EPA/625/7-818/003
July 1988
Waste Minimization
Opportunity Assessment Manual
Hazardous Waste Engineering Research Laboratory
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
-------
Notice
This report has been reviewed by the Hazardous Waste Engineering Research
Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and approved for publication.
Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, nor does mention of trade names or
commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
Users are encouraged to duplicate those portions of the manual as needed to implement
a waste minimization program. Organizations interested in publishing and distributing the
entire manual should contact the Alternative Technologies Division, Hazardous Waste
Engineering Research Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati,
Ohio 45268, to obtain a reproducible master.
-------
4, TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Waste Minimization Opportunity Assessment Manual
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read instructions on the reverse before coi
REPORT NO,
EPA/625/7-88/003
PB92-216985
5, REPORT DATE
1988
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
, AUTHORiS)
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Jacobs Engineering Group
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
HWERL
Cincinnati, OH
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
Project Officer: Harry M. Freeman (HWERL)
16. ABSTRACT
This manual describes a recommended procedure for identifying
waste minimization applications. K will be of benefit to those
responsible for reducing waste streams, and to those
interested in learning about waste minimization in general.
17.
KEY WORD AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b. IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
c. COSATI RekVGroup
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
19. SECURfTY CLASS (This Report)
Unclassified
21. NO, OF PAGES
20. SECURITY CLASS (TM* Page)
Unclassified
22. PRICE
II-I
-------
Foreword
The term, "waste minimization" is heard increasingly at meetings and conferences of
individuals working in the Field of hazardous waste management. Waste minimization is an
umbrella term that includes the first two categories of the EPA's preferred hazardous
waste management strategy which is shown below:
1. Source Reduction: Reduce the amount of waste at the source, through changes in
industrial processes.
2. Recycling: Reuse and recycle wastes for the original or some other purpose, such
as materials recovery or energy production.
3. Incineration/Treatment: Destroy, detoxify, and neutralize wastes into less harmful
substances.
4. Secure Land Disposal: Deposit wastes on land using volume reduction,
encapsulation, leachate containment, monitoring, and controlled air and
surface/subsurface waste releases.
In carrying out its program to encourage the adoption of waste minimization, the
Hazardous Waste Engineering Research Laboratory has supported the development of a
recommended procedure for identifying waste minimization applications. This manual
describes that procedure and will be of interest to those responsible for reducing waste
streams, and to those interested in learning about waste minimization in general.
HI
-------
Contents
Foreword Hi
Acknowledgments vll
1. Introduction 1
2. Planning and Organization 6
3. Assessment Phase 10
4. Feasibility Analysis 19
5. Implementing Waste Minimization Options 24
Appendices
A. Waste Minimization Assessment Worksheets A-1
B. Simplified Waste Minimization Assessment Worksheets B-1
C. Example Waste Minimization Assessment C-1
D. Causes and Sources of Waste D-1
B. Waste Minimization Techniques E-1
F. Government Technical/Financial Assistance Programs F-1
G. Option Rating: Weighted Sum Method G-1
H. Economic Evaluation Example H-1
Preceding page blank
-------
Usl of Worksheets
Page
Appendix A
1. Assessment Overview A-3
2. Program Organization A-4
3. Assessment Team Make-up A-5
4. Site Description A-6
5. Personnel A-7
6. Process Information A-8
7. Input Materials Summary A-9
8. Products Summary A-10
9. Individual Waste Stream Characterization A-11
10. Waste Stream Summary A-15
11. Option Generation A-16
12. Option Description A-17
13. Options Evaluation by Weighted Sum Method A-18
14. Technical Feasibility A-19
15. Cost Information A-25
16. Profitability Worksheet #1: Payback Period A-31
17. Profitability Worksheet #2: Cash Flow tor NPV and IRR A-32
18. Project Summary A-33
19. Option Performance A-34
Appendix B
S1. Assessment Overview B-2
S2. Site Description B-3
S3. Process Information B-4
S4. Input Materials Summary B-5
S5. Products Summary B-6
S6. Waste Stream Summary B-7
S7. Option Generation B-8
S8. Option Description B-9
S9. Profitability B-10
vi
-------
Acknowledgments
The following people are members of the advisory committee that contributed valuable
comments and insights to the preparation of this manual:
Denny J. Beroiz
General Dynamics Pomona Division
Elaine Eby
Office of Solid Waste
US Environmental Protection Agency
John Frick, PhD
Directorate of Supply Operations
Defense Logistics Agency
Kevin Gashlin
Hazardous Waste Assistance Program
New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection
Gregory J. Hottod, PhD
Petrochemicals Department
E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co.
Gary Hunt
Pollution Prevention Pays Program
North Carolina Department of Environmental
Management
John S. Hunter, III, PhD
3M Corporation
Michael Overcash. PhD
Department of Chemical Engineering
North Carolina State University
Robert Pojasek, PhD
ChemCycte Corporation
Dennis Redington
Monsanto Co
Michael E, Resch
Waste Disposal Engineering Division
US Army Environmental Hygiene Agency
Jade Towers
Waste Reduction Services
Chemical Waste Management
David Wigglesworth
Waste Reduction Assistance Program
Alaska Health Project
Kathleen WoH, PhD
Source Reduction Research Partnership
Harry M. Freeman of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and
Development, Hazardous Waste Engineering Research Laboratory, was the project
officer responsible for the preparation of this manual. Special acknowledgment is given to
Myles Morse of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste, for his
assistance and comments. James Lounsbury and Roger Schecter of the EPA Office of
Solid Waste are also acknowledged for their assistance in the preparation of this manual.
This manual was developed by the Hazardous and Toxic Materials Division of Jacobs
Engineering Group as a subcontractor to Versar, Inc. Marvin Drabkin was the project
manager for Versar. Participating in the preparation of this manual for Jacobs were
Gregory A. Lorton, Carl H. Fromm, Michael P. Meltzer, Deborah A. Hanlon, Sally
Lawrence, Michael S. Callahan, and Srinivas Budaraju.
vii
-------
Section 1
Introduction
Waste minimization (WM) has been successful for
many organizations. By following the procedures
outlined in this manual, a waste generator can:
• Save money by reducing waste treatment and
disposal costs, raw material purchases, and other
operating costs.
• Meet state and national waste minimization policy
goals.
• Reduce potential environmental liabilities.
• Protect public health and worker health and safety.
• Protect the environment.
Waste minimization is a policy specifically mandated by
the U. S. Congress in the 1984 Hazardous and Solid
Wastes Amendments to the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA). This mandate, coupled
with other RCRA provisions that have led to
unprecedented increases in the costs of waste
management, have heightened general interest in
waste minimization. A strong contributing factor has
been a desire on the part of generators to reduce their
environmental impairment liabilities under the
provisions of the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liabilities Act
(CERCLA, or "Supertund"). Because of these
increasing costs and liability exposure, waste
minimization has become more and more attractive
economically.
The following terms, used throughout this manual, are
defined below:
Minimization /WML in the working definition
currently used by EPA, waste minimization consists of
source reduction art ncycting. This concept of waste
minimization is presented In Figure 1-1. Of the two
approaches, source reduction to usually preferable to
recycling from an environmental perspective. Source
reduction and recycling each are comprised of a
number of practices and approaches which are
illustrated in Figure 1-2.
The present focus of WM activities to on hazardous
wastes, as defined in RCRA. However, II to important
that aH pollutant emissions into air, water and land be
considered as part of a waste minimization program.
The transfer of pollutants from one medium to another
to not waste minimization. For example, the removal of
orgarrtcs from wastewater using activated carbon, in
and of itself, to not waste minimization, since the
pollutants are merely transferred from one medium
(wastewater) to another (carbon, as solid waste).
Waste minimization program (WMP). The RCRA
regulations require that generators of hazardous waste
"have a program hi place to reduce the volume and
toxteity of waste generated to the extent that to
economically practical." A waste minimization program
to an organized, comprehensive, and continual effort
to systematical reduce waste generation. Generally,
a program to established for the organization as a
whole. Its components may include specific waste
minimization projects and may use waste minimization
assessments as a tool for determining where and how
waste can be reduced. A waste minimization program
should reflect the goals and policies for waste
minimization set by the organization's management.
Also, the program should be an ongoing effort and
should strive to make waste minimization part of the
company's operating philosophy. While the main goal
of a waste minimization program is to reduce or
eliminate waste, H may also bring about an
Improvement In a company's production efficiency.
EPA will pubttsh separate guidance on the elements
of effective waste minimization programs. This
guidance win discuss the following elements likely to
be found in an effective WM program:
Top management support
Explicit program scope and objectives
Accurate waste accounting
Accurate cost accounting
Pervasive waste minimization philosophy
Technology transfer
Waste minimization assessment fWMA). A waste
minimization assessment to a systematic planned
procedure with the objective of identifying ways to
reduce or eliminate waste. The steps involved in
conducting a waste minimization assessment are
outlined In Figure 1-3. The assessment consists of a
careful review of a plant's operations and waste
streams, and the selection of specific areas to assess.
After a spedfic waste stream or area to established as
the WMA focus, a number of options with the potential
to minimize waste are developed and screened. Third,
the technical and economic feasibility of the selected
options are evaluated. Finally, the most promising
options are selected for implementation.
-------
WASTE MINIMIZATION
SOURCE REDUCTION
RECYCLING
J
RRST
MQH
OROCT OF EXPLORATION
fllVE BMRONMBfTAL DESRABLITY
LAST
LOW
WASTE MINIMIZATION
Tha reduction, to th* extant laaatta, of hazardous waata that la garwatad or aubaaquantiy traatad, atorad or
dhpoaad oi. i tndudaa any aouroa raducoon or neyeJng ictMly uno>rt«k«nby «g«n»f«torth«tr»»utelf>
dttw(1)thtr*ductkmoftot«lvohMMorqu«n%of hczantowwaitev^) th«
hcnrdoui WMto. or both, w bng M weh reduction is oomiatontwthth* goal olmMmizinopnMMWit and
human r*atti and th« •nvfronnwrt (EPA* Rtport to Congr^a. 1986, EPA«30-SW-a6-033).
SOURCE REDUCTION
Any activity that raduoaa or aUminataa tha ganaration of hazardc
prooaaa (op. o)L).
RECYCLING
i at flu aourea, uaualy wthin •
11 la afthar (1) employed w an bipadtont (bichidbig to uaa as an tntarmadlata)tomakaaDroduct;howavara
producta {« whan matato ara i
particular function aa an aWaceVa aubattuta for «<
r matariala) or (2) amptoyad In a
oiaJ product (40 CFB 2S1.1 (c) C5)). A malarial la
"radalfHad* f ft iapnwaaaadtoFaoovar a uaalul product or • k • ragaoafatad. Examplaa biokidatna raoovary
of laad Mriuat from apant battaria* and tha ragafMntfon of apart aohwnta (40 CFR 261.1 (c)(4)>.
Plgura 1-1. Waste Minimization Definitions
-------
WASTE MINIMIZATION TECHNIQUES
RECYCLING
{ONStTE AND OFFSITE)
SOURCE REDUCTION
US! AND REUSE
RECLAMATION
PRODUCT CHANGES
SOURCE CONTROL
Processed for
VMOMM recovery
Processed as a
fay-product
Return to ongnui preceM
Raw notarial substitute
in
lor another process
Change In product
composition
INPUT MATERIAL
CHANGES
TECHNOLOGY
CHANGES
GOOD OPERATING
PRACTICES
Equipment, piping, or
layout change*
Additional •utotntllofi
Changes in operational
settings
Procedural measurM
Loss prevention
Management practic*
Waste stream segregation
Matsrialhandtoio
ImpttJveiDents
Production schedulng
Figure 1-1. Waste Minimization Techniques
-------
Figure 1-3. TIM Watt* Minimization AsMMment Procedure
Th* recognized need to minimize
1
PLANNING AND ORGANIZATION
* Get management commitment
* Set overal a**e«sment program goal*
* Organize a»*e**inent program task face
Assessment organization
and oommMment to I
ASSESSMENT PHASE
1 Coftect procees and fadity data
1 Prioritize and select assessment targets
> Select people for a**e**ment team*
'Review data and inspect site
• Generate options
•Screen and select a
e tor further ttudy
aiieetment target*
and reeveJuete
previous option*
FEASIilUTY ANALYSIS PHASE
• Technical evaluation
• Economic evalmlkm
• Select options for implecnsntation
Final report, including
recommended option* 1
IMPLEMENTATION
» Justify projects and obtain funding
» Instalatbn (equipment)
* Implementation (procedure)
* Evaluate performance
Reoeatme
Successfuny Implemented
watte rnJnirnizatbn projecti
-------
Incentives for Waste Minimization
There are a number of compelling incentives for
minimizing waste. Table 1-1 summarizes some of
these incentives.
Tab)* 1-1. West* Minimization Incentive*
Economic*
• Landfill disposal coat increases.
• Coatty altarnativa treatment tachnologiaa.
• Savings in raw material and manufacturing coats.
Reputations
• Certification of a WM program on the hazardous waste
manifest.
• Biennial WM program reporting.
• Land disposal restrictions and bans.
• Increasing permitting requirements for waste handling
and treatment.
U&Bty
• Potential reduction in generator liability for environmental
problems at both onsite and offsKa treatment, storage.
and disposal facilities.
• Potential reduction in Babilfty for worker safety.
Pubic Image and Environmental Concern
• Improved image In the community and from employees.
• Concern for improving the environment
EPA intends to publish a manual entitled "Waste
Minimization Benefits Handbook" which will discuss in
detail the cost/benefit analyses of WM options.
About this manual
This manual has been prepared for those responsbte
for planning, managing, and implementing waste
minimization activities at the plant and corporate levels.
The manual concentrates on procedures that motivate
people to search, screen, and put into practice
measures Involving administrative, material, or
technology changes that result In decreased waste
generation. It Is also a source of concepts and Ideas
for developing and implementing a waste minimization
program.
The manual is organized as foflows:
• Section 2 outBnesthe planning and organizational
aspects that provide a necessary foundation for a
waste minimization assessment
• Section 3 describes the assessment phase,
Including collecting information, selecting
assessment targets, selecting assessment teams.
and identifying potential WM options.
• Section 4 discusses the methods tor evaluating
options for technical and economic feasbiRty.
• Section 5 describes the implementation of attractive
options: obtaining funding, installation and
Implementation, and measuring the effectiveness
of implemented options.
A set of worksheets useful in carrying out assessments
is included in Appendix A. Because individual
generators' circumstances and needs vary widely,
users of this manual are encouraged to modify the
procedures and worksheets to fit their unique
requirements. The manual is intended to serve as a
point of departure, rather than as a set of rigid
requirements. Accordingly, Appendix B presents a
simplified set of worksheets that are designed to assist
generators who are interested in performing only
preliminary assessments. These worksheets also
provide a useful framework for conducting
assessments for smal businesses and small quantity
generators.
A sample assessment is presented in Appendix C.
Appendix D describes waste streams from common
industrial operations. Appendbc E is a catalog and brief
description of waste minimization techniques
applicable in a number of common waste-intensive
operations. Appendix F is a list of addresses and
telephone numbers of state programs for technical
assistance in waste minimization. Appendix G
presents describes a method for screening and rating
potential waste minimization options for further study.
Finally, an example of an economic feasibility analysis
of a large waste minimization project Is presented In
Appendix H.
-------
Section 2
Planning and Organization
The recognized need to minimize waste
PLANNING AND ORGANIZATION
Get management commitment
Set overaN assessment program goad
Organize assessment program task foros
Assessment
Phase
Faasnlity
Analysts Phase
Implementation
Succeufuty Implemented
waste minimization projects
This sectk>n discusses factors that are Important to trw
success of a waste minimization program. Because a
comprehensive WM program affects many functional
groups within a company, the program needs to bring
these different groups together to reduce wastes.
The formality of the program depends upon the size
and complexity of the organization and its waste
problems. The program structure must be flextole
enough to accommodate unforeseen changes. The
developmental activities of a WM program include:
• getting management commitment
• setting WM goals
• staffing the program task force
Getting Managtmtnt Commitment
The management of a company will support a waste
minimization program if It is convinced that the benefits
of such a program will outweigh the costs. The
potential benefits include economic advantages,
compliance with regulations, reduction in liabilities
associated with the generation of wastes, improved
public image, and reduced environmental Impact
The objectives of a WM program are best conveyed to
a company's employees through a formal pofcy
statement or management directive. A company's
upper management is responsible for establishing a
formal commitment throughout all divisions of the
organization. The person in charge of the company's
environmental affairs is responsible to advise
management of the importance of waste minimization
and the need for this formal commitment. An example
of a formal policy statement follows:
CORPORATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY
[A major chemical company].. ."is committed to continue
excellence, leadership, and stewardship in protecting the
environment. Environmental protection is a primary
management responsMtty, as wen as the responsibitty of
every employee.
In keeping with this pokey, our objective as a company is to
reduce waste and achieve minimal adverse impact on the air,
water, and land through exosience in environmental control
The Environmental Guidelines include the following points:
• Environmental protection to a line responsMMy and an
important measure of employee performance. In addi-
tion, every employee is responsMe for environmental
protection in the same manner he or she is for safety.
• Minimizing or eliminating the generation of waste has
been and continues to be a prime consideration hi
research, process design, and plant operations; and is
viewed by management Ifce safety, yield, and loss
Reuse and recycling of materials has been and wil
continue to be given first consideration prior to
dasaMcation and dlspots.1 of waste,"
Involve Employe**
AKhough management commitment and direction are
fundamental to the success of a waste minimization
program, commitment throughout an organization Is
necessary in order to resolve conflicts and to remove
barriers to the WM program. Employees often cause
the generation of waste, and they can contribute to the
overall success of the program. Bonuses, awards,
plaques, and other forms of recognition are often used
to provide motivation, and to boost employee
cooperation and participation. In some companies,
meeting the waste minimization goals is used as a
measure for evaluating the job performance of
managers and employees.
6
-------
Ceue* Champion*
Any WM program needs one or more people to
champion the cause. These "cause champions" help
overcome the inertia present when changes to an
existing operation are proposed. They also lead the
WM program, either formally or informally. An
environmental engineer, production manager, or plant
process engineer may be a good candidate for this
role. Regardless of who takes the toad, this cause
champion must be given enough authority to
effectively carry out the program.
Organizing a WM Program:
The Program Task Force
The WM program wB affect a number of groups within a
company. FW this reason, a program task force should
be assembled. TWs group should include members of
any group or department in the company that has a
significant interest in the outcome of the program.
TaWe 2-4 at the end of this section and Worksheet 3 in
Appendix A lists departments or groups of a typical
manufacturing company that should be involved in the
program.
The formality or informality of the WM program will
depend on trie nature of the company. The program hi
a large highly structured company will probably
develop to be quite formal, In contrast to a small
company, or a company in a dynamic industry, where
the organizational structure changes frequently.
Table 2-1 lists the typical responsibilities of a WM
program task force. It will draw on expertise within the
company as required. The scope of the program wll
determine whether full-time participation is required by
any of the team members.
Table 2-1. Responsibilities of the WM Program
Task Porae
Get commitment and * •t*tem*nt of policy from
management
Establish overall WM program goals.
Establish a waste tracking system.
Prioritize the waste streams or facility areas for
assessment.
Select assessment teams.
Conduct (or supervise) assessments.
Conduct (or monitor) technical/economic feasibility
analyse* of favorable options.
Select and Justify feasMe options for bnplementaflon.
Obtain funding and establish schedule for
implementation.
Monitor {andtor direct) implementation progress.
Monitor performance of the option, once K to operating.
in a small company, several people at most wRI be al
tr«t are recjulr^ to Irnplemerrt a WM program. Include
the people with responstoPfty for production, facilities,
maintenance, quality control, and waste treatment and
disposal on the team. It may be that a single person,
such as the plant manager, has all of these
responsibilities at a small facility. However, even at a
small facility, at least two people should be involved to
get a variety of viewpoints and perspectives.
Some larger companies have developed a system hi
which assessment teams periodically visit different
facilities within the company. The benefits result
through sharing the ideas and experiences with other
divisions. Similar results can be achieved wtth periodic
in-house seminars, workshops, or meetings. A large
chemical manufacturer held a corporate-wide
symposium in 1986 dealng specifically with waste
minimization. The company has also developed other
programs to increase company-wide awareness of
waste minimization, Including an internally published
newsletter and videotape.
Salting Goals
The first priority of the WM program task force Is to
establish goals that are consistent wtth the policy
adopted by management. Waste minimization goals
can be qualitative, for example, "a significant reduction
of toxic substance emissions into the environment."
However, H is better to establish measurable,
quantifiable goals, since qualitative goals can be
interpreted amWguousty. Quantifiable goate establish
a dear guide as to the degree of sucess expected of
the program. A major chemical company has adopted a
corporate-wide goal of 8% waste reduction per year, hi
addition, each facttty within the company has set to
own waste rnWrnizatton goals.
As part of Is general potey on hazardous waste, a huge
defense contractor has established an ambitious
corporate-wide goal of zero discharge of hazardous
wastes from its facilities by the end of 1988. Each
division within the corporation is given the
responsfcillty and freedom to develop Us own program
(with intermediate goals) to meet this overs! goal. This
has resulted in an extensive Investigation of
procedures and technologies to accomplish source
reduction, recycling and resource recovery, and orate
treatment.
Table 2-2 tats the qualities that goals should possess.
It Is Important that the company's overall waste
minimization goals be incorporated Into the appropriate
individual departmental goals.
The goals of the program should be reviewed
periodically. As the focus of the WM program becomes
more defined, the goals should be changed to reflect
any changes. Waste mWmtzatton assessments are not
Intended to bs s one-time project. Periodic
revaluation of goals is recommended due to
changes, for example, in avaiabte technology, raw
-------
Table 2-2. Attribute* of Effective Goals
ACCEPTABLE to ttoM who wi work to achieve them.
FLEXIBLE and adaptable to changing requirements.
MEASURABLE over time.
MOTIVATIONAL
SUITABLE to th* overall corporate goals and mission.
UNDERSTANDABLE
ACHIEVABLE with a practical level of effort
Sourea: Pearca and Robinson, Strategic
(1985)
Tabla 2-3. Examples of Barrlara to Waata
Minimization
material supplies, environmental regulations, and
economic dniate.
Overcoming Barriers
As ft sets goals for waste minimization and then defines
specific objectives that can be achieved, the program
task force should recognize potential barriers.
Although waste minimization projects can reduce
operating costs and Improve environmental
compliance, they can lead to conflicts between
different groups within the company. Table 2-3 Usts
examples of Juriaolctional conflicts that can arise during
the implementation of a waste minimization project
In addition to jurisdiction^ conflicts related to these
objective barriers, there are attitude-related barriers
that can disrupt a WM program. A commonly held
attitude is "If I aint broke, donl fix IP This attitude
stems from the desire to maintain the status quo and
avoid the unknown. It to also based on the fear that a
new WM option may not work as advertised. Without
the commitment to carefuly conceive and Implement
the option, this attitude can become a self-fulfilling
prophecy. Management must declare that"» to broker
Another attitude-related barrier to the feeling that It
just wont wotM" Thto response to often given when a
person does not futty understand the nature of the
proposed option and its Impact on operations. The
danger here to that promising options may be dropped
before they can be evaluated. One way to avoid this to
to use idea-generating sessions (e.g., brainstorming).
This encourages participants to propose a large
number of options, .which are indMdualy evaluated on
their limits.
An often-encountered barrier to the fear that the WM
option will diminish product quality. Thto to particularly
common in situations where unused feed materials are
recovered from the waste and then recycled back to
the process. The deterioration of product quality can
be a vaHd concern I unacceptable concentrations of
waste materials bukJ up in the system. The best way to
allay this concern to to set up a small-scale
demonstration in the facility, or to observe the
particular option in operation at another facility.
Production
• A nsw operating procedure wi reduce waste but may also
be a bottleneck that decreases the overall production
rate.
• Production will be stopped while the new process
A4M ^MMBAMft ^ jJUj^ltMjf
squpfnefn is nsraiMO.
• A new piece of ec^ipment he* not been demonstrated in a
similar service. It may not work here.
• Adequatespace is not available for the installation of new
equipment.
• Adequate utilities are not available for the new
oojuiprnonL
• Engineering or construction manpower will not be
avalabte in time to meet the project schedule.
• Extensive maintenance may be required.
Quitty Control
• More intensive QC may be needed.
• More rework may be required
Changes in product characteristics may affect customer
acceptance.
e
• A program to reduce inventory (to avoid material
deterioration and reprocessing) may lead to stockouts
during high product demand.
There is not enough money to fund the project
PurcnasirKj
• Existing stocks (or binding contracts) wffl delay the
replacement of a hazardous material with a non-
hazardous substitute.
Em*onmentaf
• Accepting another plant's waste as a feedstock may
require a lengthy resolution of regulatory Issues.
nQUw TfsMavJIsWIf
• Use of s new nonhazardous raw material wM adversely
impact the existing wastewater treatment faoHty.
Planning and Organization Summary
Table 2-4 provides a summary of the steps Involved hi
planning and organizing a waste minimization program.
Assessment Worksheets
Appendix A Includes a set of worksheets for use in
planning and carrying out a waste minimization
assessment, and implementing the selected options.
Worksheet 1 summarizes the entire assessment
procedure. Worksheets 2 and 3 are used to record the
organization of the WM program task force and the
8
-------
individual assessment teams, respectively. Worksheet
3 includes a list of functions and departments that
should be considered when organizing the
assessment teams.
Table 2-4. Planning and Organization Activities
Summary
SETTING UP THE PROGRAM
Get management commitment to:
• Establish watte minimization as a company goal.
* Establish a waste minimization program to meet this
goal.
• Give authority to the program task force to
implement this program.
Set overall goals for the program. These goals should be:
• ACCEPTABLE to those who will work to achieve
mam.
FLEXIBLE to adapt to changing requirements.
MEASURABLE over time.
MOTIVATIONAL
SUITABLE to the overall corporate goals.
UNDERSTANDABLE
ACHIEVABLE with a practical level of effort.
STAFRNG THE PROGRAM TASK FORCE
Find a 'cause champion", with the following attributes:
* Familiar with the facility, its production processes,
and its waste management operations.
• Familiar with the people.
* Familiar wfth quality control requirements.
* Good rapport with management
* Familiar with new production and waste
management technology.
• Familiar with VVM principles and techniques, and
environmental regulations.
* Aggressive managerial style.
Get people who know the facility, processes, and
procedures.
Get people from the affected department* or groups.
Production.
Facilities/Maintenance.
Process Engineering.
Quality Control.
Environmental
Research and Development.
Safety/Health.
Marketing/Client Relations.
Purchasing.
Material Control/Inventory.
Legal,
Finance/Accounting.
Information Systems.
GETTING COMPANY-WOE COMMITMENT
Incorporate the company's WM goals into departmental
goals.
Solicit employee cooperation and participation.
Develop incentives and/or awards tor managers and
9
-------
Section 3
Assessment Phase
the recognized need to minimlzt waste
Planning and
Organization
ASSESSMENT PHASE
• CoHaet precast and facility data
* Prioritize and salad aasassmant targata
* Salad paopla for aaaaaamant taama
* Haviaw data and inapad sit*
* Oaoarata option*
* Scraan and salad options tor furtnar study
Feasibility
Analysis Phas*
tgBa»»t^am a Oi•>!«•!
ImpWiTMnnauOfi
Suocaasf uly implsmantad
wasta minimization projacts
The purpose of the assessment phase is to develop a
comprehensive set of waste minimization options, and
to identify the attractive options that deserve
additional, more detailed analysis. In order to develop
these WM options, a detailed understanding of the
plant's wastes and operations is required. The
assessment should begin by examining information
about the processes, operations, and waste
management practices at the facffity.
Collecting and Compiling Data
The questions that thte information gathering effort wU
attempt to answer include the following:
• What are the waste streams generated from the
plant? And how much?
* Which processes or operations do these waste
streams come from?
* Which wastes are classified as hazardous and which
are not? What makes them hazardous?
* What are the input materials used that generate the
waste streams of a particular process or plant area?
• How much of a particular input material enters each
waste stream?
• How much of a raw material can be accounted for
through fugitive tosses?
• How efficient is the process?
* Are unnecessary wastes generated by mixing
otherwise recyclable hazardous wastes with other
process wastes?
* What types of housekeeping practices are used to
limit the quantity of wastes generated?
• What types of process controls are used to Improve
process efficiency?
Table 3*1 lists Information that can be useful in
conducting the assessment. Reviewing this
information will provide Important background for
understanding the plant's production and
maintenance processes and wBI allow priorities to be
determined. Worksheets 4 through 10 in Appendix A
can be used to record the information about site
characteristics, personnel, processes, input materials,
products, and waste streams. Worksheets 82 through
S6 In Appendix B are designed to record the same
information, but in a more simplified approach.
Wt9t» Stream Records-
One of the first tasks of a waste minimization
assessment is to identify and characterize the facility
waste streams. Information about waste streams can
come from a variety of sources. Some information on
waste quantities is readily available from the completed
hazardous waste manifests, which include the
description and quantity of hazardous waste shipped
to a TSDF. The total amount of hazardous waste
shipped during a one-year period, for example, is a
convenient means of measuring waste generation and
waste reduction efforts. However, manifests often lack
such information as chemical analysis of the waste,
specific source of the watt*, and the time period
during which the waste was generated. Also,
manifests do not cover wastewater effluents, air
emissions, or nonhazardous solid wastes.
Oner sources of Worrnat ton on waste streams Include
UertnW reports and NPDES (National Polutant
10
-------
Tabl* 3-1. Facility Information for WM
Assessments
Design Information
• Process flow diagrams
* Material and heat balances (both design balances and
actual balances) for
production processes
pollution control processes
Operating manuals and process descriptions
Equipment lists
Equipment specifications and data sheets
Piping and instrument diagrams
Plot and elevation plans
Equipment layouts and work flow diagrams
Environmental Information
Hazardous waste manifests
Emission inventories
Biennial hazardous wast* reports
Waste analyses
Environmental audit reports
Permits and/or permit applications
Raw Material/Production Information
• Product composition and batch sheets
* Material application diagrams
* Material safety data sheets
* Product and raw material inventory records
* Operator data togs
* Operating procedures
* Production schedules
Economic Information
• Waste treatment and disposal costs
» Product, utility, and raw material costs
• Operating and maintenance costs
* Departmental cost accounting reports
Other Information
• Company environmental policy statements
* Standard procedures
* Organization charts
Discharge Elimination System) monitoring reports.
These NPDES monitoring reports will include the
volume and constituents of wastewaters that are
discharged. Additionally, toxic substance release
inventories prepared under the "right to know"
provisions of SARA Title lit, Section 313 (Superlund
Amendment and Reauthorlzation Act) may
providevaluable information on emissions into all
environmental media (land, water, and air).
Analytical test data available from previous waste
evaluations and routine sampling programs can be
helpful if the focus of the assessment is a particular
chemical within a waste stream.
Flow Diagrams and Material Balances
Flow diagrams provide the basic means for identifying
and organizing information that is useful for the
assessment. Flow diagrams should be prepared to
identify important process steps and to identify
sources where wastes are generated. Flow diagrams
are also the foundation upon which material balances
are butt.
Material balances are important for many WM projects,
since they allow for quantifying tosses or emissions
that were previously unaccounted for Also, material
balances assist in developing the following
information:
* baseline for tracking progress of the WM efforts
* data to estimate the size and cost of additional
equipment and other modifications
* data to evaluate economic performance
In its simplest form, the material balance is represented
by the mass conservation principle:
Mass in • Mass out + Mass accumulated
The material balance should be made individually for ail
components that enter and leave the process. When
chemical reactions take place in a system, there is an
advantage to doing "elemental balances* for specific
chemical elements in a system.
Material balances can assist in determining
concentrations of waste constituents where analytical
test data is limited. They are particularly useful where
there are points in the production process where ft is
difficult (due to inaccessibility) or uneconomical to
collect analytical data. A material balance can help
determine if fugitive losses are occurring. For
example, the evaporation of solvent from a parts
cleaning tank can be estimated as the difference
between solvent put into the tank and solvent
removed from the tank.
To characterize waste streams by material balance can
require considerable effort. However, by doing so, a
more complete picture of the waste situation results.
This helps to establish the focus of the WM activities
and provides a baseline for measuring performance.
Appendix D lists potential sources of waste from
specific processes and operations.
Sources of Material Balance Information
By definition, the material balance includes both
materials entering and leaving a process. Table 3-2
lists potential sources of material balance information.
11
-------
Table 3-2. Sources of Material Balance
Information
Sample*, analyses, and flow measurements of feed
stocks, products, and waste streams
Raw material purchase records
Material inventories
Emission inventories
Equipment cleaning and validation procedures
Batch make-up records
Product specifications
Design material balances
Production records
Operating logs
Standard operating procedures and operating manuals
Waste manifests
Material balances are easier, more meaningful, and
more accurate when they are done for individual units,
operations, or processes. For this reason, it is
important to define the material balance envelope
properly. The envelope should be drawn around the
specHc area of concern, rather than a larger group of
areas or the entire facility. An overal material balance
for a facility can be constructed from individual unit
material balances. This effort will highlight
interrelationships between units and wil help to point
out areas for waste minimization by way of cooperation
between different operating units or departments.
Pitfalls In Preparing Material Balances
There are several factors that must be considered
when preparing material balances in order to avoid
errors that could significantly overstate or understate
waste streams. The precision of analytical data and
flow measurements may not allow an accurate measure
ofthestream. In particular, In processes with very large
Inlet and outlet streams, the absolute error in
measurement of these quantities may be greater in
magnitude than the actual waste stream Itself. In this
case, a reliable estimate of the waste stream cannot be
obtained by subtracting the quantity of hazardous
material in the product from that in the feed.
The time span is important when constructing a
material balance. Material balances constructed over a
shorter time span require more accurate and more
frequent stream monitoring in order to close the
balance. Material balances performed over the
duration of a complete production run are typically the
easiest to construct and are reasonably accurate. Time
duration also affects the use of raw material purchasing
records and onsfte inventories for calculating input
material quantities. The quantities of materials
purchased during a specific time period may not
necessarily equal the quantity of materials used in
production during the same time period, since
purchased materials can accumulate in warehouses or
stockyards.
Developing material balances around complex
processes can be a complicated undertaking,
especially if recycle streams are present. Such tasks
are usually performed by chemical engineers, often
with the assistance of computerized process
simulators.
Material balances will often be needed to comply with
Section 313 of SARA (Superfund Amendment and
Reauthorization Act of 1986) in establishing emission
inventories for specific toxic chemicals. EPA's Office
of Toxic Substances (OTS) has prepared a guidance
manual entitled Estimating Releases and Waste
Treatment Efficiencies for the Toxic Chemicals
Inventory Form (EPA 560/4^8-02). The OTS manual
contains additional information for developing material
balances for the listed toxic chemicals. The information
presented in this manual applies to a WM assessment
when the material balances are for individual
operations being assessed rather than an overall
facility, when the variations in flow over time is
accounted for, and when the data is used from
separate streams rather than from aggregate streams.
Tracking Wastes
Measuring waste mass flows and compositions Is
something that should be done periodically. By
tracking wastes, seasonal variations in waste flows or
single large waste streams can be distinguished from
continual, constant flows. Indeed, changes in waste
generation cannot be meaningfully measured unless
the Information is collected both before and after a
waste minimization option is implemented.
Fortunately, ft is easier to do material balances the
second time, and gets even easier as more are done
because of the 'learning curve" effect In some larger
companies, computerized database systems have
been used to track wastes. Worksheets 9 and 10 in
Appendix A (and Worksheet S6 in Appendix B)
provide a means of recording pertinent waste stream
characteristics.
Prioritizing Wast* Streams and/or
Operations to Asssss
Ideally, all waste streams and plant operations should
be assessed. However, prioritizing the waste streams
and/or operations to assess Is necessary when
available funds and/or personnel are limited. TheWM
assessments should concentrate on the most
important waste problems first, and then move on to
the tower priority problems as the time, personnel, and
budget permit.
Setting the priorities of waste streams or facility areas to
assess requires a great deal of care and attention,
since this step focuses the remainder of the
12
-------
assessment activity. Table 3-3 lists important criteria to
consider when setting these priorities.
Table 3-3. Typical Considerations for
Prioritizing Waste Streams to Assess
Compliance with current and future regulations.
Costs of waste management (treatment and disposal).
Potential environmental and safety liability.
Quantity of waste.
Hazardous properties of the waste (including toxicrty,
flammability, corrosivrty, and reactivity).
Other safety hazards to employees.
Potential for (or ease of) minimization.
Potential for removing bottlenecks in production or waste
treatment.
Potential recovery of valuable by-products.
Available budget for the weste minimization assessment
program and projects.
Worksheet 10 in Appendix A (Worksheet S6 in
Appendix B) provides a means for evaluating waste
stream priorities lor the remainder of the assessment.
Small businesses, or large businesses with only a few
waste generating operations should assess their entire
facility. K to also beneficial to look at an entire facility
when there are a large number of similar operations.
Similarly, the implementation of good operating
practices that involve procedural or organizational
measures, such as soliciting employee suggestions,
awareness-building programs, better inventory and
maintenance procedures, and internal cost accounting
changes, should be implemented on a facility-wide
basis. Since many of these options do not require
large capital expenditures, they should be
implemented as soon as practical.
Selecting the Assessment Teams
The WM program task force Is concerned with the
whole plant. However, the focus of each of the
assessment teams is more specific, concentrating on a
particular waste stream or a particular area of the plant.
Each team should include people with direct
responsibility and knowledge of the particular waste
stream or area of trie plant. Table 3-4 presents four
examples of teams for plants of various sizes In
different industries.
In addition to the Internal staff, consider using outside
people, especially In the assessment and
implementation phases. They may be trade
association representatives, consultants, or experts
from a different facility of the same company, in large
multi-division companies, a centralized staff of experts
at the corporate headquarters may be available. One
or more "outsiders* can bring in new ideas and provide
an objective viewpoint. An outsider also is more likely
to counteract bias brought about by •inbreeding", or
Table 3-4. Examples of WM Assessment Teams
1. Metal finishing department in a large defense contractor.
* Metal finishing department manager
* Process engineer responsible for metal finishing
processes
* Facilities engineer responsible for metal finishing
department*
* Wastewater treatment department supervisor
* Staff environmental engineer
2. Small pesticide formulator.
* Production manager*
• Environmental manager
* Maintenance supervisor
• Pesticide industry consultant
3. Cyanide plating operation it a military facility.
• Internal assessment team
- Environmental coordinator*
- Environmental engineer
- Electroplating facility engineering supervisor
• Metallurgist
* Material* science group chemist
.* Outside assessment team
- Chemical engineers (2)
- Environmental engineering consultant
* Plating chemistry consultant
4. Large offeet printing facility.
• Internal assessment team
Plant vice president
FUm processing supervisor
Pressroom supervisor
Outside assessment team
Chemical engineers (2)*
Environmental scientist
Printing Industry technical consultant
• Team leader
the "sacred cow* syndrome, such as when an old
process area, rich in history, undergoes an
assessment.
Outside consultants can bring a wide variety of
experience and expertise to a waste minimization
assessment. Consultants may be especially useful to
smaller companies who may not have in-house
expertise in the relevant waste minimization
techniques and technologies.
Production operators and Ine employees must not be
overlooked as a source of WM suggestions, since they
possess firsthand knowledge and experience wHh the
process. Their assistance is especially useful in
assessing operational or procedural changes, or in
equipment modifications that affect the way they do
their work.
•Quality circles" have been instituted by many
companies, particularly in manufacturing industries, to
13
-------
improve product quality and production efficiency.
These quality circles consist of meetings of workers
and supervisors, where improvements are proposed
and evaluated. Quality circles are beneficial in that they
involve the production people who are closely
associated with the operations, and foster participation
and commitment to improvement. Several large
companies that have quality circles have used them as
a means of soliciting successful suggestions for waste
minimization.
Site Inspection
With a specific area or waste stream selected, and with
the assessment team in place, the assessment
continues with a visit to the site. In the case where the
entire assessment team is employed at the plant being
assessed, the team should have become very familiar
with the specific area in the process of collecting the
operating and design data. The members of the
assessment team should familiarize themselves with
the site as much as possible. Although the collected
information is critical to gaining an understanding of the
processes involved, seeing the site is important in
order to witness the actual operation. For example, in
many instances, a process unit is operated differently
from the method originally described in the operating
manual. Modifications may have been made to the
equipment that were not recorded in the flow diagrams
or equipment lists.
When people from outside of the plant participate in
the assessment, h is recommended that a formal site
inspection take place. Even when the team is made up
entirely of plant employees, a site inspection by all
team members is helpful after the site information has
been collected and reviewed. The inspection helps to
resolve questions or conflicting data uncovered during
the review. The site inspection also provides
additional information to supplement that obtained
earlier.
When the assessment team includes members
employed outside of the plant, the team should
prepare a list of needed information and an inspection
agenda. The list can be presented in the form of a
checklist detailing objectives, questions and issues to
be resolved, and/or further information requirements.
The agenda and information list are given to the
appropriate plant personnel in the areas to be
assessed early enough before the visit to allow them to
assemble the information in advance. Of course, it may
be that the assessment team members themselves are
in the best position to collect and compile much of the
data. By carefully thinking out the agenda and needs
list, important points are less likely to be overlooked
during the inspection. Table 3-S presents useful
guidelines for the site inspection.
Tabl* 3-5. Guidelines for th* Sit* Inspection
• Prepare an agenda in advance that covers all point* that
still require clarification. Provide staff contacts in the
area being assessed with the agenda several days
before th* inspection.
• Schedule the inspection to coincide with the particular
operation that is of interest (e.g., make-up chemical
addition, bath sampling, bath dumping, start-up.
shutdown, etc.).
• Monitor the operation at different times during th* shift.
and if needed, during all three shirts, especially when
waste generation is highly dependent on human
involvement (e.g., in painting or part* cleaning
operations).
• Interview th* operators, shift supervisors, and foremen in
the assessed area. Do not hesitate to question mor*
than on* parson if an answer is not forthcoming. Assets
the operators' and their supervisors' awar*n**s of th*
wast* generation aspects of the operation. Note th*ir
familiarity (or lack thereof) with th* impact* th*ir
operation may have on other operations.
• Photograph th* area of interest, ft warranted.
Photographs ar* valuable in th* absence of plant layout
drawings. Many details can be captured in photograph*
that otherwise could be forgotten or inaccurately recalled
at a later date.
• Observe the "housekeeping" aspects of th* operation.
Check tor signs of spills or leaks. Visit th* maintenance
shop and ask about any problem* in keeping th*
•quipnwnt leak-free. Assess th* overall ctoanfin*** of
th*sit*. Pay attention to odor* and fume*.
• Ass**s th* organizational structur* and l*v*l of
coordination of environmental activities between various
department*.
• As**** administrative controls, such as cost accounting
procedures, material purchasing procedures, and wast*
collection procedures.
In performing the site inspection the assessment team
should follow the process from the point where raw
materials enter the area to the point where the
products and the wastes leave the area. The team
should identify the suspected sources of waste. This
may include the production process; maintenance
operations; storage areas for raw materials, finished
product, and work-in-process. Recognize that the
plant's waste treatment area Itself may also offer
opportunities to minimize waste. This inspection often
results in forming preliminary conclusions about the
causes of waste generation. Fun confirmation of these
conclusions may require additional data collection,
analysis, and/or site visits.
14
-------
Generating WM Option*
Once the origins and causes of waste generation are
understood, the assessment process enters the
creative phase. The objective of this step is to
generate a comprehensive set of WM options for
further consideration. Following the coHectton of data
and site inspections, the members of the team will
have begun to identify possible ways to minimize
waste in the assessed area. Identifying potential
options relies both on the expertise and creativity of
the team members. Much of the requisite knowledge
may come from their education and on-the-job
experience, however, the use of technical literature,
contacts, and other sources is always helpful. Some
sources of background information for waste
minimization techniques are listed in Table 3-6.
Table 3-6. Source* of Background Information
on WM Options
Trade assoe/ations
A* part of their overall function to assist companies
within their industry, trads associations generally
provide assistance and information about environmental
regulations and various available techniques for
complying with these regulations. The information
provided is especially valuable since it is industry-
specific.
Plant tnigineen and opinion
The employees that are intimately familiar with a faculty's
operations are often the best source of suggestions for
potential WM options.
Pubfahid Iforttun
Technical magazines, trade journals, government
reports, and research briefs often contain information
that can be used as waste minimization options.
Stale and local t
tin
A number of states and local agencies have, or are
developing, programs that include technical assistance,
Information on industry-specific waste minimization
techniques, and compiled bibliographies. Appendix E
provides a list of addresses for state and federal
programs for WM assistance.
Equipment vendors
Meetings with equipment vendors, as wen as vendor
literature, are particularly useful in identifying potential
equipment-oriented options. Vendors are eager to assist
companies in implementing projects. Remember, though,
that the vendor's job is to sett equipment
Consultant*
Consultants can provide information about WM
techniques. Section 2 discusses the use of consultants
in WM programs. A consultant with waste minimization
experience in your particular industry is most desirable.
Waste Minimization Options
The process for identifying options should follow a
hierarchy in which source reduction options are
explored first, followed by recycling options. This
hierarchy of effort stems from the environmental
desirability of source reduction as the preferred means
of minimizing waste. Treatment options should be
considered only after acceptable waste minimization
techniques have been identified.
Recycling techniques allow hazardous materials to be
put to a beneficial use. Source reduction techniques
avoid the generation of hazardous wastes, thereby
eliminating the problems associated with handling
these wastes. Recycling techniques may be
performed onshe or at an offsfte facility designed to
recycle the waste.
Source reduction techniques are characterized as
good operating practices, technology changes,
material changes, or product changes. Recycling
techniques are characterized as use/reuse techniques
and resource recovery techniques. • These techniques
are described below:
Source Reduction: Good Operating
Practices
Good operating practices are procedural,
administrative, or institutional measures that a company
can use to minimize waste. Good operating practices
apply to the human aspect of manufacturing
operations. Many of these measures are used in
industry largely as efficiency improvements and good
management practices. Good operating practices can
often be implemented with little cost and, therefore,
have a high return on investment These practices can
be implemented in all areas of a plant, including
production, maintenance operations, and in raw
material and product storage. Good operating
practices include the following:
Waste minimization programs
Management and personnel practices
Material handling and inventory practices
Loss prevention
Waste segregation
Cost accounting practices
Production scheduling
Management and personnel practices include
employee training, incentives and bonuses, and other
programs that encourage employees to
conscientiously strive to reduce waste. Material
handling and inventory practices include programs to
reduce loss of input materials due to mishandling,
.expired shelf life of time-sensitive materials, and
proper storage conditions. Loss prevention minimizes
15
-------
wastes by avoiding leaks from equipment and spills.
Waste segregation practices reduce the volume of
hazardous wastes by preventing the mixing of
hazardous and nonhazardous wastes. Cost
accounting practices include programs to allocate
waste treatment and disposal costs directly to the
departments or groups that generate waste, rather
than charging these costs to general company
overhead accounts. In doing so, the departments or
groups that generate the waste become more aware of
the effects of their treatment and disposal practices,
and have a financial incentive to minimize their waste.
By judicious scheduling of batch production runs, the
frequency of equipment cleaning and the resulting
waste can be reduced.
Example: Good Operating Practice^
A large consumer product company in California
adopted a corporate policy to minimize the
generation of hazardous waste. In order to
implement the policy, the company mobilized
quality circles made up of employees representing
areas within the plant that generated hazardous
wastes. The company experienced a 75%
reduction in the amount of wastes generated by
instituting proper maintenance procedures
suggested by the quality circle teams. Since the
team members were also line supervisors and
operators, they made sure the procedures were
followed.
Source Reduction: Technology Changes
Technology changes are oriented toward process and
equipment modifications to reduce waste, primarily In a
production setting. Technology changes can range
from minor changes that can be implemented in a
matter of days at low cost, to the replacement of
processes involving large capital costs. These
changes include the following:
• Changes in the production process
• Equipment, layout, or piping changes
• Use of automation
• Changes in process operating conditions, such as
- Flow rates
• Temperatures
- Pressures
- Residence times
Example: Technology Changes
A manufacturer of fabricated metal products
cleaned nickel and titanium wire in an alkaline
chemical bath prior to using the wire in their product.
In 1986, the company began to experiment with a
mechanical abrasive system. The wire was passed
through the system which uses silk and carbide
pads and pressure to brighten the metal. The
system worked, but required passing the wire
through the unit twice for complete cleaning. In
1987. The company bought a second abrasive unit
and installed It in series with the first unit. This
system allowed the company to completely
eliminate the need for the chemical cleaning bath.
Source Reduction: Input Material Changes
Input material changes accompHsh waste minimization
by reducing or eliminating the hazardous materials that
enter the production process. Also, changes in input
materials can be made to avoid the generation of
hazardous wastes within the production processes.
Input material changes include:
• Material purification
• Material substitution
Example: Input Material Changes
An electronic manufacturing facility of a large
diversified corporation originally cleaned printed
tinjit boards with solvents. The company found that
by switching from a solvent-based cleaning system
to an aqueous-based system that the same
operating conditions and workloads could be
maintained. The aqueous-based system was found
to dean six times more effectively. This resulted In a
tower product reject rate, and eliminated a
hazardous waste.
Source Reduction: Product Changes
Product changes are performed by the manufacturer
of a product with the intent of reducing waste resulting
from a product's use. Product changes include:
• Product substitution
• Product conservation
• Changes in product composition
Product chanes
In the paint manufacturing Industry, water-based
coatings are finding Increasing applications where
solvent-based paints were used before. These
products do not contain toxic or flammable solvents
that make solvent-based paints hazardous when
they are disposed of. Also, cleaning the applicators
with solvent is not necessary. The use of water-
16
-------
based paints instead of solvent-based paints also
greatly reduces volatile organic compound
emissions to the atmosphere.
Recycling: Use and Reuse
Recycling via use and/or reuse involves the return of a
waste material either to the originating process as a
substitute for an input material, or to another process
as an input material.
Era/note; Reuse
A printer of newpaper advertising in California
purchased an ink recycling unit to produce black
newspaper ink from Its various waste inks. The unit
blends the different colors of waste ink together
with fresh black ink and black toner to create the
black ink. This ink & then filtered to remove flakes of
dried ink. This ink is used in placo of fresh black ink,
and eliminates the need for the company to ship
waste ink off site for disposal. The price of the
recycling unit was paid off in 18 months based onfy
on the savings in fresh Mack ink purchases. The
payback improved to 9 months when the costs for
disposing of ink as a hazardous waste are included.
Recycling: Reclamation
Reclamation is the recovery of a valuable material from
a hazardous waste. Reclamation techniques differ
from use and reuse techniques in that the recovered
material is not used in the facility, rather ft is sold to
another company.
Examle:
A photoprocessing company uses an electrolytic
deposition cell to recover silver out of the rinsewater
from film processing equipment. The silver is then
soldtoasmallrecyder. By removing the silver from
this wastewater, the wastewater can be discharged
to the sewer without additional pretreatment by the
company. This unit pays for itself in less than two
years with the value of silver recovered.
The company also collects used film and soHs it to
the same recycler. The recycler bums the film and
collects the silver from the the residual ash. By
removing the silver from the ash, the ash becomes
nonhazardous.
Appendix E lists many WM techniques and concepts
applicable to common waste-generating operations
(coating, equipment cleaning, parts cleaning, and
materials handling). Additionally, a list of good
operating practices is provided.
Methods of Generating Options
The process by which waste minimization options are
identified should occur In an environment that
encourages creativity and independent thinking by the
members of the assessment team. While the individual
team members wilt suggest many potential options on
their own, the process can be enhanced by using
some of the common group decision techniques.
These techniques allow the assessment team to
identify options that the individual members might not
have come up with on their own. Brainstorming
sessions with the team members are an effective way
of developing WM options. Most management or
organizational behavior textbooks describe group
decision techniques, such as brainstorming or the
nominal group technique.
Worksheet 11 in Appendix A is a form for listing
options that are proposed during an option generation
session. Worksheet 12 in Appendix A is used to
briefly describe and document the options that are
proposed. Worksheets S? and S8 in Appendix B
perform the same function in the simplified set of
worksheets.
Screening and Selecting Options for Further
Study
Mary waste minimization options will be identified in a
successful assessment. At this point, it is necessary to
identify those options that offer real potential to
minimize waste and reduce costs. Since detailed
evaluation of technical and economic feasibility is
usually costly, the proposed options should be
screened to identify those that deserve further
evaluation. The screening procedure serves to
eliminate suggested options that appear marginal,
impractical, or Inferior without a detailed and more
costly feasibility study.
The screening procedures can range from an informal
review and a decision made by the program manager or
a vote of the team members, to quantitative decision*
making tools. The informal evaluation is an
unstructured procedure by which the assessment
team or WM program task force selects the options that
appear to be the best. This method is especially useful
in small facilities, with small management groups, or in
situations where only a few options have been
generated. This method consists of a discussion and
examination of each option.
The weighted sum method is a means of quantifying
the important factors that affect waste management at a
17
-------
particular facility, and how each option win perform with
respect to these factors. This method is
recommended when there are a large number of
options to consider. Appendix G presents the
weighted sum method in greater detail, along with an
example. Worksheet 13 in Appendix A is designed to
screen and rank options using this method.
The assessment procedure is ftexble enough to alow
common group decision-making techniques to be
used here. For example, many large corporations
currently use decision-making systems that can be
used to screen and rank WM options.
No matter what method is used, the screening
procedure should consider the following questions.
• What is the main benefit gained by Implementing
this option? (e.g., economics, compliance, lability,
workplace safety, etc.)
• Does the necessary technology exist to develop
the option?
• How much does ft cost? Is R cost effective?
• Can the option be Implemented within a reasonable
amount of time without disrupting production?
• Does the option have a good "track record"? If not,
is there convincing evidence that the option will
work as required?
• Does the option have a good chance of success?
(A successfully initiated WM program will gain wider
acceptance as the program progresses.)
• What other benefits will occur?
The results of the screening activity are used to
promote the successful options for technical and
economic feasbUity analyses. The number of options
chosen for the feasibility analyses depends on the
time, budget, and resources available for such a study.
Some options (such as procedural changes) may
involve no capital costs and can be implemented
quickly with little or no further evaluation. The
screening procedure should account for ease of
implementation of an option. If such an option is clearly
desirable and indicates a potential cost savings, It
should be promoted for further study or outright
implementation.
18
-------
Section 4
Feasibility Analysis
The recognized need to minimize waste
Planning and
Organization
Aa**MRi«nt
Phase
FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS PHASE
• Technical •valuation
• Economic evaluation
• Select options tor implementation
Implementation
Successfully implemented
waste minimization projects
The final product of the assessment phase is a list of
WM options for the assessed area. The assessment
will have screened out the impractical or unattractive
options. The next step is to determine H the remaining
options are technically and economically feasible.
Technical Evaluation
The technical evaluation determines whether a
proposed WM option will work in a specific application.
The assessment team should use a last-track*
approach in evaluating procedural changes that do not
involve a significant capital expenditure. Process
testing of materials can be done relatively quickly, If the
options do not involve major equipment installation or
modifications.
For equipment-related options or process changes,
visits to see existing installations can be arranged
through equipment vendors and industry contacts.
The operator's comments are especially important and
should be compared with the vendor's claims. Bench-
scale or pilot-scale demonstration is often necessary.
Often K is possible to obtain scale-up data using a
rental test unit for bench-scale or pilot-scale
experiments. Some vendors will install equipment on a
trial basis, with acceptance and payment after a
prescribed time, if the user is satisfied.
The technical evaluation of an option also must
consider facility constraints and product requirements,
such as those described in Table 4-1. Although an
inability to meet these constraints may not present
insurmountable problems, correcting them will likely
add to the capital and/or operating costs.
Table 4-1. Typical Technical Evaluation Criteria
• Is the system safe tor workers?
• * Will product quality be maintained?
* Is space available?
» Is the new equipment, matarials, or procedures
compatible with production operating procedures, work
flow, and production rates?
* is additional later required?
• Are utilities available? Or must they be installed,
thereby raising capital costs?
• How tong will production be stopped in order to install the
system?
* Is special expertise required to operate or maintain the
new system?
• Does the vendor provide acceptable service?
• Does the system create other environmental problems?
All affected groups in the facility should contribute to
and review the results of the technical evaluation. Prior
consultation and review with the affected groups (e.g.,
production, maintenance, purchasing) is needed to
ensure the viability and acceptance of an option, tfthe
option calls for a change in production methods or
input materials, the project's effects on the quality of
the final product must be determined. M after the
technical evaluation, the prefect appears infeasibte or
impractical, it should be dropped. Worksheet 14 in
Appendix A is a checklist of important items to consider
when evaluating the technical feasibility of a WM
option.
Economic Evaluation
The economic evaluation is carried out using standard
measures of profitability, such as payback period,
return on investment, and net present value. Each
organization has Us own economic criteria for selecting
projects for implementation. In performing the
economic evaluation, various costs and savings must
be considered. As hi any projects, the cost elements
of a WM project can be broken down into capital costs
and operating costs. The economic analysis descrtoed
in this section and in the associated worksheets
represents a preliminary, rather than detafted, analysis.
For smaller facilities with only a few processes, the
entire WM assessment procedure will tend to be much
19
-------
Table 4-2. Capital Inveatment for e Typical
Large WM Project
Direct Capital Coata
Site Development
Demolition and alteration work
Srte clearing and grading
Wakways, roads, and fencing
Process Equipment
AH equipment listed on ftew sheets
Spare parts
Taxes, freight, insurance, and duties
Materials
Piping and ducting
Insulation and painting
Electrical
Instrumentation and controls
BuiWings and structures
Connections to Existing Utilities and Services (water,
HVAC, power, steam, refrigeration, fuels, plant air
and inert gaa, lighting, and fire control)
New Utity and Service Facilities (same Kerns aa above)
Omar Non-Process Equipment
Construct ton/Installation
Construction/Installation labor salaries and burden
Supervision, accounting, timekeeping, purchasing,
safety, and expediting
Temporary facWtiee
Construction tools and equipment
Taxaa and insurance
Building permits, field tests, licenses
Indirect Capital Costs
In-house engineering, procurement and other home
office coats
Outside engineering, deaign, and consulting Services
Permitting costs
Contractors'fees
Start-up coata
Training coata
Contingency
Interest accrued during construction
TOTAL FIXED CAPITAL COSTS
Working Capital
Raw materials inventory
Finished product inventory
Materials and supplies
TOTAL WORKING CAPITAL
TOTAL CAPITAL MvtSTMENT
Source: Adapted from Perry, Chemical Engineer's
Handbook (1885): and Patera and Tlmmerhaus. Plant Design
ST]d£conQmteitjgrChefflkisJEMinMrs (1980).
less formal, in this situation, several obvious WM
options, such as instalation of flow controls and good
operating practices may be implemented wth Mm or
no economic evaluation. In these instances, no
complicated analyses are necessary to demonstrate
the advantages of adopting the selected WM options.
A proper perspective must be maintained between the
magnitude of savings that a potential option may offer,
and the amount of manpower required to do the
technical and economic feastoWty analyses.
Capftaf Coafa
Table 4-2 is a comprehensive 1st of capital cost Hems
associated with a large plant upgrading project. These
costs include not only the fixed capital costs for
designing, purchasing, and installing equipment, but
also costs tor working capital, permitting, training, start-
up, and financing charges.
With the Increasing level of environmental regulations,
initial permitting costs are becoming a significant
portion of capital costs for many recycling options (as
well as treatment, storage, and disposal options).
Many source reduction techniques have the
advantage of not requiring environmental permitting in
order to be Implemented.
Of*ntlng Cost* and* Sev//i0*
The basic economic goal of any waste minimization
prelect is to reduce (or eliminate) waste disposal costs
and to reduce input material costs. However, a variety
of other operating costs (and savings) should also be
considered. In making the economic evaluation, it is
convenient to use incremental operating costs In
comparing the existing system with the new system
that incorporates the waste minimization option.
("Incremental operating coats* represent the
difference between the estimated operating costs
associated with the WM option, and the actual
operating costs of the existing system, without the
option.) Table 4-3 describes Incremental operating
costs and savings and incremental revenues typtealy
associated with waste mWmbaUon projects.
Reducing or avoiding present and future operating
costs associated with waste treatment, storage, and
disposal are major elements of the WM project
economic evaluation. Companies have tended to
ignore these costs In the past because land disposal
was relatively inexpensive. However, recent regulatory
requirements Imposed on generators and waste
management facilities have caused the costs of waste
management to increase to the point where it is
becoming a signlfcant factor ki a company's overall
cost structure. Table 4-4 presents typical external
costs for offslte waste treatment and disposal. In
addition to these external coata, than am significant
internal costs, including the labor to store and ship out
wastes, llabitty insurance costs, and onelte treatment
costs.
20
-------
Table 4-3.
Associated
Operating Costa
with Wlf Project*
and Savings
Reduced waste management cost*.
This includes reductions in costs for.
Offsite treatment, storage, and disposal fsas
Stats fsss and taxes on hazardous wast* generators
Transportation costs
OnsHe treatment, storage, and handling costs
Permitting, reporting, and recordkeeping costs
Input mafena/ oat savings.
An option that reduces waste usually decreases the
demand lor input material*.
AM unmet and Cab/% savfrig*.
A WM option may be significant enough to reduce a
company's insurance payments. It may also lower a
company's potential liability associated with remedial
dean-up of TSDFs and workplace safety. (The
magnitude of liability savings is difficult to determine).
Changes ft; ceste associated w*n quality.
A WM option may have a positive or negative effect on
product quality. This could result in higher (or lower)
costs tor rework, scrap, or quality control functions.
Changes in uMMss coals.
Utilities costs may increase or decrease. This Includes
steam, electricity, process and cooling water, plant air,
refrigeration, or inert gas.
Change* in operating and ma/ntenance fetor, burden, and
benefit.
An option may either increase or decrease labor
requirements. This may be reflected in changes In
overtime hours or in changes hi the number of
employees. When direct labor costs change, then the
burden and benefit costs will also change. In targe
project!, supervision costs will also change.
Chang* In operating and maintenance suppies.
An option may result increase or decrease the use of
O&M supplies.
Cnangas In over/lead costs.
Large WM projects may affect a facility's overhead
costs.
Chungis In revenues from Increased (or decreased;
production.
An option may result In an increase in the productivity of
a unit This will result in a change in revenues. (Note that
operating coats may also change accordingly.)
Increased revenues ftwn by-products.
A WM option may produce a by-product that can be sold
to a recyder or sold to another company as a raw
material. This wiB increase the company1! revenues.
Table 4-4. Typical Coata of Offalte Industrial
Waste Management*
Disposal
Drummed hazardous waste**
Solids $7S to $110 per drum
Liquids $65 to $120 per drum
Suk waste
Solids $120 per cubic yard
Liquids $0.60 to $2.30 per gafton
Lab packs $110 per drum
Analysis (at disposal site)
Transportation
$200 to $300
$65 to $85 per hour 9 45 miss
per hour (round trip)
Does not include internal costs, such as taxes and fees,
and labor for manifest preparation, storage, handling, and
reeordkeeping.
•Based on 55 gaton drums. These prices are for larger
quantities of drummed wastes. Disposal of a smai
number of drums can be up to four timee higher par
drum.
For the purpose of evaluating a project to reduce
waste quantities, some types of costs ait larger and
more easBy quantified. These include:
disposal fees
transportation costs
predisposal treatment costs
raw materials costs
operating and maintenance costs.
it is suggested that savings in these costs be taken
kite consideration first, because they have a greater
effect on project economics and involve less effort to
estimate reliably. The remaining elements are usually
secondary in their direct impact and should be
included on an as-needed basis in fine-tuning the
analysis.
Proflttbllity An*ly»l»
A project's profitability is measured using the estimated
net cash flows (cash incomes minus cash outlays) tor
each year of the project's We. A profitability analysis
example in Appendix H Includes two cash flow tables
(Figure H-3 and H-4).
H the project has no significant capital costs, the
project's profitability can be judged by whether an
operating cost savings occurs or not. H such a project
reduces overall operating costs, it should be
implemented as soon as practical.
21
-------
For projects wfth significant capital costs, a more
detailed prafltabtty analysis to necessary. The three
standard prottabity measures are:
* Payback period
* Internal rate of return (IRR)
* Net present value
The payback period tor • prelect to the amount of time t
takes to recover the initial cash outlay on the project.
The formula for calculating the payback period on a
pretax baste to the foRowing:
Payback period «
Capital invwtmant
Annual operating cost saving*
For example, suppose a waste generator Installs a
piece of equipment at a total cost of $120,000. Kthe
piece of equipment is expected to save $48,000 per
year, then the payback period to 2.5 years.
rayoBGK pvnoos are lypicany measu
However, a particularly attractive projec
payback period measured In months. Pi
In the/ range of three to four vein
Payback periods are typically measured in years.
project may have a
^ayback periods
range of three to four years are usually
considered acceptable for tow-risk Investments. This
method to recommended for quick assessments of
prefltabWy. If large capital expenditures are involved, R
to usuafly followed by more detailed analysis.
The internal rate of return (IRR) and the net present
value (NPV) are both discounted cash flow techniques
for determining profitability. Many companies use
these methods for ranking capital protects that are
competing for funds. Capital funding for a project may
wen hinge on the ability of the project to generate
positive cash flows beyond the payback period to
realize acceptable return on investment. Both the
NPV and IRR recognize the time value of money by
Discounting the projected future net cash flows to the
present. For Investments with a tow level of risk, an
aftertax IRR of 12 to 15 percent to tvpteaty acceptable.
Most of the popular spreadsheet programs for
personal computers wi automatfcaly calculate IRR and
NPV for a series of cash flows. Refer to any financial
management, cost accounting, or engineering
economics text for more Information on determining
the IRR or NPV. Appendix H presents a profitability
analysis example for a WM project using IRR and NPV.
Adju9tm*nt* tor JM*» *nd Liability
As mentioned earler, wast* minimization projects may
reduce the magnitude of environmental and safety
risks for a company. Although these risks can be
identified, ft to difficult to predict if problems occur, the
nature of the problems, and their resulting magnitude.
One way of accounting tor the reduction of these risks
to to ease the financial performance requirements of
the project. For example, the acceptable payback may
be lengthened from four to five years, or the required
Internal rate of return may be lowered from 15 percent
to 12 percent. Such adjustments reflect recognition of
elements that affect the risk exposure of the company,
but cannot be included directly In the analyses. These
adjustments are judgmental and necessarily reflect the
individual viewpoints of the people evaluating the
protect for capital funding. Therefore, K to Important
that the financial analysts and the decision makers hi
the company be aware of the risk reduction and other
benefits of the WM options. As a policy to encourage
waste minimization, some companies have set lower
huidto rates for WM projects.
White the prefltabnty to important to deciding whether
or not to Implement an option, environmental
regulations may be even more important. A company
operating hi violation of environmental regulations can
face fines, lawsuits, and criminal penalties for the
company's managers. UUmateiy, the fadlty may even
be forced to shut down. In this caw the total cash flow
of a company can hinge upon Implementing the
environmental project.
tor Economic Evaluation
Worksheets 15 through 17 in Appendix A are used to
determine the economic evaluation of a WM option.
Worksheet 15 to a checklist of capital and operating
cost items. Worksheet 16 to used to find a simple
payback period for an option that requires capital
investment Worksheet 17 to used to find the net
present value and internal rate of return for an option
that requires capital investment. Worksheet S9 in
Appendix B to used to record estimated capital and
operating costs, and to determine the payback period
h the shnpHfled assessment procedure.
Final Roport
The product of a waste minimization assessment to a
report that presents the results of the assessment and
the technical and economic feasibility analyses. The
report also contalnes recommendations to implement
the f easMs options.
A good final report can be an important tool for getting
a project implemented. H to particularly valuable hi
obtaining funding tor the project. In presenting the
feasibility analyses, it to often useful to evaluate the
project under different scenarios. For example,
comparing a protects'* profltaoMy under optimtetie and
pessimistic assumptions (such as increasing waste
disposal costs) can be beneficial. Sensitivity analyses
that indicate the effect of key variables on profHabHty
are atoo useful.
22
-------
The report should include not only how much the
project wll cost and Its expected performance, but also
now ft wH be done. It is Important to dbcuss:
• whether the technology Is established, with
mention of succesful applications;
* the required resources and how they will be
obtained;
• estimated construction period;
* estimated production downtime;
* how the performance of the project can be
evaluated after k is implemented.
Before the report is finalized, ft is important to review
the results with the affected departments and to sofctt
their support. By having department representatives
assist in preparing and reviewing the report, the
chances are increased that the projects win be
implemented. In summarizing the results, a quaJrtatrve
evaluation of intangible costs and benefits to the
company should be Included. Reduced MaMMes and
improved Image In the eyes of the employees and the
community should be dtecussed.
23
-------
Section 5
Implementing Waste Minimization Options
Tha racognizad naad to minimize wasta
Pl»nning«r»d
Organization
Aaaaasmant
Phaa*
Faaafcflity
Analyaia Phaaa
IMPLEMENTATION
Justify projects and obtain funding
Installation (equipment)
Implefliefltajion (procedure)
Evaluata performance
Succaaafully implemented
waata minimization projacta
Hit WM assessment report provides the basis tor
obtaining company funding of WM projects. Because
prelects are not always sold on their technical merits
alone, a clear description of both tangible and
intangble benefits can help edge a proposed project
past competing projects for funding.
The champions of the WM assessment program
should be flexble enough to develop alternatives or
modifications. They should also be committed to the
point of doing background and support work, and
should anticipated potential problems hi implementing
the options. Above all, they should k«ep in mind that
an idea will not sel If the sponsors are not sold on M
themselves.
Obtaining Funding
Waste reduction projects generally Involve
improvements in process efficiency and/or reductions
in operating costs of waste management. However, an
organization's capital resources may be prioritized
toward enhancing future revenues (for example,
moving Mo new fines of business, expanding plant
capacity, or acquiring other companies), rather than
toward cutting current costs. If this is the case, then a
sound waste reduction project could be postponed
urtil me next capital budgeting period. It to then up to
the project sponsor to ensure that the project is
reconsidered at that time.
Knowing the level within the organization that has
approval authority for capital projects will help in
enlisting the appropriate support. In large
corporations, smaller projects are typically approved at
the plant manager level, medium-size projects at the
divisional vice president level, and larger projects at the
executive committee level.
An evaluation team made up of financial and technical
personnel can ensure that a sponsor's enthusiasm is
balanced with objectivity. It can also serve to quad
opposing 'cam be done' or If It aini broke, dontflx W
attitudes that might be encountered within the
organization. The team should review the project In
the context of:
« past experience In this area of operation
• what the market and the competition are doing
* how the implementation program fits into the
company's overall business strategy
• advantages of me proposal in relation to competing
requests for capital funding
Even when a project promises a high interal rate of
return, some companies will have difficulty raising
funds Wemally for capital Investment. In this case, the
company should took to outside financing. The
company generally has two major sources to consider:
private sector financing and government-assisted
funding.
Private sector financing includes bank loans and other
conventional sources of financing. Government
financing is available in some cases. It may be
worthwhile to contact your state's Department of
Commerce or the federal Small Business
Administration for Information regarding loans for
pollution control or hazardous waste disposal projects.
Some states can provide technical and financial
assistance. Appendix F includes a list of states
providing this assistance and addresses to get
information.
24
-------
Installation
Waste minimization options that Involve operational,
procedural, or materials changes (without additions or
modifications to equipment) should be implemented
as soon as the potential cost savings have been
determined. For projects involving equipment
modifications or new equipment, the installation of a
waste minimization project is essentially no different
from any other capital improvement project. The
phases of the project include planning, design,
procurement, and construction.
Worksheet 18 is a form for documenting the progress
of a WM project through the implementation phase.
Demonstration and Follow-up
After the waste minimization option has been
implemented, it remains to be seen how effective the
option actually turns out to be. Options that don't
measure up to their original performance expectations
may requre rework or modifications. It is important to
get warranties from vendors prior to installation of the
equipment.
The documentation provided through a follow-up
evaluation represents an important source of
information for future uses of the option in other
facilities. Worksheet 19 fe a form for evaluating the
performance of an implemented WM option. The
experience gained in implementing an option at one
facility can be used to reduce the problems and costs
of implementing options at subsequent facilities.
Measuring Waste Reduction
One measure of effectiveness for a WM project is the
project's effect on the organization's cash flow. The
project should pay for itself through reduced waste
management costs and reduced raw materials costs.
However, it is also important to measure the actual
reduction of waste accomplished by the WM project.
The easiest way to measure waste reduction is by
recording the quantities of waste generated before
and after a WM project has been implemented. The
difference, dividied by the original waste generation
rate, represents the percentage reduction in waste
quantity. However, this simple measurement ignores
other factors that also affect the quantity of waste
generated.
In general, waste generation is directly dependent on
the production rate. Therefore, the ratio of waste
generation rate to production rate is a convenient way
of measuring waste reduction.
Expressing waste reduction in terms of the ratio of
waste to production rates is not free of problems,
however. One of these problems Is the danger of
using the ratio of infrequent large quantities to the
production rate. This problem is illustrated by a
situation where a plant undergoes a major overhaul
Involving equipment cleaning, paint stripping, and
repainting. Such overhauls are fairly infrequent and
are typically performed every three to five years. The
decision to include this intermittent stream in the
calculation of the waste reduction index, based on the
ratio of waste rate to product rate, would lead to an
increase in this index. This decision cannot be
justified, however, since the infrequent generation of
painting wastes is not a function of production rate. In
a situation like this, the waste reduction progress
should be measured in terms of the ratio of waste
quantity or materials use to the square footage of the
area painted. In general, a distinction should be made
between production- related wastes and maintenance-
related wastes and dean-up wastes.
Also, a few waste streams may be inversely
proportional to production rate. For example, a waste
resulting from outdated input materials is likely to
increase H the production rate decreases. This is
because the age-dated materials in inventory are more
likely to expire when their use in production
decreases.
For these reasons, care must be taken when
expressing the extent of waste reduction. This
requires that the means by which wastes are
generated be well understood.
In measuring waste reduction, the total quantity of an
individual waste stream should be measured, as wed as
the individual waste components or characteristics.
Many companies have reported substantial reduction
in the quanftites of waste disposed. Often, much of
the reduction can be traced to good housekeeping
and steps taken to concentrate a dilute aqueous
waste. Although concentration, as such, does not fall
within the definition of waste minimization, there are
practical benefits that result from concentrating
wastewater streams, including decreased disposal
costs. Concentration may render a waste stream easier
to recycle, and is also desirable if a facility's current
wastewater treatment system is overloaded.
Obtaining good quality data for waste stream quanities,
flows, and composition can be costly and time
consuming. For this reason, it may be practical, in
some instances, to express waste reduction indirectly
In terms of the ratio of Input materials consumption to
production rate. These data are easier to obtain,
although the measure is not direct.
25
-------
Measuring waste minimization by using a ratto of waste
quantity to material throughput or product output is
generally more meaningful for specific unite or
operations, rather than for an entire facility. Therefore,
it is important to preserve the focus of the WM project
when measuring and reporting progress. For those
operations not involving chemical reactions, ft may be
hebful to measure WM progress by using the ratto of
input material quantity to material throughput or
production rate.
Waata Minimization Aaaaaamanta for
Naw Production Procaaaaa
This manual concentrates on waste minimization
assessments conducted in existing facilities.
However, ft is important that waste minimization
principles be applied to new projects. In general, ft is
easier to avoid waste generation during the research
and development or design phase than to go back and
modify the process after ft has already been Installed.
The planning and design team tor a new product,
production process, or operation should address
waste generation aspects early oa The assessment
procedure in this manual can be modftled to provide a
WM review of a product or process In the planning or
design phase. The earlier the assessment is
performed, the less likely It Is that the project wil
require expensive changes. All new projects should
be reviewed by the waste mJnlmlzatton program task
force.
A better approach than a pre-project assessment Is to
include one or more members of the WM program task
force on any new project that wM generate waste. In
this way, the new project wil bei
presence of a WM champion and
m generate*
nef> from the
JNsorherinfl
influence to
design the process to minimize waste At a CaMomia
faculty of a major defense contractor, aN new projects
and modfficattons to existing faclUes and equipment
are reviewed by the WM program team. All projects
that have no environmental impact are quickly
screened and approved. Those projects that do have
an environmental impact are assigned to a team
member who participates ta the project kick-off and
review meetings from inception to Implementation.
Ongoing Waata Minimization Program
The WM program is a continuing, rather than a one-
time effort. Once the highest priority waste streams
and facility areas have been assessed and those
projects have been implemented, the assessment
program should took to areas and waste streams wfth
tower priorities. The ultimate goal of the WM program
should be to reduce the generation of waste to the
maximum extent achievable. Companies that have
eliminated the generation of hazardous waste should
continue to took at reducing industrial wastewater
dtocharges, air emissions, and sold wastes.
The frequency wfth which assessments are done wil
depend on the program's budget, the company's
budgeting cycle (annual cycle In most companies), and
special circumstances. These special circumstances
might be:
• a diange In raw rnatorlal or product retirements
• higher waste management coste
• new regulations
• new technology
• a major event wfth undesirable environmental
consequences (such as a major spM)
Askts from the special circumstances, a new series of
assessments should be conducted each fiscal year.
To be truly effective, a philosophy of waste
minimization must be developed In the organization.
This means that waste minimization must be an integral
part of the company's operations. The most
successful waste minimization programs to date have
al developed this philosophy within their companies.
26
-------
Appendix A
Waste Minimization Assessment Worksheets
Tha workahaats that follow ara daaignad to f adlitat* th* WM aaaaaamant prooadura. Tabk* A-1 li*U tha workahaata,
according to th* particular phaaa of tha program, and a briaf daacripllon of tha purpoaa of tha woikahaata.
Appandix B praaanta a aariaa of aimplWad woikahaata for amall bualnaaaaa or tor praliminaiy aaaaaamanta.
Tabla A-1. Llat of Waata Minimization Aaaaaamant Workahaata
Phaaa
Numbar and Tltla
Purpoaa/Ramarka
1. Aaaaaamant Ovarviaw
Planning and Organization
(Sactlon 2)
2. Program Organization
3. Aaaaaamant Taam Maka-up
Aaaaaamant Phaaa
(Sactton 3)
4, Stta Daacriptton
S. Paraonnal
6, Procata Information
7. Input Matariate Summary
8. Products Summary
9. Individual Waata Straam
Charactarizatton
tO. Waata Straam Summary
SummariZM \haovarafl aaaaaarnant procadura.
Raoorda kay mambara In tha WMA program taak foroa and tha WM
imant taarra. Aiao racorda tha ralavant organization.
Uatanamaa of aaaaaarnant taam mambara aa wal aa dutkw. tndudaa
a Hat of potantial dapartmants to contkJar whan aalacting tha taama.
UaU background Information about tha facility, including location,
product*, and oparationa.
Raoorda information about tha paraonnal who work In tha araa to ba
aaaaaaad.
Thia ia a chackW of uaaful prooaaa Information to took for bafora
starting tha aaaaaarnant,
Raoorda input malaria) Information for a specific production or prooaaa
araa Thk* indudaa nama, auppHar, hazardoua componant or
propartiaa, coat, dalivaiy and ahaff-Ma information, and poaaibia
substltuta*.
(dantMaa hazardoua oomponanta, production rata, ravanuaa, and
othar information about producta.
Raoorda aourea, hazard, ganaradon rata. disposal coat, and mathod
of traatmant or diapoaaJ for aach waata atraam.
Summarizes all of tha Information cokactad for aach waata atraam,
Thto anaat la ateo uaad to priorttiza waata atraama to i
(contlnuad)
A-1
-------
Table A-1. List of Watt* Minimization Aaaaaamont Workahoata (eontlnuod)
Phase
Number and Title
Purpoae/Remarka
Assessment Phaae (continued)
(Section 3)
11. Option Generation
12. Option Description
13. Options Evaluation by
Feasibility Analyala Phaaa
(Saetlon 4)
14. T
Wy
15. Coat Information
16. Profltabifty Worksheets
Payback Period
Records option* prepoaad during braJnatonning or nominal group
technique sessions. Indudea the rationale for proposing each option.
Deacribaa and summarizes information about a proposed option. Also
notes approval of premising options.
Usodfon
ling options using the weighted sum method.
Detated checks* for oeifomiing a technical evakiaJlon of sWM option.
m*^ ii^lrifaii • ^ W ithAtimtt k^M mmr*tmmm
-------
Finn.
Site.
Date.
Wast* Minimization Aawsamtnt
Worksheet*
Proj. No.
Prepared By
Checked By __
Sheet 1 of.,1 Page of.
WORKSHEET
1
ASSESSMENT OVERVIEW
&EPA
Begin the Waste Minimization
Assessment Program
I
Worksheets used
PLANNING AND ORGANIZATION
• Get management commitment
* Set overall assessment program goals
* Organize assessment program task force
I
Assessment organization
and commitment to proceed
Select new
assessment targets
and reevaluate
previous options
ASSESSMENT PHASE
* Compile process and fadttry data
* Prioritize and select assessment targets
* Select people for assessment teams
• Review date and inspect site
* Generate options
* Screen and select options for further study
1
Assessment report of
selected options
FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS PHASE
* Technical evaluation
* Economic evaluation
* Select options for implementation
i
Final report, including
recommended options
Repeat the process
IMPLEMENTATION
* Justify projects and obtain funding
• Installation {equipment)
* Implementation (procedure)
* Evaluate performance
Successfully operating
waste minimization projeeta
4,i,7.a,9.10
10
3
11.12
13
14
18.16,17
16
18
19
A-3
-------
Firm
.SIM
nat*
WMtft Mnlmi9*tlnn AtMMrrMnt
Pmj No
.
Prepared By
Ch«ck«dBy
Shtet J_ ol j_ Pa(^ of
WOBKSHEET
2
4»EPA
FUNCTION
NAME
LOCATION
TELEPHONE f
Sit* Coordinator
TMRI
Organization Chart
A-4
-------
Firm
Site
Data
WORKSHEET
3
Waste Minimization Assessment
Pi»j No
P«
Ch
Sin
iparedBy
acked By
set 1 of 1 Page of
&EPA
Function/Department
Assessment Team
LMdw
SK« Coordinator
Operations
Engineering
Maintenance
Scheduling
Matertala Control
Procurement
Shipping/Receiving
FadlHIee
Quality Control
Environmental
Accounting
Personnel
RtD
Legal
Management
-------
Firm.
Site
Date
Wttte Mnlmlzttion Aiieument
ProJ.No.
Prepared By
Checked By ;
Sheet J_ of J_ Page of
WORKSHEET
4
&EPA
Rrm:
Ptont:
)epertment:
Ana;
Street Addre««:
8t«teyZIPCode:
Telephone: (
Malor Products
SIC Cadet;
EPA Generator Number
MelorUrUtor
Product or:
Ope ret tones
FacltHtee/Equlpment Age:
A-6
-------
Firm
Site
Data
Waste Minimization Assessment
Pmj Mo
Prepared By
Chocked Bv
Sheet J_ of J_ Page of
WORKSHEET
5
PERSONNEL
&EPA
Attribute
Overall
Department/Area
Total Staff
Direct Supv. Staff
Management
Average Age, yrt.
Annual Turnover Rate %
Seniority, yrt.
Yrt. of Formal Education
Training, hrtTyr.
Additional Remarks
A-7
-------
Firm
Site
Hate
Wast* Minimization Assessment
Pmj No.
Prepared By
Checked Bv
Sheet J_ of _l_ Page of
WORKSHEET
6
&EPA
Process Unit/Operation:
Operation Type: Q Continuous
D Batch or Semi-Batch
Discrete
Other—
Document
Process Flow Diagram
Material/Energy Balance
Design
Operating
Flow/Amount Measurements
Stream
Analyses/Assays
Stream
Process Description
Operating Manuals
Equipment List
Equipment Specifications
Piping & Instrument Diagrams
Plot and Elevation Plan(s)
Work Flow Diagrams
MaMwfnm Wacte ilnnlfa«l«
no&aiuum <*a«iv maiillMlV
Emission Inventories
Annual/Biennial Reports
Environmental Audit Reports
Permit/Permit Applications
Batch Sheet(s)
Materials Application Diagrams
Product Composition Sheets
Material Safety Data Sheets
Inventory Records
Operator Logs
Production Schedules
Status
Complete?
(Y/N)
Current?
(Y/N)
Last
Revision
Used In this
Report (Y/N)
Document
Number
Location
A-8
-------
Rrm
Sits
Date
Wast* Minimization Assessment
Pro]. No.
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet_l_ of _l_ Page of
WORKSHEET
7
&EPA
Attribute
Name/ID
Source/Supplier
Component/Attribute of Concern
Annual Consumption Rate
Overall
Components) of Concern
Purchase Price, f per
Overall Annual Cost
Delivery Mode*
Shipping Container Size & type*
Storage Mode*
Transfer Mode*
Empty Container Disposal/Management*
Shelf Lit*
Supplier Would
• accept expired material (Y/N)
• accept shipping containers (Y/N)
• revise expiration date (Y/N)
AM»A*tt*M* dihMttt itm/m\ If mn\i
fWCVflUHMV 0UU*IllUMl*Ji II •liy
Alternate SuppHer(s)
Description1
Stream No.
Stream No.
•
Stream No.
1 stream numbers, If applicable, should correspond to those used on process flow diagrams.
e.g., pipeline, tank ear, 100 bW. tank truck, truck, etc.
e.g., 55 gal, drum, 100 lb. paper bag, tank, etc.
e.g., outdoor, warehouse, underground, aboveground, etc.
e.g., pump, forklfft, pneumatic transport, conveyor, etc.
e.g., crush and landfill, clean and recycle, return to supplier, etc.
A-9
-------
Firm
Site
Date
Waste Minimization Assessment
Pro]. No.
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet _1_ of J_ Page of
WORKSHEET
8
PRODUCTS SUMMARY
&EPA
Attribute
Name/ID
Component/Attribute of Concern
Annual Production Rate
Overall
Component(s) of Concern
Annual Revenues, $
Shipping Mods
Shipping Container Size ft Type
Onslte Storage Mode
Container* Returnable (Y/N)
Shelf Life
Rework Possible (Y/N)
Customer Would
• relax specification (Y/N)
- accept larger containers (Y/N)
Description1
Stream No.
Stream No.
Stream No.
1 stream numbers, If applicable, should correspond to those used on process flow diagrams.
A-10
-------
Firm,
Stte .
Date
Watte Minimization Assessment
ProJ.No.
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet _2L_ ol .j Page
of
WORKSHEET
9a
1. Waste Stream Name/ID:.
Process Unit/Operation
Stream Number.
Waate Characterlatlca (attach additional sheets wRh composition data, as necessary.)
D
gas
D
liquid
CUsoDd CH mixed phase
Density, to/cuft
ViscosRy/Consistency
pH .Flash PoW,
High Heating Value, Btu/to.
.;% Water
Waste Leaves Process as:
LJ air emission LJ waste water EJ solid waste LJ hazardous waste
Occurrence
I—i continuous
D discrete
UWtMVW ii
discharge triggered by LJ chemical analysis
D other (describe)
Type: D periodic length of period:
LJ sporadic (irregular occurrence)
LJ non-recurrent
Generation Rate
Annual
Maximum -
Average -
Frequency.
Batch Size-
average
be per year
be per
I* per
batches per
range
A-11
-------
Rrm,
Site
Date
Wast* Minimization Asstssnttnt
Proc. Unit/Oper.
Proj. No
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet 2- of J_ Page
of
WORKSHEET
9b
(oonttatwd)
&EPA
6. Wast* Origins/Sources
mi out this workshatt to Identify the origin of the waste. If the waste to a mixture of waste
streams, nil out • sheet for each of ths Individual waste streams.
Is the waste mixed wtth other wastes? Q Yes EH No
Doscrfbs now the waste Is generated.
Example: Formation and removal of an undesirable compound, removal of an uncon-
verted Input material, depletion of a key component (e.g., drag-out), equip-
ment cleaning waste, obsolete Input material, spoiled batch and production
run, spill or leak cleanup, evaporative loss, breathing or venting losses, etc.
A-12
-------
Fhn.
Ste .
Date
Waste Minimization Assessment
Proc, UrtbOper,
Prol. No, _
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet Ji_ of A_ Page __ of
WORKSHEET
9c
Watte St roam
(oenttMM*
&EPA
?. Management Method
Leave* site In
D
D roll off bins
55 gal drums
other (describe)
Disposal Frequency
Applicable Regulations1
Regulatory Classification2
Managed
Recycling
onsfte
commercial TSDF
ownTSDF
D other (describe)
O direct use/re-use
O energy recovery
D
D other (describe)
reclaimed material returned to site?
D Yes D No D usedbyrthers
residue yield
residue disposal/repository
Note1 listlederal, slate &tocal regulations, (e.g., RCRA.TSCA, etc.} ,
Note 2 Kst pertinent reflufatory classification (e.g., RCRA - Listed K011 waste, etc.)
A-13
-------
Rrni
Site
Data
Wast* Minimization AsMssiwnt
Prae. Untt/Oper.
Proj No,
P«
Ch
Sh
WORKSHEET
9d
JDaredBy
eckedBy
set 4 of 4 Page erf
4>EPA
7.
Wasto Stream
Management Method (continued)
Treatment
CD biological
LJ oxidation/reduction
LJ Incineration
LJ pH adjustment —
CH precipitation
I I solidification
I I other (describe)
residue disposal/repository
Final Disposition
Costs as of
EH
landfill
pond
lagoon
LJ deep well
I'D ocean
other (describe).
(quarter and year)
Cost Element:
Onstte Storaae & Handling
Pretreatment
Container
Transportation Fee
Disposal Fee
Local Taxes
State Tax
Federal Tax
Total Disposal Cost
Unit Price
S oer
Reference/Source:
A-14
-------
Firm
Sit*
Date
WORKSHEET
10
Wast* Minimization Assessment
Pine. Unrt/Oper
Pmj No
Pre
Ch
Sh<
WASTE STREAM SUMMARY
pared By
acked By
set 1 of 1 Page of
&EPA
Attribute
Waste ID/Name:
Source/Origin
Component/or Property of Concern
Annual Generation Rate (units )
Overall
Components) of Concern
Cost of Disposal
UnH Cost (S per: }
Overall (per year)
Method of Management*
Priority Rating Criteria*
Regulatory Compliance
Treatment/Disposal Cost
Potential Liability
Waste Quantity Generated
Waste Hazard
Safety Hazard
Minimization Potential
Potential to Remove Bottleneck
Potential By-product Recovery
FUlattv*
Sum of Priority Rating Scores
Priority Rank
Description1
Stream No.
Rating (R)
HRxW)
RxW
Stream No.
Rating (R)
HRxW)
RxW
Stream No.
-
Rating (R)
£{RxW)
RxW
Notes: 1 . Stream numbers, If applicable, should correspond to those used on process flow diagrams.
2. For example, sanitary landfill, hazardous waste landfill, onslte recycle, Incineration, combustion
with heat recovery, distillation, dewatering, etc.
3. Rate each stream In each category on a scale from 0 (none) to 10 (high).
A-15
-------
Firm.
Site .
Date
Wast* Minimization Assessment
Proc. Untt/Oper.
Pro). No
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet J_ of J_ Page of
WORKSHEET
11
OPTION GENERATION & E PA
Meeting format (e.g., bramstormlng, nominal group technique)
Meeting Coordinator
Meeting Participant*
List Suggested Options
Rationale/Remarks on Option
A-16
-------
Firm
Site
Data
Waste Minimization Assessment
Pme Unit/Opflr
Proj No
Pre
Ch
Shi
WORKSHEET
12
tpared By
eckedBv
set 1 of 1 Page of
4»EPA
Option Name:
Briefly describe the option
Waste Stream(s) Affected;
Input Materfal(s) Affected:
Product(s) Affected:
Indicate Type:
LH Source Reduction
__ Equipment-Related Change
Personnel/Procedure-Related Change
Mat«rtals41elated Change
LJ Recycling/Reuse
Onslte
Offslte
Material reused for original purpose
Material used for a lower-quality purpose
Material sold
Material burned for heat recovery
Originally proposed by:
Reviewed by:
Approved for study?—
Date:
Date:-
ytt
no, by:
Reason for Acceptance or Rejection
A-17
-------
Firm
SNe
Date
Waste Minimization Assessment
Proc.
Pro), No.
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet J_ of J_ Page J_ of
WORKSHEET
13
&EPA
^
CD
Ofltito
Reduction in
waste's hazard
Reduction of treatment/disposal coats
Reduction of
Reduction of
safety hazards
Input material costs
Extent of currant UM to Industry
Effect on product quality (no effect • 10)
Low capital cost
LowOAMcost
Short implementation period
Ease of Implementation
Final
Evaluation
Weight
m
Sum of Weighted Ratings £ (WxR)
Option Ranking
FeastoHlty Analysis Scneduted for (Dat»)
Options Rating (R)
fl Option
R
RxW
f2 Optton
R
RxW
*3 Optton
R
RxW
M Option
R
RxW
f5 Option
R
RXW
-------
Firm.
Site .
Date
Waste Minimization Assessment
Proc.
ProJ. No.
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet J_ of JL Page
of
WORKSHEET
14a
Ka«:
ilWiBciaiiiiiBiii
,^^.
E PA
«T IH • ^^
WM Option Description
1. Nature of WM Opt ion D Equipment-Related
LJ Personnel/Procedure-Related
ED Materials-Related
2. If the option appears technically feasible, state your rationale for this.
Is further analysis required? LJ YesLJ No.
worksheet. If not, skip to worksheet 15.
3. Equipment - Related Option
Equipment available commercially?
Demonstrated commercially?
In similar application?
Successfully?
Describe closest industrial analog
If yes, continue with this
NQ
D
D
D
D
n
D
D
Describe status of development
Prospective Vendor
Working Installation^)
Contact Person(s)
Date Contacted 1.
1. Alto attach filled out phone conversation notes, Installation visit report, etc.
A-19
-------
Firm
Site
Date.
Wast* Minimization Assessment
Proc. Unit/Oper.
Proj. No ,
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet 2- of J__ Page of
WORKSHEET
14b
WM Option Description
(oontinwd)
oEPA
3. Equipment-Related Option (continued)
Performance Information required (describe parameters):
Scaleup Information required (describe):
Testing Required: {_] yes I I no
Scale: C3 bench CD P»ot CU
Test unit available? LU yes Q no
Test Parameters (list)
Number of test runs:
Amount of matertai(s) required:
Testing to be conducted:
In-plant
n
Facility/Product Constraints:
Space Requirements
Possible locations wHhln facility
A-20
-------
Firm
Site
Date
Watt* Minimization Assessment
Proc. Untt/Oper.
Proj-No
Prepared By
Checked By
SheetJL of _g_ Page of
WORKSHEET
14c
WM Option Description
2. Equipment-Related Option (continued)
Utility Requirements:
Electric Power Volte (AC or DC) kW
Process Water Flow Pressure
Quality (tap, demln, etc.)
Cooling Water Flow Pressure.
Temp, in
Coolant/Heat Transfer Fluid —
Temp. Out
Steam
Temp. In.
Duty
Pressure
Duty
Temp. Out
Temp.
_ Flow
&EPA
Fuel
Plant Air.
Inert Gas.
Type
Flow.
Duty.
Flow
Flow
Estimated delivery time (after award of contract)-
Estimated Installation time
Installation i
Estimated production downtime.
WIN production be otherwise affected? Explain the effect and Impact on production.
Wlll product quality be affected? Explain the effect on quality.
A-21
-------
Firm
Site
Date
WMtt Mmlmiiaf ton Assessment
Proc.UnitfOper.__
Pro|.No
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet J_ of 6 Page or
WORKSHEET
I4d
&EPA
WM Option Description
3. Equipment-Related Option (continued)
Will modlflcatlona to wortc flow or production procedures be required? Explain..
Operator and maintenance training requirements
Number of people to be trained
D Onstte
D OffsMe
Duration of training
Describe catalyst, chemicals, replacement parts, or other supplies required.
Hem
Rate or Frequency
of Replacement
Supplier, Address
Does the option meet government and company safety and health requirements?
DYssDlto Explain
How Is service handled (maintenance and technical assistance)? Explain
What warranties are offered?
A-22
-------
Firm
Site
Date
Wast* Minimization Assessment
Proc. Unit/Oper
Proj. No
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet i_ of _fe_ Page of
WORKSHEET
14e
TECHNICAL FiASIBIUTY
(eonUmMd)
&EPA
WM Option Description.
3. Equipment-Related Option (continued)
Describe any additional storage or material handling requirements..
Describe any additional laboratory or analytical requirements.
4. Personnel/Procedure-Related Changes
Affected Departments/Areas
Training Requirements
Operating Instruction Changes. Describe responsible departments.
Materials-Related Changes (Note: If substantial changes In equipment are required, then handle the
option as an equipment-related one.) *•§ Wfl
Has the new material been demonstrated commercially? LJ L_I
In a similar application? D D
Successfully? G D
Describe closest application
A-23
-------
Firm.
Site
Date
Waste Mnlmlzatlon Assessment
Proc. LlnK/Oper.
PIDJ.NO
Prepared By
CheckedBy
Sheetl_ of J_ Page of
WORKSHEET
14f
4* EPA
WM Option Description
4. MatariaJs-Relatetf Changes (continued)
Affected Departrmntf/AroM
Win production be effected? ExpWn the effect end Impact on production.
Will product quality be affected? Explain the effect and the Impact on product quality.
Will additional etorage, handling or other ancillary equipment be required? Explain.
Deecrtbe any training or procedure changee that are required:
Decrlbe any material tasting program that win be required.
A-24
-------
Firm
Site
Date
Waste Minimization Assessment
;. Unlt/Oper..
Proj. No
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet 1 of 6
Page of
WORKSHEET
&EPA
WM Option Description.
CAPITAL COSTS • Include all costs as appropriate.
LJ Purchased Process Equipment
Price (fob factory)
Taxes, freight, Insurance
Delivered equipment cost
Price for Initial Spare Parts Inventory
D Estimated Materials Cost
Piping —
Electrical —
Instruments —
Structural —
Insulation/Piping —
TOTALS
ED Estimated Costs for Utility Connections and New Utility Systems
Electricity -
Steam -
Cooling Water -
Process Water -
Refrigeration -
Fuel (Gas or Oil) -
Plant Air -
Inert Gas -
Estimated Costs for Additional Equipment
Storage & Material Handling
Laboratory/Analytical
Other
LJ site Preparation
(Demolition, site clearing, etc.)
Estimated installation Costs
Vendor ,
Contractor
In-house Staff
A-25
-------
F*m
Site
Date
Waste Minimization Assessment
Untt/Oper,.
Proj. No
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet!_ of J_ Ptga of
WORKSHEET
15b
x°xEPA
CAPITAL COSTS (Cont)
r~) Engineering and Procurement Costs (In-house & outside)
Planning
Engineering
Procurement
Consultants
TOTALS
ED Start-up Costs
Vendor
Contractor
In-house
Training Costs
ED Permitting Costs
Pees
In-house Staff Costs
ED Initial Charge of Catalysts and Chemicals
Item*!.
Ksmtz
ED Working Capital [Raw Materials, Product. Inventory, Materials and Supplies (not elsewhere specified)].
Remit.
Item §2.
item 13.
R«n*4,
D
Estimated Salvage Value (If any)
A-26
-------
Firm
Site
Data
Wast* Minimization Assessment
Pmr. UnH/Dper
Pmj No
Prepared BY
Checked By
Sheet 3 of 6 Page of
WORKSHEET
15C
&EPA
(eerninuM)
CAPITAL COST SUMMARY
Cost Hem
Purchased Process Equipment
Materials
Utility Connections
Additional Equipment
Site Preparation
Installation
Engineering and Procurement
Start-up Cost
Training Costs
Permitting Costs
Initial Charge of Catalysts and Chemteali
Rxed Capital Investment
Working Capital
Total Capital Investment
Salvage Value
Cost
A-27
-------
Firm
Site
Date
Wast* Minimization Assessment
Proc. Unit/Qper.
Proj.No
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet J__ of J_ Page of
WORKSHEET
15d
&EPA
D Estimated Decrease (or Increase) In Utilities
Utility
Electricity
StMRl
Cooling PfOCMMM
PTOOMS Wsittr
Fuel (On or OK)
Plant Air
Inert Ah-
UnttCost
SperunR
Decrease (or Increase) In Quantity
Unit per time
Total Decrease (or Increase)
$ per time
INCREMENTAL OPERATING COSTS
D
Include all relevant operating savings. Estimate these costs on an Incre-
mental basis (i.e., as decreases or increases over existing costs).
BASIS FOR COSTS Annu
Quarterly
Monthly
Dairy
Other-
LJ Estknated Dltposai Cost Saving
Decrease In TSDF Fees
Decrease In State Fees and Tarns
Decrease In Transportation Costa
Decrease In Onslte Treatment and Handling
Decrease In Permitting, Reporting and Recordkeeping
Total Decrease In Disposal Costs
ED Estimated Decrease In Raw Materials Consumption
Materials
t
Unit Cost
$ per unit
Reduction In Quantity
Units per time
Decrease In Cost
f per time
A-28
-------
Firm
Site
Date
Waste Minimization Assessment
Proc. Untt/Oper..
Proj. No
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet JL of _6_ Page of
WORKSHEET
15e
COST INFORMATION
&EPA
D
Estimated Decrease (or Increase) In Ancillary Catalysts and Chemicals
Catalyat/Chamlcal
Unit Cost
Speruntt
DMTMM (or IncrMM) hi Quantity
Unttpertlim
Total DecreaM (or IncrMM)
$ par time
LJ Estimated Decrease (or Increase) In Operating Costs and Maintenance Labor Costs
(Include cost of supervision, benefits and burden).
Estimated Decrease (or Increase) In Operating and Maintenance Supplies and Costs.
D
Estimated Decrease (or Increase) In Insurance and Liability Costs (explain).
D
Estimated Decrease (or Increase) In Other Operating Costs (explain).
INCREMENTAL REVENUES
Estimated Incremental Revenues from an Increase (or Decrease) In Production or Marketable
By-products (explain).
A-29
-------
Firm
Site
Date
Waste Minimization Assessment
Proc. Unft/Oper
Proj. No
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet J_ of _|_ Page of
WORKSHEET
15f
COST INFORMATION
vvEPA
INCREMENTAL OPERATING COST AND REVENUE SUMMARY (ANNUAL BASIS)
Decreases in Operating Cost or Increases In Revenue are Positive.
Increases In Operating Cost or Decrease hi Revenue are Negative.
Operating Cost/Revenue Kern
Decrease In Disposal Cost
Decrease In Raw Materials Cost
Decrease (or Increase) in Utilities Cost
Decrease (or Increase) In Catalysts and Chemicals
Decrease (or Increase) in 0 & M Labor Costs
Decrease (or Increase) In O & M Supplies Costs
Decrease (or increase) In Insurance/Liabilities Costs
Decrease (or Increase) In Other Operating Costs
incremental Revenues from Increased (Decreased) Production
Incremental Revenues from Marketable By-products
Net Operating Cost Savings
$ per year
A-30
-------
Firm
Site
Date
Waste Minimization Assessment
Proc. Untt/Oper..
Proj. No
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet J_ of J_ Page of
WORKSHEET
16
PROFITABILITY WORKSHEET # 1
PAYBACK PERIOD
&EPA
Total Capital Investment ($) (from Worksheet 15C)
Annual Net Operating Cost Savings ($ per year) (from Worksheet I5f).
Payback Period (In years) i
Total Capital Investment
Annual Net Operating Cost Savings
A-31
-------
Firm,
Site ,
Date.
Waste Minimization Assessment
Proc. Unit/Oper.
Proj.No
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet J_ of J_ Page of
WORKSHEET
17
PROFITABILITY WORKSHEET
&EPA
Cash Incomes (such as net operating cost savings ami salvage value) are shown as positive.
Cash outlays (such as capital Investments and Increased operating costs) are shown as negative.
Urn
A Fixed Capital Investment
• + Working Capital
C Total Capital Investment
D Salvage Value*
E Net Operating Costs Savings
F - Interest on Loans
Q -Depreciation
H Taxable Income
1 - Income Tax*
J Aftertax Profit*
K + Depredation
L - Repayment of Loan Principal
M - Capital Investment (line C)
N * Salvage Value (line 0)
O Cash Plow
P Present Value of Cash Flow*
Q Net Present Value (NPV)»
Pneent Worth* (S% discount)
1.0000
0.9524
0.8070
0.8638
OJ227
0.7S35
0.7462
0.7107
0.6768
(10% discount)
1.0000
0.9091
0.8264
0.7513
0.6830
0.6209
OJ84S
OJ132
0.4685
(15% discount)
1.0000
0.8696
0.7561
0.6575
OJ718
0.4972
0.4323
0.3759
0.3269
(20% discount)
1.0000
0.8333
0.6944
0.5787
04823
04019
0.3348
0.2791
0.2326
(25% discount)
1.0000 0.8000 OJ400 OJ120 04096 OJ277 OJ821 OJ097 0.1678
1 Adjust table as necessary If the anticipated project life is less than or more than 8 years.
2 Salvage value Includes scrap value of equipment plus eels of working capital minus demo-
lition costs.
3. The worksheet Is used for calculating an aftertax cash flow. For pretax cash ftow, use an Income tax rate of 0%.
4 The present value of the cash flow Is equal to the cash ftow multiplied by the present worth factor.
5 The net present value Is the sum of the present value of the cash flow tor that year and all of the proceeding years.
6 The formula for the present worth factor Is 1 where n Is years and r to the discount rats.
(1+r)"
The Internal rats of return 0RR) Is the discount rate (r) that reeutts In a net present value of zero over the life of the
A-32
-------
Rim
Site
Date
Goals/0
WORKSHEET
18
Elective*
Waste Minimization Assessment
Pmr Mnft/ftpar
Ptoj No
Prepared By
Checked Bv
Sheet 1 of 1 Page of
&EPA
Task
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
i.
10,
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
10.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Deliverable
Task Leader
TOTALS
Manhours
Budget
•
Wk»
Hjratto
sun
n
Finish
Reference
Approval By
Authorization By
Date.
Date
Project Started (Date)
A-33
-------
Firm
Site
Date
Waste Minimization Assessment
Proc. UnWOptr.
ProJ.No
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet J_ of JL Pag* of
WORKSHEET
19
&EPA
WM Option Description
Baseline
(without option)
(a) Period Duration
D
Projected
(b) Production per Period
From
Units i
(e) input Matertaia Conaumptlon per Period
D
Actual
.To
Material
Pounda
PoundaftJnH Product
(d) Waste Generation per Period
Warta Stream
Pound*
Pmrnda/Unlt Product
(e) Sub«tance(a) of Concern • Generation Rate per Period
Waste Stream
Substance Poupda
Pounda/UnH Product
A-34
-------
Appendix B
Simplified Waste Minimization Assessment Worksheets
The worksheets thai follow w» designed to facilitate a simplified WM assessment procedure. Table B-1 lists the
worksheets, according to the particular phase of the program; and* brief description of the purpose of the
worksheets. The worksheets here are presented as supporting only a preliminary effort at minimizing waste,
or h a situation where a more formal rigorous assessment is not warranted.
Table B-1. List of Simplified WM As*es*ment Worksheets
Phase Number and Title
Purpose/Remarks
81. Assessment Overview
Assessment Phase
(Section 3)
82. Site Description
S3. Process Information
34. Input Materials Summary
85. Products Summary
86. Waste Stream Summary
S7. Option Generation
SB. Option Description
Feasibility Analysis Phase
(Section 4)
S9. Profitability
Summarizes the overall assessment procedure.
UMa background information about the facility, including location,
products, and operations.
This la a checklst of useful process information to look for before
starting the assessment.
Records input material information for a speoMc production or process
area. This Includes name, supplier, hazardous component or
properties, cost, delivery and shelf-life information, and possible
substitutes.
Identifies hazardous components, production rate, revenues, and
other information about products.
Summarizes all of the information collected for each waste stream.
TMs sheet is also used to prioritize waste streams to assess.
Records options proposed during brainstorm ing or nominal group
technique sessions. Includes the rationale for proposing each option.
Descrbes and summarizes information about a proposed option. Also
notes approval of promising options.
This worksheet is used to Identify capital and operating costs and to
calculate the payback period.
B-1
-------
Rim
Site
Data
Waste Minimization Assessment
Simplified Worksheets
Proj. No.
Prepared By
Checked Bv
Sheet 1 of 1 Page of
W°STT
ASSESSMENT OVERVIEW
&EPA
Begin the Waete Minimization
Assessment Program
T
Workahaata uaad
PLANNING AND ORGANIZATION
• Gat management commitment
• Sat overall assessment program goals
• Organize assessment program task force
1
Assessment organization
and commitment to proceed
assessment targets
and reevaluate
previous options
ASSESSMENT PHASE
• Compile process and facility data
• Prioritize and select assessment targets
• Select people for assessment teams
• Review data and inspect site
• Generate options
• Screen and select options for further study
S5
S2.S3.S4
S6
S7.S8
S8
S8
1
Assessment report of
selected options
FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS PHASE
• Technical evaluation
• Economic evaluation
• Select options for implementation
S9
I
Final report, including
recommended options
Repeat the Process
IMPLEMENTATION
• Justify projects and obtain funding
• Installation (equipment)
• Implementation (procedure)
• Evaluate performance
1
Successfully operating
waste minimization projects
B-2
-------
Firm.
Site
Date
Wasts Minimization Assessment
Simplified Worksheets
Proj. No.
Prepared By _
Checked By
Sheet JL of J_ Page
of
SITE DESCRIPTION
v>EPA
Firm:
Plant:
Department:
Area;
Street Address:
Cltv;
State/ZIP Cods:
Telephone: (
Mator Products;
SIC Codes:
EPA Generator Number :
Mator Unit or:
Product or:
Operations;
Facilities/Equipment Age:
B-3
-------
Firm
SH«
Hate
Waste Mnhnlatton Assessment
Simplified Worksheets
PmjMo
.
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet _1_ of J_ Page of
WORKSHEET
PROCESS INFORMATION
&EPA
Process Unit/Operation:
Operation Type: C
LJ Continuous D Discrete
D Batch or Semi-Batch D Other—
Document
Process Flow Diagram
Material/Energy Balance
Design
Operating
Flow/Amount Measurements
Stream
Analyses/Assays
Stream
Process Description
Operating Manuals
Equipment List
Equipment Specifications
Piping & Instrument Diagrams
Plot and Elevation Plan(s)
Work Flow Diagrams
Hazardous Waste Manifests
Emission Inventories
Annual/Biennial Reports
Environmental Audit Reports
Permit/Permit Applications
Batch Sheet(s)
Materials Application Diagrams
Product Composition Sheets
Material Safety Data Sheets
Inventory Records
Operator Logs
Production Schedules
Status
Complete?
(Y/N)
Current?
(Y/N)
Last
Revision
Used In this
Report (Y/N)
Document
Number
Location
B-4
-------
Firm
Slf«
Date
WORKSHEET
S4
Waste Minimization Assessment
Simplified Worksheets
Pro] No
Pra
Ch
Shi
INPUT MATERIALS SUMMARY
•Dared By
eckedBy
set 1 of 1 Page _ of
vvEPA
Attribute
Name/ID
Source/Supplier
Component/ Attribute of Concern
Annual Consumption Rat*
Overall
Component(s) of Concern
Purchase Price, $ per
Overall Annual Cost
Delivery Mode1
Shipping Container Size & Type*
Storage Mode1
Transfer Mode4
Empty Container Disposal/Management*
Shelf Life
Supplier Would
- accept expired material (Y/N)
- accept shipping containers (Y/N)
• revise expiration date (Y/N)
Acceptable Substitute*!), If any
Alternate Suppliers)
Description
Stream No.
Stream No.
Stream No.
1 e.g., pipeline, tank car, 100 bbi. tank truck, truck, etc.
* e.g., 55 gat. drum, 100 Ib. paper bag, tank, etc.
* e.g., outdoor, warehouse, underground, aboveground, etc.
4 e.g., pump, forkllft, pneumatic transport, conveyor, etc.
* e.g., crush and landfill, clean and recycle, return to supplier, etc.
B-5
-------
Finn
Site
Date
Waate Mnlmliatlon Aaaeaament
Simplified Workaheeta
Pmj No
Pri
Chi
Shi
WOflKSHEIT
S5
11
k^'^^S^^fi^^^ms^i^S^^^f^^^}^!!^
n
oared By
BckedBy
Mt J_ of 1 Page of
4* EPA
Attribute
Nama/ID
Component/ Attribute of Concern
Annual Production Rat*
Overall
Compontnt(») of Conoam
Annual Revenues, t ,
Shipping Mode
Shipping Container Size ft Type
Onatte Storage Mode
Container* Returnable (Y/N)
Shelf Lite
Rework PoaalMa (Y/N)
Cuatomer Would
• relax apecmcatkxi (Y/N)
• accept larger contalnera (Y/N)
Dtterlptlon
Stream No.
Stream No.
Stream No.
B-6
-------
Firm
Stta
nat»
waste Minsntzation Assessment
Simplified Worksheets
PiQC- IJnVOpf
Pmj No
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet 1 of J_ Page of
W
WASTE STREAM SUMMARY
oEPA
Attribute
Watte ID/Name:
Source/Origin
Component/or Property of Concern
Annual Generation Rate (units }
Overall
Components) of Conctm
Cost of Disposal
Untt Cost (t p«r: )
Overall (par year)
Method of Management1
Priority Rating Criteria1
Regulatory Compliance
Treatment/Disposal Cost
Potential Liability
Waste Quantity Generated
Waste Hazard
Safely Hazard
Minimization Potential
Potential to Remove Bottleneck
Potential By-product Recovery
Relative
Wt.(Wi
Sum of Priority Rating Scores
Priority Rank
Description
Stream No.
Rating (R)
KRxW)
RxW
Stream No.
Rating (ft)
KRxW)
RxW
Stream No.
Rating (R)
»RxW)
RxW
Notes: 1 . . For example, sanitary landfill, hazardous waste landfill, onslte recycle, Incineration, combustion
with heat recovery, distillation, dewatering, etc.
2. Rate each stream In each category on a scale from 0 (none) to 10 (high).
B-7
-------
Firm
Site
Date
Wsstt IflnlBiteatlon Attsiamtm
Simplified WorkshMts
Proc. UnBOptr.
Proj. No
Prepared By
Crocked By
Shift J_ of J_ Pag« <*
WOHKSHEET
v>EPA
MMtlng format («.g., bralnttonnlng, nominal group t*chnlqu«)
MMlIng Coordinator
Maatlng Participants
List Suflfl««t»d Options
B-8
Ratlonal«/R«marks on Option
-------
Rrm
Stte
Data
1
Waste Minimization Assessment
Simplified Workeheets
P"w?- Unft^pt?i "., ' "
Proj No
P«
Ch
Shi
w°sliT
f^J ^J •^••^•^^^o^^
^^^ ^^r vivx-Xvy;:;: :>< ^v:i:;;;:;:::;Xv.::v.> :;::•:':'x5;:-::::^:-l::v:'::;^•:v:^::1^x:^:^:::;::::::'^^^>^^i^»:%y^^: x^::::> •' '•'- ' ':v:::-:":'--::.v
Dotton Name:
toaredBy
sckedBv
set 1 of 1 Page of
&EPA
Brltf ly describe th* option
wast* Stream(s) Aff«cMd;
Input MattriaKs) Affaetad;
Product(s) Affaetad:
IndlcataTypa:
Sourca Raductlon
___ Equlpmant-Ralatad Changa
Paraonnal/Procadura-RalatadCtunga
Matarialaflalatad Chang*
LJ Racycllng/Rauaa
On»tt» _
Offatta
Matarlal rausad for original purpoaa
Mataria) uaad for a towar-quallty purpoa*
Matarfai aold
Matartal burnad for haat racovary
Originally proposad by:
Ravlawadby:
Approved for atudy?—
MM:
Data:
yaa
no, by;
Reason for Acceptance or Rejection
B-9
-------
Finn
SB*
r»at«
Waste Minimization Assessment
Simplified Worksheets
Pmc lln»/Op«r
Proj. No.
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet 1 of 1 Page of
WORKSHEET
S9
> EPA
Capital Costs
Purchased Equipment
Materials
Installation
Utility Connections -
Engineering
Start-up and Training.
Other Capital Costs-
Total Capital Costs
Incremental Annual Operating Costs
Change In Disposal Costs —
Chang* In Raw Material Costs
Changs In Other Costs
Annual Nat Operating Cost Savings
Payback Period (in yews)
Total Capital Costs
B-10
-------
Appendix C
Waste Minimization Assessment Example
Amalgamated Metal Reflnlshlng Corporation
The following case study is an example of a waste
minimization assessment of a metal plating operation.
This example is reconstructed from an actual
assessment, but uses fictitious names. The example
presents the background process and facility data, and
then describes the waste minimization options that are
identified and recommended for this facility.
Amalgamated Metal Refinishing Corporation is in the
business of refinishing decorative items. The
corporation owns and operates a small facility in
Beverly Hills, California. The principal metals plated at
this facility are nickel, brass, silver, and gold.
Preparing for the Assessment
Since the facility is a small one with a rather small
number of employees, an assessment team was
assembled that included both company personnel and
outside consultants. The team was made up of the
following people:
• Plant manager (assessment team leader)
• First shift plating supervisor
• Corporate process engineer
• Plating chemistry consultant
• Environmental engineering consultant
The assessment team chose to look at all of the plating
operations, rather than focusing on one or two specific
plating processes.
The assessment began by collecting recent
production records, input material information,
equipment layout drawings and flow diagrams, waste
records, and plant operator instructions. After each of
the team members had reviewed the information, a
comprehensive inspection of the plating room was
carried out. The following process, layout, and waste
descriptions summarize the information that was
collected for the assessment.
Process Description
Items brought in for refinishing are cleaned,
electroplated and polished The basic operations
include paint stripping, cleaning, electroplating, drying,
and polishing.
In silver plating, the original plated metal is stripped off
the item by dipping ft into a sodium cyanide solution
with the system run in reverse current. This is followed
by an acid wash in a 50% muriatic acid solution. The
item is then polished to a bright finish. The polished
torn is then cleaned with caustic solution to remove
dirt, rinsed with a 5% suHuric acid solution to neutralize
any remaining caustic solution on the item, and rinsed
with water. The item is now ready for electroplating.
After the Hem is immersed in the plating tank for the
required amount of time, it is rinsed in a still rinse tank,
followed by a continuous water rinse. Tap water is
used for both the still and continuous rinsing steps.
Solution from the still rinse tank is used as make-up for
the plating baths.ln places where two still rinse tanks
are used, water from the second tank is used to-
replenish the first still rinse tank. Overflow from the
continuous rinse tank is discharged as wastewater.
The item is polished following the plating step.
Gold plating generally does not require stripping. After
the initial cleaning operation, the Hem is electroplated.
Nickel and brass plating are also done in a similar
manner. Vapor degreasing using 1,1,1-
trichloroethane is often perfomed on brass- and nickel-
plated items to remove oil and grease. In some cases,
items are first nickel-plated and then plated with gold,
silver, or brass.
For electroplating operations, the constituents of the
cyanide solutions must be kept at an optimum
concentration. The solutions are analyzed twice a
month by an outside laboratory. A representative
sample from a tank is obtained by dipping a tube to the
bottom of the plating tank. The sample is analyzed and
recommendations tor make-up are made based on the
test results. Table C-1 shows a typical analysis for
brass and nickel electroplating solutions, respectively.
This table also shows the optimum concentrations tor
each constituent in the baths, as well as the
recommended make-up and/or dilution requirements.
All plating operations at the facility are performed
manually. The facility operates one shift per day and
employs eight operators.
Equipment Layout Description
All plating, cleaning, and rinse tanks are located in one
room at the plating shop, while an adjacent room
houses all equipment used tor buffing and polishing.
C-1
-------
Tabla C-1. Electroplating Solution Analyse*
Concentrations
TabUi C-2. Wastawatar characteristics
Brass Plating
Copper metal
Zinc metal
Sodium cyanide
Sodium hydroxide
Copper cyanide
Zinc cyanide
Rochelle salts
Qptimujffi
0.3oz/gal
6.0
8.0
10.0
0.5
2.0
Actual
7.52oz/g«l
0.80
3J4
7JO
10.60
1.45
359
Nickel Plating
Nickel metal
Nickel chloride
Boric acid
Nickel sulfate
A-5
SA-1
PH
8.0 oz/gal
6.0
40.0
25%
12%
4.0
16.65 oz/gal
15.66
6.92
57.26
2.86%
1J8%
45
Figure C-1 is a plan of the facility. The area north of the
buff ing room is used for drying and storage purposes.
Finished goods, as wel as raw materials, are stored hi
the front of the building.
Thirty tanks are used in cleaning and electroplating
operations. Figure C-1 includes the names and normal
working volumes of these tanks. The configuration of
atypical plating unit includes a plating bath, followed by
one ore two still tanks and a continuous rinse tank.
Except for nickel plating, all plating and stripping
solutions used at the facility are cyanide-based.
Waste Stream Description
Cyanide waste is generated from silver stripping; from
silver, gold, brass, and copper electroplating; and from
the associated riming operations. The principal waste
streams are wastewater from the continuous rinse
tanks and from floor washings, and plating tank filter
waste.
Aqueous streams generated from paint stripping, from
metal stripping and electroplating, and from floor
washings are routed to a common sump. This sump
discharges to the santtary sewer. Table C-2 presents
trw results of a typical analysis on the wastewater.
Metal sludges accumulate hi the plating tanks. This
sludge is filtered out of the plating solution once a
month using a portable dual cartridge filter. Two filter
cartridges are used for each plating tank. Cartridges
are typically replaced every two to three months.
The sump is pumped out and disposed of as
hazardous waste once every six months. When
pumped out the sump usually contains 300 to 400
Sampling date
Sampling location
Type of sample
Reporting period
Total flow in
Total flow out
Peak flow
August 8,1987
Clarifier Sample Box
Time Composite
July '87 to August '87
322galons
290gatons
1.5 gallons per minute
Suspended soRds
PH
Total cyanide
Total chromium
Comef
""**f*™*™*
Nick*!
Silver
Oil and grease
Temperature
1.0mg/L
7J
1.0 mg/L
0.42 mg/L
1.30 mg/L
0.93 mg/L
<0.05mg/L
0.2 mg/L
TOT
gallons of sludge comprised of dirt, stripped paint, and
a solution containing cyanide and heavy metals.
Proposed Waste Minimization Options
After the she Inspection was completed and additional
information was reviewed, the team held a
brainstorming session to identify potential waste
minimization options for the facility. The following
options were proposed during the meeting:
• Reduce solution drag-out from the plating tanks by:
- Proper positioning of workpiece on the plating
rack.
• Increasing plating solution temperatures.
- Lowering the concentration of plating solution
constituents.
• Increase the recovery of drag-out wfth drain
boards.
* Extend plating solution bath life by:
- Reducing drag-In by better rinsing.
- Using detonized make-up water.
- Using purer anodes.
- Returning spent solutions to the suppliers.
* Reduce the use of rinse water by:
- Using multiple countercurrent rinse tanks.
- Using still rinsing.
- Using spray or fog rinsing.
• Prevent dust from the adjacent buffing and
polishing room from entering the plating room and
contaminating the plating baths.
Segregate cyanide wastes from the rinse tanks from
other wastewater streams, such as floor washings
and paint stripping wastes.
C-2
-------
Figure C-1. PLANT LAYOUT
Amalgamated Motel Refinfshinq Corporation
Worldwide Headquarters and Production Facilities
Beverly Hills, California
C-3
-------
The team members etch independently reviewed the
options and then met to deckle which options to study
further. The team chose the following options for the
feasibility analysis:
* Reduce drag-out by using drain boards.
* Extend bath life using detonized water for make-up.
« Use spray rinsing to reduce rinsewater usage.
* Segregate hazardous waste from nonhazardous
waste.
Feasibility Analysis
The assessment team conducted technical and
economic feasibility analyses on each of the four
options.
Segregate Hazardous Wastes
The assessment team recognized that segregating
hazardous wastes from nonhazardous wastes could be
implemented at virtually no cost and would save money
immediately. There were no identified technical
problems.
U»0 Drain Bosnia to Reduce Drag-out
Drain boards are used to collect plating solution that
drips off the rack and the workplace after they are
pulled out of the plating tank. The plating solution
drains back into the plating tank. This option reduces
the amount of dilute rinse water waste, but impurities
build up faster in the plating solution. Since drag-out te
reduced, make-up chemical consumption is reduced.
The purchase price of drain boards is estimated at
$115, with installation costs of $200, for a total capital
cost of $315. This option is expected to reduce rinse
water disposal costs by $500 per year, and reduce
make-up chemicals costs by $400 per year. The
resulting payback period is 0.35 years, or about 4
months.
Use Delonlzed Water for Make-up Solutions
and Rinse Water
Using Dl water will reduce the build-up of impurities in
the plating solutions. In particular, the build-
uphardness minerals from tap water will be avoided.
This, hi turn, will avoid the precipitation of carbonates in
the plating tanks.
The assessment team decided to combine the
evaluation of this option with the previous option of
using drain boards. The initial purchase and installation
of the detonizer was $267. When adding the cost of
the drain boards, the total capital cost of this option to
$582. The deionizer is rented and serviced by an
outside water treating service company for $450 per
year. The savings in disposal costs and make-up
chemical costs is $900 per year. Therefore, the annual
net operating cost savings is $450 per year. The
payback period te 1.3 years.
Install Spray Rinses
Installing spray rinses will reduce the amount of rinse
water required to clean the items. With spray rinse
nozzles and controls, rinsing can be done on demand.
Rinse water usage was estimated to be reduced by
50%. The resulting rinse wastewater is more
concentrated and some can be returned to the plating
tanks as a water make-up.
The assessment team determined that four spray rinse
units would cost $2,120, plus an additional $705 for
piping, valves, and installation labor. The total capital
cost was $2825. The reduction in disposal costs were
estimated at $350 per year, based on a 50% reduction
in rinse wastewater. This resulted in a payback of over
8 years.
Implementation
The procedures for segregating hazardous wastes
from nonhazardous wastes was implemented before
the feasibility analysis was completed for the other
three options. The Installation of drain boards and the
purchase of a water deionizer were made shortly after
the feasibility analysis was completed. The Dl water
system was online two months later. The assessment
team decided not to implement the spray rinse option
because of the long payback period.
Future WM Assessments
During the next cycle of waste minimization
assessments, the assessment team will review
previously suggested options in the plating area and
will look at ways to reduce the generation of metallic
dust In the buffing and polishing area. In the
meantime, the assessment team will continue to look
for additional opportunities to reduce waste
throughout the facility.
C-4
-------
Appendix D
Typical Causes and Sources of Waste
In order to devetop a comprehensive list of waste minimization options for a facility, His necessary to
understand the sources, causes, and controlling factors that influence waste generation. The tables
in this Appendix list this information for common industrial operations.
Table D-1. Typical Wastes from Plant Operations
Table D-2. Causes and Controlling Factors of Waste Generation
Table D-1. Typical Wast** from Plant Operations
Plant Function Location/Operation
Potential Watte Material
Material Receiving Loading docks, incoming Packaging materials, off-spec material*, damaged containers,
pipelines, receiving arms inadvertant spills, transfer hose emptying
Raw Material and
Product Storage
Production
Tanks, warehouses, drum
storage yards, bins,
storerooms
Tank bottoms; off-spec and excess materials; spill residues;
leaking pumps, valves, tanks, and pipes; damaged containers,
empty containers
Malting, curing, baking, Washwater; rinse water; solvents; still bottoms; off-spec
distilling, washing, coating, products; catalysts;empty containers; sweepings; ductwork
dean-out; additives; oil; fitters; spill residue; excess materials;
process solution dumps; leaking pipes, valves, hoses, tanks,
and process equipment
formulating, reaction
Support Services
Laboratories
Maintenance shops
Garages
Powerhouses/boilers
Cooling towers
Reagents, off-spec chemicals, samples, empty sample and
chemical containers
Solvents, cleaning agents, degreasing sludges, sand-blasting
waste, caustic, scrap metal, oils, greases
Oils, filters, solvents, acids, caustics, cleaning bath sludges,
batteries
Fly ash, slag, tube dean-out material, chemical additives, oil
empty containers, boiler btowdown, water-treating chemical
wastes
Chemical additives, empty containers, cooling tower bottom
sediment, cooing tower bbwdown. fan lube oes
Source: adapted from Gary Hunt and Roger Scnecter, 'Minimization of Hazardous Waste Generation*,
Standard Handbook of Hazardous Waste Management Harry Freeman, editor, McGraw-Hill, New York (currently in press).
D-1
-------
Table D-2. Causes and Controlling Factor* in Wast* Generation
Waste/Origin Typical Cause* Operation*) Factort
Design Factors
Chemical Reaction
Contact between
aqueous and
organic phases
Prooeta equipment
cleaning
Heat exchanger
cleaning
Metal part*
cleaning
Metal curfi
treating
Disposal of
unusable few
materials or
off-spec products
Clean-up of spills
and leaks
* Incomplete conversion
* By "Product formation
• Catalyst deactivation
(by poisoning or sintering)
* Condensate from steam
jet ejectors
• Presence of water as a
reaction by-product
•Use of water tor product
rinse
* Equipment cleaning
•Spin clean-up
•Presence of ding
• Deposit formation
•Uss of filler aids
* Use of chemical cleaners
• Presence of ding (process
side) or scat* (cooing
water side)
• Deposit formation
* Use of chemical cleaners
* Disposal of spent solvents,
spent cleaning solution, or
cleaning sludge
•Drsgout
* Disposal of spent treating
solution
• Obsolete raw material*
* Off-spec products caused
by contamination. Improper
reactant controls, inadequate
pre-deaning of equipment or
workpieos, temperature or
pressure excursions
* Manual material transfer and
handing operations
• Leaking pump seals
• Leaking flange gaskets
• Inadequate temperature control
* Inadequate mixing
* Poor feed flow control
* Poor feed purity control
• Indiscriminate use of water tor
desning or washing
* Drainage prior to cleaning
* Production scheduling to
reduce cleaning frequency
* inadequate cooling water
treatment
* Excessive cooling water
temperature
> Indiscriminate use of solvent
or water
* Poor rack maintenance
* Excessive rinsing with water
• Fast removal of workpiece
• Poor operator training or
supervision
* Inadequate quality control
* Inadequate production planning
and inventory control of
feedstock*
• Inadequate maintenance
* Poor operator training
* Lack of attention by operator
• Excessive use of water in
cleaning
• Proper reactor design
• Proper catalyst selection
• Choice of process
• Choice of reaction conditions
• Vacuum pumps instead of
steam jet ejectors
• Use of reboHers instead of
steam stripping
> Design reactors or tanks
wfeer blades
•Reduce ding
' Equipment dedication
• Design for lower film temperature
and high turbulence
•Controls to prevent cooling
water from overheating
»Choice between cold dip tank or
vapor degreesing
* Choice between solvent or
aqueous cleaning solution
* Countercurrent rinsing
• Fog rinsing
• Dragout collection tanks or trays
• Use of automation
• Maximize dedication of
equipment to a single function
* Choice of gasketing materials
•Choice of seals
• Use of welded or seal-welded
construdwA
Source: Jacobs Engineering Group
D-2
-------
Appendix E
Waste Minimization Techniques
The tables in this appendix lists techniques and practices for waste reduction in operations that are
applied in a wide range of industries. Most of the techniques listed here are source reduction techniques.
Table E-1. Waste Minimization Options for Coating Operations
Table E-2. Waste Minimization Options for Equipment Cleaning Operations
Table E-3. Waste Minimization through Good Operating Practices
Table E-4. Waste Minimization Options in Materials Handing, Storage, and Transfer
Table E-5. Waste Minimization Options for Parts Cleaning Operations
Source: Jacobs Engineering Group
E-1
-------
Tabie E-1. Waste Minimization Options for Coating Operations
Waste
Source/Origin
Waste Reduction Measures
Remarks
References
Coating overspray
Coating material that fate
to reach the object being
coated
Maintain 50% overlap between spray pattern
Maintain 6" • 8" distance between spray gun
and the workpiece
Maintain a gun speed of about 250 feet/minute
Hold gun perpendicular to the surface
Trigger gun at the beginning and ond of each
pass
Proper training of operators
Use robots tor spraying
Avoid excessive air pressure for coating
atomeation
Recycle overspray
Use electrostatic spray systems
Use air-assisted airless spray guns in place of
air-spray guns
The coaled object does not took
streaked, and wastage of coating
material is avoided, tf the spray
gun is arched 45*, the overspray
can be as high as 65%.
By air pressure adjustment,
overspray can be reduced to 40%.
Overspray can be reduced by 40%.
Increases transfer efficiency.
1.2
2
2
2
3
4
4
Stripping wastes
111
ro
Coating removal from parts
before apprying a new coal
Solvent emissions
Equipment cleanup
Evaporative losses from
process equipment and
coated parts
Process equipment cleaning
with solvents
Overal
Avoid adding excess thinner
Use abrasive media stripping
Use bead-Masting for paint stripping
Use cryogenic stripping
Use caustic stripping solutions
Clean coating equipment after each use
Keep solvent soak tanks away from heat sources
Use high-solids formulations
Use powder coatings
Use water-baaed formulations
Ught-to-dark batch sequencing
Produce large batches of similarly coated
objects instead of smal batches of differently
coated items
Isolate solvent-based paint spray booths from
water-based paint spray booths
Reuse cleaning solution/sorvenl
Standardize solvent usage
Reexamine the need for coating, as wel as
available alternatives
Reduces stripping wastes due to rework.
Solvent usage is eliminated.
Solvent usage is eliminated.
Solvent usage is eliminated.
Solvent usage is eliminated.
Lower usage of solvents.
Avoids solvent usage.
Avoids solvent usage.
6
7
8
1
9
10,11
4.12
13
20
-------
Table E-2. Waste Minimization Options for Equipment Cleaning Operations
Waste
Source/Origin
Waste Reduction Measures
Remarks
References
Spent solvent-or
inorganic-based
cleaning solutions
Tank cleaning operations
fit
Maximize dedication of process equipment
Use squeegees to recover ding of product
prior to rinsing
Avoid unnecessary cleaning
Closed storage and transfer systems
Provide sufficient drain time for liquids
Lining the equipment to prevent ding
Tigging" process lines
Use high-pressure spray nozzles
Use courrtercurrent riming
Use dean4n-place systems
dean equipment immediately after use
Reuse cleanup solvent
Rework cleanup solvent Mo useful products
Segregate wastes by solvent type
Standardize solvent usage
Reclaim solvent by distillation
Schedule production to tower deaning
frequency
Scaling and drying up can be prevented.
Minimizes leftover material.
Reduces ding.
Minimizes solvent consumption.
Prevents hardening of scale that requires
more severe cleaning.
18
19
Wastewater
sludges, spent
acidic solutions
Heat exchanger deanlng
* Use bypass control or pumped recyde to
maintain turbulence during turndown
* Use smooth heat exchange surfaces
* Use on-stream cleaning techniques
* Use hydroblasling over chemical cleaning
where possible
Onsita or offsite recycling.
Electroplated or Teflon* tubes.
"Superscrubber", for example.
20
21
-------
Table E-3. Waste Minimization through Good Operating Practices
Good Operating Practice
Program Ingredients
Remarks
References
Waste minimization assessments
Environmental audits/reviews
Loss prevention programs
Wast* Segregation
Preventive maintenance programs
Form a team of qualified individuate
Establish practical short-term and long-term goals
Allocate resources and budget for the program
Establish assessment targets
Identify and select options to minimize wast*
Periodically monitor the program's effectiveness
* Assemble pertinent documents
* Conduct environmental process revtevw
* Carry out a site inspection
* Report on and fofow up on the findings
* Estabftjh SpW Prevention, Control, and
Countermeasures (SPCC) plans
* Conduct hazard assessment in the design and
operating phases
« Prevent mixing of hazardous wastes with
non-hazardous wastes
* Isolate hazardous wastes by contaminant
* Isolate liquid wastes from soBd wastes
• Use equipment dam cards on equipment location,
characteristics, and maintenance
* Mairrtein a master preventive maintenance (PM)
schedule
» Deferred PM reports on equipment
* Maintain equipment history cards
* Maintain equipment breakdown reports
* Keep vendor maintenance manuals handy
* Maintain a manual or c»mputerJze
-------
Table E-3. Waste Minimization through Good Operating Practices (continued)
Good Operating Practice
Program Ingredients
Remarks
References
Training/Awareness-butMing
programs
m
Effective supervision
Employee participation
Production schedulng/plannlng
Cost accounting/allocation
* Provide training for
- Safe operation el the equipment
• Proper materials handling
- ioonomte and environmental ramifications of
hazardous waste generation and disposal
- Detecting reteaaea of hazardous materials
- Emergency procedure*
- Use of safely gear
• ttoser supervision inay improve pnxhrtion efficiency
and reduce inadvertent waste generation
* ManageoHmtbyobjectrvee(MBO),wfthgoateter
waste reduction
* 'Ch*a%drctee* (tree fc^ms between employee*
and supervisors) can identify ways to reduce waste
* Solid employee suggestions tor waste reduction ideas
* Maximize bath size
* Dedicate equipment to a tingle product
* After batch sequencing to minimize cfearang frequency
(Bght-to-dark batch sequence, for example)
• Schedule production to minimizing cleaning frequency
* Cost accounting done for aR waste streams leaving
the facilities
* AHocate waste treatment and disposal costs to the
operations that generate the waste
These programs are conducted to reduce
occupational health and safely
hazards, in addition to reducing
waste generation due to operator
or procedural errors.
Increased opportunity for early detection
4«£ ^nlmti'nti a m
of mtsiaKes.
Better coordination among the various
parts of an overall operation.
Employees who tntimater/ understand the
operations can identify ways to reduce
waste.
Altering production schedule can have a
major impact on waste minimization.
Allocating costs to me waste-producing
operations will give them an incentive
to cut their wastes.
-------
Table E-4. Waste Minimization Options in Materials Handling, Storage, and Transfer
Waste/Source
Waste Reduction Measures
Remarks
References
Material/waste tracking and
inventory control
m
Avoid over -purchasing
Accept raw material only afar inspection
Ensure that invertcfy quantity ctoes not go to
wast*
Ensure thai r» containers stay in Inventory
bnger than « specftod period
Review material procurement specifications
Return expired material to supplier
Validate she»-flte expiration dates
Test outdated material for effectiveness
Elrninate shef-Hfe requirements for stabte
Conduct frequent inventory checks
Use computer-assisted plant Inventory system
Conduct periodic materials tracking
Proper •being of al containers
Set up manned stations tor dtepensing
chemicais and collecting wastes
These procedures are employed to find
areas where the waste minimization
efforts are to be concentrated.
30.31
Loss prevention programs
* Use property designed tanks and vessels only tor
their intended purposes
* Install overflow alarms for all tanks and vessels
* Maintain physical Integrity of all tanks and vessels
* Set up written procedures Iw all loadingAjnloading
and transfer operations
* Install secondary containment areas
* Forbid operators to bypass interiocks, alarms, or
slgnificantty alter setpoMs without authorization
* isolate equipment or process lines that leak or are
not in service
* Use seaMess pumps
* Use bellows-seaJ varves
* Document a» spWage
* Perform overaJ material balances and estimate
the quantity and ddtar value of aH losses
* Use floafing-roof tanks for VOC control
* Use conservation vents tw fixed roof tanks
* Use vapor recovery systems
-------
Table E-4. Waste Minimization Options in Materials Handling. Storage, and Transfer (continued)
Waste/Source Waste Reduction Measures Remarks References
SpiJte and leaks • Store containers in such a way as to albw for
visual inspection tor corrosion and teaks
• Slack containers in a way to minimize the chance
of tipping, puncturing, or breaking
* Prevent concrete "sweating* by raising the
drum off storage areas
• Maintain MSDSs to correctryhandtesptH
situations
* Provide adequate lighting in the storage area
* Maintain a dean, even surface'm transportation
• Keep aisles dear of obstruction
• Maintain distance between incornpatibte chemicals
* Maintain distance between d'rflerent types of
__ chemicals to prevent cross-contamination
• * Avotd stacking containers against process
equipment
* Fottow manufacturers'suggestions on the storage
and handing of al raw materials
* Insulation and inspection of electric circuitry for
corrosion and potential sparking
Cling * Use larga containers instead ol smaH containers
whenever possible
* Use containera wSh height-to-diameter ratio equal
to one to minimize wetted area
* Empty drums ar>d containers thoroughly before
cleaning or disposal
-------
Table E-5. Waste Minimization Options tor Parts Cleaning Operations
Waste
Source/Origin
Waste Reduction Measures
Remarks
References
Spent solvent
Contaminated advent from
parts cleaning operations
Use water-soluble cutting fluids instead
of oil-based fluids
Us* peel coatings in place of protective oils
Use aqueous dearwrs
Us* aqueous paint stripping solutions
Use oyogentc stripping
Use bead blasting for paint stripping
Use multi-stage countercurrent cleaning
Prevent cross-contamination
Prevent drag-in from other processes
Prompt removal of sludge from the tank
Reduce the number of different solvents
wed
This could eliminate the need for solvent
• cleaning.
A single, larger waste that is more
amenable to recydng.
8
7
6
Mr emission*
Solvent loss from
degreasers and cold tanks
rn
00
Use roll-type covers, not hinged covers
Increase freeboard height
tnstal freeboard chBters
Use silhouette entry cover*
Proper equipment layout
Avoid rapid Insertion and removal of ien»
Avoid Inserting oversized objects into
the tank
Allow fof proper drainage before removing
lem
Avoid water contamination o< solvent
indegreasers
24 to 50% reduction in emissions,
39% reduction in solvent emissions.
The speed that items are put into the
tank should be less than 11 feet/min.
Cross-sectional area of the Hem should
be test that 50% of tank area to reduce
piston effect
15
IS
15
16
17
Rinse water
Water rinse to remove
solvent carried out with
the parts leaving the
cleaning tank
Reduce solvent dragout by proper design and
operation of rack system
Install air )ett to btow parts dry
Use fog nozzles on rime tanks
Prooer design and operation of barrel system
Use countercurrent rinse tank*
Use water sprays on rinse tanks
The dragout can be 0.4 gai/1000 sqft,
versus 24 gal/1000 sqft for poorty
drained parts.
More efficient rinsing is achieved
15
15
15
1S
-------
Appendix E
References
1. Kohl, J., J. Pearson, and P. Wright. Managing and Recycling Solvents In the Furniture
North Carolina State University, Raleigh, 1986.
2. Lenckus, D. "Increasing productivity". Finishing Wood and Wood Products Magazine Vol. 87, No.
4, May 1982, pp 44-66.
3. Campbell, M. E., and W. M. Glenn. Profit from Pollution Prevention. The Pollution Probe
Foundation. Toronto, Canada, 1982.
4. Kohl, J., P. Moses, and B. Triplett. Managing and Recycling Solvents! North Carolina Practices.
Facilities andI Regulations North Carolina State University, Raleigh, 1984.
5. Dumey.J. J. "How to improve your paint stripping". Product Finishing. December 1982, pp 52-53.
6. Higgins, T. E. Industrial Process Modifications to Reffcice Generation of Hazardous Waste at POD
Facilities! Phase I Report CH2M Hill, Washington, D.C., 1985.
7. "Cryogenic paint stripping". Product Finish December 1982.
8. Mallamee, W. M. "Paint and varnish removers". Kirk-Qmmer Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology.
3rd edition, Volume 16, pp 762-767,1981.
9. Sandberg, J. Final Report on the Internship served at Gaoe Tool Company. Minnesota Technical
Assistance Program, Minnesota Waste Management Board, Minnesota, 1985.
10. Powder Coatings Institute. Information brochure. Washington, D. C., 1983.
11. Cole, G. E. "VOC emission reduction and other benefits achieved by major powder coating
operations". Paper No. 84-38.1 presented at the Air Pollution Control Association. June 25,1984.
12. California State Department Of Health Services. Alternative Technology for Recycling and Treatment
of Hazardous Waste 3rd Biennial Report. Sacramento, 1986.
13. California State Department of Health Services. Guide to Solvent Waste Reduction Alternatives.
October 1986, pp 4-25 to 4-49.
14. Kenson, R. E. "Recovery and reuse of solvents from VOC air emissions". Environmental Progress.
August 1985, pp 161-165.
15. Dumey, L. J., editor. Electroplating Engineering Handbook. 4th edition. Van Nostrand Reinhold.
New York, 1984.
16. American Society of Testing Materials. Handbook of Vapor Decreasing Special Technical
Publication 310-A., ASTM, Philadelphia, April 1976.
17. Smith, C. Troubleshooting vapor degreasers". Product Finish. November 1981.
18. Loucks, C. M. -Boosting capacities with chemicals". Chemical Engineering Deakbook Issue. Vol.
80, No. 5, pp 79-84,1973.
19. 3M Corporation. Ideas - A Compendium of 3M Success Stories. St. Paul, MN.
E-9
-------
20. Fromm, C. H., S. Budaraju, and S. A. Cordery. "Minimization of process equipment cleaning waste'.
Conference proceedings of HAZTECH international, Denver, August 13-15, 1986. pp 291-307.
21 . Versa/, Inc. and Jacobs Engineering Group. Waste Minimization: Issues and Options. Vol. II. U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D. C., October
22. Fromm, C. H. and M. S. Catehan. "Waste reduction audit procedure". Conference proceedings of
the Hazardous Materials Oontrol Research Institute. Atlanta, 1986, pp 427-435.
23. North Carolina Pollution Prevention Pays Program. Environmental Auditing. North Carolina
Department of Environmental Health. 1985.
24. Baumer, R. A. Making environmental audits*. Chemieat Engineering Vol. 89, No. 22. November 1 ,
1982, p 101.
25. KletZ, T. A. -Minimize your product Spillage". Hydrocarbon Ptocesslno. Vol. 61 , No. 3, 1982, p 207.
26. Sarokin, D. "Reducing hazardous wastes at the source: Case studies of organic chemical plants in
New Jersey. Paper presented at Source Reduction of Hazardous Waste Conference, Rutgers
University, August 22, 1985.
27. Singh, J. B. and R. M. Alton. "Establishing. a preventive maintenance program". Plant Engineering.
February 27, 1986, p 46.
28. Rimberg, D. "Minimizing maintenance makes money". Pollution Engineering. Vol. 12, No. 3,
December 1983, p 46.
29. Parker, N. H. "Corrective maintenance and performance optimization". Chemical Engineering. Vol.
91, No. 7, April 16, 1984, p 93.
30. Geftenan. E. "Keeping chemical records on track". Chemteai Business Vol. 6, No. 1 1 , 1984, p 47.
31 . Hickman, W. E. and W. D. Moore. "Managing the maintenance dollar-. Chemical Engineering. Vol
93, No. 7, April 24, 1986, p 68.
E-10
-------
Appendix F
Government Technical/Financial Assistance Programs
The EPA's Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response has set up a telephone call-in service to answer
questions regarding RCRA and Superfund (CERCLA):
(800) 424-9346 (outside the District of Columbia)
(202) 382-3000 (in the District of Columbia)
The following states have programs that offer technical and/or financial assistance in the areas of waste
minimization and treatment.
Al»b*ma
Hazardous Material Management and Resource
Recovery Program
University of Alabama
P.O. Box 6373
Tuscaloosa, AL 35487-6373
(205)348-8401
Al»*kt
Alaska Health Project
Waste Reduction Assistance Program
431 West Seventh Avenue, Suite 101
Anchorage, AK 99501
(907)276-2864
Arktnu*
Arkansas Industrial Development Commission
One State Capitol Mall
Little Rock, AR 72201
(501)371-1370
Californl*
Alternative Technology Section
Toxic Substances Control Division
California State Department of Health Services
714/744 P Street
Sacramento, CA 94234-7320
(916) 324-1807
Connecticut
Connecticut Hazardous Waste Management Service
Suite 360
800 Asylum Avenue
Hartford, CT 061 OS
(203)244-2007
Connecticut Department of Economic Development
210 Washington Street
Hartford CT 06106
(203)566-7196
Georglt
Hazardous Waste Technical Assistance Program
Georgia Institute of Technology
Georgia Technical Research Institute
Environmental Health and Safety Division
O'Keefe Building, Room 027
Atlanta, GA 30332
(404)894-3806
Georgia (continued)
Environmental Protection Division
Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Floyd Towers East, Suite 1154
205 Butler Street
Atlanta, CA 30334
(404) 656-2833
Illinois
Hazardous Waste Research and Information Center
Illinois Department of Energy and Natural Resources
1808 Woodfield Drive
Savoy, IL 61874
(217)333-8940
Illinois Waste Elimination Research Center
Pritzker Department of Environmental Engineering
Alumni Building, Room 102
Illinois Institute of Technology
3200 South Federal Street
Chicago, IL 60616
(312)567-3535
Indian*
Environmental Management and Education Program
Young Graduate House, Room 120
Purdue University
West Lafayette, IN 47907
(317)494-5036
Indiana Department ol Environmental Management
Office of Technical Assistance
P.O.Box 6015
105 South Meridian Street
Indianapolis. IN 46206-6015
(317)232-8172
Iowa
Iowa Department of Natural Resources
Air Quality and Solid Waste Protection Bureau
Wallace State Office Building
900 East Grand Avenue
Des Moines, 1A 50319-0034
(515)281-8690
Center for Industrial Research and Service
205 Engineering Annex
Iowa State University
Ames, IA 50011
(515) 294-3420
F-1
-------
Kansas
Bureau of West* Management
Department of Health and Environment
Forbes Reid, Building 730
Topeka, KS 66620
(913)296-1607
Kentucky
Division of Watt* Management
Natural Resource* and Environmental Protection Cabinet
18RefflyRoad
Frankfort, KY 40601
(502)564-6716
Loultlan*
Department of Environmental Quality
Office of Solid and Hazardous Waste
P.O. Box 44307
Baton Rouge, LA 70804
(504)342-1354
Maryland
Maryland Hazardous Wast* FadBties Siting Board
60 We* Street, Suite 200A
AnnapoBt, MD 21401
(301)974-3432
Maryland Environmental Service
2020 Industrial DnVe
Annapolis, MD 21401
(301)269-3291
(800) 492-9188 (In Maryland)
Afassacnusetfs
Office of Safe Waste Management
Department of Environmental Management
100 Cambridge Street, Room 1094
Boston, MA 02202
(617)727-3260
Source Reduction Program
Massachusetts Department of Environmental Quality
Engineering
1 Winter Street
Boston, MA 02106
(617)292-5982
Michigan
Resource Recovery Section
Department of Natural Resources
P.O. Box 30028
Lansing, Ml 48909
(517)373-0540
Minnesota
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
Solid and Hazardous Waste Division
S20 Lafayette Road
St. Paul, MN 55155
(612)296-6300
M/nnesota (continued)
Minnesota Technical Assistance Program
W-140 Boynton Health Service
University of Minnesota
Minneapolis, MN 55455
(612)625-9677
(800) 247-0015 (in Minnesota)
Minnesota Waste Management Board
123 Thorson Center
7323 Fifty-Eighth Avenue North
Crystal, MN 55428
(612) 536-0816
Mluourl
State Environmental Improvement and Energy
Resources Agency
P.O. Box 744
Jefferson City, MO 65102
(314)751-4919
Mew Jersey
New Jersey Hazardous Waste Faculties Siting
Commission
Room 614
28 West State Street
Trenton, NJ 06608
(609) 292-1459
(609)292-1026
Hazardous Waste Advisement Program
Bureau of Regulation and Classification
New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection
401 East State Street
Trenton, NJ 08625
Risk Reduction Unit
Off tee of Science and Research
New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection
401 East State Street
Trenton, NJ 08625
Mew
New York State Environmental Facilities Corporation
50 Wo« Road
Albany, NY 12205
(518)457-3273
North Cunltna
PoIutJon Prevention Pays Program
Department of Natural Resources and Community
Development
P.O. Box 27687
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27611
(919)733*7015
Governor's Waste Management Board
32S North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, NC 27611
(919) 733-9020
F-2
-------
North Ctrolln* (continued)
Technics Assistance Unit
Solid and Hazardous Waste Management Branch
North Carofina Department of Human RMOUTOM
P.O. Box 2091
306 North Wilmington Str»*t
Raleigh, NC 27602
(919)733-2178
Ohh
Division of Solid and Hazardous Waat* Management
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
P.O. Box 1049
1800 WaterMark Drive
Columbus, OH 43266-1048
(614)481-7200
Ohio Technology Transfer Organization
Suite 200
65 East State Street
Columbus. OH 43266-0330
(614)466-4286
Oklahoma
Industrial Waste Elimination Program
Oklahoma State Department of Health
P.O. Box 53551
Oklahoma CHy, OK 73152
(405) 271-7353
Oregon
Oregon Hazardous Waste Reduction Program
Department of Environmental QuaJty
811 Southwest Sixth Avenue
Portland, OR 97204
(503)229-5913
Pinniylvtnlg
Pennsylvania Technical Assistance Program
501 F. Orvis Keller Bulding
University Park. PA 16802
(814)865-0427
Bureau of Waste Management
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources
P.O. Box 2063
Fulton Building
3rd and Locust Streets
Harrisburg. PA17120
(717)787-6239
Center of Hazardous Material Research
32QWHamPktWay
Ptttsburgh, PA 15238
(412)826-5320
Rhode /stand
Ocean State Cleanup and Recycling Program
Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management
9 Hayes Street
Providence, Rl 02908-5003
(401)277-3434
(BOO) 253*2674 (in Rhode island)
ffnode blind (continued)
Center of Environmental Studies
Drown University
P.O. Box 1943
135 Anoell Street
Providence, Rl 02912
(401) 863-3449
F*fMM****
Center for Industrial Services
102 Alumni Hal
University of Tennessee
Knoxvlle,TN 37996
9742456
Vtrglnb
Office of Poficy and Planning
Virginia Department of Waste Management
11th Floor, Monroe Bulding
101 North 14th Street
Richmond, VA 23219
(804)225-2687
Wtihlngton
Hazardous Waste Section
Mai Stop PV-11
Washington Department of Ecology
Otympia,WA 96504-6711
(206)4594322
Bureau of SoH Watte Management
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
P.O. Box 7921
101 South Webster Street
Madison, Wl 53707
(608)266-2699
Sold Waste Management Program
Wyoming Department of Environmental Quafty
Hsrschter Buldkig, 4tti Rear, West Wing
122 Watt 25th Street
Cheyenne, WY 82002
(307)777-7752
F-3
-------
Appendix G
Option Rating
Weighted Sum Method
The Weighted Sum Method is a quantitative method
for screening and ranking waste minimization options.
This method provides a means ot quantifying the
important criteria that affect waste management in a
particular facility. This method involves three steps.
1. Determine what the important criteria are in terms
of the WM assessment program goals a
constraints, and the overall corporate goals in
constraints. Examples of criteria are the following:
Reduction in waste quantity
Reduction in waste hazard (e.g., toxicity,
flammability, reactivity, corrosivity, etc.)
Reduction in waste treatment/disposal costs
Reduction in raw material costs
Reduction in liability and insurance costs
Previous successful use within the company
Previous successful use in industry
Not detrimental to product quality
Low capital cost
Low operating and maintenance costs
Short implementation period (and minimal
disruption of plant operations)
• Ease of implementation
The weights (on a scale of 0 to 10, for example) are
determined for each of the criteria in relation to
their importance.For example, if reduction in waste
treatment and disposal costs are very important,
while previous successful use within the company
is of minor importance, then the reduction in waste
costs is given a weight of 10 and the previous use
within the company is given a weight of 1 or 2.
Criteria that are not important are not included (or
given a weight of 0).
2. Each option is then rated on each of the criteria.
Again, a scale of 0 to 10 can be used (0 for low and
10 for high).
3. Finally, the rating of each option from particular
criteria is multiplied by the weight of trie criteria. An
option's overall rating is the sum of the products of
rating times the weight of the criteria.
The options with the best overall ratings are then
selected for the technical and economic feasibility
analyses. Worksheet 13 in Appendix A is used to rate
options using the Weighted Sum method. Table G-1
presents an example using the Weighted Sum Method
for screening and ranking options.
Table G-1. Sample Calculation using the
Weighted Sum Mtthod
ABC Corporation has determined that reduction in waste
treatment exists is the most important criterion, with a weight
factor of 10. Other significant criteria Include reduction In
safety hazard (weight of 8), reduction in liability (weight of 7).
and ease of implementation (weight of 5), Options X, Y, and
Z are then each assigned effectiveness factors. For
example, option X is expected to reduce waste by nearly
80%, and is given an rating of 8. ft is given a rating of 6 for
reducing safety hazards, 4 for reducing liability, and
because it is somewhat difficult to implement, 2 for ease of
implementation. The table below shows how the options are
rated overall, with effectiveness factors estimated for
options Y and Z.
Ratings for each
Rating Criteria
Reduce treatment costs
Reduce safety hazards
Reduce liability
Ease of Implementation
Sum of weight times ratings
Weight
10
8
7
S .
x Y z
863
638
445
228
166 122 169
From this screening, option Z rates the highest with a score
of 169. Option X's score is 166 and option Y's score is 122.
In this case, option Z and option X should both be selected
for further evaluation because both of their scores are high
and relatively dose to each other.
G-1
-------
Appendix H
Economic Evaluation Example
The following example presents a profitability analysis
for a relatively large hypothetical waste minimization
project. This project represents the installation of a
package unit that improves plant production while
reducing raw material consumption and disposal costs.
The analysis was done on a personal computer using a
standard spreadsheet program. The salient data used
in this evaluation are summarized below.
Capital Costs
• The delivered price of the equipment is quoted by
the vendor at $170,000. This includes taxes and
insurance.
• Materials costs (piping, wiring, and concrete) are
estimated at $35,000.
• Installation labor is estimated at $25,000.
• Internal engineering staff costs are estimated at
$7,000. Outside consultant and contractor costs
are estimated at $15,000.
• Miscellaneous environmental permitting costs are
estimated at $15,000.
• Working capital (including chemical inventories, and
materials and supplies) is estimated at $5,000.
• Start-up costs are estimated by the vendor at
$3,000.
• A contingency of $20,000 for unforeseen costs
and/or overruns Is included.
• Planning, design, and installation are expected to
take one year.
Financing
• The project will be financed 60% by retained
earnings and 40% by a bank loan.
• The bank loan will be repaid over 5 years of equal
installments of principal, plus interest at an annual
percentage rate of 13%. Interest accrued during .
installation will be added into the total capital costs.
• All capital costs, except working capital and interest
accrued during construction, will be depreciated
over 7 years using the double-declining balance
method, switching to the straight-line method when
the charges by this method become greater.
H-1
• The marginal income tax rate is 34%.
• Escalation of all costs is assumed to be 5% per year
for the life of the project.
• The firm's cost of capital is 15%.
Operating Costs and Revenues
The WM project is estimated to decrease raw
materials consumption by 300 units per year at a
cost of $50 per unit. The project will not result in an
increased production. However, ft will produce a
marketable by-product to be recovered at a rate of
200 units per year and a price of $25 per unit.
The project will reduce the quantity of hazardous
waste disposed by 200 tons per year. The following
items make the total unit disposal costs:
Offsfte disposal fees
State generator taxes
Transportation costs
Other costs
TOTAL DISPOSAL COSTS
Costs per ton of waste
$500
10
25
$560
Incremental operating labor costs are estimated on
the basis that the project is expected to require one
hour of operator's time per eight-hour shift. There
are three shifts per day and the plant operates 350
days per year. The wage rate for operators is
$12.50 per hour.
Operating supplies expenses are estimated at 30%
of operating labor costs.
Maintenance labor costs are estimated at 2% of the
sum of the capital costs for equipment, materials,
and installation. Maintenance supplies costs are
estimated at 1% of these costs.
Incremental supervision costs are estimated at 30%
of the combined costs of operating and
maintenance labor.
The following overhead costs are estimated as a
percentage of the sum of operating and
maintenance labor and supervision costs.
Labor burden and benefit 28%
Plant overhead 25%
Headquarter overhead 20%
-------
* Escalation of all costs is assumed to be 5% per year
for the life of the project.
• The project life is expected to be 8 years.
* The salvage value of the project is expected to be
zero after eight years.
Results
The four-page printout in Figures H-1 through H-4
presents the WM project profitability spreadsheet
program. Figure H-1 represents the input section of
the program. Each of the numbers in the first three
columns represents an input variable in the program.
The righthand side of Figure H-1 is a summary of the
capital requirement. This includes a calculation of the
interest accrued during construction and the financing
structure of the project.
Figure H-2 Is a table of the revenues and operating
cost items for each of the eight years of the project's
operating life. These costs are escalated by 5% each
year for the life of the project.
Figure H-3 presents the annual cash flows for the
project. The calculation of depreciation charges and
the payment of interest and repayment of loan principal
is also shown here. The calculation of the internal rate
of return (IRR) and the net present value (NPV) are
based on the annual cash flows. Since the project is
leveraged (financed partly by a bank loan), the equity
portion of the investment is used as the initial cash
flow. The NPV and the IRR are calculated on this basis.
The IRR calculated this way is referred to as the "return
on equity". The program is structured to present the
NPV and IRR after each year of the projects operating
life. In the example, after six years, the IRR is 19.92%
and the NPV is $27,227.
Figure H-4 is a cash flow table based entirely on equity
financing. Therefore, there are no interest payments
or deb principal repayments. The NPV and the IRR in
this case are based on the entire capital investment in
the project. The IRR calculated this way is referred to
as the "return on investment".
The results of the profitability analysis for this project
are summarized below:
Method of Financing JRR NPV
60% equity/40% dabt 26.47% $84,844
100% equity 23.09% $81.625
The IRR values are greater than the 15% cost of
capital, and the NPVs are positive. Therefore, the
project is attractive, and should be implemented.
H-2
-------
Wast* MWmbatJon
ProfltabllKy Program
Capital Cost Factors
CaphalCost
Equipment
Materials
Installation
Plant Engineering
Contractor/Engineering
Permitting Costs
Contingency
Working Capital
Start-up Costs
%Equitv
%Debt
Interest Rate on Debt, %
Debt Repayment, years
Depreciation period
income Tax Rate, %
Escalation Rates, %
Cost of Capital (for NPV)
$170,000
$35,000
$25,000
$7.000
$15.000
$15.000
$20,000
$5,000
$3.000
60%
40%
13,00%
5
7
34.00%
5.0%
15.00%
started 5/22/87
last changed 8/1/87
•MPi/r
Operating Cost/Revenue Factors
Increased Production
Increased Rate, units/year
Price. $/unft
Marketable By-products
Rate, units/year
Price, $/un&
Decreased Raw Materials
Decreased Rate, units/year
Price. $/unii
Decreased Waste Disposal
Reduced Waste, tons/year
Offstte Fees. $/ton
State Taxes. $Aon
Transportation, $/ton
Other Disposal Costs. $/ton
Total Disposal Costs, $/ton
0
$100
200
$40
300
$50
200
$500
$10
$25
$25
$560
Operating Labor
Operator hours/shift
Shifts/day
Operating day&Vear
Wage rate. $/man-hour
Operating Supplies
(% of Operating Labor)
Maintenance Costs
(% of Capital Costs)
Labor
Materials
Other Labor Costs
(% of O&M Labor)
Supervision
(% of O&M Labor * Suf
Plant Overhead
Home Office Overhead
Labor Burden
•
i
350
$13.50
30%
2.00%
t.00%
30.0%
ervfsion
25.0%
20.0%
28.0%
CAPITAL REQUIREMENT
Construction Yea
Capital Expenditures
Equipment
Materials
Installation
Plant Engineering^
Contractor/Engineering
Permitting Costs
Contingency
Start-up Costs
Depreciable Capital
Working Capital
Subtotal
Interest on Debt
Total Capital Requirement
Equity Investment
Debt Principal
Interest on Debt
Total Financing
1
$170,000
$35,000
$25,000
$7,000
$15,000
$15,000
$20.000
$3,000
$290,000
$5,000
$295,000
$14,230
$309,230
$185,538
$109,462
$14,230
$309,230
Figure H-1. Input Information and Capital Investment
-------
*F
REVBAJE AND COST FA<
Operating Year Number
Escalation Factor
WCHEASED REVENUES
Increased Production
Marketable By-products
Amuri MwtMM
OPERATWGCOST7SAV1I
Raw Materials
Disposal Cost*
Maintenance Labor
Maintenance Supplies
Operating Labor
Operating Supples
Supervision
Labor Burden
Plant Overhead
Home Office Overhead
Total Operating GMU
TORS
1.000
MIS
1
1.050
$0
$8,400
$8.400
$1SJ50
$117,600
($4,830)
($2.415)
($14.884)
($4,465)
($5.914)
($7.176)
($6.407)
($5.1%)
$82.133
2
1,103
$0
$8.824
$8.824
$16,545
$123.5%
($5.074)
($2.537}
($15.635)
($4.691)
($6^13)
($7,538)
($6.731)
($5.384)
$86.278
3
1.158
$0
$9.264
$9.264
$17.370
$129,696
($5,327)
($2.663)
($16.415)
($4.925)
($6.523)
($7,914)
($7,066)
($5.653)
$90.580
4
1.216
$0
$9,728
$9.728
$18.240
$136,192
($5.594)
($2.797)
($17.237)
($5.171)
($6.849)
($6.310)
($7.420)
($5.936)
$95.118
5
1J77
$0
$10,216
$10,216
$19.155
$143.024
($5.874)
($2.937)
($18.101)
($5.430)
($7.193)
$8.727)
($7,792)
($6.234)
$99,891
6
1.341
$0
! i10.728
! 10,728
$20.115
$150,192
($6,169)
($3.084)
($19.009)
($5.7035
($7.553)
($9,165)
($8,183)
($6.546)
$104,895
7
1,408
$0
$11 ,264
$11.264
$21.120
$157,696
($6,477)
($3,238)
($19,958)
($5.987)
($7.931)
($9.622)
($8,592)
($6,873)
$110,138
8
1.478
$0
$11.824
$11.824
$22,170
$165,536
($6.799)
($3.399)
($20.951)
($6.285)
($8.325)
($10,101)
($9,019)
($7215)
$115.612
Figure H-2. Revenues and Operating Costs
-------
RETURN ON EQUITY/RE!
Construction Year
Operating Year
Book Value
Depreciation (by straight-
Depreciation (by doubleDI
Depreciation
Debt Balance
Interest Payment
Principal Repay merit
CASHFLOWS
Construction Year
Operating Year
Revenues
+ Operating Savings
Net Revenues
- Depreciation
• Interest on DeM
Taxable Income
- Income Tax
3rof « after Tax
N Depreciation
- Debt Repayment -
After-Tax Cash Flow
Cash Row for ROE
fef Present Value
Return on Equity
26.47%
JRN ON ASSETS
1
$290,000
r»)
)
$123,692
1
($185.538)
($185.538)
1
1207,143
$41,429
$82,857
$82.857
$123.6%
$16.080
$24,738
1
$8,400
$82,133
$90,533
$82.857
$16,080
{$8,404)
(! 2.857)
(IS.547J
$82,857
$24.738
$52,572
$52,572
($139.823)
fNUMI
2
$147.958
$41.429
$59,184
$59.184
$98.954
$12.864
$24,738
2
$8,824
_J86,278
$95.102
$59,184
$12.864
$23.054
$7,838
$15.216
$59.184
$24,738
$49.662
$49.662
»102.272)
-32.19%
3
$105.685
$41,429
$42,274
$42,274
$74.216
$9.648
$24,738
3
$9,264
$90,580
$99,844
$42.274
$9.648
$47,922
$16,293
$31.629
$42274
$24.738
$49.165
$49.165
($69.945)
-9,62%
4
$84.256
$41.429
$30,196
$41,429
$49.478
$6,432
$24.738
4
$9,728
$95,118
$104,846
$41,429
$6,432
$56,985
$19,375
$37.610
$41.429
$24.738
$54,301
$54,301
($38,898)
4.24%
5
$22.827
$41.429
$18,359
$41.429
$24.740
$3.216
$24P738
5
$10,216
$99,891
$110,107
$41,429
$3.216
$65,462
$22,257
$43^05
$41.429
$24,738
$59.896
$59.896
($9,119)
12.95%
6
$0
$41.429
$6,522
$22,827
$2
$0
$2
6
$10,728
$104,895
$115.623
$22.827
$0
$92.796
$31,551
1161.245
$22,827
$2
$84.070
$84,070
$27227
19.92%
7
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
7
$11,264
$110,138
$121.402
$0
$0
$121,402
$41277
$80,125
$0
$0
$80,125
$80,125
$57.349
23.85%
8
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
8
$11,824
$115,612
$127.436
$0
$0
$127,436
$43,328
$84.108
$0
$0
$84.108
$84,108
$84,844
26.47%
Figure H-3, Cash Bows for Return on Equity
-------
*
p
IWTUflNtoi^ESTMe
Construction Year
Opef ating Year
Book Value
Depreciation (by straight-
Depreciation J>y doubte C
Depredation
CASHFLOWS
Construction Year
Operating Year
Revenues
+ Operating Savings
Net Revenues
- Depreciation
Taxabte Income
-Income Tax
Profit after Tax
4 Depreciation
After-Tax CMft Flow
Cash Row fofROI
Net Present Value
Return on Investment
23.09%
1
$290.000
n»)
tt
1
_tf2astoooi
($295,000)
1
$207,143
$41,429
$82,857
$82,857
1
$8,400
$82.133
$90,533
$82,857
$7.676
$2,610
$5.066
$82.857
$87,123
$87,923
($218.545)
DNUMI
2
$147,959
141,429
$59.184
$59.184
2
$8.824
$86,278
$95,102
$59,184
$35,918
$12,212
$23,706
$59.184
$82.890
$82,890
($155,868)
-30.04%
3
$105,685
$41,429
$42,274
$42.274
3
JU64
$90,580
$99,844
$42,274
$57,570
f1!L574
$37.996
$42.274
$80.270
$80,270
($103.090)
-7,76%
4
fH256
$41,429
$30,196
$41,429
4
$9.728
$95,118
$104.846
$41,429
$63.417
$21,562
_I4L856
$41.429
$83.284
$83,284
($55,472)
5.26%
i
12^,827
$41.429
$18,359
$41.429
5
$io.2ie
$99,891
$110,107
$41,429
$68,678
$23,351
$45,327
$41,429
$86,756
$86,756
($12.339)
13,21%
6
$0
$41,429
$6,522
$22327
6
$10,728
1104,895
_$_1 15,623
$22,827
$92,796
$31,551
$6y?45
$22.827
$84.072
JI4072
$24.008
17.99%
7
$0
$0
$0
$0
7
111,264
$110.138
$121,402
$0
__J121,402
$41,277
$80,12S
$0
$80.125
$80,125
$54.130
20.97%
8
fo
$0
$0
$0
8
$11,824
$115.812
$127,436
$0
$127,436
$43,328
$84,108
$0
$84,108
$84,108
$81.625
23.09%
Figure H-4. Cash Flows tor Return on Investment
-------
Reproduced by NTIS
National Technical Information Service
U.S. Department of Commerce
Springfield, VA 22161
This report was printed specifically for your
order from our collection of more than 2 million
technical reports.
For economy and efficiency, NTIS does not maintain stock of its vast
collection of technical reports. Rather, most documents are printed for
each order. Your copy is the best possible reproduction available from
our master archive. If you have any questions concerning this document
or any order you placed with NTIS, please call our Customer Services
Department at (703)487-4660.
Always think of NTIS when you want:
* Access to the technical, scientific, and engineering results generated
by the ongoing multibillion dollar R&D program of the U.S. Government.
• R&D results from Japan, West Germany, Great Britain, and some 20
other countries, most of it reported in English.
NTIS also operates two centers that can provide you with valuable
information:
* The Federal Computer Products Center - offers software and
dataf iles produced by Federal agencies.
» The Center for the Utilization of Federal Technology - gives you
access to the best of Federal technologies and laboratory resources.
For more information about NTIS, send for our FREE AT77S Products
and Services Catalog which describes how you can access this U.S. and
foreign Government technology. Call (703)487-4650 or send this
sheet to NTIS, U.S. Department of Commerce, Springfield, VA 22161.
Ask for catalog, PR-827.
Name
Telephone
- Your Source to U.S. and Foreign Government
Research and Technology.
------- |