implementation Payback
Quantity Percent Annual Savings Costs Years
Hundreds of Cans 100 $500
Hundreds of Cans 90 $450
2 drums 67 $ 5001
5 drums 100 $200
Variable, but
more opportunities
becoming available
5 gal" 100 $150
6.5 gal 1 $30
165 gal 100 $900
1 drum 50 $350
$750
1.5
immed
immed
$2000 14
$50 1.6
$5000 5.5
immed
The costs would be borne by the paint manufacturer for purchase of stronger containers and development of a return system The system would
work best for large consumers of paint who would be willing to limit choices of paint type and color
t Plus value of material saved from spilling.
* Pollution prevention advantage would be reduced levels of atmospheric emissions from solvent evaporation.
For this relatively small volume of solvent, a commercial recycling service may be more reasonable.
» Hshouldberecognizedthatsubstantialdevelopmentcostsmaybeincurredinredesigninglaboratoiyworkandin
video-disc instruction.
** This will primarily result in reduced levels of solvent emissions to the atmosphere. The required art materials may cost more than the presently used
-trV.S. GOVERNMENT PUNTING OFFICE: MM - SS04W7/WM7
-------
waste, the minimization opportunity, and the possible waste
reductions, are presented in the table. When available or esti-
mable, the associated savings, and implementation costs along
with payback times are also given. However, because the
feasibility analysis was to be carried out by the staff of the
district, that information is not always readily available.
Other Pollution Prevention Options
Other options were identified which could be considered by the
district but which may be more pertinent later when use grows
or commercial technology improves.
The district uses chlorofluorocarbons in refrigeration equipment
and to a limited extent in motor vehicle air conditioning. There
is already a commitment to change to substitutes with reduced
impact upon the upper atmosphere. In addition, as mobile air
conditioning becomes more common in district vehicles, a
refrigerant recovery and reuse capability should be considered.
In some areas such equipment may become a legal require-
ment.
Consideration could be given to joint acquisition with the mu-
nicipal government of recycling equipment such as antifreeze
recycling or degreasing solvent distillation equipment. Ideally,
the equipment should be easily movable to allow it to be taken
to the facility where the need exists.
Regulatory Implications
There appear to be no significant environmental regulatory
issues which would impede the implementation of additional
pollution prevention initiatives at this facility. On the other hand,
other regulatory groups, particularly the state educational au-
thorities, have significant input into facilities, programs, and
budgets for schools. Where a pollution prevention initiative
may require a capital investment, it may not be possible to
undertake it if permission is not granted to spend money in that
way. Improved coordination between regulatory agencies about
overall goals and strategies to achieve them is important to the
development of a unified and efficient pollution prevention
program.
This Research Brief summarizes a part of the work done under
cooperative Agreement No. CR-815165 by the New Jersey
Institute of Technology under the sponsorship of the New
Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and Energy
and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
The EPA Project Officer was Mary Ann Curran. She can be
reached at:
Pollution Prevention Research Branch
Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, OH 45268
Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement
or recommendation for use.
United States
Environmental Protection Agency
Center for Environmental Research Information
Cincinnati, OH 45268
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use
$300
BULK RATE
POSTAGE & FEES PAID
EPA
PERMIT No. G-35
EPA/600/S-92/027
------- |