f/EPA
                         United States
                         Environmental Protection
                         Agency
                                    Risk Reduction
                                    Engineering Laboratory
                                    Cincinnati, OH 45268
                         Research and Development
                                    EPA/600/S-92/053   October 1992
ENVIRONMENTAL
RESEARCH   BRIEF
                     Waste Reduction Activities and Options for a
                  Printing Plate Preparation Section of a Newspaper
                                   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 printing plate  preparation  area of a large circulation
newspaper printing facility. The areas of concern on the part of
the publishing company that lead to the waste minimization
opportunities assessment were levels of contaminants in their
wastewater which were above the  limits established by  the
local sewage authority. The process used for plate preparation
is fundamentally a photographic  transfer operation  involving
developing and fixing photographic films. A site visit was made
in 1990 during which several opportunities for waste minimiza-
tion were identified. Options included changes in some of the
chemicals used in the process, reduced levels of rinse water,
and  improved silver recovery technology. 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  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 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 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) as-
                        sisted  in conducting the assessments. This research brief
                        presents an assessment  of the preparation of printing plates at
                        a newspaper printing facility (1 of the  30 assessments per-
                        formed) and provides recommendations for waste minimization
                        options resulting from the assessment.
* New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, NJ 07102
                                                                             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 inhouse 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 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.

No sampling or laboratory analysis was undertaken as part of
these assessments.


Facility Background
The facility is a printer of newspapers which circulate through a
large geographical  area. Press runs are frequently in the hun-
dreds  of thousands of copies. The facility  has been  in  its
present suburban location since the .early  sixties and currently
employs 1200 people. The  local  sewage authority samples
wastewater at a manhole  which receives effluent flow from the
administrative areas as well  as the printing plant. It was nec-
essary to identify processes throughout the facility which might
impact upon the contaminants in the wastewater.


Manufacturing Processes
The physical production of the newspaper begins by arrange-
ment of the copy and artwork which is to appear on the printed
page. The layout and pasteup is photographed to produce an
image of the page. A proof is prepared for comparison with the
final print and  to permit the printer to  make any  necessary
adjustments to the press. The photographic image is trans-
ferred to a plate through another photographic developing  and
fixing step and the plate serves. The plate is inked in the areas
which are to appear on the paper  and  the ink is transferred to
the paper.

The portions of the operation which impact upon the wastewa-
ter effluent are  primarily the photographic  image  processing
steps. The facility has six film  processors, each of  which  has
three sections—the developer, the fixer, and the rinser.

To prepare the image, a light-sensitive coating (or photographic
emulsion) is exposed to light which is reflected from or passed
through the  image (depending upon whether a  photograph is
being taken  or  if a photographic negative is being  used). The
photographic emulsion is composed of silver halides in a gela-
tin base. The emulsion may be spread upon paper, a plastic
base, or a glass plate, depending upon the intended  use for
the  image. The photographic process  produces  a negative
image in which  the light parts of the copy or artwork  which was
photographed produce heavy deposits of silver causing them
to appear dark. The dark parts  produce  little or no silver
deposits and therefore appear to be light when developed.  The
exposed film is developed and fixed  by sequential oxidation
and reduction steps.

The development step is accomplished by oxidation,  typically
with a  hydroquinone solution,  to  oxidize the  photoexposed
silver halide to metallic silver. The fixing step is a reduction with
either sodium or ammonium  thiosulfate. The fixing step termi-
nates the oxidation and aids in removal of the unexposed silver
halide from the photographic emulsion.

Following the fixing process, the plate is rinsed with water to
remove any  of the  chemicals which may still be present on or
in the  gelatin layer.  Any fixing chemicals which are  not re-
moved can continue to react  with the metallic silver to  produce
silver sulfide and impact the quality of  the image. After rinsing
the plate is dried.


Existing Waste Management Activities
The company has already instituted a significant pollution pre-
vention  activity. Because of the intrinsic value of silver and the
high volume of  photographic developing  done at the facility, a
silver recovery system has been installed. The system  involves
a silver recovery unit which essentially  operates  as an electro-
plating  process by plating out much of  the silver from solution.
At this facility, the effluent from the silver recovery unit passes
to an iron exchange cannister, where the silver ion is chemically
transformed  to  silver metal through an oxidation/reduction re-
action with iron. The effluent from this  process goes to  the
sewer.

In sequence, the effluent from  the developer section goes by
direct discharge to the sewer. The  potential contaminants from

-------
this section could be hydroquinone from the developer solution
and silver from the film.

Discharge from the fixer goes to the silver recovery unit men-
tioned above. Potential contaminants contained in this effluent
are hydroquinone dragged  in from the developer, silver not
removed by the silver recovery units, and nitrogen containing
compounds from the fixer solution, such as ammonium thiosul-
fate.

Most of the overflow discharge from the film processing system
comes from the rinsing section. This discharge goes directly to
the sewer and contains potentially the same contaminants as
found in the fixer section effluent.

The annual discharge from the facility to the sewer authority is
about 5,200,000 gal. At the time of this assessment, the sewage
authority had fixed limits of acceptability for discharge from this
type of facility. Three levels of particular concern were: silver
0.03 mg/l, Biological  Oxygen Demand (BOD)  300 mg/l,  and
Total  Kjeldahl Nitrogen 40 mg/l. At the time of the assessment,
the effluent from the plant  was occasionally reaching higher
levels  such as: 1.0 mg/l  for silver and 50-75 mg/l  for Total
Kjeldahl Nitrogen. The BOD during this period  was no higher
than  150  mg/l. The goal  of the  assessment was to identify
options which would maintain the  silver and Kjeldahl  nitrogen
levels below the levels acceptable  to the sewer authority.


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 time
are given  in the table. The quantities of waste currently gener-
ated at the facility and possible waste reduction depend on the
level of activity of the facility.

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. 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 imple-
mented in a  package. Also, no  equipment  depreciation is
factored into the calculations.
                                        A search was made for chemicals used in the facility which
                                        might contribute to the Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen. Examination of
                                        the  Material Safety Data  Sheets, revealed only a  cleaning
                                        compound which  contained ammonia.  It was found  however
                                        that only about 30 gal/yr of this material is used at the facility
                                        and this would not impact the Kjeldahl Nitrogen value  substan-
                                        tially. The other alternative identified was to consider changing
                                        the  chemical used as the  photographic fixer from ammonium
                                        thiosulfate to sodium  thiosulfate. Such a change has  been
                                        reported to have an  adverse impact  on image  quality and
                                        would not be implemented  by the company.

                                        It is also possible to recycle the fixer solution. This requires a
                                        dedicated  continuously operating electrolytic silver  recovery
                                        system, because  a  controlled  low level of silver in  the fixer
                                        solution is the key to longer life of the  system. This  recycling
                                        capability would also require control of pH and monitoring to
                                        assure that no appreciable level of sulfur was generated. This
                                        degree of monitoring and control was not seen as possible by
                                        the  processing staff; therefore this was not seen as a viable
                                        option.

                                        In order to provide a better understanding of the relationship
                                        between industrial activity  and Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen levels
                                        throughout  the facility, a  special  sampling of effluent from
                                        selected sections  of the facility was carried out.  It was found
                                        that the highest level of Kjeldahl Nitrogen (75  mg/l) was in the
                                        effluent from  a section  of the facility  which  generated only
                                        sanitary waste. That is, it had no chemical activity  at all.

                                        In contrast to  that finding, the highest levels of silver were
                                        found in the effluent from  areas where photo processing oc-
                                        curred. In  the area with both  the electrolytic silver  recovery
                                        process and  iron exchange technology operating, the  silver
                                        level was 0.02 mg/l. In another area which had a silver recov-
                                        ery  system, but no  iron exchange capability, the silver level
                                        was 1.0 mg/l.  Literature values  suggest  that the silver recovery
                                        system can reduce silver levels to  100 mg/l and  the iron
                                        exchange technology  can  reduce it further to 5  mg/l. In the
                                        present system the lower levels result from dilution with other
                                        aqueous waste streams. The levels can  be reduced even lower
                                        through use of an  ion exchange resin system, following the iron
                                        exchange cartridge.

                                        It is  not known at present whether significant levels of silver are
                                        contained in the effluent from the developer and from  the rinse
                                        section. It  is recommended that  analyses be  carried out and
                                        the silver recovery systems be used if  significant  silver levels
                                        are found in these streams. Such use would allow recovery of
                                        silver and reduce the silver loading to the sewage  authority.
Table 1. Summary of Current Waste Generation
Waste Generated
   Source of Waste
Aqueous Discharge to
 Sewer
Annual Quantity
  Generated
Effluent from photo processing
equipment and sanitary discharges.
Based on a flow meter reading, the
volume from the photo system is about
20% of the total flow from the
entire facility.
  Annual Waste
Management Costs
  5,200,000 gal
     $2050
                                                                 &U.S. GOVERNMENT PUNTING OFFICE: MM - 550-M7/MIS4

-------
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
Tablo 2.  Summary of Recommended Waste Minimization Opportunities
Waste Stream
Reduced
Outflow from Photo
Processing
Minimization Opportunity
Install iron exchange canister
and ion exchange unit on
all processing units of the
silver recovery system.
Annual Waste Reduction
Quantity Percent
This will not have a
significant impact
on the volume of water
emitted. It should
however be able to recover
about 44 Ib cf silver.
Net
Annual Savings
$5000
Implementation
Cost
$25,000
Payback
Years'
5.0
* Savings result from reduced raw materials and treatment and disposal costs when implementing each minimization opportunity independently.
  United States
  Environmental Protection Agency
  Center for Environmental Research Information
  Cincinnati, OH 45268                                                                     PERMIT No. G-35
      BULK RATE
POSTAGE & FEES PAID
         EPA
  Official Business
  Penalty for Private Use
  $300

  EPA/600/S-92/053

-------