ADMINISTERED BY
Hazardous Substance Management
Research Center
•t the
New Jersey Institute
of Technology
Newark, New Jersey
SPONSORED BY
United States
Environmental Protection Agency
Hazardous Waste Engineering
Research Laboratory
and
New Jersey Department
of Environmental Protection
Division of Science It Research
DISTRIBUTED IN NEW JERSEY
by the
New Jersey Department
of Environmental Protection
Division of
Hazardous Waste Management
Hazardous Waste
Advisement Program
EPA Manual
for the Assessment
of Reduction
and Recycling Opportunities
for Hazardous Waste
(ARROW Project)
nnnnnDnnnnDnnnn
-------
Notice
This report has been reviewed by the Hazardous Waste Engineering Research
Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and approved for publication.
Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, nor does mention of trade names or
commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
Users are encouraged to duplicate those portions of the manual as needed to implement
a waste minimization program. Organizations interested in publishing and distributing the
entire manual should contact the Alternative Technologies Division. Hazardous Waste
Engineering Research Laboratory. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati,
Ohio 45268, to obtain a reproducible master.
-------
Foreword
The term, "waste minimization" is heard increasingly at meetings and conferences of
individuals working in the field of hazardous waste management Waste minimization is an
umbrella term that includes the first two categories of the EPA's preferred hazardous
waste management strategy which is shown below:
1. Source Reduction: Reduce the amount of waste at the source, through changes in
industrial processes.
2. Recycling: Reuse and recycle wastes for the original or some other purpose, such
as materials recovery or energy production.
3. Incineration/Treatment Destroy, detoxify, and neutralize wastes into less harmful
substances.
4. Secure Land Disposal: Deposit wastes on land using volume reduction,
encapsulation, leachate containment, monitoring, and controlled air and
surface/subsurface waste releases.
In carrying out Its program to encourage the adoption of waste minimization, the
Hazardous Waste Engineering Research Laboratory has supported the development of a
recommended procedure for identifying waste minimization applications. This manual
describes that procedure and will be of interest to those responsible for reducing waste
streams, and to those interested in learning about waste minimization in general.
HI
-------
Acknowledgments
The following people are members of the advisory committee that contributed valuable
comments and insights to the preparation of this manual:
Denny J. Beroiz
General Dynamics Pomona Division
Elaine Eby
Office of Solid Waste
US Environmental Protection Agency
John Fnck. PhD
Directorate of Supply Operations
Defense Logistics Agency
Kevin Gashhn
Hazardous Waste Assistance Program
New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection
Gregory J. Hollod. PhD
Petrochemicals Department
E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co.
Gary Hunt
Pollution Prevention Pays Program
North Carolina Department of Environmental
Management
John S. Hunter. Ill, 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
Jack Towers
Waste Reduction Services
Chemical Waste Management
David Wigglesworth
Waste Reduction Assistance Program
Alaska Health Project
Kathleen Wolf, PhD
Source Reduction Research Partnership
Harry M. Freeman of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and
Development. Hazardous Waste Engineering Research Laboratory, was the project
officer responsible for the preparation of this manual. Special acknowledgment is given to
Myles Morse of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste, for his
assistance and comments. James Lounsbury and Roger Schecter of the EPA Office of
Solid Waste are also acknowledged for their assistance in the preparation of this manual.
This manual was developed by the Hazardous and Toxic Materials Division of Jacobs
Engineering Group as a subcontractor to Versar. Inc. Marvin Drabkin was the project
manager for Versar. Participating in the preparation of this manual for Jacobs were
Gregory A. Lorton, Carl H. Fromm, Michael P. Meltzer, Deborah A. Hanlon, Sally
Lawrence. Michael S. Callahan, and Srinivas Budaraju.
vii
-------
Contents
Page
Foreword '"
Acknowledgments vii
1. Introduction 1
2. Planning and Organization 6
3. Assessment Phase 10
4. Feasibility Analysis 19
5. Implementing Waste Minimization Options 24
Appendices
A. Waste Minimization Assessment Worksheets A-1
B. Simplified Waste Minimization Assessment Worksheets B-1
C. Example Waste Minimization Assessment C-1
D. Causes and Sources of Waste D-1
E. 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
-------
List of Worksheets
Page
Appendix A
1. Assessment Overview A-3
2. Program Organization A-4
3. Assessment Team Make-up A-5
4. Site Description A-6
5. Personnel A-7
6. Process Information A-8
7. Input Materials Summary A-9
8. Products Summary A-10
9 Individual Waste Stream Characterization A-11
10. Waste Stream Summary A-15
11. Option Generation A-16
12. Option Description A-17
13. Options Evaluation by Weighted Sum Method A-18
14. Technical Feasibility A-19
15. Cost Information .. A-25
16. Profitability Worksheet f 1: Payback Period A-31
17. Profitability Worksheet f 2: Cash Flow for 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 8*6
S6. Waste Stream Summary B-7
S7. Option Generation B-8
SB. Option Description B-9
S9. Profitability B-10
vi
-------
Section 1
Introduction
Waste minimization (WM) has been successful for
many organizations.- By following the procedures
outlined in this manual, a waste generator can:
• Save money by reducing waste treatment and
disposal costs, raw matenal purchases, and other
operating costs.
• Meet state and national waste minimization policy
goals.
• Reduce potential environmental liabilities.
• Protect public health and worker health and safety.
• Protect the environment.
Waste minimization is a policy specifically mandated by
the U. S Congress in the 1984 Hazardous and Solid
Wastes Amendments to the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA). This mandate, coupled
with other RCRA provisions that have led to
unprecedented increases in the costs of waste
management, have heightened general interest in
waste minimization. A strong contributing factor has
been a desire on the pan of generators to reduce their
environmental impairment liabilities under the
provisions of the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liabilities Act
(CERCLA. or "Superlund"). Because of these
increasing costs and liability exposure, waste
minimization has become more and more attractive
economically.
The following terms, used throughout this manual, are
defined below:
Waste Minimization (WM}. In the working definition
currently used by EPA, waste minimization consists of
source reduction and recycling. This concept of waste
minimization is presented In Figure 1-1. Of the two
approaches, source reduction is 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 is on hazardous
wastes, as defined in RCRA. However, R is Important
that all 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
is not waste minimization. For example, the removal of
organics from wastewater using activated carbon, in
and of Itself, is not waste minimization, since the
pollutants are merely transferred from one medium
(wastewater) to another (carbon, as solid waste).
Waste minimization propram (WMP). The RCRA
regulations require that generators of hazardous waste
"have a program in place to reduce the volume and
toxicity of waste generated to the extent that is
economically practical.' A waste minimization program
is an organized, comprehensive, and continual effort
to systematically reduce waste generation. Generally.
a program is 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 pan of the
company's operating philosophy. While the main goal
of a waste minimization program is to reduce or
eliminate waste, It may also bring about an
improvement in a company's production efficiency.
EPA will publish separate guidance on the elements
of effective waste minimization programs. This
guidance will 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 Is 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 specific waste stream or area is 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 VINIUIZATION
SOURCE REDUCTION
RECYCLING
J
FIRST
HIGH
ORDER OF EXPLORATION
RELATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL DESIRABILITY
LAST
LOW
WASTE MINIMIZATION
The reduction, to tht extent feasible, of hazardous waste that is generated or subsequently treated, stored or
disposed of. t includes any source reduction or recycling activity undertaken by a generator that result* in
either (1) the reduction of total volume or quantity of hazardous waste or (2) the reduction of toxfcky of the
hazardous waste, or both, so bng as such reduction is consistent with the goal of minimizing present and
future threats to human health and the environment (EPA's Report to Congress. 1986, EPA/530-SW46-033).
SOURCE REDUCTION
Any activity that reduces or eliminates the generation of hazardous waste at the source, usually within a
process (op. elt.).
RECYCLING
A material is 'recycled* If It Is used, reused, or reclaimed (40 CFR 261.1 (c) (7)). A material is "used or reused*
H it is either (1) employed as an ingredient (including Its use as an intermediate) to make a product; however*
material will not satisfy this condition If distinct components of the material are recovered as separate end
products (as when metals are recovered from metal containing secondary materials) or (2) employed in •
particular functon as an effective substituls for a commercial product (40 CFR 261.1 (c) (5)). A material la
•reclaimed* if it is processed to recover a useful product or If H is regenerated. Examples include the recovery
of lead values from spent batteries and the regeneration of apent solvents (40 CFR 261.1 (e) (4)).
Figure 1-1. Watte Minimization Definitions
-------
WASTE MINIMIZATION TECHNIQUES
RECYCLING
(ONSITE AND OFFSITE)
REDUCTION
RECLAMATION
USE AND REUSE
SOURCE CONTROL
PfOOOBSOd lOT
resource recovwy
Processed as •
by-product
• Rotuin to original process
• Raw material substHut*
tof •
Product oonsMVBlion
dwngc n product
INPUT MATERIAL
CHANGES
TECHNOLOGY
GOOD OPERATING
PRACTICES
rTOOOSS CnBf1Q69
• Malmal purification
- Material autatilullon
Procedural maasuras
Loss prevention
Manufjauwnt pmcttoas
Waste stream segregation
Material handling
Equipment, paring, or
layout changes
Additional automation
Production scheduling
Figure 1-2. Waste Minimization Techniques
-------
Flgura 1>3. Tha Waste Minimization AsMMmant Procedure
Tha raoogniud naad to nrinbnlM waata
I
PLANNING AND ORGANIZATION
• Get management commitment
• Sat overall assessment program goals
• Organlza assessment program taak foroa
Assessment organization
ev«d oommltmtnt to i
ASSESSMENT PHASE
• Coded prooaH and facility data
• Prbritbe and salad assessment torgata
• Salad paopla for aaaessment teams
• Review data and inapad aha
• Generate optbna
• Screen and aalad options for further study
A»saumant raport of
selected options '
Salad now
•ssasamant Urgata
and raavaluaia
previous optbna
FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS PHASE
• Technical evaluation
• Economic evaluation
• Seled options for Implementation
Final report. Including
recommended optbna<
IMPLEMENTATION
• Justify projeds and obtain funding
• Installation (equipment)
• Implementation (procedure)
• Evaluate performance
Repeat the process
Successfully implemented
waste minimizatbn projacta
-------
incentives for Waste Minimization
There are a number of compelling incentives for
minimizing waste. Table 1-1 summarizes some of
these incentives.
Teble 1*1. Watte Minimization Incentives
Eooftofrta
• Landfill disposal coat increases.
• Costly alternative treatment technologies.
• Savings in raw material and manufacturing costs.
Regulations
• Certification of a WM program on the hazardous wast*
maniftst.
• Biennial WM program reporting.
• Land disposal restrictions and bans.
• Increasing permitting requirements for waste handling
and treatment
Utbiltly
• Potential reduction in generator liability tor environmental
problems at both pnsite and offsite treatment, etorage,
and disposal facilities.
• Potential reduction in liability for worker safety.
Public /m«ge antf fnw/onmenta/ Concern
• Improved image in the community end 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 responsble
for planning, managing, and implementing waste
minimization activities at the plant and corporate levels.
The manual concentrates on procedures that motivate
people to search, screen, and put into practice
measures Involving administrative, material, or
technology changes that result in decreased waste
generation. It is also a source of concepts and ideas
for developing and implementing a waste minimization
program.
The manual is organized as follows:
• Section 2 outlines the 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 for evaluating
options (or technical and economic feasibility.
• 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
to included in Appendix A. Because individual
generators' circumstance* 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 small businesses and small quantity
generators.
A sample assessment is presented in Appendix C.
Appendix D describes waste streams from common
industrial operations. Appendix 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 tor further study.
Finally, an example of an economic feasibility analysis
of a large waste minimization project is presented in
Appendix H.
-------
Section 2
Planning and Organization
The recognized need to minimize waste
PLANNING AND ORGANIZATION
Gel management commitment
Set overall assessment program goals
Organize assessment program task tore*
Aaseument
Phase
Feasibility
Analysis Phase
Implementation
Successfully implemented
waste minimization projects
This section discusses factors that are Important to the
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 flexible
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 Management Commitment
The management of a company will support a waste
minimization program if H 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 policy
statement or management directive. A company's
upper management is responsible for establishing a
formal commitment throughout all divisions of the
organization. The person in charge of the company's
environmental affairs Is responsible to advise
management of the importance of waste minimization
and the need for this formal commitment. An example
of a formal policy statement follows:
CORPORATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY
[A major chemical company],.."ia committed to continue
excellence, leadership, and stewardship In protecting the
environment. Environmental protection ia a primary
management responsibility, as well as the raaponaibility of
•vary employee.
In keeping wKh this ppfiey, our objective as a company b to
reduce waste and achieve minimal adverse impact on the air,
water, and land through excellence in environmental control
The Environmental Guidelines include the following points:
• Environment protection is a One responsibility and an
Important measure of employee performance. In addi-
tion, every employee to responsible for environmental
protection in the aame manner ha or ahe la for safety.
• Minimizing or eliminating the generation of waate has
been and continues to be a prime consideration In
research, process design, and plant operations; and ia
viewed by management like eafety, yield, and toss
prevention.
• Reuse and recycling of materials haa been and will
continue to be given firat conaidaration prior to
classification and disposal of waste."
Involve
Although management commitment and direction are
fundamental to the success of a waste minimization
program, commitment throughout an organization to
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 lo boost employee
cooperation and participation. In some companies,
meeting the waste minimization goals Is used as a
measure for evaluating the Job performance of
managers and employees.
6
-------
Champions
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 tor this
role. Regardless of who takes the lead, 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 will affect a number of groups within a
company. For this reason, a program task force should
be assembled. This group should include members of
any group or department in the company that has a
significant interest in the outcome of the program.
Table 2-4 at the end of this section and Worksheet 3 in
Appendix A lists departments or groups of a typical
manufacturing company that should be involved in the
program.
The formality or informality of the WM program will
depend on the nature of the company. The program in
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 will
determine whether full-time participation is required by
any of the team members.
Teble 2-1. Responsibilities of the WM Program
Tesk Force
Get commitment end • statement of policy from
management.
Establish overall WM program goals.
Establish a waste tracking eystem.
Prioritize the waste streams or facility •rots for
assessment.
Select assessment teams.
Conduct (or supervise) assessments.
Conduct (or monitor) technical/economic feasibility
analyses of favorable options.
Select and justify feasible options for Implementation.
Obtain funding and establish schedule for
implementation.
Monitor (and/or direct) Implementation progress.
Monitor performance of the option, once it is operating.
In a small company, several people at most will be all
that are required to implement a WM program. Include
the people with responsibility for production, facilities,
maintenance, quality control, and waste treatment and
disposal on the team, ft 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 in
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 with periodic
In-house seminars, workshops, or meetings. A large
chemical manufacturer held a corporate-wide
symposium in 1986 dealing 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.
Setting Goale
The first priority of the WM program task force is to
establish goals that are consistent with the policy
adopted by management. Waste minimization goals
can be qualitative, tor 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 ambiguously. Quantifiable goals establish
a clear guide as to the degree of sucess expected of
the program. A major chemical company has adopted a
corporate-wide goal of 5% waste reduction per year. In
addition, each facility within the company has set its
own waste minimization goals.
As part of Its general policy on hazardous waste, a large
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
responsibility and freedom to develop Hs own program
(with intermediate goats) to meet this overall goal. This
has resulted In an extensive Investigation of
procedures and technologies to accomplish source
reduction, recycling and resource recovery, and onsite
treatment.
Table 2-2 lists the qualities that goals should possess.
H 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 minimization assessments are not
Intended to be a one-time project. Periodic
revaluation of goals is recommended due to
changes, for example, in available technology, raw
-------
Table 2-2. Attrlbutea of Effective Goal*
ACCEPTABLE to those who will work to achieve item.
FLEXIBLE and adaptabla to changing requirements.
MEASURABLE ovartima.
MOTIVATIONAL
SUITABLE to the overall corporate goals and mission.
UNDERSTANDABLE.
ACHIEVABLE with a practical level of effort
Source: Pearce and Robinaon, Strategic Man«aam«nt
(19BS)
material supplies, environmental regulations, and
economic climate.
Overcoming Barriers
As H 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 lists
examples of jurisdictional conflicts that can arise during
the implementation of a waste minimization project.
In addition to jurisdictional conflicts related to these
objective barriers, there are attitude-related barriers
that can disrupt a WM program. A commonly held
attitude is 'If it aint broke, don't fix It!' This attitude
stems from the desire to maintain the status quo and
avoid the unknown. It is also based on the fear that a
new WM option may not work as advertised. Without
the commitment to carefully conceive and implement
the option, this attitude can become a seH-fuHilling
prophecy. Management must declare that "It is broker
Another attitude-related barrier is the feeling that 'It
just won't work!' This response is often given when a
person does not fully understand the nature of the
proposed option and its impact on operations. The
danger here is that promising options may be dropped
before they can be evaluated. One way to avoid this is
to use idea-generating sessions (e.g., brainstorming).
This encourages participants to propose a large
number of options, which are individually evaluated on
their merits.
An often-encountered barrier is the fear that the WM
option will diminish product quality. This is 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 valid concern if unacceptable concentrations of
waste materials build up in the system. The best way to
allay this concern Is to set up a small-scale
demonstration in the facility, or to observe the
particular option in operation at another facility.
Table 8-3. Examplea of Barrlere to Waste
Minimization
Pioduotion
• A new operating procedure wDI reduce waste but may also
be a bottleneck that decreases the overall production
rate.
• Production will be atopped while the new process
equipment is Installed.
• A new piece of equipment has not been demonstrated in a
aimitar service. It may not work here.
• Adequate space is not available for the Installation of new
equipment.
• Adequate utilities are not available for the new
equipment.
• Engineering or construction manpower will not be
available in time to meet the project schedule.
• Extensive maintenance may be required.
Quality Control
• More intensive OC may be needed.
• More rework may be required.
G0enf flettbns/Marfteti/y
• Changes in product characteristics may affect customer
acceptance.
Inventory
• A program to reduce inventory (to avoid material
deterioration and reprocessing) may lead to atoekouts
during high product demand.
finance
• There is not enough money to fund the project
Purchasing
• Existing stocks (or binding contracts) will delay the
replacement of a hazardous material with a non-
hazardous substitute.
Environmental
• Accepting another plant's waste as a feedstock may
require a lengthy resolution of regulatory issues.
Wul* Treatment
• Use of a new nonhazardous raw material will adversely
impact the existing wastewater treatment facility.
Planning and Organization Summary
Table 2-4 provides a summary of the steps involved in
planning and organizing a waste minimization program.
Assessment Worksheets
Appendix A Includes a set of worksheets tor use In
planning and carrying out a waste minimization
assessment, and implementing the selected options.
Worksheet 1 summarizes the entire assessment
procedure. Worksheets 2 and 3 are used to record the
organization of the WM program task force and the
8
-------
individual assessment teams, respectively. Worksheet
3 includes a list of functions and departments that
should be considered when organizing the
assessment teams.
Table 2-4. Planning and Organization Activities
Summary
SETTING UP THE PROGRAM
Gel management commitment to:
• Establish waste minimization a* a company goal.
• Establish a waste minimization program to meet this
goal.
• Give authority to the program task force to
implement this program.
Set overall goals for the program. These goals should be:
• ACCEPTABLE to thoM who will work to aehieva
them.
FLEXIBLE to adapt to changing requirements.
MEASURABLE over time.
MOTIVATIONAL
SUITABLE to the overall corporate goals.
UNDERSTANDABLE.
ACHIEVABLE with a practical (aval of effort.
STAFFING THE PROGRAM TASK FORCE
Find a 'cause champion*, with the following attributes:
• Familiar with the facility, its production processes,
and its waste management operations.
• Familiar with the people.
• Familiar with quality control requirements.
• Good rapport with management
• Familiar with new producton and waste
management technology.
• Familiar with WM principles and technique*, and
environmental regulations.
• Aggressive managerial style.
Get people who know the facility, processes, and
procedures.
Get people from the affected departments or group*.
Production.
Facilities/Maintenance.
Process Engineering.
Quality Control.
Environmental.
Research and Development.
Safety/Health.
Marketing/Client Relations.
Purchasing.
Material Control/Inventory.
Legal.
Finance/Accounting.
Information Systema.
GETTING COMPANY-WIDE COMMITMENT
Incorporate the company's WM goals into departmental
goals.
Solicit employee cooperation and participation.
Develop incentives and/or awards lor managers and
employeea.
9
-------
Section 3
Assessment Phase
The recognized need to minimize waste
Planning and
Organization
ASSESSMENT PHASE
• Collect process and facility data '
• Prioritize and select assessment targets
• Select people tor assessment teams
• Review data and inspect site
• Generate optbns
• Screen and select options tor further study
Successfully implemented
waste minimization projects
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 facility.
Collecting and Compiling Data
The questions that this information gathering effort will
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 losses?
• 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 will 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 S2 through
S6 in Appendix B are designed to record the same
information, but in a more simplified approach.
tVbsfe Stream R»cord§
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 waste, and the time period
during which the waste was generated. Also,
manifests do not cover wastewater affluents, air
emissions, or nonhazardous solid wastes.
Other sources of information on waste sir earns include
biennial reports and NPDES (National Pollutant
10
-------
Table 3-1. Facility Information for WM
Assessments
Design Information
• Process flow diagrams
• Material and heat balances (both design balances and
actual balances) tor .
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 waste 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 III, Section 313 (Superfund
Amendment and Reauthorization 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 Uaterial 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 built.
Material balances are Important for many WM projects,
since they allow for quantifying losses or emissions
that were previously unaccounted for Also, material
balances assist in developing the following
information:
• baseline for tracking progress of the WM efforts
• data to estimate the size and cost of additional
equipment and other modifications
• data to evaluate economic performance
In Us simplest form, the material balance b represented
by the mass conservation principle:
Mass in • Mass out * Mass accumulated
The material balance should be made individually for all
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 It 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
re moved 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 0 lists potential sources of waste from
specific processes and operations.
•
Sources of Material Balance Information
By definition, the material balance includes both
materials entering and leaving a process. Table 3-2
lists potential sources of material balance information.
11
-------
Table 3-2. Sources of Material Balance
Information
Samples, analysts, and flow measurements of toed
stocks, products, and waste streams
Raw material purchase records
Material inventories
Emission inventories
Equipment cleaning and validation procedures
Batch make-up records
Product specifcations
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, ft is
important to define the material balance envelope
properly. The envelope should be drawn around the
specitc area of concern, rather than a larger group of
areas or the entire facility. An overall material balance
for a facility can be constructed from individual unit
material balances. This effort will highlight
interrelationships between units and will 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
of the stream. 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 ot 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 •
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 onsite 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\n
production during the same time period, since
purchased materials can accumulate in warehouses or
stockyards.
Developing material balances around complex
processes can be a complicated undertaking,
•specially K recycle streams are present. Such tasks
are usually performed by chemical engineers, often
with the assistance of computerized process
simulators.
Material balances will often be needed to comply with
Section 313 of SARA (Superfund Amendment and
Reauthorization Act of 1986) in establishing emission
Inventories tor specific toxic chemicals. EPA's Office
of Toxic Substances (OTS) has prepared a guidance
manual entitled Estimating Releases and Waste
Treatment Efficiencies for the Toxir Chemicals
Inventory Form (EPA 560/4-88-02). 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, it is easier to do material balances the
second time, and gets even easier as more are done
because of the 'learning curve' effect In some larger
companies, computerized database systems have
been used to track wastes. Worksheets 9 and 10 in
Appendix A (and Worksheet S6 in Appendix B)
provide a means of recording pertinent waste stream
characteristics.
Prioritizing Waste Streams and/or
Operations to Assess
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. The WM
assessments should concentrate on the most
important waste problems first, and then move on to
the lower priority problems as the time, personnel, and
budget permit
Setting the priorities of waste streams or facility areas to
assess requires a great deal of care and attention,
since this step focuses the remainder of the
12
-------
assessment activity. Table 3-3 lists important criteria to
consider when setting these priorities.
Table 3-3. Typical Consideration*
Prioritizing Waata Streams to Aaaaaa
for
Compliance with currant and futura regulations.
Costs of waste management (treatment and disposal).
Potential environmental and safety liability.
Quantity of waste.
Hazardous properties of the waste (including toxicity.
flammability. corrosivity, and reactivity).
Other safety hazards to amployees.
Potential for (or ease of) minimization.'
Potential for removing bottlenecks in production or waste
treatment.
Potential recovery of valuable by-products.
Available budget for the waste minimization assessment
program and projects.
Worksheet 10 in Appendix A (Worksheet S6 in
Appendix B) provides a means for evaluating waste
stream priorities for the remainder of the assessment.
Small businesses, or large businesses with only a few
waste generating operations should assess their entire
facility. It is 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 the 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. Examplea of WM Aaaaaamant Teams
1. Metal finishing department in a large defense contractor.
• Metal finishing department manager
• Process engineer responsible for metal finishing
processes
• Facilities engineer responsble for metal finishing
department*
• Wastewater treatment department supervisor
• Staff environmental engineer
2. Small pesticide formutator.
• Production manager*
• Environmental manager
• Maintenance supervisor
• Pesticide industry consultant
3. Cyanide plating operation at a military facility.
• Internal assessment team
Environmental coordinator*
Environmental engineer
Electroplating facility engineering supervisor
Metallurgist
Materials science group chemist
Outside assessment team
Chemical engineers (2)
Environmental engineering consultant
Plating chemistry consultant
4. Urge offset printing facility.
• Internal assessment team
Plant vice president
Film processing supervisor
Pressroom supervisor
>utside assessment team
Chemical engineers (2)*
Environmental scientist
Printing industry technical consultant
• Team leader
the 'sacred cow* syndrome, such as when an old
process area, rich in history, undergoes an
assessment.
Outside consultants can bring a wide variety of
experience and expertise to a waste minimization
assessment. Consultants may be especially useful to
smaller companies who may not have in-house
expertise In the relevant waste minimization
techniques and technologies.
Production operators and line employees must not be
overlooked as a source of WM suggestions, since they
possess firsthand knowledge and experience with the
process. Their assistance is especially useful In
assessing operational or procedural changes, or in
equipment modifications that affect the way they do
their work.
•Quality circles' have been Instituted by many
companies, particularly in manufacturing industries, to
13
-------
Improve product quality and production efficiency.
These quality circles consist of meetings of workers
and supervisors, where improvements are proposed
and evaluated. Quality circles are beneficial in that they
Involve the production people who are closely
associated with the operations, and foster participation
and commitment to improvement. Several large
companies that have quality circles have used them as
a means of soliciting successful suggestions for waste
minimization.
Site Inspection
With a specific area or waste stream selected, and with
the assessment team in place, the assessment
continues with a visit to the site. In the case where the
entire assessment team is employed at the plant being
assessed, the team should have become very familiar
with the specific area in the process of collecting the
operating and design data. The members of the
assessment team should familiarize themselves with
the site as much as possible. Although the collected
information is critical to gaining an understanding of the
processes involved, seeing the site is Important in
order to witness the actual operation. For example, in
many instances, a process unit is operated differently
from the method originally described in the operating
manual. Modifications may have been made to the
equipment that were not recorded in the flow diagrams
or equipment lists.
When people from outside of the plant participate In
the assessment, it is recommended that a formal site
inspection take place. Even when the team is made up
entirely of plant employees, a site Inspection by all
team members is helpful after the site information has
been collected and reviewed. The inspection helps to
resolve questions or conflicting data uncovered during
the review. The site inspection also provides
additional information to supplement that obtained
earlier.
When the assessment team Includes members
employed outside of the plant, the team should
prepare a list of needed information and an inspection
agenda. The list can be presented in the form of a
checklist detailing objectives, questions and issues to
be resolved, and/or further information requirements.
The agenda and information list are given to the
appropriate plant personnel in the areas to be
assessed early enough before the visit to allow them to
assemble the information in advance. Of course, ft 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 3-5 presents useful
guide!;nes for the site inspection.
Table 3-3. Guidelines for the Site Inspection
• Prepare an agenda in advance thai covers all points that
•till require clarification. Provide staff contact* in the
area being assessed with the aganda aavaral days
before the inspection.
• Schedule the Inspection to coincide with the particular
operation that is of interest (e.g., make-up chemical
addition, bath sampling, bath dumping, atari-up.
shutdown, ate.).
• Monitor the operation at different times during the shift,
and V needed, during all three shifts, especially when
waste generation is highly dependent en human
involvement (e.g.. in painting or parts cleaning
iralbns).
Interview the operators, shift supervisors, and foremen in
the assessed area. Do not hesitate to question more
than one person V an answer is not forthcoming. Assess
the operators' and their supervisors' awareness of the
waste generation aspects of the operation. Note their
familiarity (or lack thereof) with the impacts their
operation may have on other operations.
Photograph the area of interest, If warranted.
Photographs are valuable in the absence of plant layout
drawings. Many details can be captured in photographs
that otherwise could be forgotten or inaccurately recalled
at a later date.
Observe the "housekeeping* aspects of the operation.
Check for signs of spills or leaks. Visit the maintenance
shop and ask about any problems in keeping the
equipment leak-free. Assess the overall cleanliness of
the alia. Pay attention to odors and fumes.
Assess the organizational structure and level of
coordination of environmental activities between various
departments.
Assess administrative controls, such as cost accounting
procedures, material purchasing procedures, and waste
collection procedures.
In performing the she 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. Full confirmation of these
conclusions may require additional data collection,
analysis, and/or site visits.
14
-------
Generating WM Options
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 collection 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 tor waste
minimization techniques are listed in Table 3-6.
Table 3*6. Sourcee of Background Information
en WM Options
Trade astodation§
As pan of thair ovarall function to assist companies
within their industry, trada associations ganarally
provida assistanca and information about environmental
regulations and various available tachniquas for
complying with thasa ragulations. Tha information
provided is especially valuable ainca H la industry-
specific.
Plant engineers andoperaton
The employees that are intimately familiar with a facility's
operations are often the best aourca of suggestions for
potential WM options.
Published literature
Technical magazines, trada journals, government
reports, and research briefs often contain information
that can be used as waste minimization options.
Stale ana local environmental agendet
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 atate and federal
programs for WM assistance.
Equipment vendor*
Meetings with equipment vendora, aa well as vendor
literature, are particularly useful in Identifying potential
equipment-oriented options. Vendors are eager to waist
companies in implementing projects. Remember, though,
that the vendor's job is to sell equipment
Contuhenti
Consultants can provida 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 moat desirable.
Waste Minimization Option*
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
evoid the generation of hazardous wastes, thereby
eliminating the problems associated with handling
these wastes. Recycling techniques may be
performed onsfte or at an offsite 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
Practlcee
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 atorage. Good operating
practices Include the following:
Waste minimization programs
Management and personnel practices
Material handling and inventory practices
Loss prevention
Waste segregation
Cost accounting practices
Production scheduling
Management and personnel practices Include
employee training, incentives and bonuses, and other
programs that encourage employees to
conscientiously strive to reduce waste. Material
handling and inventory practices include programs to
reduce loss of input materials due to mishandling,
expired shelf life of time-sensitive materials, and
proper storage conditions. Loss prevention minimizes
15
-------
wastes by avoiding leaks from equipment and spills.
Waste segregation practices reduce the volume ol
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 Practices
A large consumer product company In California
adopted a corporate policy to minimize the
generation of hazardous waste. In order to
implement the policy, the company mobilized
quality circles made up of employees representing
areas within the plant that generated hazardous
wastes. The company experienced a 75%
reduction in the amount of wastes generated by
instituting proper maintenance procedures
suggested by the quality circle teams. Since the
team members were also line supervisors and
operators, they made sure the procedures were
followed.
Source Reduction: Technology Changes
Technology changes are oriented toward process and
equipment modifications to reduce waste, primarily In a
production setting. Technology changes can range
from minor changes that can be implemented In a
matter of days at low cost, to the replacement of
processes involving large capital costs. These
changes include the following:
• Changes in the production process
• Equipment, layout, or piping changes
• Use of automation
• Changes in process operating conditions, such as
• Flow rates
- Temperatures
• Pressures
• Residence times
Example: Technology Changes
A manufacturer of fabricated metal products
cleaned nickel and titanium wire In an alkaline
chemical bath prior to using the wire in their product
In 1986. the company began to experiment with a
mechanical abrasive system. The wire was passed
through the system which uses silk and carbide
pads and pressure to brighten the metal. The
system worked, but required passing the wire
through the unit twice for complete cleaning. In
1987. The company bought a second abrasive unit
and Installed It in series with the first unit. This
system allowed the company to completely
eliminate the need for the chemical cleaning bath.
Source Reduction: Input Material Changes
Input material changes accomplish 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: Inout Material Charges
An electronic manufacturing facility ef a large
diversified corporation originally cleaned printed
tinjR 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 clean six times more effectively. This resulted in a
tower product reject rate, and eliminated a
hazardous waste.
Source Reduction: Product Changea
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
Example: Product changes
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.
Example: 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
whh fresh black ink and black toner to create the
black ink. This ink is then filtered to remove flakes of
dried ink. This ink is used in place of fresh black ink,
and eliminates the need tor the company to ship
waste ink off site for disposal. The price of the
recycling unit was paid off in 18 months based only
on the savings in fresh black 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.
Example- Reclamation
A photoprocessing company uses an electrolytic
deposition cell to recover silver out of the rinsewater
from film processing equipment. The silver is then
sold to a small recycler. By removing the silver from
this wastewater, the wastewater can be discharged
to the sewer without additionalprelreatment 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 sells It to
the same recycler. The recycler burns the film and
collects the silver from the the residual ash. By
removing the silver from the ash, the ash becomes
nonhazardous.
Appendix E lists many WM techniques and concepts
applicable to common waste-generating operations
(coating, equipment cleaning, parts cleaning, and
materials handling). Additionally, a list of good
operating practices is provided.
ilethods 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 will suggest many potential options on
their own, the process can be enhanced by using
tome 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 whh 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 S7 and SB in Appendix B
perform the same function In the simplified set of
worksheets.
Screening and Selecting Options tor Further
Study
Many 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
•valuation. 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, whh small management groups, or In
situations where only a few options have been
generated. This method consists of a discussion and
examination of each option.
The weighted sum method is a means of quantifying
the important factors that affect waste management at a
17
-------
particular facility, and how each option will perform with
respect to these (actors. 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 Hexfole enough to allow
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 acreening
procedure should consider the following questions.
• What is the main benefit gained by Implementing
this option? (e.g., economics, compliance, liability,
workplace safety, etc.)
• Does the necessary technology axist to develop
the option?
• How much does It cost? is It cost effective?
• Can the option be Implemented within a reasonable
amount of time without disrupting production?
• Does the option have a good track record"? Knot,
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 feasibility 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, ft
should be promoted (or further study or outright
implementation.
18
-------
Section 4
Feasibility Analysis
The recognized need to minima* waste
Planning and
Organization
Assessment
Phase
FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS PHASE
• Technical evaluation
• Economic evaluation
• Select options for implementation
Implementation
Successfully implemented
waste minimization projects
The final product of the assessment phase Is a list of
WM options for the assessed area. The assessment
will have screened out the impractical or unattractive
options. The next step is to determine if 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 fast-track'
approach in evaluating procedural changes that do not
involve a significant capital expenditure. Process
testing of materials can be done relatively quickly, I the
options do not involve major equipment installation or
modifications.
For equipment-related options or process changes.
visits to see existing Installations can be arranged
through equipment vendors and Industry contacts.
The operator's comments are especially important and
should be compared with the vendor's claims. Bench-
scale or pilot-scale demonstration is often necessary.
Often it is possible to obtain scale-up data using a
rental lest 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, H 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 for workers?
• • Will product quality be maintained?
• Is apace available?
• Is the new equipment, materials, or procedures
compatble with production operating procedures, work
flow, and production rates?
• to additional labor required?
• Are utilities available? Or mutt they be installed.
thereby raising capital costs?
• How long will production be slopped in order to install the
system?
• b 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. If the
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. If after the
technical evaluation, the project appears Infeasible or
impractical, It should be dropped. Worksheet 14 in
Appendix A is a checklist of important Hems to consider
when evaluating the technical feasibility of a WM
option.
Economic Evaluation
The economic evaluation is carried out using standard
measures of profitability, such as payback period,
return on investment, and net present value. Each
organization has its own economic criteria for selecting
projects for implementation. In performing the
economic evaluation, various costs and savings must
be considered. As in any projects, the cost elements
of a WM project can be broken down into capital costs
and operating costs. The economic analysis described
In this section and in the associated worksheets
represents a preliminary, rather than detailed, analysis.
For smaller facilities wHh only a few processes, the
entire WM assessment procedure will tend to be much
19
-------
Table 4-2. Capital Investment for • Typical
Largs WM Prejaet
Direct Capita! Costs
Site Development
Demolitcn and alteration work
Srte clearing and grading
Walkways, reads, and fencing
Process Equipment
All equipment listed on flow sheets
Spare parts
Taxes, freight. Insurance, and duties
Materials
Piping and ducting
Insulaton and painting
Electrical
Instrumentation and controls
Buildings and structures
Connections to Existing Utilities and Services (water,
HVAC. power, steam, refrigeration, fuels, plant air
and inert gas, lighting, and fire control)
New Utility and Service Facilities (same Items as above)
Other Non-Process Equipment
Construct ion/Installation
Construction/Installation labor salaries and burden
Supervision, accounting, timekeeping, purchasing.
safety, and expediting
Temporary facilities
Construction tools and equipment
Taxes and insurance
Building permits, field tests, Ibenses
Indirect Capital Costs
In-house engineering, procurement, and other home
ofice costs
Outside engineering, design, and consulting Services
Permitting costs
Contractors' fees
Stsn-up costs
Training costs
Contingency
Interest accrued during construction
TOTAL FIXED CAPITAL COSTS
Working Capital
Raw materials Inventory
Finished product inventory
Materials and supplies
TOTAL WORKING CAPITAL
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT
Source: Adapted from Perry, Chemical Engineer's
Ha-^boaif (1985); and Peters and Timmemaus. plant Desian
and Economies for Chemical Engineers (1980).
less formal. In this situation, several obvious WM
options, such as installation of flow controls and good
operating practices may be Implemented with little 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 feasbility analyses.
CspHtl Cofti
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 for 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.
Optntlng Coiti tnd Stvlngt
The basic economic goal of any waste minimization
project 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 costs' 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 typically
associated with waste minimization 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 significant factor in a company's overall
cost structure. Table 4-4 presents typical external
costs for offsHe waste treatment and disposal. In
addition to these external costs, there are significant
Internal costs, Including the labor to store and ship out
wastes, liability insurance costs, and onsile treatment
costs.
20
-------
Table 4-3. Operating Costa and Savings
Asseelstsd wKh WM Prejsets
Raducad watta managamant costs.
This includes reductions in costs for
Off she treatment, storage, and disposal fass
Stats fses and taxss on hazardous waste generators
Transportation costs
OnsHe treatment, storage, and handling costs
Permitting, reporting, and rocordkooping costs
Input malarial co»f livings.
An option that reduces waste usually decreases the
demand for input materials.
Insuranea and Bability savory*.
A WM option may be signitcsnt enough to reduce a
company's insurance payments. K may also tower a
company's potential liability associated with remedial
clean-up of TSDFs and workplace safety. (The
magnitude of Utility savings is drtfcuft to determine).
CnangM in cottt aaaodatad with quality.
A WM option may have a positive or negative effect on
product quality. This could result in higher (or tower)
costs lor rework, scrap, or quality control functions.
Changai in utillti»$ coirs.
Utilities costs may incraass or decrease. This Includes
steim. electncity. process and cooling water, plant air,
refrigeration, or inert gas.
Cnanoei in operating and maintananea boor, burdan, and
banatnt.
An option may either inereass or decrease labor
requirements. This may be reflected in changes in
overtime hours or in changes in the number of
employees When direct labor costs change, then the
burden and benefit costs will also change. In large
projects, supervision costs will also change.
Changas in opargting and maintananea tuppfiat.
An option may result increase or decrsass the use of
O&M supplies.
Change$ in ovarhaad co$tt.
Large WM projects msy affect a facility's overhead
costs.
Changa$ In ravanuai from Incraaiad (or daeraa$ad)
production.
An option may result in sn increase In the productivity of
a unit. This will result in a change in revenues. (Note that
operating costs may also change accordingly.)
Increased ravanutt from ty-pmducta.
A WM option may produce a byproduct that can be aold
to a recycler or sold to another company as a raw
material. This will increase the company's revenues.
Table 44. Typlesl Coats of Offalte Industrial
Waate Management*
Dispossl
Drummed hazardous waste"
Solids $75 to $110 per drum
Liquids $65 to $120 per drum
Buk wasts
Solids $120 per cubic yard
Liquids $0.60 to $2 .30 per gallon
Lab packs $110 per drum
Analysis (ai disposal she) $200 to $300
Transportation $65 to IBS per hour ® 45 mies
per hour (round trip)
• • Does not include tntemsl costs, such as taxes and fees.
and labor for manifest preparation, storage, handling, and
raeordkeeping.
*•• Based on 55 galton drums. These prices are for larger
quantities of drummed wastes. Disposal of a email
number of drums can be up to tour times higher per
drum.
For the purpose of evaluating a project to reduce
waste quantities, some types of costs are larger and
more easily quantified. These include:
disposal fees
transportation costs
predisposal treatment costs
raw materials costs
operating and maintenance costs.
ft is suggested that savings In these costs be taken
into consideration first, because they have a greater
effect on project economics and Involve less effort to
estimate reliably- The remaining elements are usually
secondary In their direct impact and should be
included on an as-needed basis in fine-tuning the
analysis.
Profitability Antly»l§
A project's profitability Is measured using the estimated
net cash flows (cash incomes minus cash outlays) for
each year of the project's life. A profitability analysis
example In Appendix H includes two cash flow tables
(Figure H-3 and H-4).
If the project has no significant capital costs, the
project's profitability can be judged by whether an
operating cost savings occurs or not. If such a project
reduces overall operating costs, H should be
implemented as soon as practical
21
-------
For projects with significant capital costs, a more
detailed profitability analysis is necessary. The three
standard profitability measures are:
• Payback period
• Internal rate of return (IRR)
• Net present value
The payback period for a project is the amount of time ft
takes to recover the initial cash outlay on the project.
The formula for calculating the payback period on a
pretax basis is the following:
Payback period
(inyun)
Capital Investment
Annuil operating ooat savings
For example, suppose a waste generator installs a
piece of equipment at a total cost of $120,000. If the
piece of equipment is expected to save $48,000 per
year, then the payback period is 25 yean.
Payback periods are typically measured in years.
However, a particularly attractive project may have a
payback period measured in months. Payback periods
in the range of three to tour years are usually
considered acceptable for low-risk investments. This
method is recommended for quick assessments of
profitability. If large capital expenditures are Involved, It
is usually 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 projects that are
competing for funds. Capital funding for a project may
well 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 low level of risk, an
aftertax IRR of 12 to 15 percent is typically acceptable.
Most of the popular spreadsheet programs for
personal computers will automatically 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.
Adjustment* tor Rlaka and Liability
As mentioned earlier, waste minimization projects may
reduce the magnitude of environmental and safety
risks for a company. Although these risks can be
identified, H is difficult to predict if problems occur, the
nature of the problems, and their resulting magnitude.
One way of accounting for the reduction of these risks
k 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
project for capital funding. Therefore, I is Important
that the financial analysts and the decision makers in
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 tower
hurdle rates for WM projects.
While the profitability k Important In deciding whether
or not to Implement an option, environmental
regulations may be even more important. A company
operating in violation of environmental regulations can
face fines, lawsuits, and criminal penalties for the
company's managers. Ultimately, the facility may even
be forced to shut down. In this case the total cash flow
of a company can hinge upon implementing the
environmental project.
for economic evaluation
Worksheets 15 through 17 in Appendix A are used to
determine the economic evaluation of a WM option.
Worksheet 15 is a checklist of capital and operating
cost Hems. Worksheet 16 k used to find a simple
payback period for an option that requires capital
investment. Worksheet 17 k used to find the net
present value and Internal rate of return for an option
that requires capital Investment. Worksheet S9 In
Appendix B k used to record estimated capital and
operating costs, and to determine the payback period
in the simplified assessment procedure.
Final Report
The product of a waste minimization assessment k a
report that presents the results of the assessment and
the technical and economic feasibility analyses. The
report also containes recommendations to implement
the feasible options.
A good final report can be an important tool for getting
a project implemented. H is particularly valuable in
obtaining funding for the project. In presenting the
feasibility analyses, H k often useful to evaluate the
project under different scenarios. For example,
comparing a projects's profitability under optimistic and
pessimistic assumptions (such as increasing waste
disposal costs) can be beneficial. Sensitivity analyses
that indicate the effect of key variables on profitability
are also useful.
22
-------
•The report should include not only how much the
project will cost and Us expected performance, but also
how ft will to done. R IB important to discuss:
o whether the technology Is established, wKh
mention of succesful applications;
° the required resources and how they will be
obtained;
o estimated construction period;
o estimated production downtime;
» how the performance of the project can be
evaluated after It is implemented.
Before the report is finalized, ft is Important to review
the results with the affected departments and to solicit
their support. By having department representatives
assist in preparing and reviewing the report, the
chances are increased that the projects will be
Implemented. In summarizing the results, a qualitative
evaluation of intangible costs and benefits to the
company should be included. Reduced liabilities and
improved image In the eyes of the employees and the
community should be discussed.
23
-------
Section 5
Implementing Waste Minimization Options
The recognized need to minimize waste
Planning and
Organization
Assessment
Phaaa
Feasibility
Analysis Phase
IMPLEMENTATION
Justify project! and obtain funding
Installation (aquipmant)
Implementation (procedure)
Evaluate performance
Successfully implemented
waste minimization projects
The WM assessment report provides the basis for
obtaining company funding of WM projects. Because
projects are not always sold on their technical merits
alone, a clear description of both tangible and
intangible benefits can help edge a proposed project
past competing projects for funding.
The champions of the WM assessment program
should be flexible 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 in implementing
the options. Above all, they should keep in mind that
an idea will not sell H the sponsors are not sold on H
themselves.
Obtaining Funding
Waste reduction projects generally Involve
improvements in process efficiency and/or reductions
in operating costs of waste management. However, an
organization's capital resources may be prioritized
toward enhancing future revenues (for example.
moving into new lines 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
until the next capital budgeting period, ft Is 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 quell
opposing 'cant be done' or '« It aint broke, donl fix V
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 the 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 Internally for capital investment. In this ease, the
company should look to outside financing. The
company generally has two major sources to consider
private sector financing and government-assisted
funding.
Private sector financing includes bank loans and other
conventional sources of financing. Government
financing is available In some cases. It may be
worthwhile to contact your slate's Department of
Commerce or the federal Small Business
Administration for Information regarding loans for
pollution control or hazardous waste disposal projects.
Some states can provide technical and financial
assistance. Appendix F Includes a list of states
providing this assistance and addresses to get
Information.
24
-------
Installation
Waste minimization options that Involve operational,
procedural, or materials changes (without additions or
modifications to equipment) should be Implemented
as soon as the potential cost savings have been
determined. For projects Involving equipment
modifications or new equipment, the installation of a
waste minimization project is essentially no different
from any other capital Improvement project. The
phases of the project include planning, design,
procurement, and construction.
Worksheet 18 is a form for documenting the progress
of a WM project through the implementation phase.
Demonstration and Follow-up
After the waste minimization option has been
Implemented, ft 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
gel warranties from vendors prior to installation of the
equipment.
The documentation provided through a follow-up
evaluation represents an important source of
information for future uses of the option in other
facilities. Worksheet 19 is 0 form for evaluating the
performance of an implemented WM option. The
experience gained in implementing an option at one
facility can be used to reduce the problems and costs
of implementing options at subsequent facilities.
Measuring Waste Reduction
One measure of effectiveness for a WM project is the
project's effect on the organization's cash flow. The
project should pay for itself through reduced waste
management costs and reduced raw materials costs.
However, it is also important to measure the actual
reduction of waste accomplished by the WM project.
The easiest way to measure waste reduction is by
recording the quantities of waste generated before
and after a WM project has been Implemented. The
difference, dividied by the original waste generation
rate, represents the percentage reduction in waste
quantity. However, this simple measurement ignores
other factors that also affect the quantity of waste
generated.
In general, waste generation is directly dependent on
the production rate. Therefore, the ratio of waste
generation rate to production rate is a convenient way
of measuring waste reduction.
Expressing waste reduction In terms of the ratio of
waste to production rates is not free of problems,
however. One of these problems Is the danger of
using the ratio of Infrequent large quantities to the
production rate. This problem is illustrated by a
.situation where a plant undergoes a major overhaul
Involving equipment cleaning, paint stripping, and
repainting. Such overhauls are fairly Infrequent and
are typically performed every three to five years. The
decision to include this intermittent stream in the
calculation of the waste reduction index, based on the
ratio of waste rate to product rate, would lead to an
Increase in this index. This decision cannot be
justified, however, since the infrequent generation of
painting wastes is not a function of production rate. In
a situation like this, the waste reduction progress
should be measured in terms of the ratio of waste
quantity or materials use to the square footage of the
area painted. In general, a distinction should be made
between production- related wastes and maintenance-
related wastes and dean-up wastes.
Also, a tew waste streams may be inversely
proportional to production rate. For example, a waste
resulting from outdated input materials is likely to
increase if the production rate decreases. This is
because the age-dated materials in inventory are more
likely to expire when their use in production
decreases.
For these reasons, care must be taken when
expressing the extent of waste reduction. This
requires that the means by which wastes are
generated be well understood.
In measuring waste reduction, the total quantity of an
individual waste stream should be measured, as well as
the individual waste components or characteristics.
Many companies have reported substantial reduction
in the quanitites 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 quanhies,
flows, and composition can be costly and time
consuming. For this reason, It may be practical, in
some Instances, to express waste reduction indirectly
In terms of the ratio of input materials consumption to
production rate. These data are easier to obtain,
although the measure is not direct.
25
-------
Measuring waste minimization by using a ratio of waste
quantity to material throughput or product output is
generally more meaningful for specific units or
operations, rather than for an entire facility. Therefore,
K is important to preserve the focus of the WM project
when measuring and reporting progress. For those
operations not Involving chemical reactions, H may be
helpful to measure WM progress by using the ratio of
Input material quantity to material throughput or
production rate.
Waste Minimization Assessments for
New Production Processes'
This manual concentrates en waste minimization
assessments conducted In existing facilities.
However, .H is Important that waste minimization
principles be applied to new projects. In general, I to
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 for e new product,
production process, or operation should address
waste generation aspects early on. The assessment
procedure in this manual can be modified 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 will
require expensive changes. All new projects should
be reviewed by the waste minimization program task
force.
A better approach than a pre-project assessment to to
include one or more members of the WM.program task
force on any new project that will generate waste. In
this way, the new project will benefit from the "built-in'
presence of a WM champion and his or her Influence to
design the process to minimize waste At a California
facility of a major defense contractor, all new projects
and modifications to existing facilities 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 e team
member who participates In the project kick-off end
review meetings from inception to implementation.
Ongoing Waste Minimization Program
The WM program is a continuing, rather than e
time effort. Once the highest priority waste stream
and facility areas have been assessed and those
projects have been implemented, the assessment
program should took to areas and waste streams wtth
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 et reducing Industrial wastewater
dbcharges, air emissions, end solid wastes.
•The frequency wRh which assessments ere done will
depend on the program's budget, the company's
budgeting cycle (annual cycle in most companies), and
special circumstances, these special circumstances
might be:
• e change In raw material or product requirements
• higher waste management costs
• new regulations
technology
• a major event wfth undesirable environmental
consequences (such es e major spill)
Aside from the special circumstances, s new series of
assessments should be conducted each fiscal year.
To be truly effective, e philosophy cf 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
ell developed this philosophy within their companies.
26
-------
Appendix A
Waste Minimization Assessment Worksheets
The worksheets that follow are designed to fadlftale the WM assessment procedure. Table A-1 fall the worksheets.
according to the particular phase of the program, and a brief description of the purpoM of the worksheets.
Appendix B presents a aeriac of simplified worksheets for small buainaaaM or for preliminary assessments.
Table A-1. Llat of Waate Minimization Aaaaaamant Worksheets
Phase Number and Title
Purpoaa/Remarka
1. Assessment Overview
Planning and Organisation
(Section 2)
2. Program Organization
3. Assessment Team Make-up
Aeeeaament Phaeo
(Section 3)
4. Site Description
5. Penonnel
6. Process Information
7. Input Materials Summary
8. Products Summary
6. Individual Waste Stream
Characterization
10. Waste Stream Summary
Summarizes the overaR assessment procedure.
Records key members in the WMA program task force and the WM
assessment teams. Also records the relevant organization.
Lists names of assessment team members as wen as duties. Includes
a list of potential departments to consider when selecting the teems.
Uais background Information about the facility, including beaten.
products, and operations.
Records information about the personnel who work In the area to be
assessed.
This is a checklist of useful process Information to took for before
atarting the assessment
Records input material information for a specific production or process
area. This includss name, supplier, hazardous component or
properties, cost, delivery and shelf-life information, and possible
aubsthutes.
Identifies hazardous components, production rate, revenues, and
other Information about products.
Records source, hazard, generation rate, disposal cost, and method
of treatment or disposal for each waste stream.
Summarizes all of the Information collected for each waste stream.
This sheet is also used to prioritize waste streams to assess.
(continued)
A-1
-------
Table A-1. List of Waata Minimization AMaawnant Workahaata (eenllnuad)
Phaa* Numbar and Tltla
Purpeaa/Ramarka
Aaaaaamant Phaaa (eentlnuad)
(Sactlen 3)
11. Option Ganaration
12. Option Daaorlption
13. Options Evaluation by
Waghtad Sum Matted
Faaalblllty Analyala Phaaa
(Saetlen 4)
14. TachnicaJ Faaaibility
15. Oast Information
16. Profitability Work>haat«1
Payback Pariod
17. Profitability Workthaat 12
Cash Flow for NPV and IRR
Racord* options propoaad during braJnatorming or nominal group
laehniqu* aaaabna. Indudaa tha rational* (or propoaing aach option.
Daacrbat and aummarteaa Information about a pfopoaad option. Abo
notaa approval of promiaing option*.
Uaad for aeraaning option* uaing tha walghtad aum nwthod.
Datailad chacUiat for parforming a tachnfeaJ evaluation of a WM option.
This workthaat i* dividad into aaction* tor aqulpmant-ralalad option*.
paraonnaVprocedural-relaled option*, and m«t*riaJ»-ralatad eptbna.
Dataiiad D*t of capital and oparating ooat information for uaa in tha
aoonomic avaluation of an option.
Basad on tha capital and oparating ooat information davatopad from
Work»haet 15. this workahaat • uMd to caJculat* tha payback parted.
Thto worluhaat la uaad to davabp caah flow* for calculating NPV or RR.
Implamantatlon
(Sactlon 5)
18. Project Summary
18. Option Parformanca
Summarbaa Important taaka to ba parformad during tha
impl*mant*tion of an option. Th» Indudaa dalivarabia. raaponabla
paraon, budgat. and achadula.
Racord* malartal b*lane* Information for evaluating tha
parformanc* of an implamantad option.
A-2
-------
|Firm_
[site.
Date.
Waste Minimization Assessment
Worksheets
Proj. No.
Prepared By _^^___^^__
Checked By
Sheet _J_ of _1_ Page of
WORKSHEET
1
ASSESSMENT OVERVIEW
SEPA
Begin the Waste Minimization
Assessment Program
Wnrlceheete
PLANNING AND ORGANIZATION
• Get management commitment
• Set overall assessment program goals
• Organize assessment program task fore*
i
Assessment organizaton
and commitment to proceed
Select new
assessment targets
and reevaluate
previous options
ASSESSMENT PHASE
• Compile process and facility data
• Prioritize and select assessment targets
• Select people lor assessment teams
• Review data and inspect aha
• Generate options
• Screen and select options for further study
4.6.7.8.8.10
10
3
11,12
13
I
Assessment report of
selected options
FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS PHASE
• Technical evaluation
• Economic evaluation
• Select options for implementation
14
15,16.17
Final report, including
recommended options
Repeat the process
IMPLEMENTATION
• Justify projects and obtain funding
• Installation (equipment)
• Implementation (procedure)
• Evaluate performance
IB
IB
IB
Successfully operating
waste minimization projeete
A-3
-------
Firm,
Site .
Date,
Waaie Minimization Aattasment
Pro). No.
Prepared By
Checked By ,
Sheet JL of J_ Page of _
WORKSHEET
2
PROGRAM ORGANIZATION
SEPA
FUNCTION
NAME
LOCATION
TELEPHONE *
Program Manager
SNe Coordinator
Atsessment Team Leader
Organization Chart
(aketch)
A-4
-------
Firm
fit*
Data
Waste Minimization Assessment
Pro) No
Pra
Ch
Stv
WORKSHEET
3
ASSESSMENT
TEAM MAKE-UP
pared By
BCkedBv
set 1 of 1 Page of
SEPA
Function/Department
Assessment Team
Leader
Site Coordinator
Operations
Engineering
Maintenance
Scheduling
Materials Control
Procurement
Shipping/Receiving
Facilities
Quality Control
Environmental
Accounting
Personnel
R&D
Legal
Management
Contractor/Consultant
Safety
Name
Location/
Telephone f
Manhours
Required
Duties
Lead
Support
Review
A-5
-------
Firm
Site .
Date
Waste Unlmlatton Atteument
Pro). No.
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet J_ of J_ Pace _ of __
WORKSHEET
4
SITE DESCRIPTION
f/EPA
Firm:
Plant:
Department;
Area:
Street Address:
CHv:
State.7iP Code:
Telephone: (
Major Products;
SIC Codes:
EPA Generator Number
Major Unit or;
Product or:
Operations;
Facilities/Equipment Age:
A-6
-------
Firm
Site _
)ate
Wast* Minimization Aeeeeement
Pro) No
Pr«
Ch
srv
WORKSHEET
5
PERSONNEL
toared By
BckedBy
»et 1. of .1, Page of
&EPA
Attribute
Overall
Department/Area
Total Staff
Direct Supv. Staff
Management
Average Age, yrs.
Annual Turnover Rate %
Seniority, yra.
Yra. of Formal Education
Training, hra^yr.
Additional Remarks
A-7
-------
Firm
RHfl
natfl
Waste Minimization Assessment
Pmj Mn
Prepared By
Checked Bv
Sheet J_ of J_ Page of
WORKSHEET
6
PROCESS INFORMATION
©EPA
Process Unit/Operation:
Operation Type: D Continuous
D Discrete
D Batch or Semi-Batch D Other
Document
Process Flow Diagram
Material/Energy Balance
Design
Operating
Flow/Amount Measurements
Stream
Analyses'Assays
Stream
Process Description
Operating Manuals
Equipment List
Equipment Specifications
Piping & Instrument Diagrams
Plot and Elevation Plan(s)
Work Flow Diagrams
Hazardous Waste Manifests
Emission Inventories
Annual/Biennial Reports
Environmental Audit Reports
Permit/Permit Applications
Batch Sheet(s)
Materials Application Diagrams
Product Composition Sheets
Material Safety Data Sheets
Inventory Records
Operator Logs
Production Schedules
Status
Complete?
(Y/N)
Current?
(Y/N)
Last
Revision
Used In this
Report (Y/N)
Document
Number
Location
A-fl
-------
firm
Site
Dale
Waste Minimization Assessment
Pmj No
Pn
Ch
Sr»
WORKSHEET
7
INPUT MATERIALS SUMMARY
•oared By
•dead By
wtj_of J_ Page of
®EPA
Attribute
Name/ID
Source/Supplier
Component/Attribute of Concern
Annual Consumption Rate
Overall
Component(s) of Concern
Purchase Price, $ oer
Overall Annual Cost
Delivery Mode*
Shipping Container Size & Type*
Storage Mode*
Transfer Mode*
Empty Container Disposal/Management*
Shelf Life
Supplier Would
• accept expired material (Y/N)
• accept shipping containers (Y/N)
• revise expiration date (Y/N)
Acceptable Substltirte(s), If any
AHernate Suppliers)
Description1
Stream No.
Stream No.
Stream No.._ .
stream numbers, If applicable, should correspond to those used on process flow diagrams.
e.g., pipeline, tank car, 100 bbl. tank truck, truck, Me.
e.g., 55 gal. drum, 100 Ib. paper bag, tank, tie.
e.g., outdoor, warehouse, underground, aboveg round, etc.
e.g., pump, forkllft, pneumatic transport, conveyor, etc.
e.g., crush and landfill, clean and recycle, return to supplier, tie.
A-9
-------
Firm
Site .
Date
Waste Minimization Assessment
Proj. No.
Prepared By i
Checked By
Sheet J_ of _1_ Page of ___
WORKSHEET
8
PRODUCTS SUMMARY
©EPA
Attribute
Name/ID
Component/Attribute of Concern
Annual Production Rate
Overall
Component(s) of Concern
Annual Revenues, $
Shipping Mode
Shipping Container Size & Type
Onslte Storage Mode
Containers Returnable (Y/N)
Shelf Life
Rework Possible (Y/N)
Customer Would
• relax specification (Y/N)
• accept larger containers (Y/N)
Stream No.
Description1
Stream No.
Stream No.
stream numbers, If applicable, should correspond to those used on process flow diagrams.
A-10
-------
Firm,
Site
Date
Wast* Minimization Assessment
Pro]. No.
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet£_ of J_ Page of
WORKSHEET
9a
INDIVIDUAL WASTE STREAM
CHARACTERIZATION
&EPA
1. Waste Stream Name/ID:.
Process Unit/Operation.
Stream Number.
Waste Characteristics (attach additional sheets with composition data, as necessary.)
D
gas
liquid
D solid HH mixed phase
Density, to/cutt
Viscosity/Consistency
pH .Flash Point.
High Heating Value, Btu/b.
; % Water _
3. Waste Leaves Process as:
CD air emission [D waste water O solid waste LJ hazardous waste
4. Occurrence
LJ continuous
LJ discrete
discrete -
discharge triggered by LJ chemical analysis
other (describe)
Type: D periodic - length of period
LJ sporadic (Irregular occurrence)
LJ non-recurrent
Generation Rat*
Annual -
Maximum -
Average -
Frequency.
Batch Size-
average
fes per year
bsper
Its per
batches per
range
A-11
-------
Firm
Stta
Dais
Waste Minimization Assessment
Proc UnR/OoAr
Praj No
Pi
C
SI
WORKSHEET
9b
INDIVIDUAL WASTE STREAM
CHARACTERIZATION
reoared By
Backed Bv
teet.2_of A. Page of
vc/EPA
6. Waste Origins/Sources
Fill out this worksheet to Identify the origin of the waste. If the waste Is a mixture of waste
streams, fill out a aheet for each of the Individual waste streams.
la the waste mixed with other wastes? Q Yes Q No
Describe how the waste Is generated.
Example: Formation and removal of an undesirable compound, removal of an uncon-
verted Input material, depletion of a key component (e.g., drag-out), equip*
ment cleaning waste, obsolete Input material, spoiled batch and production
run, spill or leak cleanup, evaporative loss, breathing or venting losses, etc.
A-12
-------
Pirm
"ite _
pate_
Waste Minimization Assessment
Prac UnH/ftnar
Pro] No
Pri
Ch
Sh
WORKSHEET
9c
1 INDIVIDUAL WASTE STREAM
1 CHARACTERIZATION
(eenUnwd)
Ute*t« Sfrnam
spared By
eckedBy
eel A_ of 1_ Page of
&EPA
7. Management Method
Leaves she In
D bulk
D roll off bins
LJ 55 gal drums
D other (describe)
Disposal Frequency
Applicable Regulations1
Regulatory Classification2
Managed
Recycling
onslte
commercial TSDF
D own TSDF
D other (describe)
LJ direct use/re-use
D energy recovery
D redistilled
D other (describe) -
offske
reclaimed material relumed to site?
D Yas D No D used by others
residue yield
residue disposal/repository
Note1 list federal, state & local regulations, (e.g., RCRA, TSCA, etc.)
Note * list pertinent regulatory classification (e.g., RCRA • Listed K011 waste, etc.)
A-13
-------
Firm,
Site ,
Date
Waste Minimization Assessment
Proc.
Proj.No.
Prepared By.
Checked By .
Sheet JL of
Page of
WORKSHEET
9d
INDIVIDUAL WASTE STREAM
CHARACTERIZATION
©EPA
-------
Firm
Sits
Waste Minimization Assessment
Proc. Unlt/Oper.^
Proj. No
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet J_ of J_ Page of
WORKSHEET
10
WASTE STREAM SUMMARY
vc/EPA
Attribute
Waste ID/Name:
Source/Origin
Component/or Property of Concern
Annual Generation Rate (units )
Overall
Component(s) of Concern
Cost of Disposal
UnH Cosl ($ per: )
Overall (per year)
Method of Management*
Priority Rating Criteria1
Regulatory Compliance
Treatment/Disposal Cost
Potential Liability
Waste Quantity Generated
Waste Hazard
Safety Hazard
Minimization Potential
Potential to Remove Bottleneck
Potential By-product Recovery
Relative
Wt.fW
Sum of Priority Rating Scores
Priority Rank
Description1
Stream No.
Rating (R)
KRxW)
RxW
Stream No.
Rating (R)
KRxW)
RxW
Stream No.
Rating (R)
KRxW)
RxW
Notes: 1. Stream numbers, If applicable, should correspond to those used on process flow diagrams.
2. For example, sanitary landfill, hazardous waste landfill, onslte recycle, Incineration, combustion
with heat recovery, distillation, dewaterlng, etc.
3. Rate each stream In each category on a scale from 0 (none) to 10 (high).
A-15
-------
Firm
Site
Waste Minimization Assessment
Proc.
Pro]. No.
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet J_ of J_ Page of
WORKSHEET
11
OPTION GENERATION
©EPA
Meeting formal (e.g., transforming, nominal group technique)
Meeting Coordinator
Meeting Participants
List Suggested Options
Rationale/Remarks on Option
A-16
-------
Firm
Site
Waste Minimization Assessment
Proc.
Pro]. No.
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet J_ of J_ Page of
WORKSHEET
12
Option Name:
OPTION DESCRIPTION
oEPA
Briefly describe the option
Waste Stream(s) Affected:
Input Materlal(s) Affected:
Product(s) Affected:
Indicate Type:
LJ Source Reduction
__ Equipment-Related Change
_ Personnel/Procedure-Related Change
Materials-Related Change
Recycling/Reuse
Onstte
Oflslte
Material reused for original purpose
Material used for a lower-quality purpose
Material told
Material burned for heat recovery
Originally proposed by:
Reviewed by:
Approved for study?—
Date:.
Date:-
yet
no. by:
Reason for Acceptance or Rejection
A-17
-------
Finn
SitA
Date
Waste Minimization Assessment
PfOC Unil/Opr
Proj No
Pre
Ch
Sh«
WORKSHEET
13
OPTIONS EVALUATION BY
WEIGHTED SUM METHOD
pared By
ecked Bv
jet 1 of 1 Pane 1 ol 1
&EPA
Criteria
Reduction In waste's hazard
Reduction of treatment/disposal costs
Reduction of safety hazards
Reduction of Input material costs
Extent of current use In Industry
Effect on product quality (no effect • 10)
Low capital cost
LowO&Mcost
Short Implementation period
Ease of Implementation
Final
Evaluation
Weight
(W)
Sum of Weighted Ratings £ (W x R)
Option Ranking
Feasibility Anar/sls Scheduled for (Date)
Options Rating (R)
•1 Option
R
RXW
92 Option
R
RXW
ff3 Option
R
RxW
14 Option
R
RxW
«5 Option
R
RxW
-------
Firm ,
Site .
Date,
Waste Minimization Assessment
Proc. Unil/Oper..
Proj. No
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet J_ of .£_ Page of
WORKSHEET
14a
TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY
WM Option Description
1. Nature of WM Option D Equlpment-Related
LJ Personnel/Procedure-Related
D Materials-Related
2. If the option appears technically feasible, state your rationale for this.
Is further analysis required? ED Yes Q No. If yes, continue with this
worksheet. If not, skip to worksheet 15.
3. Equipment • Related Option
Equipment available commercially?
Demonstrated commercially?
In similar application?
Successfully?
Describe closest industrial analog
1ES
D
D
D
D
D
D
Describe status of development
Prospective Vendor
Working Installation^)
Contact Person(s)
Date Contacted 1.
i. Also attach filled out phone conversation notes, Installation visit report, etc.
A-19
-------
Firm.
Site .
Date
Waste Minimization Assessment
Pro). No.
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet 2- of .£_ Page of
WORKSHEET
14b
TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY
(eoniifUMd)
WM Option Description
©EPA
3. Equipment-Related Option (continued)
Performance Information required (describe parameters):
Scaleup Information required (describe):
Testing Required: O yes
Scale: CD bench CD pilot
Test unit available? D yes
Test Parameters (list)
no
_
CH no
Number of test runs:.
Amount of materlal(s) required:
Testing to be conducted:
D m-plant
D
Facility/Product Constraints:
Space Requirements
Possible locations within facility
A-20
-------
I Firm
Site .
ate
Waste Minimization Assessment
Proc. Unlt/Oper
Proj. No
Prepared 3y
Checked By
Sheet ,3_ of JL Page of
WORKSHEET
14c
TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY
WM Option Description
2. Equipment-Related Option (continued)
Utility Requirements:
Electric Power Volts (AC or DC)
kW
Process Water
Flow
Pressure
Quality (tap, demln, etc.)
Cooling Water Flow Pressure.
Temp. In
Coolant/Heat Transfer Fluid —
Temp. Out,
Steam
Temp. In .
Duty —
Pressure
Duty
Temp. Out
Temp.
- Flow
SEPA
Fuel
Plant Air.
Inert Gas.
Type
Flow.
Duty.
Flow
Flow
Estimated delivery time (after award of contract)-
Estlmated Installation time
Installation dates
Estimated production downtime.
Will production be otherwise effected? Explain the effect and Impact on production.
Will product quality be affected? Explain the effect on quality.
A-21
-------
Firm.
Date.
Waste Minimization Assessment
Proc. UnH/Oper.
Proj. No
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet^_ of _fi_ Page of
WORKSHEET
14d
TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY
(oonUruMd)
SEPA
WM Option Description
3. Equipment-Related Option (continued)
Will modifications to work flow or production procedures be required? Explain..
Operator and maintenance training requirements
Number of people to be trained
D Onttte
D Offslte
Duration of training
Describe catalyst, chemicals, replacement parts, or other supplies required.
Item
Rate or Frequency
of Replacement
Supplier, Address
Does the option meet government and company safety and health requirements?
D Yes D No Explain
How Is service handled (maintenance and technical assistance)? Explain
What warranties are offered?
A-22
-------
Firm ,
Site .
Date
Waste Minimization Assessment
Proc.
Proj. No.
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet .£_ of JL Page of
"iST
TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY
x>EPA
WM Option Description.
3. Equipment-Related Option (continued)
Describe any additional storage or material handling requirements.
Describe any additional laboratory or analytical requirements.
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.) Xfi> Nfl
Has the new material been demonstrated commercially? LJ LJ
In a similar application? LJ LJ
Successfully? LJ LJ
Describe closest application
A-23
-------
Firm,
Site .
Date
Waste Minimization Assessment
Proc. Untt/Oper..
Proj. No
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet JB_ of _fi_ Page of
WORKSHEET
141
TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY
(continued)
©EPA
WM Option Description
4. Materials-Related Changes (continued)
Affected Departments/Areas
Will production be affected? Explain the effect and Impact on production.
Will product quality be affected? Explain the effect and the Impact on product quality.
will additional storage, handling or other ancillary equipment be required? Explain.
Describe any training or procedure changes that are required.
Decrlbe any material testing program that will be required.
A-24
-------
IFirrn
Site
Date
Wastt Minimization Assessment
PTC MnK/Ormr
Proj No
Pre
Ch
Shi
WORKSHEET
15a
COST INFORMATION
oared By
acked By
set 1 of 6 Paoe of
t-»
&EPA
WM Option Description.
CAPITAL COSTS • Include all costs as appropriate.
LJ Purchased Process Equipment
Price (fob factory)
Taxes, freight, Insurance
Delivered equipment cost
Price for Initial Spare Parts Inventory
EH Estimated Materials Cost
Piping —
Electrical —
Instruments —
Structural —
Insulation/Piping —
TOTALS
Estimated Costs for Utility Connections and New Utility Systems
Electricity -
Steam -
Cooling Water -
Process Water -
Refrigeration -
Fuel (Gas or OH) -
Plant Air -
Inert Gas -
Estimated Costs for Additional Equipment
Storage & Material Handling
Laboratory/Analytical
Other
I— I Site Preparation
(Demolition, sKe clearing, ate.)
Estimated Installation Costs
Vendor
Contractor
In-house Staff
A-25
-------
Firm
Site
Dale
Waste Minimization Assessment
Pmc IMt/Opflr . . ,
Pmj Mn
Pf€
Ch
Shi
WORKSHEET
15b
COST INFORMATION
pared By I
BckedBv
jet 2 of 6 Paoe of .
i
vPSfr P™ fcj ^\
^^^r ••• 1 •»
fconlinuM)
CAPITAL COSTS (Cont.)
Engineering and Procurement Costs (In-house ft outside)
Planning _
Engineering _
Procurement _
Consultants _
TOTALS
CD Start-up Costs
Vendor
Contractor
In-house
CD Training Costs
CD Permitting Costs
Fees
In-house Staff Costs
CD Initial Charge of Catalysts and Chemicals
ftemfl.
Kemtt.
CD Working Capital [Raw Materials, Product, Inventory, Materials and Supplies (not elsewhere specified)].
nemfl.
Nemf2.
hem §3.
rtem«4.
CD Estimated Salvage Value (If any)
A-26
-------
Firm
Site
Waste Minimization Assessment
Proc.
Proj. No.
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet JL of _&_ p«8e °*
WORKSHEET
COST INFORMATION
©EPA
(commute)
CAPITAL COST SUMMARY
Cost Hem
Purchased Process Equipment
Materials
Utility Connections
Additional Equipment
Site Preparation
Installation
Engineering and Procurement
Start-up Cost
Training Costs
Permitting Costs
Initial Charge of Catalysis and Chemicals
Fixed Capital Investment
Working Capital
Total Capital Investment
Salvage Value
Cost
A-27
-------
Firm
Rite
natp
9
Waste Minimization Assessment
Prr>r» llnH/npar
Pro! No
P«
Ch
Sh
WORKSHEET
15d
COST INFORMATION
»
spared By I
i
ecked By L
eet 4 of 6 Pace of
-,
4>EPA
feonimuMT
D Estimated Decrease (or Increase) In Utilities
Utility
Electricity
Steam
Cooling Process
Process Water
Refrigeration
Fuel (Gas or OH)
Plant Air
Inert Air
Unit Cost
$ per unit
Decrease (or Incresse) In Quantity
Unit per time
Total Decrease (or Increase)
f per time
i
INCREMENTAL OPERATING COSTS • Include all relevant operating savings. Estimate these costs on an incre-
mental basis (i.e., as decreases or Increases over existing costs).
BASIS FOR COSTS Annual Quarterly Monthly Dally Other
D
Estimated Disposal Cost Saving
Decrease In TSDF Fees
Decrease In State Fees and Taxes
Decrease In Transportation Costs
Decrease In Onslte Treatment and Handling
Decrease In Permitting, Reporting and Recordkeeplng
Total Decrease In Disposal Costs
Estimated Decrease In Raw Materials Consumption
Materials
Unit Cost
$ per unit
Reduction In Quantity
Units per time
Decrease In Cost
$ per time
A-28
-------
Firm
Site
Date
Waste Minimization Assessment
Proc. UnK/Oper
Proj. No
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet J5_ of _6_ Page of
WORKSHEET
15e
COST INFORMATION
&EPA
(continued)
D
Estimated Decrease (or Increase) In Ancillary Catalysts and Chemicals
CatilycVChimlcal
Unit Cert
f ptrunlt
DOCTMM (or IncrMM) In Quantity
Unit per time
Total DaerctM (or IncrttM)
$ p«r time
D
Estimated Decrease (or Increase) In Operating Costs and Maintenance Labor Costs
(Include cost of supervision, benefits and burden).
L_J Estimated Decrease (or Increase) In Operating and Maintenance Supplies and Costs.
D
Estimated Decrease (or Increase) In Insurance and Liability Costs (explain).
LJ Estimated Decrease (or Increase) In Other Operating Costs (explain).
INCREMENTAL REVENUES
Estimated Incremental Revenues from an Increase (or Decrease) In Production or Marketable
By-products (explain).
A-29
-------
Firm
SitP
Date
Waste Minimization Assessment
Pror Mnft/Oopr
Pm] Nn
P«
Ch
sr»
WORKSHEET
15f
COST INFORMATION
ipared By I
1
BdcedBy
»et 6 of 6 Paoe of _
i
xc/EPA
(continued)
INCREMENTAL OPERATING COST AND REVENUE SUMMARY (ANNUAL BASIS)
Decreases In Operating Cost or Increases In Revenue are Positive.
Increases In Operating Cost or Decrease In Revenue are Negative.
Operating Cost/Revenue Hem
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 0 & M Supplies Costs
Decrease (or Increase) In Insurance/Liabilities Costs
Decrease (or Increase) In Other Operating Costs
Incremental Revenues from Increased (Decreased) Production
Incremental Revenues from Marketable By-products
Net Operating Cost Savings
$ per year
A-30
-------
•Firm
Site
Date
Waste Minimization Assessment
Pme Unit/finer
Pmj No
Preoared By
r.h«*Prt Ry
Sheet J_ o! J_ Page of
u-
WORKSHEET
16
PROFITABILITY WORKSHEET #1 JJ CD A
PAYBACK PERIOD VX C "H
Total Capital Investment ($) (from WorkshMt 15c)
Annual Net Operating Cost Savings ($ per year) (from Worksheet 150.
Payback Period (In years) <
Total Capital Investment
Annual Net Operating Cost Savings
A-31
-------
Firm.
Site ,
Date
Waste Minimization Assessment
Proc. Unlt/Oper..
Pro). No
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet J_ of J_ Page of _
WORKSHEET
17
PROFITABILITY WORKSHEET #2
CASH FLOW FOR NPV, IRR
SEPA
Cash Incomes (such as net operating cost savings and salvage value) are shown as positive.
Cash outlays (such as capital Investments and Increased operating costs) are shown as negative.
Lint
A Fixed Capital Inveatment
B 4 Working Capital
C Total Capital Invaatmant
D Salvaga Value1
E Nat Oparating Costa Savings
F • Intaraat on Loana
G • Depreciation
H Taxabla Income
I • Income Tax*
J Aftertax Profit'
K 4 Depreciation
L • Repayment of Loan Principal
M -CapitalInveatment(lineC)
N 4 Salvage Valua (Una D)
0 Caah Flow
P Present Value of Caah Flew*
0 Net Preaent Valua (NPY)"
Preaant Worth* (5% dlecount)
1.0000
0.9524
0.9070
0.8638
0.6227
0.7S35
0.7462
0.7107
0.6768
(I0%dlaoount)
1.0000
0.9091
0.8264
0.7513
0.6830
0.6209
0.5645
0.5132
0.4665
(15%dlaeount)
1.0000
0.6696
0.7561
0.6575
0.571 B
0.4972
0.4323
0.3759
0.3269
(20% dlaoount)
1.0000
0.8333
0.6944
0.5787
0.4823
0.4019
0.3349
0.2791
0.2326
(25% dlaoount)
1.0000 0.8000 0.6400 0.5120 0.4096 0.3277 0.2621 0.2097 0.1678
1 Adjust table aa necaasary If the anticipated project life la lisa than or more than 8 years.
2 Salvage value Includea acrap value of equipment plua aale of working capital mlnua demo-
lition coata.
3. The worksheet le uaed for calculating an aftertax cash flow. For pretax cash flow, use an Income tax rate of 0%.
4 The present value of the cash flow la equal to the cash flow multiplied by the present worth factor.
5 The net present value la the aum of the present value of the cash flow for that year and all of the proceeding years.
6 The formula for the preaent worth factor Is 1 where n la yeara and r la the discount rate.
(UrT
7 The Internal rate of return (IRR) le the discount rate (r) that raeutta In a net preaent value of zero over the life of the
' A-32
-------
Firm
Waste Minimization Assessment
PTOC.I
Pro). No.
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet J_ of J_ Page of
WORKSHEET
18
Goals/Objectives
PROJECT SUMMARY
EPA
Task
1.
2.
3.
4
5
6
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Deliverable
.
Task Leader
•
TOTALS
Manhours
Budget
)uraiion
Wkt
Stan
Fmth
Reference
Approval By
Authorization By
Project Started (Date),
Date.
Date
A-33
-------
Firm
Rile
Oat*
WORKSHEET
19
Wast* Minimization Assessment
Pme Unh/0per
Pro] No
Pre
Ch
SrM
OPTION PERFORMANCE
Dared By I
i
acked By '
ret 1 of .1 Pape of .
.
xc/EPA
] Baseline
(without option)
(a) Period Duration
(b) Production per Period .
D Projected
from
Untuf
D Actual
Ta
)
(c) Input Materials Consumption per Period
Material
Pounds
PoundsUntt Product
(d) Waste Generation per Period
Waste Stream
Pounds
Poundsllnlt Product
(e) Substance(s) of Concern • Generation Rate per Period
Waste Stream
Substance
Pounds
Pounds/Unit Product
A-34
-------
Appendix B
Simplified Waste Minimization Assessment Worksheets
The worksheets that follow are designed to facilitate a simplified WM assessment procedure. Table B-1 lists the
worksheets, according to the particular phase of the program, and a brief description of the purpose of the
worksheets. The worksheets here are presented as supporting only a preliminary effort at minimizing waste,
or in a situation where a more formal rigorous aasessment is not warranted.
Table B-1. List of Simplified WM Assessment Werkahaata
Phase Number and Title
Purpose/Remsrks
S1. Assessment Overview
Asssssmsnt Phaae
(Section 3)
S2. Site Description
S3. Process Information
S4. Input Materials Summary
SS. Products Summary
S6. Waste Stream Summary
S7. Option Generation
S8. Option Description
Feasibility Anslysls Phase
(Section 4)
S9. Profitability
Summarizes the overall assessment procedure.
Lists background information about the facility, including location.
products, and operations.
This Is a checklist of useful process information to took for before
starting the assessment. ,
Records input material information for • specific production or process
area. This includes name, supplier, hazardous component or
properties, cost, delivery and shell-life information, and possible
substitutes.
•
Identifies hazardous components, production rate, revenues, and
Other information about products.
Summarizes all of the information collected for each waste stream.
This sheet is also used to prioritize waste streams to assess.
Records options proposed during brainstorming or nominal group
technique sessions. Includes the rationale for proposing each option.
Describes and summarizes information about a proposed option. Also
notes approval of promising options.
This worksheet is used to Identify capital and operating costs and to
calculate the payback period.
B-1
-------
Firm
Site
Date
Waste Minimization Assessment
Simplified Worksheets
Proi. No.
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet 1 of 1 Pape of
WORKSHEET
S1
ASSESSMENT OVERVIEW
SEPA
Begin the Weete Mlnlmlzetlen
Assessment Progrem
I
mad
PLANNING AND ORGANIZATION
• Get management commitment
• Set overall assessment program goals
• Organize essessment progrem task force
I
Assessment organization
and commitment to proceed
Select new
assessment targets
end Devaluate-
previous options
ASSESSMENT PHASE
• Compile process and facility data
• Prioritize and select assessment targets
• Select people for essessment teams
• Review data and inspect aite
• Generate optbns
• Screen and select options for further study
S5
S2.S3.S4
S6
S7.S8
88
SB
Assessment report of
•elected options
FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS PHASE
• Technical evaluation
• Economic evaluation
• Select options for Implementation
i
Final report, including
recommended options
Repeat the process
IMPLEMENTATION
• Justify projects and obtain funding
• Installation (equipment)
• Implementation (procedure)
• Evaluate performance
Successfully operetlng
waste minimization projects
B-2
-------
Site
Date
Waste Minimization Assessment
Simplified Worksheets
Proj. No.
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet J_ of J_ Page of
WORKSHEET
S2
SITE DESCRIPTION
&EPA
Firm:
Plant:
Department:
Area:
Street Address:
City:
State7lP Code:
Telephone: (
Major Products:
SIC Codes:
EPA Generator Number :
Malor Unit or;
Product or:
Operations:
Facilities'Equipment Age:
B-3
-------
Firm
ShP
natP
1
Wast* Minimization Aaaatamant
Simplified Worksheets
Pm| No
Prepared By I
*- 1
Checked Bv 1
Sheet _1_ of J_ Page of
WORKSHEET
S3
PROCESS INFORMATION
©EPA
Process Unit/Operation:
Operation Type: D Continuous
D Discrete
D Batch or Semi-Batch D Other
Document
Process Flow Diagram
Material/Energy Balance
Design
Operating
Flow/Amount Measurements
Stream
Analyses/Assays
Stream
Process Description
Operating Manuals
Equipment List
Equipment Specifications
Piping & Instrument Diagrams
Plot and Elevation Plan(a)
Work Flow Diagrams
Hazardous Waste Manifests
Emission Inventories
Annual/Biennial Reports
Environmental Audit Reports
Permit/Permit Applications
Batch Sheet(s)
Materials Application Diagrams
Product Composition Sheets
Material Safety Data Sheets
Inventory Records
Operator Logs
Production Schedules
Status
Complete?
(V/N)
•
Currant?
(Y/N)
Last
Revision
•
Used In this
Report (Y/N)
Document
Number
Location
B-4
-------
IFirm
•
Halo
l
WORKSHEET
S4
Waste Minimization Assessment
Simplified Worksheets
Pro) Nr»
Pre
Ch
Shi
INPUT MATERIALS SUMMARY
pared By
eckedBv
set 1 of 1 Page . of
vvEPA
Attribute
Name/ID
Source/Supplier
Component/Attribute of Concern
Annual Consumption Rate
Overall
Component(s) of Concern
Purchase Price, $ per
Overall Annual Cost
Delivery Mode1
Shipping Container Size & Type*
Storage Mode1
Transfer Mode*
Empty Container Disposal/Management*
Shelf Life
Supplier Would
• accept expired material (Y/N)
• accept shipping containers (Y/N)
• revise expiration date (Y/N)
Acceptable Substltute(s), H any
Alternate Suppliers)
Description
Stream No.
Stream No.
Stream No.
•
e.g., pipeline, tank ear, 100 bbl. tank truck, truck, ate.
••fl., 55 gal. drum, 100 ib. paper bag, tank, ate.
e.g., outdoor, warehouse, underground, aboveground, ate.
e.g., pump, forkllft, pneumatic transport, conveyor, ate.
e.g., crush and landfill, clean and recycle, return to supplier, ate.
B-5
-------
Firm
Site _
Date
Waste Minimization Assessment
Simplified Worksheets
Pmj Mn
Prc
Ch
Shi
WORKSHEET
S5
PRODUCTS SUMMARY
•oared Bv 1
MkadBy
wtj_ot J_ Pa0e of
i
SEPA
Attribule
Name/ID
Component/Anrlbute of Concern
Annual Production Rate
Overall
Component(s) of Concern
Annual Revenues. S
•
Shipping Mode
Shipping Container Size ft Type
Onsiie Storage Mode
Containers Returnable (Y/N)
Shelf Life
Rework Possible (Y/N)
Customer Would
• relax specification (Y/N)
• accept larger containers (Y/N)
—
Description
Stream NO.
Stream No.
Stream NO.
.
1
1
B-6
-------
Rrm
Site _
Date
Wait* Minimization Assessment
Simplified Worksheets
Pmr Unk/Qnftr
Pmj MA
Prc
Ch
srw
WORKSHEET
S6
WASTE STREAM SUMMARY
ipared By
BckedBv
aet 1 of J_ Page of
SEPA
Attribute
Waste ID/Name:
Source/Origin
Component/or Property of Concern
Annual Generation Rat* (unHa )
Overall
Component(s) of Concern
Cost of Disposal
UnM Cost (i per: ,,. )
Overall (per year)
Method of Management1
Priority Rating Criteria1
Regulatory Compliance
Treatment/Disposal Cost
Potential Liability
Waste Quantity Generated
Waste Hazard
Safety Hazard
Minimization Potential
Potential to Remove Bottleneck
Potential By-product Recovery
Rtlitlvt
Wl.fWI
Sum of Priority Rating Scores
Priority Rank
Description
Stream No.
Rating (R)
KRiW)
RiW
Stream No.
Rating (R)
KRiW)
RiW
Stream No.
Rating (R)
I(RiW)
RiW
•
Notes: 1. For example, sanitary landfill, hazardous waste landfill, onslte recycle, Incineration, combustion
with heat recovery, distillation, dewaterlng, ate.
2. Rate each stream In each category on a scale from 0 (none) to 10 (high).
B-7
-------
Firm
ftito
rtalA
Watt* Minimization Aaaeaament
Simplified Worksheets
Pmr Ifnft/Ontf . .
Pmj Nn
Prepared By 1
r- » |
ChaekMiBy
Sheet J_ or _1_ Page of
WORKSHEET
S7
OPTION GENERATION
&EPA
Meeting format (e.g., bralnttormlng, nominal group technique)
Meeting Coordinator
Meeting Panielpants
List Suggested Options
Rationale/Remark! on Option
B-8
-------
[ Firm
Site
Waste Minimization Assessment
Simplified Worksheets
Proc.
PTOJ.NO.
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet J_ of J_ Page of
WORKSHEET
S8
OPTION DESCRIPTION
5 EPA
Option Nams:
Briefly describe the option
Waste Stream(s) Affected:
Input Materlal(s) Affected:
Product(s) Affected:
Indicate Type:
LJ Source Reduction
__ Equipment-Related Change
PersonneVProcedure-Related Chang*
Matertalsfielaled Chang*
O Recyellng/ReuM
Onsne
Offslte
Material reused tor original purpose
Material used for a lower-quality purpose
Material sou
Material burned for heat recovery
Originally proposed by:
Reviewed by:
Approved for study?—
Date:-
Date:-
yes
no, by:
Reason for Acceptance or Rejection
B-9
-------
Firm.
Site .
Date
Waste Minimization Assessment
Simplified Worksheets
Proc. Unlt/Oper
Proj No. .
Prepa-ed By
Checked By
Sheet JL of J_ Page of
WORKSHEET
S9
PROFITABILITY
&EPA
Capital Costs
Purchased Equipment
Materials
Installation
Utility Connections.
Engineering
Start-up and Training.
Other Capital Costs -
Total Capital Costs
Incremental Annual Operating Costs
Change In Disposal Costs —
Change In Raw Material Costs •
Change In Other Costs
Annual Net Operating Cost Savings
Total Capital Costs
Payback Period (In years). Annu.| Net Operating Cost Savings
B-10
-------
Appendix C
Waste Minimization Assessment Example
Amalgamated Metal Refinlshlng 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 It 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
Mem is then polished to a bright finish. The polished
lem is then cleaned with caustic solution to remove
dirt, rinsed with a 5% sulfuric acid solution to neutralize
any remaining caustic solution on the hem, and rinsed
with water. The Hem 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.
Hems 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 for 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 for
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 for buffing and polishing.
C-1
-------
Table C-1. Electroplating Solution Analyaea
Tabla C-2. Waatawater characterlatlca
Brass Plating
ftstinrmm
Actual
Sampling dale
Sampling location
Type of (ample
August 8.1987
Ciarifwr Sample Box
Time Composite
Copper metal
Zinc metal
Sodium cyanide
Sodium hydroxide
Copper cyanide
Zinc cyanide
Rochelle salts
Nickel Plating
Nickel metal
Nickel chloride
Boric acid
Nickel sulfate
A-5
SA-1
PH
-
0.3 oz/gal
6.0
8.0
10.0
0.5
2.0
.
8.0 oz/gal
6.0
40.0
2.5%
12%
4.0
7.52 oz/gal
0.80
3.54
750
10.60
1.45
3.59
16.65 oz/gal
15.66
6.92
57.26
2.86%
138%
45
Reporting period
Total flow In
Total flow out
Peak flow
Suspended solids
PH
Total cyanide
Total chromium
GooDflr
^^Pf^T^M
Nickel
Silver
Oil and grease
Temperature
July -87 to August *7
322gabns
290gatons
15 gallons par minute
1.0mg/L
75
1.0 mg/L
0.42 mg/L
1.30 mg/L
0.93 mg/L
40.05 mg/L
02 mg/L
70 -F
Figure C-1 is a plan of the facility. The area north of the
buffing room is used for drying and storage purposes.
Finished goods, as well as raw materials, are stored in
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
a typical plating unit includes a plating bath, followed by
one ore two still tanks and a continuous rinse tank.
Except tor 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 rinsing operations. The principal waste
streams are wastewater from the continuous rinse
tanks and from floor washings, and plating tank filter
waste.
Aqueous streams generated from paint stripping, from
metal stripping and electroplating, and from floor
washings are routed to a common sump. This sump
discharges to the sanitary sewer. Table C-2 presents
the results of a typical analysis on the wastewater.
Metal sludges accumulate in 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
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 workplace on the plating
rack.
• Increasing plating solution temperatures.
- Lowering the concentration of plating solution
constituents.
- Increase the recovery of drag-out with drain
boards.
• Extend plating solution bath Me by:
• Reducing drag-in by better rinsing.
• Using deionized make-up water.
• Using purer anodes.
• Reluming spent solutions to the suppliers.
• Reduce the use of rinse water by:
• Using multiple oountercurrent 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.
C-2
Segregate cyanide wastes from the rinse tanks from
other wastewater streams, such as floor washings
and paint stripping wastes.
-------
Bufflno mo Polvwv Room
Figure C-1. PLANT LAYOUT
Amalgamated Metal Reflnlshlng Corporation
Worldwide Headquarters and Production Facilities
Beverly Hills, California
C-3
-------
The team members each independently reviewed the
options and then met to decide 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 defonbed water for make-up.
• Use spray rinsing to reduce rinsewater usage.
t
• Segregate hazardous waste from nonhazardous
waste.
Feasibility Analysis
The assessment team conducted technical and
economic feasibility analyses on each of the four
options.
Segregate Hazardous Wattes
The assessment team recognized that segregating
hazardous wastes from nonhazardous wastes could be
implemented at virtually no cost and would save money
immediately. There were no identified technical
problems.
Use Drain Boards 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 is
reduced, make-up chemical consumption is reduced.
The purchase price of drain boards is estimated at
$115. with installation costs of $200. for a total capital
cost of $315. This option is expected to reduce rinse
water disposal costs by $500 per year, and reduce
make-up chemicals costs by $400 per year. The
resulting payback period is 0.35 years, or about 4
months.
Use Deionlzed Water for Make-up Solutions
and Pinse Water
Using Dl water will reduce the build-up of impurities In
the plating solutions. In particular, the build*
upnardness minerals from tap water will be avoided.
This, in 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 deionizer was $267. When adding the cost of
the drain boards, the total capital cost of this option is
$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 is 1.3 years.
Install Spray Rinses
Installing spray rinses will reduce the amount of rinse
water required to dean the Kerns. With spray rinse
nozzles and controls, rinsing can be done on demand.
Rinse water usage was estimated to be reduced by
50%. The resulting rinse wastewater is more
concentrated and some can be returned to the plating
tanks as a water make-up.
The assessment team determined that four spray rinse
units would cost $2.120, plus an additional $705 for
piping, valves, and installation labor. The total capital
cost was $2825. The reduction In disposal costs were
estimated at $350 per year, based on a 50% reduction
in rinse wastewater. This resulted in a payback of over
8 years.
Implementation
The procedures for segregating hazardous wastes
from nonhazardous wastes was implemented before
the feasibility analysis was completed for the other
three options. The installation of drain boards and the
purchase of a water deionizer were made shortly after
the feasibility analysis was completed. The Dl water
system was online two months later. The assessment
team decided not to implement the spray rinse option
because of the long payback period.
Future WM Assessments
During the next cycle of waste minimization
assessments, the assessment team will review
previously suggested options in the plating area and
will look at ways to reduce the generation of metallic
dust In the buffing and polishing area. In the
meantime, the assessment team will continue to look
for additional opportunities to reduce waste
throughout the fa
C-4
-------
Appendix D
Typical Causes and Sources of Waste
In order to develop a comprehensive fist of waste minimization options for a facility, ft is 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
Tsbls D-1. Typical Wastes from Plant Oparatlona
Plant Function Location/Operation
Potential Waste Material
Material Receiving
Raw Material and
Product Storage
Productcn
Loading docks, incoming
pipelines, receiving areas
Tanks, warehouses, drum
storage yards, bins,
storerooms
Melting, curing, baking,
distilling, washing, coating.
formulating, reaction
Support Services Laboratories
Maintenance shops
Garages
Powerhouses/boilers
Cooling towers
Packaging materials, off-spec materials, damaged containers,
inadvertent spills, transfer hose emptying
Tank bottoms; off-spec and excess materials; spill residues;
leaking pumps, valves, tanks, and pipes; damaged containers.
empty containers
Washwater; rinse water; solvents; still bottoms; off-spec
products; caialysts;empty containers; sweepings; ductwork
clean-out; additives; oil; filters; spill residue; excess materials;
process solution dumps; leaking pipes, valves, hoses, tanks,
and process equipment
Reagents, off-spec chemicals, samples, empty sample and
chemical containers
Solvents, cleaning agents, degreasing sludges, sand-blasting
waste, caustic, scrap metal, oils, greases
Oils, fillers, solvents, acids, caustics, cleaning bath sludges,
batteries
Fly ash, slag, tube dean-out material, chemical additives, oil
empty containers, boiler bbwdown, water-treating chemical
wastes
Chemical additives, empty containers, cooling tower bottom
sediment, cooling tower btowdown, fan lube oOs
Source: adapted from Gary Hunt and Roger Schecter, 'Minimization of Hazardous Waste Generation'.
Standard Handbook of Hazardous Waste Management. Harry Freeman, editor, McGraw-Hill, New York (currently in press).
D-1
-------
Tebls D-2. CIUMS and Controlling Factors In Wests Generation
Waste/Origin Typical Causes Operational Factor*
Design Factors
Chemical Reaction
Contact between
aqueous and
organic phases
Process equipment
cleaning
Heat exchanger
cleaning
Metal parts
cleaning
Metal surface
treating
Disposal of
unusable raw
materials or
off-spec products
Clean-up of spills
and leaks
• Incomplete conversion
• By-product formation
• Catalyst deactivatbn
(by poisoning or sintering)
• Condsnsate from steam
Jet ejectors
• Presence of water as a
reaction by-produa
• Use of water for product
rinse
• Equipment cleaning
• Spill dean-up
• Presence of cling
• Deposit formation
• Use of filter aids
• Uss of chemical cleaners
• Presence of cling (process
side) or scale (cooling
waterside)
• Deposit formation
• Use of chemical cleaners
• Disposal of spent solvents,
spent clesning solution, or
cleaning sludge
• Dragoul
• Disposal of spent treating
solution
• Obsolete raw materials
• Off-spec products caused
by contamination, improper
reactant controls, inadequate
pre-cleaning of equipment or
workpieoe. temperature or
pressure excursions
• Manual material transfer and
handling operations
• Leaking pump seals
• Leaking flange gaskets
• Inadequate temperature control
• Inadequate mixing
• Poor feed flow control
• Poor feed purity control
• Indiscriminate use of water for
cleaning or washing
• Drainage prior to cleaning
• Production scheduling to
reduce clesning frequency
1 Inadequate cooling water
treatment
' Exosssivs cooling watsr
temperature
• Indiscriminate use of solvent
or water
• Poor rack maintenance
• Excessive rinsing with water
• Fast removal of workpieoe
• Poor operator training or
supervision
• Inadequate quality control
• Inadequate production planning
and Inventory control of
feedstocks
• Inadequate maintenance
• Poor operator training
• Lack of attention by operator
• Excessive use of water hi
cleaning
• Proper reactor design
• Proper catalyst selection
• Choice of process
• Choice of reaction conditions
• Vacuum pumps Instead of
•team jet ejectors
• Choice of process
• Use of retailers Instead of
•team stripping
• Design reactors or tanks
wiper 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 degreasing
• 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
construction
Source: Jacobs Engineering Group
D-2
-------
Appendix E
Waste Minimization Techniques
The tables in this appendix lists techniques and practices for waste reduction In operations that are
applied in a wide range of Industries. Most of the techniques listed here are source reduction techniques
Table E-1. Waste Minimization Options for Coating Operations
Table E-2. Waste Minimization Options for Equipment Cleaning Operations
Table E-3. Waste Minimization through Good Operating Practices
Table E-4. Waste Minimization Options In Materials Handling, Storage, and Transfer
Table E-5. Waste Minimization Options for Parts Cleaning Operations
Source: Jacobs Engineering Group
E-1
-------
Table E-1. Waste Minimization Options for Coating Operations
Waste
Source/Origin
Waste Reduction Measures
Remarks
References
Coaling overspray Coating material that fails
to reach the object being
coaled
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 end of each
pass
Proper training of operators
Use robots for spraying
Avoid excessive air pressure for coating
atomization
Recycle overspray
Use electrostatic spray systems
Use air-assisted airless spray guns m place of
air-spray guns
The coated object does not look
streaked, and wastage of coating
material is avoided. If the spray
gun B arched 45*. the overspray
can be as high as 65%.
By air pressure adjustment,...
overspray can be reduced to 40%.
Overspray can be reduced by 40%.
Increases transfer efficiency.
1.2
2
2
2
3
4
4
Stripping waste* Coating i
rifn
its
m
rb
Solvent emissions
Overel
before applying a new coat
process equipment and
coated parts
Equtmentdeanup Pti
iqutamant daanlng
Avoid adding i
i 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
Usa water-based formulations
Light-to-dark batch sequencing
Produce large batches of similarly coated
objects instead of smaR batches of differently
coated items
• Isolate solvent-based paint spray booths from
water-based paint spray booths
* Reuse cleaning solution/solvent
• Standardize solvent usage
• noexemlne the need for coating, as we" as
available alternatives
Solvent usage to eliminated.
Solvent usage b eliminated.
Solvent usage to eliminated.
Solvent usage b eliminated.
Lower usage of sotvants.
Avoids solvent usage.
Avoids solvent usage.
> due to rework.
e
7
8
1
9
10.11
4.12
13
20
-------
Table E-2. Waste Minimization Options tor Equipment Cleaning Operations
Waste
Source/Origin
Waste Reduction Measures
Remarks
References
Spent solvent-or
Inorganic-based
cleaning solutions
Tank cleaning operations
to
Maximize dedication ot process equipment
Use squeegees to recover cling of product
prior to rinsing
Avoid unnecessary cleaning
Closed storage and transfer systems
Provide sufficient drain time tor liquids
Lining the equipment to prevent ding
r*igging" process lines
Use high-pressure spray nozzles
Use countercurrent rinsing
Use dean-Jn-place systems
Clean equipment immediately after use
Reuse cleanup solvent
Rework cleanup solvent into useful products
Segregate wastes by solvent type
Standardize solvent usage
Reclaim solvent by distillation
Schedule production to tower cleaning
frequency
Scaling and drying up can be prevented.
Minimizes leftover material.
Reduces ding.
Minimizes solvent consumption.
Prevents hardening of scale that requires
more severe deaning.
18
19
Wastewater
sludges, spent
acidic solutions
ngerdeanmg
• Use bypass control or pumped recyde to
maintain turbulence during turndown
• Use smooth heat exchange surf aces
• Use on-stream cleaning techniques
• Use hydroWasting over chemical cleaning
where possible
Onsfto or off site focycflng.
Electroplated or Tel Ion® tubes.
*Superscrubber°. for example.
20
21
-------
Table E-3. Waste Minimization through Good Operating Practices
Good Operating Practice
Program Ingredients
Remarks
References
Waste minimization assessments
Em*
Lou prevention pregran
Waste Segiegation
Form a team of qualified individuals
Establish practical short-term and long-term goals
Allocate resources and budget for the program
Establish assessment targets
Identify and select options to minimize waste
Periodically monitor the program's effectiveness
• Assemble pertinent documents
• Conduct environmental process reviews
• Cany out a site inspection
• Report on and follow up on the findings
• Eslabnsh Spill 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 solid wastes
• Use eo^ipment data cards on equipment location.
characteristics, and maintenance
• Maintain a master preventive maintenance (PM)
schedule
• Deferred PM lepwts on equipment
• Maintain equipment history cards
• Maintain equipment breakdown reports
• Keep vendor maintenance manuals handy
• Maintain a manual or computerized repair history ffle
These programs are conducted to reduce
waste in a facility.
22
These audits are conducted to monitor
compliance with regulations.
SPCC plans are required by law for oR
storage facilities.
23.24
3.25.26
These measures can result In lower wastt
haulage volumes and easier disposal of
the hazardous wastes.
These programs are conducted to cut
production costs and decrease
equpmerft downtime, in addition
to preventing waste releases due
to equipment failure.
27.28.29
-------
Table E-3. Waste Minimization through Good Operating Practices (continued)
Good Operating Practice
Program Ingredients
Remarks
References
Traintng/Awararttss-buiUing
IfanlS
Eniptoyee participation
Cost accountap/arfocalion
Provide training for
- Sate operation of the equipment
- Proper materials handling
• Economic and environmental ramifications of
hazardous waste generation and disposal
• Detecting releases of hazardous materials
- Emergency procedures
- Use of safety gear
Closer supervision may Improve production efficiency
and reduce inadvertent waste generation
Management by objectives (MBO). with goals for
waste reduction
•Quality circles* (Tree forums between employees
and supervisors) can Identify ways to reduce waste
Solicit employee suggestions for waste reduction Ideas
Maximize batch size
Dedicate equipment to a single product
Alter batch sequencing to minimize cleaning frequency
(fighl-to-daik batch sequence, for example)
Schedule production to minimizing cleaning frequency
Cost accounting done for all waste streams leaving
the facilities
Allocate waste treatment and disposal costs to the
operations that generate the waste
These programs are conducted to reduce
occupational health and safety
hazards, in addition to reducing
waste generation due to operator
or procedural errors.
increased
itunHy for early detection
of mistakes.
Better coordination among the various
parts of an overall operation.
Employees who Intimately understand the
operations can Identify ways to reduce
waste.
Altering production schedule can have a
major impact on waste minimization.
Allocating costs to the waste-producing
operations win give them an incentive
to cut their wastes.
-------
Table E-4. Waste Minimization Options In Materials Handling, Storage, and Transfer
Waste/Source
Waste Reduction Measures
Remarks
References
Material/Waste tracking and
inventory control
• Avoid over-purchasing
• Accept raw material only after inspection
• Ensure that inventory quantity does not go to
waste
• Ensure that no containers stay hi inventory
longer than a specified period
• Review material procurement specifications
• Return expired material to supplier
• Validate shell-life expiration dales
• Test outdated material tot effectiveness
• Eliminate shell-lite requirements for stable
compounds
• Conduct frequent Inventory checks
• Use computer-assisted plant inventory system
• Conduct periodic materials tracking
• Proper tabefing of aP containers
• Set up manned stations for drapenslng
chemicals and corbeling wastes
These procedures are employed to find
areas where the waste minimization
efforts are to be concentrated.
30.31
ntion progr
Use property designed tanks and vessels only for
their intended purposes
Install overflow alarms for all tanks and vessels
Maintain physical integrity of al tanks end vessels
Set up written procedures lor all bad'mg/unbading
and transfer operations
Install secondary containment areas
Forbid operators to bypass Interlocks, alarms, or
significantly alter setpoints without authorization
Isolate equipment or process Ines that leak or are
not in service
Use seal-less pumps
Use bellows-seal valves
Document al spillage
Perform overall material balances and estimate
the quantity and dollar value of all losses
Use floating-roof tanks for VOC control
Use conservation vents on 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
Spirts and leaks
• Store containers in such a way as to allow lor
visual inspection tor corrosion and leaks
• Slack containers in a way to minimize the chance
ol tipping, puncturing, or breaking
• Prevent concrete 'sweating' by raising the
drum off storage areas • •
• Maintain MSDSs to correctly handle spill
situations
Provide adequate lighting in the storage area
Maintain a dean, even surface in transportation
areas
Keep aisles dear of obstruction
Maintain distance between incompatible chemicals
Maintain distance between different types of
chemicals to prevent cross-contamination
Avoid stacking containers against process
eojwpmenl
Follow manufacturers* suggestions on the storage
and handling of afl raw materials
Insulation and inspection of electric circuitry for
corrosion and potential sparking
Cling
• Use large containers Instead of small containers
whenever possible
• Use containers with helght-to-diameter ratb equal
to one to minimize wetted area
• Empty diums and containers thoroughly before
daarong or disposal
-------
Table E-5. Waste Minimization Options lor Parts Cleaning Operations
Waste
Source/Origin
Waste Reduction Measures
Remarks
References
Spent solvent
Contaminated solvent from
parts cleaning operations
Use water-soluble cutting fluids instead
of oil-based fluids
Use peel coatings in place of protective oils
Use aqueous cleaners
Use aqueous paint stripping solutions
Use cryogenic 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
used
This could eliminate the need for solvent
cleaning.
8
7
6
A single, larger waste that b more
amenable to recycling.
Solvent toss Irani
degreasenanda
m
Use roll-type covers, not hinged covers
Increase freeboard height
Install freeboard chillers
Use silhouette entry covers
Proper eqiMpment layout
Avoid rapid insertion and removal of Dems
AUK!^ IBAA^IK^ — i • •• !• • j A^I^^^M i^^^
Mvon Risening oversizeo oojecis OTTO
the tank
• Allow for proper drainage before removing
•i,._
nem
• Avoid water contamination of solvent
24 to 50% reduction m emissions.
39% reduction in solvent emissions.
The speed that (ferns are put Into the
tank should be toss than 11 f eet/min.
Cross-sectional area of the Item should
be toss that 50% of tank area to reduce
15
15
15
16
17
Water rinse to remove
solvent carried out with
the parts leaving the
cleaning tank
otvent dragout by proper design and
operation of rack system
Install air fets to blow parts dry
Use fog nozzles on rinse tanks
Proper design and operation of barrel system
Use countercurrent rinse tanks
Use water sprays on rinse tanks
The dragout can be 0.4 gal/1000 sqfl.
versus 24 gal/1000 soft for poorly
drained parts.
More efficient rinsing b achieved.
15
15
15
15
-------
Appendix E
References
1. Kohl. J., J. Pearson, and P. Wright. Managing and Recycling Solvents in the Furniture Industry.
North Carolina Stale University, Raleigh, 1986.
2. Lenckus. D. •Increasing productivity*. Finishing Wood and Wood Products Maoarine. 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. Triplet!. Managing and Recycling Solvents! North Carolina Practices
Facilities and Reputations North Carolina State University, Raleigh, 1984.
5. Dumey, J. J. "How to improve your paint stripping*. Product Finishing December 1982, pp 52-53.
6. Higglns, T. E. Industrial Process Modifications to Reduce 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-Olhmer Encyclopedia ot Chemical Technology.
3rd edition, Volume 16, pp 762-767.1981.
9. Sandberg, J. Final Report on the Internship served at Gage Toot 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 16M65.
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'. Chemieaf Engineering Peskbook Issue. Vol.
80, No. 5, pp 79-84,1973.
19. 3M Corporation. Ideas • A Compendium of 3M Success Stories. St. Paul, MN.
E-9
-------
20. Fromm. C. H., S. Budaraju, and S. A. Cordery. "Minimization of process equipment cleaning waste'.
Conference proceedings of HAZTECH International. Denver, August 13-15,1986, pp 291-307.
21. Versar, Inc. and Jacobs Engineering Group. Waste Minimisation- Issues and Potions. Vol. II. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D. C., October 1986.
22. Fromm, C. H. and M. S. Callahan. "Waste reduction audit procedure'. Conference proceedings of
the Hazardous Materials Control 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', comical Eiyrfneering. Vol. 89, No. 22. November 1,
1982,p 101.
25. Kletz, T. A. "Minimize your product spillage'. HyHmeatfean Processing. 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. Allen. '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. Gehenan, E. Keeping chemical records on track*. Chemical Business. Vol. 6, No. 11,1984, p 47.
31. Hickman. W. E. and W. D. Moore. "Managing the maintenance dollar. Chemical Engineering. Vol.
93. No. 7, April 24,1986, p 68.
E-10
-------
Appendix F
Government Technical/Financial Assistance Programs
The EPA's Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response has set up a telephone call-In service to answer
questions regarding RCRA and Superfund (CERCLA):
(800) 424-9346 (outside the District of Columbia)
(202)382-3000 (in the District of Columbia)
The following slates 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
(205) 348-6401
Aliski
Alaska Health Project
Waste Reduction Assistance Program
431 West Seventh Avenue, Suite 101
Anchorage. AK 99501
(907)276-2864
Arktnitt
Arkansas Industrial Development Commission
One State Capitol Mall
Little Rock, AR 72201
(501)371-1370
Cilllornli
Alternative Technology Section
Toxic Substances Control Division
California State Department of Health Services
714/744 P Street
Sacramento, CA 94234-7320
(916)324-1807
Connecticut
Connecticut Hazardous Waste Management Service
Suite 360
900 Asylum Avenue
Hartford. CT 06106
(203) 244-2007
Connecticut Department of Economic Development
210 Washington Street
Hartford CT 06106
(203)566-7196
Gtorglt
Hazardous Waste Technical Assistance Program
Georgia Institute of Technology
Georgia Technical Research Institute
Environmental Health and Safety Division
O'Keefe Building, Room 027
Atlanta. GA 30332
(404) 894-3806
Otorglt (continued)
Environmental Protection Division
Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Floyd Towers East, Suite 1154
205 Butler Street
Atlanta. CA 30334
(404) 656-2833
////note
Hazardous Waste Research and Information Center
Illinois Department of Energy and Natural Resources
1808 Woodfield Drive
Savoy. IL 61874
(217)333-8940
Illinois Waste Elimination Research Center
Pritzker Department of Environmental Engineering
Alumni Building. Room 102
Illinois Institute of Technology
3200 South Federal Street
Chicago. IL 60616
(312)567-3535
Indltnt
Environmental Management and Education Program
Young Graduate House, Room 120
Purdue University
West Lafayette, IN 47907
(317)494-5036
Indiana Department of Environmental Management
Office of Technical Assistance
P.O.Box 6015
105 South Meridian Street
Indianapolis. IN 462064015
(317)232-8172
loir*
towa Department of Natural Resources
Air Quality and Solid Waste Protection Bureau
Wallace State Office Building
900 East Grand Avenue
DBS Moines. IA 50319-0034
(515)281-6690
Center for Industrial Research and Service
205 Engineering Annex
towa State University
Ames. IA 50011
(515) 294-3420
F-1
-------
K»n$$t
Bureau of Waste Management
Department of Health and Environment
Forbes Field, Building 730
Topeka. KS 66620
(913)296-1607
Kentucky
Division of Waste Management
Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet
IBReillyRoad
Frankfort. KY 40601
(502)564-6716
Loul$ltn»
Department of Environmental Quality
Office of Solid and Hazardous Waste
P.O. Box 44307
Baton Rouge. LA 70804
(504) 342-1354
Mtrylind
Maryland Hazardous Waste Facilities Siting Board
60 West Street. Suite 200A
Annapolis. MD 21401
(301)974-3432
Maryland Environmental Service
2020 Industrial Drive
Annapolis. MD 21401
(301)269-3291
(600)492-9168 (in Maryland) •
Mi»itchu*»tt»
Office of Sale Waste Management
Department of Environmental Management
100 Cambridge Street. Room 1094
Boston. MA 02202
(617)727-3260
Source Reduction Program
Massachusetts Department of Environmental Quality
Engineering
1 Winter Street
Boston. MA 02108
(617)292-5962
Michigan
Resource Recovery Section
Department of Natural Resources
P.O. Box 30028
Lansing. Ml 48909
(517)373-0540
Mlnnifoti
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
Solid and Hazardous Waste Division
520 Lafayette Road
St Paul, MN 55155
(612)296-6300
AV/nnesote (eontlnv9d)
Minnesota Technical Assistance Program
W-140 Boynton Health Service
University of Minnesota
Minneapolis. MN 55455
(612)625-9677
(800) 247-0015 (in Minnesota)
Minnesota Waste Management Board
123 Thoreon Center
7323 Fifty-Eighth Avenue North
Crystal, MN 55428
(612)536-0816
tlltteurl
State Environmental Improvement and Energy
Resources Agency
PO Box 744
Jefferson City, MO 65102
(314)751-4919
Mew Jtrtty
New Jersey Hazardous Waste Facilities Siting
Commission
Room 614
26 West State Street
Trenton, NJ 08608
(609)292-1459
(609)292-1026
Hazardous Waste Advisement Program
Bureau of Regulation and Classification
New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection
401 East State Street
Trenton. NJ 08625
Risk Reduction Unit
Offce of Science and Research
New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection
401 East State Street
Trenton, NJ 08625
New York State Environmental Facilities Corporation
SO Wolf Road
Albany, NY 12205
(518)457.3273
North Caroff/M
Pollution Prevention Pays Program
Department of Natural Resources and CommunRy
Development
P.O. Box 27687
512 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh. NC 27611
(919) 733-7015
Governor's Waste Managemert Board
325 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh. NC 27611
(919) 733-9020
F-2
-------
North Ctrollnt (continued)
Technical Assistance Unit
Solid and Hazardous Waste Management Branch
North Carolina Department of Human Resources
P.O. Box 2091
306 North Wilmington Street
Raleigh. NC 27602
(919)733-2178
Ohio
Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
P.O. Box 1049
1800 WaterMarK Drive
Columbus. OH 43266-1049
(614)481-7200
Ohio Technology Transfer Organization
Suite 200
65 East State Street
Columbus. OH 43266-0330
(614)466-4286
Oklahoma
Industrial Waste Elimination Program
Oklahoma State Department of Health
P.O. Box 53551
Oklahoma City .OK 73152
(405)271-7353
Oregon
Oregon Hazardous Waste Reduction Program
Department of Environmental Quality
811 Southwest Sixth Avenue
Portland. OR 97204
(503)229-5913
Ponntylvtrtlt
Pennsylvania Technical Assistance Program
501 F. Orvis Keller Building
University Park, PA 16802
(814) 865-0427
Bureau of Waste Management
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources
P.O. Box 2063
Fullon Building
3rd and Locust Street*
Harrisburg. PA 17120
(717)767-6239
Center of Hazardous Material Research
320 William Pin Way
Pittsburgh. PA 15238
(412)826-5320
Rhodt l$lind
Ocean State Cleanup and Recycling Program
Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management
9 Hayes Street
Providence. Rl 02908-5003
(401)277-3434
(800) 253-2674 fin Rhode Island)
Rhodt Itlind (continued)
Center of Environmental Studies
Brown University
P.O. Box 1943
135 Angell Street
Providence. Rl 02912
(401)863-3449
Fennteeee
Center lor Industrial Services
102 Alumni Hall
University of Tenneeeee
Knoxville.TN 37996
(615) 974-2456
Vlrglnlt
Orfce of Policy and Planning
Virginia Department of Waste Management
11th Floor, Monroe Building
101 North 14th Street
Richmond. VA 23219
(804)225-2667
Wtthlngton
Hazardous Waste Section
Mail Stop PV-11
Washington Department of Ecology
Otympia.WA 98504-8711
(206)459-6322
Wl$coniln
Bureau of Solid Waste Management
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
P.O. Box 7921
101 South Webster Street
Madison. Wl 53707
(608)266-2699
Wyoming
Solid Waste Management Program
Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality
Herschler Building. 4th Floor, West Wing
122 West 25th Street
Cheyenne, WY 82002
(307) 777-7752
F-3
-------
Appendix G
Option Rating
Weighted Sum Method
The Weighted Sum Method is a quantitative method
for screening and ranking waste minimization options.
This method provides a means ot quantifying the
important criteria that affect waste management in a
particular facility. This method involves three steps.
1. Determine what the important criteria are in terms
of the WM assessment program goals a
constraints, and the overall corporate goals an
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 tor low and
10 for high).
3. Finally, the rating of each option from particular
criteria is multiplied by the weight of the 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.
Tab It G-1. Sample Calculation ualng tha
Walghtad Sum Mathod
ABC Corporation has determined that reduction in waste
treatment costs is the most important criterion, with a weight
factor of 10. Other tignifcant 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
2 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 lor
reducing aafety hazards, 4 for reducing liability, and
because h is somewhat difficult to implement, 2 lor ease of
implementation. The table below shows how the options are
rated overall, with effectiveness lectors estimated for
options Y and Z.
Rating Criteria
Reduce treatment costs
Reduce aafety hazards
Reduce liability
Ease of implementation
Sum of weight times ratings
Ratines for aaeh option
Weipht X Y 2
10 863
8 638
7 445
5 g 2 8
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 close to each other.
G-1
-------
Appendix H
Economic Evaluation Example
The following example presents a profitability analysis
for a relatively large hypothetical waste minimization
project. This project represents the installation of a
package unit that Improves plant production while
reducing raw material consumption and disposal costs.
The analysis was done on a personal computer using a
standard spreadsheet program. The salient data used
in this evaluation are summarized below.
Capital Costs
• The delivered price of the equipment Is quoted by
the vendor at $170,000. This includes taxes and
Insurance.
• Materials costs (piping, wiring, and concrete) are
estimated at $35,000.
• Installation labor is estimated at $25,000.
• Internal engineering staff costs are estimated at
$7,000. Outside consultant and contractor costs
are estimated at $15,000.
• Miscellaneous environmental permitting costs are
estimated at $15,000.
• Working capital (including chemical inventories, and
materials and supplies) is estimated at $5,000.
• Start-up costs are estimated by the vendor at
$3.000.
• A contingency of $20,000 for unforeseen costs
and/or overruns is included.
• Planning, design, and installation are expected to
take one year.
Financing
• The project will be financed 60% by retained
earnings and 40% by a bank loan.
• The bank loan will be repaid over 5 years of equal
Installments of principal, plus Interest at an annual
percentage rate of 13%. Interest accrued during
installation will be added into the total capital costs.
• All capital costs, except working capital and interest
accrued during construction, will be depreciated
over 7 years using the double-declining balance
method, switching to the straight-line method when
the charges by this method become greater.
• 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, K 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
Hems make the total unit disposal costs:
OffsKe disposal fees
State generator taxes
Transportation costs
Other costs
TOTAL DISPOSAL COSTS
Costs per ion of wasle
$500
10
25
$560
Incremental operating labor costs are estimated on
the basis that the project is expected to require one
hour of operator's time per eight-hour shift. There
are three shifts per day and the plant operates 350
days per year. The wage rate for operators is
$12.50 per hour.
Operating supplies expenses are estimated at 30%
of operating labor costs.
Maintenance labor costs are estimated at 2% of the
sum of the capital costs for equipment, materials,
and installation. Maintenance supplies costs are
estimated at 1% of these costs.
Incremental supervision costs are estimated at 30%
of the combined costs of operating and
maintenance labor.
The following overhead costs are estimated as a
percentage of the eum of operating and
maintenance labor and supervision costs.
Labor burden and benefit 28%
Plant overhead 25%
Headquarter overhead 20%
H-1
-------
• 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 IB expected to be
zero after eight years.
Results
The four-page printout In Figures H-1 through H-4
presents the WM project profitability spreadsheet
program. Figure H-1 represents the Input section of
the program. Each of the numbers in the first three
columns represents an Input variable in the program.
The righthand side of Figure H-1 is a summary of the
capital requirement. This includes a calculation of the
interest accrued during construction and the financing
structure of the project.
Figure H-2 is a table of the revenues and operating
cost Hems 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 project's 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 PR AFV
60% equity/40% dtbt 26.47% fS4,S44
100% equity 23.09% $81.625
The IRR values are greater than the 15% cost of
capital, and the NPVs are positive. Therefore, the
project is attractive, and should be Implemented.
H-2
-------
Waste Minimization
Profitability Program
Capttal Coat Factor*
Capital Cost
Equipment
Materials
Installation
Plant Engineering
Contractor/Engineering
Permitting Costs
Contingency
Working Capital
Start-up Costs
%Eouitv
%Debt
Interest Rate on Debt. %
Debt Repayment, years
Depreciation period
Income Tax Rate. %
Escalation Rates. %
$170.000
$35.000
_$251000J
$7.000
$15,000
$15.000
$20.000
$5.000
$3.000
60%
40%
13.00%
5
7
34.00%
5.0%
Cost of Capital (tor NPVN 15.00%
started 5/22/87
last changed 8/1/87
MPUT
Operating Cost/Revenue Factor*
Increased Production
Increased Rate, units/year
Price. $AinH
Marketable Bv-oroducts
Rate. units/year
Price. $Ainit
Decreased Raw (Materials
Decreased Rate, units/year
Price. I/unit
Decreased irVssto Disposal
Heduced waste, ions/year
OHsite Fees. $/ton
State Taxes, $/lon
Transportation. $Aon
Other Disposal Costs. $/ton
Total Disposal Costs. Won
0
$100
200
$40
300
$50
200
$500
$10
$25
$25
$560
Operating Labor
Operator hours/shift
Shifts/day
Operating dajrs/year
Wage rate. $/man-hour
Operating Supplies
(% of Operating Labor)
Maintenance Costs
(% of Capital Costs)
Labor
Materials
Other Labor Costs
(% of OSM Labor)
Supervision
(% of OftM Labor + Sui
Plant Overhead
Home Office Overhead
Labor Burden
1
«
«.
35C
$13.50
30%
2.00%
1.00%
30.0%
irviSNjn
25.0%
20.0%
28.0%
CAPITAL REQUIREMENT
Construction Year
Capital Expenditures
Equipment
Materials
Installation
Plant E ng ineering
Contractor/Enqineerina
Pormrtting Costs
Contingency
Start-up Costs
Depreciable Capital
Working Capital
Subtotal
Interest on Debt
Equity Investment
Debt Principal
Interest on Debt
Total Financing
i
$170.000
$35.000
$25.000
$7.000
$15.000
$15.000
$20.000
$3.000
$290.000
$5.000
$295,000
$14.230
$309.230
$185.538
$109.462
$14.230
$309.230
Figure H-1. fc-.put Information and Capital Investment
-------
REVENUE AND COST FA<
Operating Year Number
Escalation Factor
MCREASED REVENUES
Increased Production
Marketable By-products
Annual Revenue
OPERATING COST/SAVI
Raw Materials
Disposal Costs
Maintenance Labor
Maintenance Supplies
Operation Labor
Operatina SuDDies
Supervision
Labor Burden
Plant Overhead
Home Office Overffieejo
ToMOMrnlhiaOMl.
'TONS
1.000
K»
1
1.050
$0
$8.400
$8.400
$15.750
_f 11 7,600
($4.630)
($2.415)
($14.884)
($4.465)
($5.914)
(! 7.176)
2
1.103
SO
$8.824
$8.824
$16.545
$123,536
($5.074)
($2.537)
($15.635)
($4.691)
($6.213)
($7.538)
3
1.158
$0
$9264
$9264
$17.370
$129.696
($5.327)
($2.663)
($16.415)
($4.925)
($6.523)
1 7.914)
(! *.407)l ($6.731)1 f! 7.066)
($5.126)1 ($5.384)1 (< 5.653)
$82.1331 $862781 $90580
4
1.216
$0
$9.728
$9.728
$18240
$136.192
($5.594)
($2.797)
($17237)
($5.171)
($6.849)
($8.310
($7.420
($5.936
$95.118
5
1277
$0
$10216
$10216
$19.155
$143.024
($5.874)
($2.937)
($18.101)
($5.430)
($7.193)
($8.727)
6
1.341
$0
$10.728
$10.728
$20.115
_J150.192
($6.169)
7
1.408
$0
$11264
$11264
$21.120
$157.696
($6.477)
($3.084) ($3.238)
($19.009)1 ($19.958)
($5.703)
($7.553)
($9.165)
($7.792) ($8.183)
($6.234) ($6.546)
$99.891 1 $104.895
($5.987)
($7.931)
($9.622)
($8.592)
($6.873)
$110.138
8
1.478
$0
$11.824
$11.824
$22.170
_$.165.536
($6.799)
($3.399)
($20.951)
($6285)
($8.325)
($10.101)
($9,019)
($7215)
$115.612
Figure H-2. Revenues and Operating Costs
-------
RETURN ON EQUITY/RETURN ON ASSt I s
Construction Year
Operating Year
Book Value
Depreciation (by straight-l
Depreciation (by doubteDE
Depreciation
Debt Balance
Interest Payment
Principal Repayment
CASHFLOWS
v/onsiruciion Tear
Operating Year
Revenues
•*• Operatinq Savinqa
Not Revenues
- Depreciation
- Interest on Debt
Taxable Income
- Income Tax
Profit alter Tax
• Depreciation
• Debt Repayment
After-Tax Cash Flow
Cash Fbw for ROE
Net Present Value
Return on Eojuitv
28.47%
1
$290.000
ne)
)
$123.692
1
($185.538)
($185538)
1
$207.143
$41.429
$82.857
$82.857
_$123J592
$16,080
$24.738
1
$8,400
$82.133
$90.533
$82,857
$16.080
($8.404)
($2.857)
($5.547)
$82.857
$24.738
$52.572
$52^72
($139.823)
•NUMI
2 .
$147.959
$41.429
$59,184
$59.184
$98.954
$12.864
$24.738
2
$8.824
$86.278
$95.102
$59.184
$12.864
$23.054
$7.838
$15.216
$59.184
$24.738
$49.662
$49.662
($102.272)
•32.19%
3
$105,685
$41.429
$42.274
$42.274
$74.216
$9.648
$24.738
3
$9.264
$90.580
$99.844
$42.274
$9.648
$47.922
$16.293
$31.629
$42.274
$24.738
$49.165
$49.165
($69.945)
•9.62%
4
$64.256
$41.429
$30,196
$41.429
$49.478
$6.432
$24.738
4
$9.728
$95.118
$104.846
$41.429
$6.432
$56.985
$19,375
$37.610
$41.429
$24.738
$54.301
$54.301
($38,898)
4.24%
5
$22.827
$41.429
$18.359
$41.429
$24.740
$3.216
$24.738
5
$10.216
$99.891
$110.107
$41.429
$3.216
$65.462
$22.257
$43.205
$41.429
$24.738
$59.896
$59.896
($9.119)
12.95%
6
$0
$41.429
$6.522
$22.827
$2
$0
$2
6
$10,728
$104,895
$115.623
$22.827
$0
$92.796
$31,551
$61.245
$22.827
$2
$84.070
$84.070
$27.227
19.92%
7
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
7
$11.264
I $110.138
$121.402
$0
$0
$121.402
$41.277
$80.125
$0
$0
$80.125
! 180,125
! 57.349
23.85%
8
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
8
$11,824
$115.612
$127.436
$0
$0
$127.436
$43.328
$84.108
$0
$0
$84.108
$84,108
$84.844
26.47%
-------
H£TUriN ON MVESTMEN
Construction Year
Operating Year
BookVahM
DepreciatKMi (by straight-!
Depreciation (oy double c
Depreciation
CASHFLOWS
ConstnicHon Yaw
Operating Year
Revenuoa
4. Operating Savimn
Net Rovenuas
•Depreciation
Taxable Income
• Income Tax
Profit after Tax
• ueprecunion
After-Tax Gash How
Cashflow for FKM
Net Preaent Value
R0fufn on IvivMflnMflt
23.09%
1
$290.000
nel
»
1
(S29S.OOO)
IS295.000)
1
_$207J43
$41.429
$82.857
$82.857
1
$8.400
$82.133
$90.533
$82,857
$7,676
$2.610
$5.066
$82.857
$87.923
$87.923
2
$147.959
$41.429
$59.184
$59.184
2
$8.824
$86.278
$95.102
$59,184
$35,918
$12.212
$23.706
$59.184
$82.890
$82.890
3
$105,685
$41.429
$42274
$42^74
3
$9.264
$90.580
$99.844
$42,274
$57.570
$19574
$37.996
$42274
$80270
$80270
($2183451 ($155.868)1 ($103.090)
fNUMI 1 -30.04X1 -7.76%
1 1
4
$64256
$41.429
$30.196
$41.429
4
$9.728
$95.1 18
$104.846
$41.429
$63.417
$21.562
$41.855
$41.429
$83284
$83284
($55.472)
526%
5
$22.827
$41.429
$18.359
$41.429
5
$10216
$99,891
$110.107
$41.429
$68,678
$23.351
$45.327
$41.429
$86.756
$86.756
($1£339)
13.21%
6
$0
$41.429
$6.522
$22.827
6
$10.728
$104.895
$115.623
$22.827
$92.796
$31.551
$61245
$22.827
$84.072
$84,072
$24.008
17.99%
7
$0
$0
$0
$0
7
$11264
$110.138
$121.402
$0
$121.402
$41277
$80.125
$0
$80.125
$80.125
$54.130
20.97%
8
10
$0
$0
$0
8
$11,824
$115.612
$127.436
$0
$127.436
$43.328
$84.108
$0
$84.108
$84.108
$81.625
23.09%
FipUW H4. CaMR FlOWS tof Rmllfffl Ofl •WMtfTMfll
------- |