United States     Office of Pollution
Environmental Protection  Prevention and Toxics
Agency
                       EPA/560/8-92/001 C
                       February 1992
Pollution Prevention
Options In Wood
Furniture
Manufacturing

A Bibliographic Report
                      Printed on Recycled Paper

-------
POLLUTION PREVENTION OPTIONS
IN WOOD FURNITURE MANUFACTURING

A BIBLIOGRAPHIC REPORT

FEBRUARY 1992
This report was developed by U.S. EPA's Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, under the direction
of:
David A. Hindin
William M. Burch
Special Projects Office

and

Daniel L. Fort
Economics and Technology Division
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M. Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
This report was prepared under EPA contract number No. 68-WO-0027
by Science Applications International Corporation.

-------
                             TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION I.     INTRODUCTION 	     1

              Overview	     1
              What is Pollution Prevention?  	     2
              Information on Pollution Prevention 	     3
              Purpose of this Report	     4
              Limits of this Report	•	    5

SECTION H.    OVERVIEW OF FURNITURE MANUFACTURING	     6

              Introduction to Furniture Manufacturing Industries 	     6
              Wastes of Concern	     7
              Furniture Manufacturing Processes	     7
              General Source Reduction and Recycling Techniques	     9


SECTION m.   POLLUTION PREVENTION DOCUMENTS AND REFERENCES	    14

              Compendiums and Guides	    14
              Additional Pollution Prevention Information 	    15


SECTION IV.   BIBLIOGRAPHY	    19
APPENDIX A  RELEASES OF TARGET CHEMICALS (1988 TRI data)  	   20

-------
                                    LIST OF TABLES


                                                                                      Page

Table 1.  Wood Furniture Manufacturing Industries	     6

Table 2.  Typical Operations Using Materials Which May Generate Hazardous Wastes	     8

Table 3.  Examples of Source Reduction and Recycling Options for Finishing
         and Gluing Operations	     9

Table 4.  Recommended Compendiums and Guides	    14

Table 5.  Additional Pollution Prevention References	    16



                                   LIST OF FIGURES


Figure 1. Process Flow Diagram:  Franklin Furniture, Greeneville, Tennessee	     7

-------
                    POLLUTION PREVENTION OPTIONS IN
                    WOOD FURNITURE MANUFACTURING:
                           A BIBLIOGRAPHIC REPORT

                                     SECTION I:
                                  INTRODUCTION
Overview
   The United States Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA)  developed  this bibliographic
report to assist wood furniture manufacturers in
developing cost-effective pollution prevention
practices to reduce or eliminate their releases of
the 17 chemicals targeted  for  reductions  in
EPA's 33/50 Program.   In addition, EPA
developed this report to educate its own staff and
State personnel on pollution prevention oppor-
tunities in these  industries.  EPA hopes this
report also will assist the public, engineering and
business students, and other interested persons in
learning about pollution prevention.

   The 33/50 Program is EPA's voluntary
pollution prevention initiative to reduce national
pollution releases and off-site transfers of  17
toxic chemicals by 33 per cent by the end  of
1992 and by  50 per cent by the  end of 1995.
The Agency is inviting companies to participate
in this voluntary  program by  examining their
own industrial processes to identify and imple-
ment cost-effective pollution prevention practices
for these chemicals.  The Program aims, through
voluntary  pollution  prevention activities,  to
reduce releases  and  off-site  transfers of  a
targeted set of 17 chemicals from a national total
of 1.4 billion pounds in  1988 to  700  million
pounds by 1995, a 50% overall reduction.

   While EPA is seeking to reduce aggregate
national  environmental  releases  of the  17
chemicals  by 50  per cent  by  1995,  individual
companies are encouraged to develop their own
reduction goals to contribute to this national
effort.   EPA also  encourages companies  to
reduce releases of other TRI chemicals and to
extend these reductions to their facilities outside
the United States.   EPA  will  periodically
recognize those companies  that have committed
to reduce their releases and  transfers of the
targeted chemicals, and publicly recognize the
pollution prevention successes these companies
subsequently achieve.
                          POLLUTION PREVENTION CAN:

         *  Reduce a company's costs and legal liabilities associated with waste
            treatment and disposal;

         •  Reduce production costs by conserving raw materials, water, and
            energy} and
         •  Protect the environment and public health.

-------
          THE  17 CHEMICALS  TARGETED  FOR  REDUCTIONS IN THE 33/50
          PROGRAM:
          Benzene
          Cadmium and Compounds
          Carbon TetrachJoride  .
          Chloroform
          Chromium and Compounds
          Cyanide and Compounds
          Lead and Compounds
          Mercury and Compounds
          Methylene Chloride
Methyl Ethyl Ketone
Methyl Isobutyl Ketone
Nickel and Compounds
Tetrachloroethylene
Toluene
14,1-Trichloroemane
Trlchloroethylene
Xylenes
         These chemicals were selected from the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI).  The TRI
         is a computerized data base containing public information on the annual releases and
         transfers of approximately 300 toxic chemicals reported by  U.S. manufacturing
         facilities to EPA and the States.  Since 1987 federal law has  required facilities to
         report the amount of both routine and accidental releases of the 300 listed chemicals
         to the air, water and soil, and the amount contained in wastes transferred off-site.
         As required by the Pollution Prevention  Act of 1990, TRI  industrial report
         requirements will be expanded, beginning in calendar year  1991, to include
         Information on pollution prevention.
What is Pollution Prevention?

    Pollution prevention (sometimes referred to
as source reduction) is the use of materials,
processes, or practices that reduce or eliminate
the creation of pollutants or wastes at the source.
Pollution  prevention  includes  practices  that
reduce the use of hazardous materials, energy,
water or other resources,  and practices  that
protect natural resources through conservation or
more efficient use.

   Pollution prevention should be considered
the first step in  a hierarchy of options for
reducing the generation of pollution.  The next
step in the hierarchy is responsible recycling of
any wastes that cannot be reduced or eliminated
at the source.  Wastes that cannot be recycled
should be treated  in accordance with environ-
mental standards.   Finally,  any  wastes  that
remain  after  treatment should be  disposed of
safely.

    EPA  is  promoting  pollution  prevention
because it is often the most cost-effective option
to reduce pollution and the environmental and
health risks associated with pollution. Pollution
prevention is often cost effective because it may
reduce raw material losses, reduce reliance on
expensive "end-of-pipe" treatment technologies
and disposal practices, conserve energy, water,
chemicals, and other  inputs,  and reduce the
potential  liability  associated   with   waste
generation.      Pollution   prevention   is
environmentally desirable for these very same
reasons:  pollution itself is reduced at the source
while resources are conserved.

    Perhaps the best way to understand pollution
prevention is to  consider a few examples of
some possible  types  of pollution  prevention

-------
techniques   and  processes.    Some  general
examples of pollution prevention techniques are
described below:

•   Production Planning and Sequencing - plan
    and  sequence  production  so  that  only
    necessary operations are performed and that
    no operation  is needlessly "undone" by  a
    following operation. One example is to sort
    out "reject" parts  prior  to painting.   A
    second  example is  to reduce the frequency
    of cleaning  equipment  by  painting all
    products of the same color at the same time.
    A  third  example   is  to schedule  batch
    processing  in  a manner  that  allows  the
    wastes or residues from one batch to be used
    as an input for the subsequent batch (e.g., to
    schedule  paint formulation from  lighter
    shades to darker) so that equipment need not
    be cleaned between batches.

•   Process  or  equipment   modification  -
    change the process,  parameters or equipment
    used in that process, to reduce the amount of
    waste generated.   For example,  you  can
    change to a paint application technique that
    is more efficient than spray painting.

•   Raw material  substitution or elimination —
    replace existing  raw materials  with other
    materials that produce less waste, or a non-
    toxic waste.     Some examples  include
    substituting  water  based  coatings  and
    adhesives for  solvent based coatings and
    adhesives.

•   Loss   prevention  and   housekeeping  -
    perform preventive maintenance and manage
    equipment and materials so as to minimize
    opportunities for leaks, spills, evaporative
    losses and other releases of potentially toxic
    chemicals.  For example, clean  spray guns
    in  a manner that does  not damage leather
    packings and subsequently causes the guns to
    leak;  or  place drip pans under  leaking
    machinery to allow recovery of the leaking
    fluid.
•  Waste segregation and separation -  avoid
    mixing different types of wastes, and mixing
    hazardous   wastes  with   non-hazardous
    wastes.  This technique makes the recovery
    of hazardous wastes easier by minimizing
    the  number   of  different   hazardous
    constituents  in any given waste stream.
    Also, it prevents the contamination of non-
    hazardous wastes.  For example, segregate
    solvents by solvent type.

•  Closed-loop Recycling -  use or reuse of a
    waste as an ingredient or feedstock  in the
    production process on-site.   Recycling in
    which a waste is recovered and reused in the
    production process on-site as an input is a
    form of pollution prevention.  One example
    is using a small on-site still to recover and
    re-use degreasing solvents.

•  Training and  Supervision   -   provide
    employees  with  the  information and  the
    incentive to minimize  waste  generation in
    their daily duties.   For example, this might
    include  ensuring  that  employees practice
    proper   and  efficient  use  of  tools and
    supplies,  and that  they are  aware  of,
    understand,  and  support the company's
    pollution prevention goals.
Information on Pollution Prevention

    One good source of information on pollution
prevention is EPA's Pollution Prevention Infor-
mation Clearinghouse ("PPIC").  PPIC contains
technical, policy, programmatic, legislative, and
financial information on  pollution prevention
efforts in the  United States and abroad.   The
PPIC may be reached  by personal computer
modem ("PIES"),  telephone hotline  or mail.
Associated with  the PPIC is the  PIES,  or
Pollution  Prevention  Information  Exchange
System, a free 24-hour computer bulletin board
consisting of  message centers, technical data
bases,  issue-specific "mini-exchanges",  and a
calendar of pollution prevention  events.   The

-------
PIES allows a user to access the full range of
information in the PPIC.  For information on
how to use the PPIC/PIES call (703) 821-4800.
To logon to the PIES system using a modem and
a PC call (703) 506-1025 (set your communica-
tion software at 8 bits and no parity).  Many of
the documents referenced  in this report  are
available through the PPIC/PIES.

    While  the  PPIC  provides  a  centralized
information source, you may wish to seek the
guidance or help of pollution prevention experts.
Some organizations that you may wish to contact
include:

Trade Associations - often trade associations can
provide you with pollution prevention assistance
directly, or they can refer you to someone who
can.

State Waste Management Agencies -  These
agencies  often  have  staff  people  who  are
knowledgeable about  pollution prevention and
are willing to provide assistance.   Many  states
now have pollution prevention programs which
may be able to offer information and sometimes
technical assistance on pollution prevention.

Regional  Environmental  Protection  Agency
Offices  — There are ten Regional Offices of the
U.S.  Environmental  Protection Agency.   The
easiest way to find out which Regional Office is
responsible for your area is to  call the toll free
RCRA/Superfund Hotline (see below) and ask
for the  telephone number  or address of  the
Regional Office responsible for your area.

EPA  Office  of  Research  and  Development
Pollution Prevention Research Branch, at  (513)
569-7215   can  also  provide  technical  and
engineering pollution prevention information.

Environmental Protection Agency - Within U.S.
EPA Headquarters you may conveniently contact
any of the folio whig information sources:
EPA Waste Minimization Branch, at (703) 308-
8402,  can provide you with technical  waste
minimization information;

Pollution  Prevention  Division, at (202)  260-
3557, can assist you hi understanding pollution
prevention and provide a great deal of pollution
prevention information; and the

RCRA/Superfund Hotline, at (800) 424-9346 (or
(202) 260-3000),  can answer your  pollution
prevention questions,  help you access informa-
tion in PIES, and assist you in searching for and
obtaining documents.

    A   comprehensive,   national  listing   of
pollution  prevention  resources,  documents,
courses,  and programs, including names and
phone numbers,  is contained in an annual EPA
publication.   Copies  of  this  document  -
Pollution  Prevention  Resources  and Training
Opportunities in  1992 - may be obtained by
calling the PPIC/PIES support number at (703)
821-4800.

Purpose of this Report

    This report  is  intended  to help  wood
furniture  manufacturing  companies   develop
pollution prevention practices to reduce their
releases  of  the  17  chemicals   targeted  for
reductions  in the 33/50 Program, as  well  as
other pollutants  and wastes  generated.    In
addition, this report is intended to assist EPA
staff,  state environmental  agencies,  and  other
interested  persons hi learning about pollution
prevention opportunities.  The remainder of this
report provides:

•   An overview of the various wood furniture
    manufacturing processes and the wastes they
    produce;

•   A quick  reference to pollution prevention
    options   applicable  to  many   of  these
    processes, including summaries of economic
    benefits; and

-------
•  A  bibliography of references  that describe
    additional information on potentially useful
    pollution  prevention  options,  procedures,
    techniques,  as  well  as  waste  recycling
    options.

Limits of this Report

    This report provides an overview of the
pollution prevention and  recycling alternatives
that may  be available in this  industry.   This
report  is only a starting point to assist the user
hi his or her preliminary research  and develop-
ment of  pollution  prevention options.    Of
course, each company remains responsible for
identifying,   evaluating   and   implementing
pollution   prevention   practices   that    are
appropriate for its  particular  situation.    By
compiling and distributing this report EPA  is not
recommending  the   use  of  any  particular
processes, raw materials, products, or techniques
in any  particular industrial setting.  Compliance
with environmental, occupational and safety and
health  laws,  as well  as all applicable federal,
state,  and  local  laws and regulations is  the
responsibility of each individual business and is
not the focus of this document.

    The information contained  in this report is
intended to be a fairly comprehensive biblio-
graphy of the documented information on pollu-
tion prevention and recycling practices for the
wood furniture industry.  However, the collec-
tion, organization and dissemination of pollution
prevention information is a relatively new under-
taking, as well as an ongoing and evolutionary
process.   In addition, there are  limits to any
bibliography, including this bibliography. Thus,
this bibliography may not contain every relevant
article  on pollution prevention and recycling for
wood manufacturers.  EPA encourages all users
who discover,  hi the literature or hi the  field,
pollution prevention options that are not cited hi
this report  to share this information with  EPA.
Please  submit any  corrections,  updates,  or
comments on this report to:
Pollution Prevention Information Clearinghouse
Science Applications International  Corporation
7600-B Leesburg Pike
Falls Church, VA 22043
    or
Special Projects Office  (TS-792A)
Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics
U.S. EPA
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460

-------
                                     SECTION H:
               OVERVIEW OF FURNITURE MANUFACTURING
Introduction   to    Furniture
Manufacturing Industries

   The  furniture   industry   encompasses
manufacturers of both metal and wood furniture.
This report  focuses  on the  wood furniture
manufacturing  portion  of   this  industry.
Pollution prevention   techniques  for  metal
furniture manufacturing are contained in the
companion report Pollution Prevention Options
In Metal Fabricated Products Industries:  A
Bibliographic Report.   Within  the  wood
furniture manufacturing sector, three industries
were identified as responsible for the majority
                      of environmental releases of one or more of the
                      33/50  Program   target  chemicals:   Wood
                      Household Furniture  - Except  Upholstered;
                      Wood Household  Furniture — Upholstered; and
                      Wood Office Furniture.  Table 1 lists the types
                      of products produced by each of these industries
                      (1). These industries typically include processes
                      that  shape,  assemble and finish wood  into
                      different types of  furniture.
                    Table 1. Wood Furniture Manufacturing Industries
  SIC 2511  Wood Household Furniture, Except Upholstered

     This group includes establishments that manufacture wood household furniture commonly
     found in dwellings such as:
     •  Beds
     •  Bookcases
     •  Chairs
Stools
Tables
Desks
• Chests
• Headboards
  SIC 2512 Wood Household Furniture, Upholstered

     This group includes establishments that manufacture upholstered furniture on wooden
     frames such as:
     •  Chairs
     •  Recliners
Couches   •  Sofas
Rockers
  SIC 2521  Wood Office Furniture

     This group includes establishments that manufacture office furniture such as:
        Benches
        Chairs
        Desks
        Tables
Cabinets
Bookcases
Filing Cabinets
Partitions

-------
Wastes of Concern
Furniture Manufacturing Processes
    The wood furniture industry was selected for
this 33/50 Program report because of the large
volume of solvent releases  reported by this
industry in the Toxic Release Inventory (TRI).
A wide range of solvents are reported as used in
the  furniture  industry,  including   alcohols,
ketones, esters, glycols, glycol ethers, aliphatics,
aromatics,  amines,  and  chlorinated  solvents
(2,3).   The  major  33/50  Program  solvents
released  from this industry are  methyl ethyl
ketone, methyl isobutyl ketone,  toluene, and
xylenes.    The  overwhelming  majority  of
environmental releases  of solvents  from this
industry   are  via   atmospheric  emissions.
Appendix A  summarizes  reported releases  of
target  chemicals  from  the  wood  furniture
manufacturing industry.   Trace  amounts  of
cadmium, chromium,  mercury and lead are also
reported   as  released  in  wood   furniture
manufacturing process wastewater (4).
    The four general processes of any wood
furniture manufacturing operation are raw stock
shaping, parts assembly, finishing or coatings
application, and unit packaging.  Figure 1  is an
example of an operation diagram for  a wood
furniture manufacturing facility (5).  Raw stock
shaping and unit packaging operations do not use
or generate  wastes containing any of  the  17
chemicals  of concern.  Wastes from  shaping
operations are predominantly wood (e.g., dust
and shavings) which are typically burned in the
boiler  as a fuel supplement.   Unit packaging
wastes are nonhazardous solid wastes  such as
paper, plastic, cardboard, and wooden  pallets.
Finishing  operations, and  to  a  lesser extent
gluing during parts assembly, are the major
sources  of  solvent  wastes  and   releases.
Finishing involves coating,  drying, and sanding
the furniture in a series of repeated steps until
                          Figure 1. Process Flow Diagram: Franklin
                               Furniture, Greeneville Tennessee
        •Mr
                                                            FILTCN CMC

-------
the desired final appearance is achieved.  Table
2   lists  typical   furniture  operations  using
materials which may generate hazardous wastes.
Solvents are used in the stains, paints,  and
finishes as well as in inks used in the printing of
simulated wood grain onto plywood and particle
board. Solvents used in finishing operations are
typically a complex blend of different types of
solvents.  Solvents are also used to strip earlier
coatings from pieces prior to recoating.  Further
solvents  are used in cleanup operations (i.e..
removing overspray  from  spray  booths and
rinsing solvent-based finishes from spray lines
and equipment between color changes).
               Table 2. Typical Operations Using Materials Which May Generate
                                      Hazardous Wastes
Typical
Process/Operation
Wood cleaning and wax
removal
Refinishing/Stripping
Staining
Painting
Finishing
Cleaning brashes, spray gun
and spray equipment, and
overspray from spray booths
Gluing, cleaning adhesive
application equipment
Typical Materials
Used
petroleum distillates, white
spirits
paint removers, varnish
removers, enamel
removers, shellac removers,
paint solvents, turpentine
stains
enamels, lacquers, epoxy,
alkyds, acrylics
varnish, shellac,
polyurethane, lacquers with
residues
paint thinners, enamel
reducers, varnish removers,
shellac removers, white
spirits
Adhesives
Typical Material
Ingredients
petroleum distillates
mineral spirits
acetone, toluene,
petroleum distillates,
methanol, methylene
chloride, alcohols,
ketones, oxygenated
solvents
mineral spirits, alcohol
pigments
toluene, pigments,
titanium dioxide,
epoxy ester resins,
aromatic hydrocarbons,
glycol ether, halogenated
hydrocarbons,
vinylacetate acrylic
denatured alcohols,
resins, shellac, petroleum
distillates, toluene,
diisocyanate
acetone, toluene,
petroleum distillates,
methanol, methylene
chloride, isopropanol,
mineral spirits, alcohols
methyl isobutyl ketone,
methyl ethyl ketone,
xylene, toluene,
1,1,1 ,tricholorethane
General Types of
Wastes Generated
ignitable wastes, spent
solvents, volatile
emissions
ignitable wastes, ignitable
paint wastes, solvent still
bottoms, volatile
emissions
ignitable wastes, spent
solvents, solvent still
bottoms, volatile
emissions
ignitable paint wastes,
ignitable wastes, solvent
still bottoms, paint wastes
containing heavy metals,
volatile emissions
ignitable wastes, spent
solvents, solvent still
bottoms, volatile
emissions
ignitable paint wastes,
ignitable wastes, spent
solvents, solvent still
bottoms, volatile
emissions
volatile emissions
Source: Tennessee Hazardous Waste Minimization Program.

-------
Gluing  operations  are  another   source  of
atmospheric solvent releases.  The amount of
adhesives used in wood furniture manufacturing
varies  depending  on the   type of  product.
Adhesive use may not be a significant source of
solvent releases from a facility that has minimal
gluing operations.  However, solvent releases
due  to  adhesive use  from  a  facility  manu-
facturing  products  with   vaneer  may   be
significant.    Commonly  used  solvents  in
adhesive  formulations  include methyl isobutyl
ketone, methyl ethyl ketone, xylene, toluene,
and 1,1,1, trichloroethane (6). Solvents are also
used  to clean adhesive  application equipment
such as spray guns.
                            General    Source    Reduction
                            Recycling Techniques
                                and
                                Finishing operations are the largest source of
                            environmental release of solvents and hence the
                            focus  of most source reduction and recycling
                            efforts.  The  most  common  management  of
                            solvents is recycling or disposal.  Many facilities
                            incinerate spent solvents or burn them for fuel
                            since the solvents are typically non-halogenated
                            and have high BTU values (2).   Table  3
                            provides examples  of source  reduction and
                            recycling  options  for  finishing  and  gluing
                            operations.  Recycling solvents from adhesives
                            operations may not  be practicable at  facilities
                            which use small quantities of adhesives.
                 Table 3. Examples of Source Reduction and Recycling Options
                               for Finishing and Gluing Operations
  Types of Techniques
            Description
Examples of Costs and Savings
      and Other Information*
  Source Reduction
  Training and Supervision
Train spray gun operators in proper spray
techniques to minimize coating waste
generation.
Annual cost savings:  $50,000 to $70,000.
Finishing material required reduced 8-
10%.
[Reference #4.]
  Production Planning and
  Sequencing
Flush equipment first with dirty solvent
before final cleaning with virgin solvent.
Waste savings/reduction: 98%; from
25,000 gallons of paint cleanup solvents to
400 gallons. Company uses cleanup
solvents in formulation of subsequent
batches.
[Reference #8, p. 14]
                          Use virgin solvents for final equipment
                          cleaning, then as paint thinner.
                                      Reduced solvent requirements.  [Reference
                                      #4, p. 15]
                          Schedule coatings so as to minimize color
                          changes or paint with lighter colors before
                          darker colors to minimize the number of
                          equipment cleanouts.
                          Consolidate solvent cleaning operations to
                          reduce losses through centralized cleaning
                          and standardized solvent usage.
                         Standardize cleanup solvent use to help
                         identify solvent use, consumption, and
                         release patterns.

-------
                Table 3. Examples of Source Reduction and Recycling Options
                         for Finishing and Gluing Operations (continued)
Types of Techniques
             Description
Examples of Costs and Savings
      and Other Information*
Production planning and
sequencing (continued)
Preinspect parts to prevent painting of
obvious rejects.
                         Reuse cleaning solvents for the same resin
                         system by first allowing solids to settle out
                         of solution.
                         Use pressurized air mixed with a mist of
                         solvent to clean equipment.
Process or Equipment
Modifications
Implement alternatives to compressed air
spray gun systems including:

•   Airless and air assisted airless
Material consumption reduced 15%.
Annual cost savings:  $55,000.  Waste
volume from spray booth cleanup reduced
50%. Payback period:  1 year.
[Reference #4, p. 14]
                             Electrostatic spray systems
                                         Annual cost savings: $150,000.  Payback
                                         period:  2 years.  Waste
                                         savings/reduction: 25% reduction in
                                         wiping stain compared to conventional
                                         spray units.  [Reference #4, p. 18, #25]
                             Flat line finishing
                                         Annual savings: 20-30% savings in total
                                         coating costs. Payback period:  2 years.
                                         Waste savings/reduction: 25% VOC
                                         reduction. [Reference #4, p. 17]
                         •   High-volume low-pressure (HVLP)
                                         Reference #1, #23, #24, #25
                         •   Vacuum systems
                                         Reference #11
                             Heaters in conjunction with
                             compressed air or airless systems
                                         Reference #1
                         Investigate use of substitutions to solvent-
                         based adhesives:

                         •  Water-based adhesives

                         •  Radiation curable adhesives

                         •   electron beam curing
                             ultraviolet curing

                         •  100% liquid reactive adhesives
                         •  High solids adhesives
                                         These are newly emerging technologies.
                                         [Reference #20]
                                                   10

-------
Table 3.  Examples of Source Reduction and Recycling Options
       for Finishing and Gluing Operations (continued)
Types of Techniques
Raw Material
Substitutions
Waste Segregation and
Separation
Inventory :-
Description
Investigate substitution to solvent-based
coatings such as:
a) Water-based inks
b) Water-based coatings
c) High-solids coatings
d) COj-based coatings
e) Vernoia oil-based coatings
Replace water-based paint booth filters
with dry filters. Dry filters will double
paint booth life and allow more efficient
treatment of wastewater.
Segregate cleaning solvents to facilitate
recycling.
Segregate non-hazardous paint solids from
hazardous paint solvents and thinner.
Segregate solvent waste streams and keep
free from water contamination.
Establish inventory procedures to minimize
degradation of stock (e.g., rust forming on
inside of open cans) and amount of
unusable coating if a product goes out of
production, changes.
Examples of Costs and Savings
and Other Information*
a) Annual cost savings: $75,000 in raw
material savings, $37,000 in disposal
costs. [Ref. #4, p. 15]
b) References #3 & #19
c) Reference #19
d) Reference #14
e) A newly emerging technology. [Ref.
#15, p. 12]
Annual cost savings: $1,500. Waste
SavingsVReductions: 3,000 gallons/year.
[Reference #9]
References #1 & #6

Accumulation of unusable materials
prevented, disposal costs for "wastes"
avoided, direct cost savings for new
coating materials. [Reference #4]
Recycling and Reuse
Solvent Recycling
Capture solvent emissions from gluing for -
reuse. Methods include use of activated
carbon or condensers, membrane system,
Brayton cycle heat pump, polymer
absorption.
Recycle spent solvents with recovery units
including:
• small on-site solvent recovery
stills to recycle spent lacquer
thinner.
• small in-house stills to recycle
methylene chloride.
• in-house stills to recycle xylene.
Membrane system, Brayton cycle heat
pump, polymer absorption are emerging
technologies and have not yet been
proven. [Reference #20]
Annual cost savings: $5,700. Payback
period: 1 year. [Reference #4]
Payback period: 2 years. Incentive was
to avoid RCRA liability related to
disposal. [Reference #4]
Payback period: 13 months. [Reference
#4]
                            11

-------
                Table 3. Examples of Source Reduction and Recycling Options
                         for Finishing and Gluing Operations (continued)
Types of Techniques
         Description
Examples of Costs and Savings
      and Other Information*
Recycling and reuse
(continued)
batch distillation units to recover
xylene from paint equipment cleanup.
Payback period:  13 months.  Annual
savings:  $5,000.  [Reference #8, p. 18]
                         •  recovery system for solvents contained
                                     Annual savings:  $1,000.  [Reference #8,
                                     p. 10]
                             in air emissions.
                             batch distillation units to recover
                             isopropyl acetate generated during
                             equipment cleanup.
                                     Payback period:  2 years. [Reference #8,
                                     p. 17]
                             small solvent recovery stills to recover
                             spent paint thinner from spray gun
                             cleanups and excess paint batches.
                                     Capital investment:  $6,000 for a 15
                                     gallons capacity still. Annual savings:
                                     $3,600 in new thinner savings; $5,400 in
                                     disposal savings. Payback period:  less
                                     than 1 year. Waste Savings/reduction:
                                     75% (745 gallons of thinner recovered
                                     from 1,003 gallons).  Product/Waste
                                     throughput information:  1,500 gallons of
                                     spent thinner processed per year.
                                     [Reference #8, p. 6]
                             a methyl ethyl ketone solvent recovery
                             system to recover and reuse waste
                             solvents.
                                     Annual savings:  $43,000/year; MEK
                                     recovery rate:  20 gallons/day, reflecting a
                                     90% reduction in waste.  [Reference #9,
                                     p. 7]
                         Arrange an agreement with other small
                         companies to jointly recycle cleaning
                         wastes.
                                     Reference #1 &
                         Develop cooperative recycling with other
                         facilities in area to make distillation
                         economically viable for all participants.
                                     Reference #1 & #6
                         Recover and reuse cleanup solvents for
                         cleaning operations or with a compatible
                         coating operation.
                         Modify spray booth to allow recovery and
                         reuse of overspray solids.
                         If possible, return extended shelf life items
                         to the manufacturer rather than disposal; if
                         manufactures won't take the items they
                         may be sold or donated as a raw material.
                                                   12

-------
             Table 3. Examples of Source Reduction and Recycling Options
                    for Finishing and Gluing Operations (continued)
Types of Techniques
Loss Prevention and
Housekeeping
Description
To prevent spray gun leakage, submerge
only the front end (or fluid control) of the
gun into the cleaning solvent.
Improve housekeeping practices to reduce
spillage of cleaning solvents.
Perform routine maintenance to prevent
equipment from breaking down.
Fix leaks and routinely monitor for leaking
equipment.
Investigate using Statistical Process Control
to improve product quality.
Examples of Costs and Savings
and Other Information*

Reference #26
* Reference numbers refer to documents listed in Tables 4 and 5.

Note: The cost, savings, and waste reduction information in Table 3 is based on case studies and
reflects the successes of wood furniture manufacturing facilities.  However, specific applications are
variable and thus this information should only be used as an indicator of how a particular pollution
prevention  option may perform  at a particular facility.  These case studies are found in EPA's
PPIC/PffiS.
                                           13

-------
                                  SECTION ra
                  POLLUTION PREVENTION DOCUMENTS
Compendiums and Guides

   Table 4 contains a listing of some key guides
and compendiums on waste minimization, pollu-
tion prevention and recycling that may be of
particular interest or use for wooden furniture
manufacturing.   In  many  instances, these
documents may provide a firm with important
information as it begins to explore pollution
prevention options for its operations. Copies of
documents with EPA document numbers may be
obtained from EPA  or the Pollution Prevention
Information Clearinghouse  (PPIC).   Copies of
documents with PIES catalogue numbers may be
obtained through PPIC.
                    Table 4.  Recommended Compendiums and Guides

Title
1. Managing and Recycling
Solvents in the Furniture Industry



,•








2. Alternative Approaches to
Waste Reduction in Materials
Coating Processes







Date
May 1988













1987








Author &
Reference
North Carolina
Pollution
Prevention Pays
Program, Raleigh,
N.C.
(PIES #034-018-
A-000)







Gardner, Lisa, C.,
and Huisingh
Donald,
Hazardous Waste
& Hazardous
Materials, Vol 4,
No. 2, pp 177-191
(PIES #534-001-
A-000)

Abstract
Topics covered include factors involved in
change; proper spray techniques; a description
and list of the advantages and disadvantages of
coating methods, water-based and high solids
coatings; good housekeeping procedures; North
Carolina regulations governing waste solvents;
waste management options and recycling
options. Document includes case studies of
successful source reduction and recycling
technologies implemented by furniture
manufacturing facilities. Appendices list
coating suppliers, equipment suppliers, waste
management and waste exchange information
sources.
Describes the constraints and considerations to
be considered before changing to an alternative
coating. Discusses advantages and
disadvantages of water-based coatings, high
solids coatings, electron beam curing, and
ultraviolet (UV) curing systems as well as
recent developments in these technologies.


                                        14

-------
                Table 4. Recommended Compendiums and Guides (continued)

Title
3. Reducing Emissions From the
Wood Furniture Industry With
Walerbome Coatings






4. Case Summaries of Waste
Reduction by Industries in the
Southeast
-


5. Waste Minimization
Opportunity Assessments Manual





Date
1980








1989





1988





Author &
Reference
USEPA, Industrial
Environmental
Research
Laboratory, Office
of Research and
Development,
Cincinnati, OH
EPA/600/2/80/160

North Carolina
Pollution
Prevention
Program
(PIES #112-003-
A)
USEPA, Office of
Research and
Development
EPA/625/7-88/003



Abstract
Document provides an in-depth report on the
factors and impediments to switching from a
solvent-based coating to a water-based or
lower-solvent coating. This report discusses
findings from a cooperative project between
EPA and the wood furniture manufacturing
industry to identify, test, and evaluate lower
hydrocarbon finishes for wood furniture as well
as quantify the VOC reductions.
Compendium of case studies that describe
source reduction and recycling techniques that
have been used in the furniture manufacturing
industry in southeastern states. Case studies
provide technical and economic information on
proven techniques and technologies.
Describes a procedure to identify waste
reduction opportunities for industrial processes.
While the manual is not specific to any
particular industry, it is designed to provide a
systematic assessment strategy to any industrial
sector.
Additional    Pollution   Prevention
Information

   EPA has identified  additional sources of
information  that discuss  pollution prevention
concepts, techniques and  technologies as they
apply to furniture manufacturing or coating
operations in general.  Many of these documents
are  contained   in  the  PPIC   repository.
Documents may be available though the PPIC
depending on copywrite status and the desires of
the author and or publisher. The following table
of references is divided by general topic area.
                                            15

-------
Table 5. Additional Pollution Prevention Resources
Title
Date
Author
Abstract
Solvent Usage and Recycling
6. Guidelines for Waste
Reduction and Recycling
Solvents
7. "Solvent Distillation:
In-House or Contract"
8. Accomplishments of
North Carolina Industries:
Case Summaries
9. Hazardous Waste
Reduction, Annual Report
10. Compendium on
Low-And Non-Waste
Technology
1989
March 1990
January 1989
1987
1981
Oregon Department of
Environmental Quality,
Hazardous Waste
Reduction Program of
Oregon, Portland OR
(PIES #038-009)
Carney, Michael,
Industrial Finishing, 3/90,
pp 30-31
(PIES #528-028-A-000)
Pollution Prevention Pays
Program, North Carolina
Department of Natural
Resources and Community
Development, Raleigh,
N.C.
(PIES #034-012-A-040)
Boeing Corporation,
(PIES #806-01)
United Nations
Geneva Switzerland, p 32.
(PEES /WOO-032)
This document provides a detailed discussion
of sources of solvent waste, source reduction
methods, solvent recovery capture and reuse,
the advantages and disadvantages of different
types of recycling options, as well as factors
to consider when deciding what recycling
option to choose. This document is not
specific to the furniture manufacturing
industry but provides useful information on
solvent recycling options.
Briefly describes the advantages and
disadvantages of on-site versus off-site
solvent recycling.
Describes forty case studies of waste
minimization techniques from different
industries; includes economic data.
Describes waste minimization efforts at
Boeing Corporation facilities. Furniture
manufactures may find the discussion on
solvent recovery and reuse valuable.
This document contains over 100 different
case studies on a wide range of industries.
Each case study briefly describes the
conventional technology, the new
technology, and cost and or environmental
savings from the new technology.
Equipment Modifications/Changes
11. "How Rapid Rack
Raised Transfer
Efficiency"
12. "Boost Overall
Transfer Efficiency"
October 1990
May 1990
Industrial Finishing,
October, 1990
Walberg, Arvid, C.,
Industrial Finishing, 5/90,
pp 20-30
(PIES /(528-027-A-OOO)
Discusses, in detail, how a vacuum system
coating operation works, its advantages and
disadvantages, and lists a commercial vender
contact. While the discussion focuses on a
fabricated metal facility the article provides
good background information on vacuum
coating systems.
This article discusses the major transfer
efficiency parameters in applying coatings
with electrostatic spray systems.
                       16

-------
Table 5. Additional Pollution Prevention Resources (continued)
Title
13. "Understanding
Electrostatic Finishing"
Date
September
1990
Author
Robinson, Frank, and
Dennis Stephens,
Industrial Finishing, 9/90,
pp 34-37
(PIES IW28-026-A-000)
Abstract
A technical introduction to electrostatic
finishing principals is presented. Describes
the use and characteristics of rotary
atomizers, air/airless spray, powder guns
and liquid coating electrostatic systems.
Alternative Coatings/Technologies
14. "New CO, Spay
Finishing Technology!"
15. "Paint Technology
Can Boost L.A.'s Pursuit
of Clean Air"
16. An Evaluation of
Control Technology For
Spray Painting
17. "Waterborne Paint
Circulation"
18. "Exciting Infrared
and UV Developments"
19. "Intense Resin R&D
Bearing Fruit"
September
1989
November
1990
1982
July 1990
September
1990
January 1991
Schiantz, J., Industrial
Finishing, 9/89
(PIES 0528-025-A-OOO)
Lents, James, M.,
American Paint &
Coatings Journal
Convention Daily, p!7-18,
November 2, 1990
(PIES #591-001-A-000)
O'Brian, Dennis, M., and
Hurley, Donald, E.,
American Industrial
Hygiene Association
Journal, 43(9):695-703,
1982
Bankert, Peter, J.,
Industrial Finishing, 7/90,
pp 42-43
(PIES 0528-024-A-OOO)
Schiantz, J., Industrial
Finishing, 9/90, pp 14-
121
(PIES /W28-023-A-000)
Schrantz, Joe, and Baily,
Jane, Industrial Finishing,
1/91, pp 20-24
(PIES 0528-Q22-A-000)
Discusses the environmentalXsafety,
economic, and performance factors of
Unicarb, a CO2-based coatings. The
technology involves formulating a coating
with only "coalescing" (retarder or tail)
solvents; the CO, replaces the fast-
evaporating "cutting" (dilutent) solvent. The
COj-based coating reportedly reduces VOC
emissions by 30% to 70% depending on the
coating type.
Describes research underway to develop
zero- VOC coatings and UV curable finishes.
Numerous zero- VOC coatings using
vemonia oil as a base are being tested. A
high quality ultraviolet-curable base coat for
furniture that successfully highlights wood
grain has been developed. Research is
reportedly underway to develop a high
quality ultraviolet-curable topcoating for
wood furniture.
Presents a technical review of water-based,
high-solid coatings; including the advantages
and disadvantages of each coating type.
Discusses the circulation system
characteristics critical to converting a
solvent-borne coating circulation system to a
waterborne coating circulating system.
Discusses recent developments in infrared
and ultraviolet curing equipment/finishes;
lists commercial suppliers.
Describes new commercially available
waterborne, high-solid, and powder coating
resins. The resins are not specifically for
the wood furniture manufacturing industry.
                             17

-------
Table 5. Additional Pollution Prevention Resources (continued)
Title
20. Adhesive*
Manufacture: Source
Reduction of Chlorinate
Solvents
21. Airless Spray
Techniques
22. The Efficient
Utilization of Materials in
the Finishing Room
23. "HVLP Spray Puts
You Into Compliance"
24. "HVLP Spray: Ten
Questions Answered"
25. "Coatings for
Compliance"
26. The Basics of SPC"
Date
June 1990
1982
Undated
March 1989
March 1990
July 1990
June 1991
Author
Source Reduction
Partnership, Metropolitan
Water District of Southern
California and
Environmental Defense
Fund. (PIES #609-004-A-
000)
Airless Spray Training
Series. GRACO, Inc.,
Minneapolis, MN
DeVilbiss Education
Services 83A, DeVilbiss
Company, Toledo, OH
Marg, Ken, Metal
Finishing Vol. 87, No. 3,
pp. 21-23
Products Finishing, pp.
46-51
Graves, B; Products
Finishing, pp. 56-69
• Schneberger, G.L.,
Industrial Finishing', pp.
28-30
Abstract
The document evaluates pollution prevention
options: chemical substitution, process
modification, product substitution, and
solvent recovery and recycling. Discussion
is not specific to furniture manufacturing.
This manual introduces the correct airless
spraying techniques when operating a manual
airless spray gun.
This document discusses factors leading to
efficient spray gun technique. It is designed
for the spray gun operator.
Describes HVLP spray technology.
Answers ten questions on high volume, low
pressure spray technology.
Describes advantages and disadvantages of
different coating technologies.
This article describes applying statistical
process control techniques to a paint line.
                             18

-------
                                      SECTION IV
                                   BIBLIOGRAPHY
Adams, J,. "Reducing Spray Booth VOCs", Industrial Finishing, 3/90, pp. 34-35.  (PIES #528-021-A-
000)

Kohl, J., Pearson, J., Rose.,  Managing and Recycling Solvents in the Furniture Industry. Pollution
Prevention Pays Program, North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources,
May 1988. (PIES #034-018-A)

Landrock, A.H., Handbook of Plastics and Elastomers. Harper Publishing, 1975.

O'Brian, Dennis, M., and Hurley, Donald, E., An Evaluation of Control Technology For Spray Painting
, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health,
Division of Physical Sciences and Engineering, Cincinnati, OH, 1981.

Oberzal, Robert, A., "Solvents: What Are They All About?", Industrial Finishing, 11/90, pp 37-40.
(PIES #528-003-A-000)

Office of Management and Budget, Handbook of Standard Industrial Classifications. Springfield, VA,
1987.

Ross, Vincent, R.  "Waste Reduction - Pollution Prevention In The Furniture Industry", presented at
Pollution Prevention, Waste Reduction for Industrial Air Toxic Emissions, April 24-25, Four Seasons
Holiday Inn, Greensboro, N.C., 1989.

Schrantz, Joe, "Solventborne Coatings: Facing Extinction?", Industrial Finishing, 3/91, pp 14-16.  (PIES
#528-002-A-000)

Schrantz, Joe,  "The Coatings Industry and Environmental Regulations", Industrial Finishing, 3/90, pp
12-19.   (PffiS #528-004-A-000)

Source  Reduction  Research Partnership, Adhesive  Manufacture:  Source Reduction  of Chlorinated
Solvents. Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, Environmental Defense Fund, Final Draft,
June 1990.

Tennessee Hazardous Waste Minimization Program, Tennessee Hazardous Waste Management Assistance
Furniture Fabricators. Tennessee Department of Economic  and  Community  Development, Nashville,
Tennessee, 1986.

University of Tennessee, Center for Industrial Services, "Waste Minimization in the Furniture Industry,"
undated.

USEPA, Best Demonstrated Available Technology (BOAT) Background Document For F001-F005 Spent
Solvents. Vol 1, Office  of Solid Waste, Washington D.C., November 1986.
                                             19

-------
APPENDIX A
    20

-------
       Releases of the 17 Chemicals of Concern
by Wood Furniture Manufacturing Industries (in pounds)
SIC 2511
Chemical
CH2CL2
Chromium
MEK
M1BK
Toluene
Xylene
TCE
111 TCE
Wooden Household Furniture, Except Upholstered
Air
62369
0
4360161
1247698
12425089
5208690
14413 .
145038
Land&
Injection
0
0
5221
0
15032
3386
0
0
Water
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Transfers
500
250
237378
18800
526415
200069
750
0
Total
62869
250
4602760
1266498
12966536
5412145
15163
145038
SIC 2512
Chemical
CH2CL2
Chromium
Cyanide
MEK
MIBK
Toluene
Xylene
111 TCE
Wooden Household Furniture, Upholstered
Air
5160
0
0
51398
349209
878683
480136
189126
Land&
Injection
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Water
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Transfers
16080
8000
573
1684
500
21240
8522
2640
Total
21240
8000
573
53082
349709
899923
488658
191766
                        21

-------
                           Releases of the 17 Chemicals of Concern
             by Wood Furniture Manufacturing Industries (in pounds)  (continued)
SIC 2521
Chemical
CH2CL2
Chromium
MEK
MIBK
Toluene
Xylene
111 TCE
Wood Office Furniture
Air
6700
500
226672
202547
667462
471299
62153
Land&
Injection
0
0
24925
0
0
0
0
Water
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Transfers
3800
0
31880
13283
71838
37762
1020
Total
10500
500
283477
215830
739300
509061
63173
CCL4
CH2 C12
CHCLj
MEK
MBK
TCE
PCE
111 TCE

Notes:
Carbon Tetrachloride
Dichloromethane
Chloroform
Methy Ethyl Ketone
Methyl Isobutyl Ketone
Trichloroethylene
Tetrachloroethylene
1,1,1-Trichloroethane
• Land category includes underground injection.
• Other Transfers include transfers to POTWs.
• Only primary SIC code field was used to avoid double counting.
• Transfers refers to quantity of the chemical sent to off-site disposal, treatment, or storage facilities.

Source: USEPA, Toxics Release Inventory Database, 1988.
                                               22

-------