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


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.

 Waste Minimization Opportunity Assessment Manual
                                     TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
                          (Please read instructions on the reverse before coi
             5, REPORT DATE
                                                                 6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
  Jacobs Engineering Group
             10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
                                                                 11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
 Cincinnati, OH
              14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
   Project Officer: Harry M. Freeman (HWERL)
         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.
                                          KEY WORD AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
c. COSATI RekVGroup
                                                    19. SECURfTY CLASS (This Report)
                              21. NO, OF PAGES
                                                    20. SECURITY CLASS (TM* Page)
                              22. PRICE

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
   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.

    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

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
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

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

 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.

                                          Section  1
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

•  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

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
                              OROCT OF EXPLORATION
                            fllVE BMRONMBfTAL DESRABLITY
   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).
  Any activity that raduoaa or aUminataa tha ganaration of hazardc
  prooaaa (op. o)L).

                                                           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
                                                                          {ONStTE AND  OFFSITE)
                                                                  US! AND REUSE
                                                                                         Processed for
                                                                                           VMOMM recovery
                                                                                         Processed as a
                                                       Return to ongnui preceM
                                                       Raw notarial substitute
                                                           lor another process
Change In product
                                    GOOD OPERATING
                    Equipment, piping, or
                      layout change*
                    Additional •utotntllofi
                    Changes in operational

                                  Procedural measurM
                                  Loss prevention
                                  Management practic*
                                  Waste stream segregation
                                  Production schedulng
                             Figure 1-1.   Waste Minimization Techniques

Figure 1-3.   TIM Watt* Minimization AsMMment Procedure
        Th* recognized need to minimize
      * Get management commitment
      * Set overal a**e«sment program goal*
      * Organize a»*e**inent program task face
  Assessment organization
 and oommMment to I
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*

          • Technical evaluation
          • Economic evalmlkm
          • Select options for implecnsntation
      Final report, including
      recommended option* 1
» Justify projects and obtain funding
» Instalatbn (equipment)
* Implementation (procedure)
* Evaluate performance
               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*

•  Landfill disposal coat increases.
•  Coatty altarnativa treatment tachnologiaa.
•  Savings in raw material and manufacturing coats.
•  Certification of a WM program on the hazardous waste
•  Biennial WM program reporting.
•  Land disposal restrictions and bans.
•  Increasing permitting requirements for waste handling
   and treatment.
•  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

 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

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
       Get management commitment
       Set overaN assessment program goad
       Organize assessment program task foros
                 Analysts Phase
             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:

[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.

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

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
   Establish overall WM program goals.
   Establish a waste tracking system.
   Prioritize  the  waste streams or facility  areas for
   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
   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

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.
   SUITABLE to th* overall corporate goals and mission.
   ACHIEVABLE with a practical level of effort
Sourea:  Pearca and Robinson, Strategic
Tabla  2-3.   Examples of  Barrlara  to  Waata
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.
•  A nsw operating procedure wi reduce waste but may also
   be  a bottleneck that decreases the overall production
•  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
•  Adequate utilities are not available  for the new
•  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
•  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

 •  Existing stocks (or binding contracts) wffl delay the
   replacement of  a hazardous material  with a  non-
   hazardous substitute.

 •  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

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

   Get management commitment to:
     •   Establish watte minimization as a company goal.
     *   Establish a waste minimization program to meet this
     •   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
        FLEXIBLE to adapt to changing requirements.
        MEASURABLE over time.
        SUITABLE to the overall corporate goals.
        ACHIEVABLE with a practical level of effort.

   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
   Get people from the affected department* or groups.
        Process Engineering.
        Quality Control.
        Research and Development.
        Marketing/Client Relations.
        Material Control/Inventory.
        Information Systems.

    Incorporate the company's WM goals into departmental
    Solicit employee cooperation and participation.
    Develop incentives and/or awards tor managers and

                                          Section 3
                                     Assessment Phase
        the recognized need to minimlzt waste
                  Planning and

      • 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
                 Analysis Phas*
                 tgBa»»t^am a Oi•>!«•!
             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

Tabl*   3-1.    Facility  Information  for   WM

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

*  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.

Table  3-2.    Sources  of  Material  Balance
   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
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

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

 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

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
   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
   *  Facilities engineer responsible for metal finishing
   *  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

 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

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

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

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

•  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

 •  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.

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-

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
   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

   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

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

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
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-

   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.
   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
 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

Screening and Selecting Options for  Further

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

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

                                            Section  4
                                      Feasibility Analysis
         The recognized need to minimize waste
                   Planning and
         • Technical •valuation
         • Economic evaluation
         • Select options tor 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

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
*  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

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

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
      Piping and ducting
      Insulation and painting
      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
   Start-up coata
   Training coata
   Interest accrued during construction

Working Capital
   Raw materials inventory
   Finished product inventory
   Materials and supplies


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

Table  4-3.
  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
   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

Chungis  In  revenues  from Increased  (or  decreased;
   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*

   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)
                                           $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

                                           •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
                                         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

                                          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.

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.

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
• 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.

                                          Section 5
                      Implementing  Waste Minimization  Options
         Tha racognizad naad to minimize wasta
                 Analyaia Phaaa
           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

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

 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


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

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

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

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.

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

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
                                    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.

                                         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
           Numbar and Tltla
         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

        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

                                      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

                                      (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

Table A-1.   List of Watt* Minimization  Aaaaaamont Workahoata  (eontlnuod)
   Number and Title
Assessment Phaae  (continued)
   (Section 3)
       11. Option Generation

       12. Option Description

       13. Options Evaluation by
Feasibility Analyala Phaaa
   (Saetlon 4)
14. T

       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.
                                         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 
                 Wast* Minimization Aawsamtnt
                  Proj. No.
                                 Prepared By	
                                 Checked By __	
                                 Sheet  1 of.,1     Page	of.
                                 Begin the  Waste Minimization
                                     Assessment  Program
                                                       Worksheets used
                               PLANNING AND ORGANIZATION
                                      • Get management commitment
                                      * Set overall assessment program goals
                                      * Organize assessment program task force
                                   Assessment organization
                                   and commitment to proceed
   Select new
assessment targets
  and reevaluate
 previous options
      * 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
                                    Assessment report of
                                      selected options
                                FEASIBILITY  ANALYSIS PHASE
                                       * Technical evaluation
                                       * Economic evaluation
                                       * Select options for implementation
                                    Final report, including
                                    recommended options
               Repeat the process
                         * Justify projects and obtain funding
                         • Installation {equipment)
                         * Implementation (procedure)
                         * Evaluate performance
                                     Successfully operating
                                   waste minimization projeeta




WMtft Mnlmi9*tlnn AtMMrrMnt

Pmj No

Prepared By
Shtet J_ ol j_ Pa(^ of

Sit* Coordinator
                           Organization Chart



Waste Minimization Assessment
Pi»j No


acked By
set 1 of 1 Page of 	

Assessment Team
SK« Coordinator

Matertala Control
Quality Control

 Wttte Mnlmlzttion Aiieument
Prepared By	
Checked By 	;	
Sheet J_ of J_ Page	of 	
Street Addre««:
Telephone: (
Malor Products
SIC Cadet;
EPA Generator Number
Product or:
Ope ret tones
 FacltHtee/Equlpment Age:


Waste Minimization Assessment

Pmj Mo

Prepared By
Chocked Bv
Sheet J_ of J_ Page of

Total Staff
Direct Supv. Staff
Average Age, yrt.
Annual Turnover Rate %
Seniority, yrt.
Yrt. of Formal Education
Training, hrtTyr.
Additional Remarks


Wast* Minimization Assessment

Pmj No.

Prepared By
Checked Bv
Sheet J_ of _l_ Page of

Process Unit/Operation:	
Operation Type:     Q  Continuous
                D  Batch or Semi-Batch
Process Flow Diagram
Material/Energy Balance
Flow/Amount Measurements


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




Used In this
Report (Y/N)




 Wast* Minimization Assessment
Pro]. No.
Prepared By	
Checked By	
Sheet_l_ of _l_  Page	of

Component/Attribute of Concern

Annual Consumption Rate
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)

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.

                          Waste Minimization Assessment
 Pro]. No.
Prepared By	
Checked By 	
Sheet _1_ of J_ Page	of 	


Component/Attribute of Concern

Annual Production Rate
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)

Stream No.

Stream No.

Stream No.

 1     stream numbers, If applicable, should correspond to those used on process flow diagrams.

Stte .
                                   Watte Minimization Assessment
                                  Prepared By	
                                  Checked By	
                                  Sheet _2L_ ol .j   Page
       1.     Waste Stream Name/ID:.
              Process Unit/Operation
                                                 Stream Number.
              Waate Characterlatlca (attach additional sheets wRh composition data, as necessary.)
CUsoDd      CH  mixed phase
                        Density, to/cuft  	
                        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
                  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
                            Maximum -
                            Average  -
                            Batch Size-
                                              be per year
                                              be per	
                                              I* per	
                                              batches per



 Wast* Minimization Asstssnttnt

Proc. Unit/Oper.	

Proj. No	
Prepared By	

Checked By	

Sheet 2-  of J_ Page
     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.

Ste .
 Waste Minimization Assessment
Proc, UrtbOper,	
Prol. No, _	
Prepared By	
Checked By	
Sheet Ji_ of A_  Page __ of
             Watte St roam
       ?.      Management Method
              Leave* site In
  D  roll off bins
                                       55 gal drums
                                       other (describe)
              Disposal Frequency
              Applicable Regulations1
              Regulatory Classification2
       commercial TSDF
  D  other (describe)

  O  direct use/re-use
  O  energy recovery
                                   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.)


Wast* Minimization AsMssiwnt
Prae. Untt/Oper.
Proj No,



set 4 of 4 Page erf

Wasto Stream
Management Method (continued)
                              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
                       LJ  deep well
                       I'D  ocean
                            other (describe).
                                   (quarter and year)
Cost Element:
Onstte Storaae & Handling
Transportation Fee
Disposal Fee
Local Taxes
State Tax
Federal Tax
Total Disposal Cost
Unit Price
S oer 	 	





Wast* Minimization Assessment
Pine. Unrt/Oper
Pmj No


pared By
acked By
set 1 of 1 Page of


Waste ID/Name:
Component/or Property of Concern
Annual Generation Rate (units )
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

Sum of Priority Rating Scores
Priority Rank
Stream No. 	

Rating (R)


Stream No. 	

Rating (R)


Stream No. 	

Rating (R)


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).

 Site  .
   Wast* Minimization Assessment
  Proc. Untt/Oper.	
  Pro). No	
Prepared By	
Checked By 	
Sheet J_ of J_  Page	of 	
Meeting format (e.g., bramstormlng, nominal group technique)
Meeting Coordinator	
Meeting Participant*	
             List Suggested Options
                          Rationale/Remarks on Option


Waste Minimization Assessment
Pme Unit/Opflr
Proj No



tpared By
set 1 of 1 Page of

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
                        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?—
no,    by:
 Reason for Acceptance or Rejection

 Waste Minimization Assessment
Pro), No.
Prepared By	
Checked By	
Sheet J_ of J_ Page J_ of


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
Short implementation period
Ease of Implementation



Sum of Weighted Ratings £ (WxR)
Option Ranking
FeastoHlty Analysis Scneduted for (Dat»)
Options Rating (R)
fl Option



f2 Optton



*3 Optton



M Option



f5 Option



Site .
 Waste Minimization Assessment
ProJ. No.
Prepared By	
Checked By 	
Sheet J_ of JL  Page
                                              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?
        Describe closest industrial analog
                                              If yes, continue with this
        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.

 Wast* Minimization Assessment
Proc. Unit/Oper.	
Proj. No	,	
Prepared By	
Checked By 	
Sheet 2- of J__ Page	of
   WM Option Description
   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:
      Facility/Product Constraints:
          Space Requirements	
          Possible locations wHhln facility

 Watt* Minimization Assessment
 Proc. Untt/Oper.
                                                   Prepared By	
                                                   Checked By	
                                                   SheetJL of _g_  Page	of 	
  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
Temp. In.
                                                   Temp. Out
                                         _ Flow

Plant Air.
Inert Gas.
      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.

 WMtt Mmlmiiaf ton Assessment
Prepared By	
Checked By 	
Sheet J_ of 6   Page	or 	
  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.

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?

    Wast* Minimization Assessment
   Proc. Unit/Oper	
   Proj. No	
Prepared By	
Checked By 	
Sheet i_ of _fe_  Page	of  	
     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	

 Waste Mnlmlzatlon Assessment
Proc. LlnK/Oper.	
Prepared By	
Sheetl_ of J_  Page	of
                                        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.

                                  Waste Minimization Assessment
   ;. Unlt/Oper..
Proj. No	
Prepared By	
Checked By	
Sheet 1   of  6
Page	of  	
 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                  —
         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
         LJ site Preparation
             (Demolition, site clearing, etc.)
             Estimated installation Costs
                Vendor               ,
                In-house Staff

                               Waste Minimization Assessment
                  Proj. No	
Prepared By	
Checked By	
Sheet!_ of J_ Ptga	of
        CAPITAL COSTS (Cont)

        r~) Engineering and Procurement Costs (In-house & outside)
        ED Start-up Costs
           Training Costs                  	
        ED Permitting Costs
              In-house Staff Costs           	
        ED Initial Charge of Catalysts and Chemicals
        ED Working Capital [Raw Materials, Product. Inventory, Materials and Supplies (not elsewhere specified)].
                                    Item §2.
                                    item 13.
Estimated Salvage Value (If any)


Wast* Minimization Assessment
Pmr. UnH/Dper
Pmj No

Prepared BY
Checked By
Sheet 3 of 6 Page of

Cost Hem
Purchased Process Equipment
Utility Connections
Additional Equipment
Site Preparation
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


                         Wast* Minimization Assessment
                         Proc. Unit/Qper.	
                      Prepared By	
                      Checked By	
                      Sheet J__ of J_ Page	of  	
D Estimated Decrease (or Increase) In Utilities
Cooling PfOCMMM

Fuel (On or OK)
Plant Air
Inert Ah-


Decrease (or Increase) In Quantity
Unit per time

Total Decrease (or Increase)
$ per time

                          Include all relevant operating savings. Estimate these costs on an Incre-
                          mental basis (i.e., as decreases or increases over existing costs).
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

Unit Cost
$ per unit

Reduction In Quantity
Units per time

Decrease In Cost
f per time


                           Waste Minimization Assessment
                          Proc. Untt/Oper..
                          Proj. No	
Prepared By	
Checked By 	
Sheet JL of _6_ Page	of 	
                          COST INFORMATION

Estimated Decrease (or Increase) In Ancillary Catalysts and Chemicals

Unit Cost

DMTMM (or IncrMM) hi Quantity

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.
Estimated Decrease (or Increase) In Insurance and Liability Costs (explain).
Estimated Decrease (or Increase) In Other Operating Costs (explain).
     Estimated Incremental Revenues from an Increase (or Decrease) In Production or Marketable
     By-products (explain).

 Waste Minimization Assessment
Proc. Unft/Oper	
Proj. No	
Prepared By	
Checked By 	
Sheet J_ of _|_ Page	of 	
          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


                             Waste Minimization Assessment
   Proc. Untt/Oper..
   Proj. No	
Prepared By	
Checked By 	
Sheet J_ of J_  Page	of
     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

Site  ,
 Waste Minimization Assessment
Proc. Unit/Oper.	
                     Prepared By	
                     Checked By	
                     Sheet J_ of J_  Page	of 	
                                PROFITABILITY WORKSHEET
      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.
   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)
                      (10% discount)
                      (15% discount)
                      (20% discount)
                      (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.
     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




Waste Minimization Assessment
Pmr Mnft/ftpar
Ptoj No

Prepared By
Checked Bv
Sheet 1 of 1 Page of



Task Leader








Approval By	
Authorization By
Project Started (Date)

 Waste Minimization Assessment
Proc. UnWOptr.	
Prepared By	
Checked By 	
Sheet J_ of JL  Pag*	of  	
     WM Option Description
(without option)
  (a)    Period Duration
            (b)    Production per Period
                 Units i
            (e)    input Matertaia Conaumptlon per Period
      PoundaftJnH Product
            (d)    Waste Generation per Period
                  Warta Stream
      Pmrnda/Unlt Product
            (e)    Sub«tance(a) of Concern • Generation Rate per Period
      Waste Stream
   Substance       Poupda
      Pounda/UnH Product

                                         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
        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

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.

Waste Minimization Assessment
Simplified Worksheets
Proj. No.
Prepared By
Checked Bv
Sheet 1 of 1 Page of
                              Begin the Waete Minimization
                                  Assessment Program
                                                     Workahaata  uaad
                           PLANNING  AND  ORGANIZATION
                                   • Gat management commitment
                                   • Sat overall assessment program goals
                                   • Organize assessment program task force
                                   Assessment organization
                                   and commitment to proceed
assessment targets
  and reevaluate
 previous options
      • 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
                                               Assessment report of
                                                 selected options
                            FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS  PHASE
                                    • Technical evaluation
                                    • Economic evaluation
                                    • Select options for implementation
                                               Final report, including
                                               recommended options
            Repeat the Process
                         • Justify projects and obtain funding
                         • Installation (equipment)
                         • Implementation (procedure)
                         • Evaluate performance
                                  Successfully operating
                                waste minimization projects

 Wasts Minimization Assessment
    Simplified Worksheets
Proj. No.
Prepared By _	
Checked By 	
Sheet JL of J_  Page
                              SITE DESCRIPTION
Street Address:
State/ZIP Cods:
Telephone:  (
Mator Products;
SIC Codes:
EPA Generator Number :
Mator Unit or:
Product or:
Facilities/Equipment Age:



Waste Mnhnlatton Assessment

Simplified Worksheets

Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet _1_ of J_ Page of

                     PROCESS INFORMATION
Process Unit/Operation:
Operation Type:   C
LJ Continuous        D Discrete
D Batch or Semi-Batch   D Other—

Process Flow Diagram
Material/Energy Balance
Flow/Amount Measurements


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




Used In this
Report (Y/N)






Waste Minimization Assessment
Simplified Worksheets
Pro] No


•Dared By
set 1 of 1 Page _ of



Component/ Attribute of Concern

Annual Consumption Rat*
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)

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.


Waate Mnlmliatlon Aaaeaament
Simplified Workaheeta
Pmj No




oared By
Mt J_ of 1 Page of

4* EPA


Component/ Attribute of Concern

Annual Production Rat*
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)

Stream No. 	

Stream No. 	

Stream No.




waste Minsntzation Assessment
Simplified Worksheets
Pmj No

Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet 1 of J_ Page of


Watte ID/Name:
Component/or Property of Concern
Annual Generation Rate (units }
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

Sum of Priority Rating Scores
Priority Rank
Stream No. 	

Rating (R)


Stream No.

Rating (ft)


Stream No.

Rating (R)


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).

 Wsstt IflnlBiteatlon Attsiamtm
    Simplified WorkshMts
Proc. UnBOptr.	
Proj. No	
Prepared By	
Crocked By 	
Shift J_ of J_ Pag«	<*  	
MMtlng format («.g., bralnttonnlng, nominal group t*chnlqu«)
MMlIng Coordinator	
Maatlng Participants	
             List Suflfl««t»d Options
                       Ratlonal«/R«marks on Option


Waste Minimization Assessment
Simplified Workeheets
P"w?- Unft^pt?i 	 "., ' "
Proj No


f^J ^J •^••^•^^^o^^
^^^ ^^r vivx-Xvy;:;: :>< ^v:i:;;;:;:::;Xv.::v.> :;::•:':'x5;:-::::^:-l::v:'::;^•:v:^::1^x:^:^:::;::::::'^^^>^^i^»:%y^^: x^::::> •' '•'- ' ':v:::-:":'--::.v
Dotton Name:
set 1 of 1 Page of

Brltf ly describe th* option
wast* Stream(s) Aff«cMd;
Input MattriaKs) Affaetad;
Product(s) Affaetad:
  Sourca Raductlon
  ___  Equlpmant-Ralatad Changa
  	  Matarialaflalatad Chang*
                         LJ Racycllng/Rauaa
                             	 On»tt»  _
                      Matarlal rausad for original purpoaa
                      Mataria) uaad for a towar-quallty purpoa*
                      Matarfai aold
                      Matartal burnad for haat racovary
 Originally proposad by:
 Approved for atudy?—
no,   by;
 Reason for Acceptance or Rejection


Waste Minimization Assessment
Simplified Worksheets
Pmc lln»/Op«r
Proj. No.

Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet 1 of 1 Page of

Capital Costs
      Purchased Equipment
      Utility Connections -
      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

                                         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.

Tabla C-1.  Electroplating Solution Analyse*

                           TabUi C-2.   Wastawatar  characteristics
Brass Plating
     Copper metal
     Zinc metal
     Sodium cyanide
     Sodium hydroxide
     Copper cyanide
     Zinc cyanide
     Rochelle salts

Nickel Plating
Nickel metal
Nickel chloride
Boric acid
Nickel sulfate
8.0 oz/gal
16.65 oz/gal
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

 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

 1.5 gallons per minute
Suspended soRds
Total cyanide
Total chromium
Oil and grease
1.0 mg/L
0.42 mg/L
1.30 mg/L
0.93 mg/L
0.2 mg/L
                           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
                              • Increasing plating solution temperatures.
                              - Lowering the concentration of plating solution
                              • Increase the recovery of drag-out wfth drain

                            * 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.

         Figure C-1.  PLANT LAYOUT

   Amalgamated Motel Refinfshinq Corporation
Worldwide Headquarters and Production Facilities
            Beverly Hills, California

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

Feasibility  Analysis

The assessment team conducted technical and
economic feasibility  analyses on  each of the four

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

 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

 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.


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.

                                            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

Tanks, warehouses, drum
  storage yards, bins,
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

Maintenance shops



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,

Fly ash, slag, tube dean-out material, chemical additives, oil
  empty containers, boiler btowdown, water-treating chemical

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).

 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
 Heat exchanger
 Metal part*
 Metal curfi
  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
* 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
* Disposal of spent treating

• 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
* Excessive cooling water
 > Indiscriminate use of solvent
  or water
* Poor rack maintenance
* Excessive rinsing with water
• Fast removal of workpiece

• Poor operator training or
* Inadequate quality control
*  Inadequate production planning
   and inventory control of
 • Inadequate maintenance
 * Poor operator training
 * Lack of attention by operator
 • Excessive use of water in
• 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
Source: Jacobs Engineering Group

                                      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

    Tabie E-1.   Waste Minimization Options for Coating  Operations
         Waste Reduction Measures
      Coating overspray
 Coating material that fate
 to reach the object being
 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
 Proper training of operators
 Use robots tor spraying
 Avoid excessive air pressure for coating
 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.

     Stripping wastes
 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
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.




      Table E-2.   Waste Minimization Options for Equipment  Cleaning  Operations
        Waste Reduction Measures
        Spent solvent-or
        cleaning solutions
Tank cleaning operations
  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
                                                                                                        Scaling and drying up can be prevented.
                                                                                                        Minimizes leftover material.
                                                                                                        Reduces ding.

                                                                                                        Minimizes solvent consumption.
                                                                                                        Prevents hardening of scale that requires
                                                                                                         more severe cleaning.
        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.

Table E-3.   Waste Minimization through Good Operating Practices
     Good Operating Practice
                 Program Ingredients
  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)
» 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
           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

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 Reduction Measures
          Material/waste tracking and
          inventory control
   Avoid over -purchasing
   Accept raw material only afar inspection
   Ensure that invertcfy quantity ctoes not go to
   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.
          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
                                              * 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
                                             * 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 Reduction Measures
         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
This could eliminate the need for solvent
• cleaning.
                                                                                                          A single, larger waste that is more
                                                                                                          amenable to recydng.
         Mr emission*
Solvent loss from
degreasers and cold tanks
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
Avoid water contamination o< solvent
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

         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

                                      Appendix E
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.

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.

                                            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.
   Hazardous Material Management and Resource
     Recovery Program
   University of Alabama
   P.O. Box 6373
   Tuscaloosa, AL 35487-6373

   Alaska Health Project
   Waste Reduction Assistance Program
   431 West Seventh Avenue, Suite 101
   Anchorage, AK 99501

   Arkansas Industrial Development Commission
   One State Capitol Mall
   Little Rock, AR 72201

   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 Hazardous Waste Management Service
   Suite 360
   800 Asylum Avenue
   Hartford, CT 061 OS

   Connecticut Department of Economic Development
   210 Washington Street
   Hartford CT 06106

   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
Georgia  (continued)
   Environmental Protection Division
   Georgia Department of Natural Resources
   Floyd Towers East, Suite 1154
   205 Butler Street
   Atlanta, CA 30334
   (404) 656-2833

   Hazardous Waste Research and Information Center
   Illinois Department of Energy and Natural Resources
   1808 Woodfield Drive
   Savoy, IL 61874

   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

   Environmental Management and Education Program
   Young Graduate House, Room 120
   Purdue University
   West Lafayette, IN 47907

   Indiana Department ol Environmental Management
   Office of Technical Assistance
   P.O.Box 6015
   105 South Meridian Street
   Indianapolis. IN 46206-6015

   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

   Center for Industrial Research and Service
   205 Engineering Annex
   Iowa State University
   Ames, IA 50011
   (515) 294-3420

   Bureau of West* Management
   Department of Health and Environment
   Forbes Reid, Building 730
   Topeka, KS 66620

   Division of Watt* Management
   Natural Resource* and Environmental Protection Cabinet
   Frankfort, KY 40601

   Department of Environmental Quality
   Office of Solid and Hazardous Waste
   P.O. Box 44307
   Baton Rouge, LA 70804

   Maryland Hazardous Wast* FadBties Siting Board
   60 We* Street, Suite 200A
   AnnapoBt, MD 21401

   Maryland Environmental Service
   2020 Industrial DnVe
   Annapolis, MD 21401
   (800) 492-9188 (In Maryland)

   Office of Safe Waste Management
   Department of Environmental Management
   100 Cambridge Street, Room 1094
   Boston, MA 02202

   Source Reduction Program
   Massachusetts Department of Environmental Quality
   1 Winter Street
   Boston, MA 02106

   Resource Recovery Section
   Department of Natural Resources
   P.O. Box 30028
   Lansing, Ml 48909

   Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
   Solid and Hazardous Waste Division
   S20 Lafayette Road
   St. Paul, MN 55155
M/nnesota  (continued)
   Minnesota Technical Assistance Program
   W-140 Boynton Health Service
   University of Minnesota
   Minneapolis, MN 55455
   (800) 247-0015 (in Minnesota)

   Minnesota Waste Management Board
   123 Thorson Center
   7323 Fifty-Eighth Avenue North
   Crystal, MN 55428
   (612) 536-0816

   State Environmental Improvement and Energy
     Resources Agency
   P.O. Box 744
   Jefferson  City, MO 65102

Mew Jersey
   New Jersey Hazardous Waste Faculties Siting
   Room 614
   28 West State Street
   Trenton, NJ 06608
   (609) 292-1459

   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
    New York State Environmental Facilities Corporation
    50 Wo« Road
    Albany, NY 12205

 North Cunltna
    PoIutJon Prevention Pays Program
    Department of Natural Resources and Community
    P.O. Box 27687
    512 North Salisbury Street
    Raleigh, NC 27611

    Governor's Waste Management Board
    32S North Salisbury Street
    Raleigh, NC 27611
    (919) 733-9020

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

   Division of Solid and Hazardous Waat* Management
   Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
   P.O. Box 1049
   1800 WaterMark Drive
   Columbus, OH 43266-1048

   Ohio Technology Transfer Organization
   Suite 200
   65 East State Street
   Columbus. OH 43266-0330

   Industrial Waste Elimination Program
   Oklahoma State Department of Health
   P.O. Box 53551
   Oklahoma CHy, OK 73152
   (405) 271-7353

   Oregon Hazardous Waste Reduction Program
   Department of Environmental QuaJty
   811 Southwest Sixth Avenue
   Portland, OR 97204

   Pennsylvania Technical Assistance Program
   501 F. Orvis Keller Bulding
   University Park. PA 16802

   Bureau of Waste Management
   Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources
   P.O. Box 2063
   Fulton Building
   3rd and Locust Streets
   Harrisburg. PA17120

   Center of Hazardous Material Research
   Ptttsburgh, PA 15238

 Rhode  /stand
   Ocean State Cleanup and Recycling Program
   Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management
   9 Hayes Street
   Providence, Rl 02908-5003
   (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

   Center for Industrial Services
   102 Alumni Hal
   University of Tennessee
   Knoxvlle,TN 37996
   Office of Poficy and Planning
   Virginia Department of Waste Management
   11th Floor, Monroe Bulding
   101 North 14th Street
   Richmond, VA 23219

   Hazardous Waste Section
   Mai Stop PV-11
   Washington Department of Ecology
   Otympia,WA 96504-6711
   Bureau of SoH Watte Management
   Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
   P.O. Box 7921
   101 South Webster Street
   Madison, Wl 53707
   Sold Waste Management Program
   Wyoming Department of Environmental Quafty
   Hsrschter Buldkig, 4tti Rear, West Wing
   122 Watt 25th Street
   Cheyenne, WY 82002

                                            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
S .
x Y z
                                   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.

                                          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

• 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

•  A  contingency  of  $20,000 for  unforeseen costs
   and/or overruns Is included.

•  Planning, design, and installation are expected to
   take one year.


•  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.

•  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
Costs per ton of waste
   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.


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.

Wast* MWmbatJon
ProfltabllKy Program

Capital Cost Factors

Plant Engineering
Permitting Costs
Working Capital
Start-up Costs

Interest Rate on Debt, %
Debt Repayment, years

Depreciation period
income Tax Rate, %

Escalation Rates, %

Cost of Capital (for NPV)






started 5/22/87
last changed 8/1/87


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





Operating Labor
Operator hours/shift
Operating day&Vear
Wage rate. $/man-hour

Operating Supplies
(% of Operating Labor)

Maintenance Costs
(% of Capital Costs)

Other Labor Costs
(% of O&M Labor)
(% of O&M Labor * Suf
Plant Overhead
Home Office Overhead
Labor Burden






Construction Yea

Capital Expenditures
Plant Engineering^
Permitting Costs
Start-up Costs
Depreciable Capital
Working Capital
Interest on Debt
Total Capital Requirement

Equity Investment
Debt Principal
Interest on Debt
Total Financing




Figure H-1. Input Information and Capital Investment


Operating Year Number
Escalation Factor

Increased Production
Marketable By-products
Amuri MwtMM

Raw Materials
Disposal Cost*
Maintenance Labor
Maintenance Supplies
Operating Labor
Operating Supples
Labor Burden
Plant Overhead
Home Office Overhead
Total Operating GMU



















! i10.728
! 10,728



$11 ,264




                                                                 Figure H-2. Revenues and Operating Costs


Construction Year
Operating Year

Book Value
Depreciation (by straight-
Depreciation (by doubleDI

Debt Balance
Interest Payment
Principal Repay merit


Construction Year
Operating Year

+ 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










(! 2.857)












































Figure H-3, Cash Bows for Return on Equity


Construction Year
Opef ating Year

Book Value
Depreciation (by straight-
Depreciation J>y doubte C


Construction Year
Operating Year

+ 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

































_$_1 15,623












                                                                  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
* 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.
              - Your Source to U.S. and Foreign Government
                 Research and Technology.