xvEPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Research and Development
Risk Reduction
Engineering Laboratory
Cincinnati, OH 45268
EPA/600/S-92/063 OctobeTl992"
ENVIRONMENTAL
RESEARCH BRIEF
Waste Reduction Activities and Options for an Electrical Utility
Transmission System Monitoring and Maintenance Facility
Kevin Gashlin 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 an electrical utility transmission system monitoring and
maintenance facility which has the responsibility to monitor,
maintain, and repair the distribution system for the electrical
service provided in a defined geographical area by a regulated
public utility. A site visit was made in 1990 during which
several opportunities for waste minimization were identified.
Options identified for waste reduction included more accessible
inventory records to identify PCB-containing transformers,
changing procedures for vehicle oil changes, a search for
alternatives for electrical connection degreasing, and change
to low-solvent or water-based coatings for transformer recondi-
tioning. Implementation of the identified waste minimization
opportunities was not part of the program. Percent waste
reduction, net annual savings, implementation costs and pay-
back 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 Technobgy (NJIT) assisted
in conducting the assessments. This research brief presents
an assessment of a monitoring and maintenance facility for an
electrical utility transmission system (1 of the 30 assessments
performed) and provides recommendations for waste minimi-
zation 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, 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 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 devebped, 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 has the responsibility to monitor, maintain, and
repair the distribution system for the electrical service provided
in a defined geographical area by a regulated public utility.
Included among the functions of the facility are response to
accidents involving company equipment, service to a fleet of
vehicles, and repair, maintenance, and rebuilding of transform-
ers. The facility studied is only one of several operated by the
company throughout its service area.
Operational Processes
Conceptually, the industrial activities at this facility are rela-
tively simple. Company staff respond to accidents which may
involve damaged utility poles and broken transformers. They
also have responsibility for regular inspection and maintenance
of distribution lines and ancillary equipment. Maintenance and
repair of a fleet of vehicles used in this operation is also carried
out at the facility. Finally, repair, reconditioning, and rebuilding
of transformers and similar equipment is a regular operation of
this facility.
The response to accidents involves emergency repair and
replacement of equipment in the field and may involve clean up
of leaking transformer oil of which some may contain PCB's.
This clean up activity may result in substantial quantities of
waste, not only of oil which must be drained from damaged
transformers, but also from soil or other materials which may
have been contaminated with the oil.
The reconditioning operation for the transformers involves
draining the oil, repairing any damaged components, painting
them, filling them with fresh mineral oil, and putting them back
into service. The painting operation currently uses aerosol
cans of solvent-based paints.
In the process of reinstalling the electrical equipment within the
system, it is a standard practice to clean the electrical connec-
tions with a solvent, usually 1,1,1-trichloroethane, to promote
good contact by removal of any grease.
The vehicle maintenance activities carried out at the facility
include fluid changes (resulting in waste streams of oil, anti-
freeze, and freon) and metal part repair and replacement.
Existing Waste Management Activities
The company has already recognized some advantages and
benefits of identifying and implementing waste reduction and
pollution prevention practices. A study was done which indi-
cated that the time between vehicle oil changes could be
lengthened without adversely affecting the operation of the
engines. Such a change would reduce the volume of waste oil
generated at the facility. The company has plans to acquire a
recovery and recycling unit for the freon used in vehicle air
conditioning systems. Scrap metals recovered as part of the
operations of the facility are sent out for secondary recovery
and not disposed of as waste.
The company has taken a conservative position with regard to
transformer oil by making the initial assumption that all such oil,
particularly that appearing as leaks or spills, should be treated
as if it contained PCB's. Tests are done subsequently to
confirm this assumption. Consequently, a significant volume of
waste is initially listed as PCB-containing and later reclassified.
Other waste streams are sent for treatment and management
offsite.
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.
K 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 savings that would
result when the opportunities are implemented in a package.
Also, no equipment depreciation is factored into the calculations.
The largest volume of waste from this facility is related to clean
up activities over which the facility has no direct control. A long
range answer is to improve the durability of equipment, spe-
cifically in the case of transformers, to decrease the likelihood
of leakage as a result of accidents and aging. An additional
facet of this situation is the desire of the company to avoid any
negative perception of contamination problems, and therefore
it is taking a very conservative position regarding clean up and
management of spill situations. While such a position is in
many ways laudable and understandable, it does add to the
waste management quantity when material is treated as haz-
ardous waste when other options may be available, such as
easy identification and location of hazardous materials through
a tracking system.
Regulatory Implications
Changes in reconditioning of electrical equipment may have
regulatory implications. There are penalties incurred by the
company for service disruptions. When a particular method has
been shown by experience to be satisfactory in maintaining an
acceptable level of customer service, there is a reluctance to
make changes without a clear determination of superiority or at
least of comparability. Therefore, some of the options identified
in this assessment will require evaluation and field trials before
adoption.
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 endorse-
ment or recommendation for use.
Table 1. Summary of Current Waste Generation
Waste Generated Source of Waste
Oil Spill and Leak
Residue
Waste Oil from
Electrical Transformers
Wastes Containing PCB
Motor Vehicle Oil
Painting Residue
Annual Quantity
Generated
Primarily damage to transformers
155 Tons
Draining of oil prior to reconditioning 126 Tons
or decommissioning transformers
Primarily damage to transformers and 28 Tons
PCB recovery
Vehicle maintenance and repair
Transformer casing painting
2.7 Tons
1 Ton
Annual Waste
Management Costs
$46,000
100,000
50,000
400
2000
•U.S. Government Printing Office: 1992— 648-080/60124
-------
Table 2. Summary of Recommended Waste Minimization Opportunities
Waste Stream Minimization Opportunity Annual Waste Reduction Net Implementation Payback
Reduced Quantity Percent Annual Savings Cost Years *
Wastes Containing Improved access to information 21 tons 75 $30,000 $20,000 0.67
PCB about the PCS content of
individual transformers. A
computerized system of record
keeping is suggested.
(It should be noted that this does not represent a net reduction of waste. It merely moves a portion of a waste stream from one type of hazard category
to another less hazardous category.)
Motor Vehicle Oil Change frequency of oil changes 0.7 tons 25 100 0
from 6000 mile to 7500 mile
intervals.
Painting Residue Change from solvent-based 0.9 tons 90 1800 300 0.16
aerosol paint to brushed-on
water-based paint.
(It should be noted that this depends upon the availability ofawa ter-based coating with the necessary performance characteristics. It also ignores the
extra worker time needed to apply coatings by brushing as well as the possibility that coatings will have to be applied more regularly.)
Residues from Modify design and construction 140 tons 50 70,000 unknown unknown
Transformer Leaks of transformers to reduce damage
and Repairs and subsequent leaks and spills.
(It should be noted that this option will require substantial additional research by transformer manufacturers into why transformers fail and whether and
what changes can be made to improve their performance. Such research and design changes are beyond the present technical scope of the company.
Therefore only an approximation can be made. Certainly, because this is the largest waste category at the facility, effort should be made to identify
options.)
Chlorinated Solvent Change to non-chlorinated 10 gal 100 none none
from Electrical solvent.
Contact Degreasing
(It should be noted that this option would have no effect on wastes manifested from the facility. Rather it changes the category of use of a relatively toxic
material to one which is less toxic. The total quantity of volatile material emitted to the air may stay the same or in fact may increase. Without tests of
performance it will not be possible to determine the amount to be used. It is often the case in substitution situations of this type that employee perception
plays a significant role in the quantity of material to be used. If the worker believes that the performance of the substitute is not as good as that of the
original material, then more of the material will be used.)
' Savings result from reduced raw material and treatment and disposal costs when implementing each minimization opportunity independently.
United States
Environmental Protection Agency
FPA
Center for Environmental Research Information OCDUITM ^ ^
.^. . .. _. . ,,-_,,,_. rbHMI I NO. Ca-35
Cincinnati, OH 45268
BULK RATE
POSTAGE & FEES PAID
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use
$300
EPA/600/S-92/063
------- |