United States
                         Environmental Protection
                         Agency
           Risk Reduction
           Engineering Laboratory
           Cincinnati, OH 45268
                         Research and Development
           EPA/600/S-92/045   Oct. 1992
                         ENVIRONMENTAL
                         RESEARCH   BRIEF
                     Waste Reduction Activities and Options for a
                          Manufacturer of Artists Supply Paints

                                  Alan Ulbrecht 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 manufacturer of artists'  supply paints. A site visit was
made in 1990 during which several opportunities for waste
minimization  were  identified.  These opportunities  include
changes in product formulation, reduction of spills and  leaks of
solvents, improved  solvent handling techniques, improved
equipment cleaning techniques,  and recovery of waste solvents.
Implementation of the identified waste minimization opportuni-
ties 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 as-
sessment.


Introduction
The environmental issues facing industry today have expanded
considerably  beyond traditional concerns. Wastewater, air
emissions, potential  soil and groundwater contamination, solid
waste disposal, and  employee health and safety have  become
increasingly important concerns. The management and disposal
of hazardous substances, including both process-related wastes
and residues from waste treatment, receive significant attention
because of regulation and economics.
* New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, NJ 07102
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 operations
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 the New Jersey Institute of Technology (NJIT) assisted
in conducting the assessments. This research brief presents
an assessment of a manufacturer of  artists' supply paints (1 of
the 30 assessments performed) and provides recommendations
for waste minimization options resulting from the assessment.


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 minimizatidn manual is designed to be
primarily applied by the inhouse staff of the facility, the degree
of involvement of the NJIT team varied according to the ease
                                                                              Printed on Recycled Paper

-------
with which the facility staff could apply the manual.  In some
cases, NJIPs 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 lo follow these steps as presented.
In each case, however, the identification  of  waste-generating
sites and processes, detailed site inspections, and development
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 com-
mitment 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.


The Artists' Supply Paints Manufacturer
The facility is a manufacturer of  specialty artistic paints for
application on designer wear clothing, tops, scarfs, and home
decor items  such  as  wall paintings, quilts,  and pillows.  The
paints, which come  in a variety of  colors,  are packaged in
either aluminum or polyethylene tubes. The product line includes
both  solvent-based and water-based paints.  Generally the
products are marketed as a  kit including the  homecraft article,
the necessary paints,  and other accessories.

In addition  to the paint  manufacturing/formulation operation,
the facility has a high speed  printing department and a cutting/
assembly  area for the kits. Some items are silk-screened and
specialty items are hand embroidered.

The paint manufacturing/formulation process is a batch process
and both water-based  and solvent-based paints are formulated
to a maximum batch size of 50 gal in a 55-gal drum.  For the
solvent-based paints, the  required raw materials are mixed with
a combination of solvents such as  mineral spirits and light
aromatic naphthas to achieve the desired color specification.
The water-based or latex paints similarly require that pigments
and other raw materials  be mixed with water to the required
color specification.

All of the components of the paints are purchased from outside
suppliers. Moreover, both types of paints must have  the ap-
propriate consistency and  viscosity to allow tube filling  and
customer use. The customer desired performance characteris-
tics for this particular use include fast drying time, color fastness,
and product durability. Therefore, the formulations must address
these needs in addition to any manufacturing requirements.

The formulated batches are analyzed for color and other prop-
erties, and once approved are transferred to the filling  line. Air
diaphragm pumps are used to fill the small tubes with the paint.
In order to prevent the paint from plugging the fill line tubing or
to prevent color cross-contamination when changing from one
product to another, the tubing is rinsed  with either water or
solvents, depending upon the last product filled. Moreover,
when it  is necessary  to change the filling equipment from
water-based to solvent-based products, or vice-versa, a second
rinse with the new solvent is required to minimize  the opportu-
nities for product contamination and solids  precipitation in the
filling equipment.


Waste  Streams and Existing Waste
Management
Solvent wastes are sent offsite for disposal through fuel blend-
ing. Aqueous wastes are drummed and sent offsite for treatment
as a non-hazardous waste. Off-specification raw materials and
formulated paint are sent offsite for disposal.

The company has already instituted some product formulation
and manufacturing scale practices which have led to a reduction
in the total amount of waste generated  at the  facility.  The
appearance of the facility shows that the management and
employees recognize the waste  reduction value of ease of
movement of raw materials, good maintenance of equipment,
and spill  control and spill prevention activities.


Summary of Waste Minimization Opportunities
The  type of waste  currently generated by  the  facility, the
source of the waste, the quantity of the waste and the annual
treatment and disposal costs are given in Table 1.

Table 2 shows the opportunities for waste minimization recom-
mended  for the facility. The  type of waste, the minimization
opportunity, the possible waste reduction and associated sav-
ings,  and the implementation  cost along  with the payback
times are given in  the table. The quantities of waste currently
generated at the facility and possible waste reduction  depend
on the level  of activity of the facility. All  values should  be
considered in that context.

It should be noted that in most cases the economic savings of the
minimization opportunity results from the need for less raw material
and from  reduced present and future costs associated with waste
treatment and disposal.  It should also be noted that the savings
given  for each opportunity reflect the  savings achievable when
implementing each waste  minimization opportunity independently,
and do not reflect duplication of savings that would result when the
opportunities are implemented in a package. Also, no equipment
depreciation is factored into the calculations.

-------
Tad/0 1.  Summary of Current Waste Generation
Waste Generated
Source of Waste
                                                                   Annual Quantity
                                                                      Generated
                                                                                Annual
                                                                                 Costs
Fugitive Solvents       Losses during transfer and
                      mixing of organic solvents
Solvent Wastes        Residues from paint formulation
                      and rinsing of filling equipment

Aqueous Wastes       Residues from paint formulation
                      and rinsing of filling equipment

Off-Specification       Inferior raw materials and formulated
Materials              paints which do not meet specifications

* By use of the senses, such as smell.
                                            Cannot be determined
                                            from available records
                                            but can be detected
                                            organoleptically *

                                                    3000 gal
                                                  16,000 gal
                                            1000gal(solvent)
                                             2250 gal(water)
                                          No direct management
                                          costs, but is a direct
                                          financial loss of raw
                                          materials

                                               $3545
                                              $23,273
                                               $1,300
                                               $3,280
Table 2.   Summary of Waste Minimization Opportunities
 Waste Stream
 Reduced
                                 Annual Waste Reduction
 Minimization Opportunity
Quantity
Percent
      Net      Implementation   Payback
Annual Savings      Cost        Years*
Solvent Wastes        Distillation for inhouse              2700gal          90%            $15,000        $4000          0.3
                      recycling and reuse

Aqueous Wastes       Use of final rinses as               4000 gal          25%            $5,800         0              immed.
                      process water

                      Dewatering of waste stream         14,400 gal         90%           $20,000        $20,000        1
                      using ultra-filtration

Off-specification        Re-formulate into products          200 gal (solvent)   20%            $1,000         0              immed.
Paints                perhaps with darker colors          250 gal (water)    20%            $1,000         0              immed.

Fugitive Solvent        Re-formulate products into
Emissions             all water-based products

                      Install condensing equipment
                      to capture solvents during
                      container filling operations

                      Stage manufacturing and tube
                      filling operations to go from
                      lighter to darker colors and
                      runs as long as possible of
                      solvent-based or water-based
                      product. This reduces amount
                      of solvent used and thus reduces
                      fugitive emissions.

(It should be noted that because it was not possible to quantify fugitive emissions, it is not possible to accurately determine costs and payback. On the
other hand, goodpollution prevention practices wouldencourage and support efforts of this type. Changes in product formulation may meet with customer
resistance leading to hesitation on the part of the manufacturer to make such changes.)
* Savings result from reduced raw materials and treatment and disposal costs when implementing each minimization opportunity independently.
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
                                                                       •&U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1994 • S3MC7/MM7

-------
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-92/045

-------