Hazardous Substance Management
    Research Center
       •t the
   New Jersey Institute
     of Technology
   Newark, New Jersey

     United States
Environmental Protection Agency
 Hazardous Waste Engineering
   Research Laboratory
   New Jersey Department
  of Environmental Protection
 Division of Science It Research

       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)


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.

The term, "waste minimization"  is heard increasingly at meetings and conferences of
individuals working in the field of hazardous waste management Waste minimization is an
umbrella term that includes the  first two categories of the EPA's preferred hazardous
waste management strategy which is shown below:

   1.  Source Reduction: Reduce the amount of waste at the source, through changes in
      industrial processes.
   2.  Recycling: Reuse and recycle wastes for the original or some other purpose, such
      as materials recovery or energy production.
   3.  Incineration/Treatment Destroy, detoxify, and neutralize wastes into less harmful
   4.  Secure Land Disposal:  Deposit wastes  on  land  using volume  reduction,
      encapsulation,  leachate containment,  monitoring,  and controlled air  and
      surface/subsurface waste  releases.

In carrying out Its  program to  encourage  the adoption of waste minimization, the
Hazardous Waste Engineering Research Laboratory has supported the development of a
recommended procedure for  identifying waste minimization  applications.  This manual
describes that procedure and will be of interest to those responsible for reducing waste
streams, and  to those interested in learning about waste minimization in general.

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

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.

    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

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
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

                                          Section 1
Waste minimization (WM) has been successful for
many organizations.-  By following the procedures
outlined in this manual, a waste generator can:

•  Save money  by reducing waste treatment and
   disposal costs, raw matenal purchases, and other
   operating costs.

•  Meet state and national waste minimization policy

•  Reduce potential environmental liabilities.

•  Protect public health and worker health and safety.

•  Protect the environment.

Waste minimization is a policy specifically mandated by
the U. S  Congress in the 1984 Hazardous and Solid
Wastes Amendments to the Resource  Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA).  This mandate, coupled
with  other  RCRA  provisions  that  have led to
unprecedented  increases  in the  costs  of  waste
management,  have heightened general interest in
waste minimization.  A strong contributing factor has
been a desire on the 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

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


                                  ORDER OF EXPLORATION

   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).

   Any activity that reduces or eliminates the generation of hazardous waste at the source, usually within a
   process (op. elt.).

   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
                                                                           (ONSITE AND OFFSITE)
                                                                   USE AND REUSE
                          SOURCE CONTROL
                                                                                          PfOOOBSOd lOT
                                                                                            resource recovwy
                                                                                          Processed as •
                                                                 • Rotuin to original process
                                                                 • Raw material substHut*
                                                                   tof •
Product oonsMVBlion
dwngc n product
                                   GOOD OPERATING
                     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
      • Get management commitment
      • Sat overall assessment program goals
      • Organlza assessment program taak foroa
  Assessment organization
 evซd 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
      Aปsaumant raport of
        selected options  '
      Salad now
   •ssasamant Urgata
     and raavaluaia
    previous optbna
         • Technical evaluation
         • Economic evaluation
         • Seled options for Implementation
     Final report. Including
     recommended optbna<
         • 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

•  Landfill disposal coat increases.
•  Costly alternative treatment technologies.
•  Savings in raw material and manufacturing costs.
•  Certification of a WM program on the hazardous wast*
•  Biennial WM program reporting.
•  Land disposal restrictions and bans.
•  Increasing permitting requirements for waste handling
   and treatment
•  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 /mซge 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

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

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
       Gel management commitment
       Set overall assessment program goals
       Organize assessment program task tore*
                 Analysis Phase
             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:

[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

•  Reuse and recycling of materials haa been and will
   continue to be  given firat conaidaration prior to
   classification and disposal of waste."
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.

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

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
   Establish overall WM program goals.
   Establish a waste tracking eystem.
   Prioritize the waste  streams  or  facility •rots for
   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
   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

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.
   SUITABLE to the overall corporate goals and mission.
   ACHIEVABLE with a practical level of effort

Source:  Pearce and Robinaon, Strategic  Manซaamซnt
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

•  A new operating procedure wDI reduce waste but may also
   be  a bottleneck that decreases the overall production
•  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
•  Adequate utilities  are not available for the new
•  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

•  A program to reduce  inventory  (to avoid material
   deterioration and reprocessing) may lead to atoekouts
   during high product demand.

•  There is not enough money to fund the project

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

•  Accepting another plant's  waste as a feedstock may
   require a lengthy resolution of regulatory issues.

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

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

  Gel management commitment to:
     •   Establish waste minimization a* a company goal.
     •   Establish a waste minimization program to meet this
     •   Give authority to the program task force to
        implement this program.
  Set overall goals for the program. These goals should be:
     •   ACCEPTABLE to thoM who will work to aehieva
        FLEXIBLE to adapt to changing requirements.
        MEASURABLE over time.
        SUITABLE to the overall corporate goals.
        ACHIEVABLE with a practical (aval of effort.

  Find a 'cause champion*, with the following attributes:
     •   Familiar with the facility, its production processes,
        and its waste management operations.
     •   Familiar with the people.
     •   Familiar 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
  Get people from the affected departments or group*.
        Process Engineering.
        Quality Control.
        Research and Development.
        Marketing/Client Relations.
        Material Control/Inventory.
        Information Systema.

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

                                           Section  3
                                     Assessment  Phase
         The recognized need to minimize waste
                  Planning and
             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 Rปcordง

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

 Table   3-1.     Facility  Information  for  WM

 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

 •  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.

Table   3-2.    Sources  of   Material   Balance
   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
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

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

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

 assessment activity. Table 3-3 lists important criteria to
 consider when setting these priorities.
 Table   3-3.     Typical   Consideration*
   Prioritizing Waata Streams to Aaaaaa
   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
   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
   •  Facilities engineer responsble for metal finishing
   •  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
       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

      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

Improve  product quality and production efficiency.
These quality circles consist of meetings of workers
and supervisors, where improvements are proposed
and evaluated. Quality circles are beneficial in that they
Involve  the  production  people  who are  closely
associated with the operations, and foster participation
and  commitment to  improvement.  Several  large
companies that have quality circles have used them as
a means of soliciting successful suggestions for waste

Site  Inspection

With a specific area  or waste stream selected, and with
the assessment team in  place,  the assessment
continues with a  visit to the site. In the case where the
entire assessment team is employed at the plant being
assessed, the team should have  become very familiar
with the  specific area in the process of collecting the
operating and design data.  The members of the
assessment team should  familiarize themselves with
the site as much as possible.  Although the collected
information is critical to gaining an understanding of the
processes involved, seeing the site is Important in
order to witness  the actual operation.  For example, in
many instances, a process unit is operated differently
from the method originally described in the operating
manual.  Modifications may have been made to the
equipment that were not recorded in the flow diagrams
or equipment lists.

When people from  outside of the plant participate In
the assessment, 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

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
   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

   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.

 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 astodationง
   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-

 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

   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

 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

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
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
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

Screening and  Selecting Options tor Further

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

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

                                            Section  4
                                      Feasibility Analysis
         The recognized need to minima* waste
                   Planning and
          • Technical evaluation
          • Economic evaluation
          • Select options for 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

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
•  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

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

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
     Piping and ducting
     Insulaton and painting
     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
   Interest accrued during construction

Working Capital
   Raw materials Inventory
   Finished product inventory
   Materials and supplies


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

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 coปf 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 utilltiป$ 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
   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

Changa$  In ravanuai from Incraaiad (or daeraa$ad)
   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*

   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 ฎ 45 mies
                         per hour (round trip)

• • Does not include tntemsl costs, such as taxes and fees.
   and labor for manifest preparation, storage, handling, and

*•• 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
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

Profitability Antlyปlง

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

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
                      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.

•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;
 ฐ  the required resources  and how they will  be
 o  estimated construction period;
 o  estimated production downtime;
 ป  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.

                                           Section 5
                       Implementing Waste  Minimization Options
         The recognized need to minimize waste
                  Planning and
                 Analysis Phase
           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

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 'ซ 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

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


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

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

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

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.

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

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
•  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.

                                         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
         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

        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

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

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.

Table  A-1.  List of Waata Minimization AMaawnant Workahaata  (eenllnuad)
Phaa*     Numbar and  Tltla
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>haatซ1
             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 mซt*riaJป-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
Workปhaet 15. this workahaat • uMd to caJculat* tha payback parted.

Thto worluhaat la uaad to davabp caah flow* for calculating NPV or RR.
     (Sactlon 5)

        18. Project Summary
        18. Option Parformanca
 Summarbaa Important taaka to ba parformad during tha
 impl*mant*tion of an option. Thป Indudaa dalivarabia. raaponabla
 paraon, budgat. and achadula.

 Racord* malartal b*lane* Information for evaluating tha
 parformanc* of an implamantad option.



       Waste Minimization Assessment
        Proj.  No.
Prepared By _^^___^^__

Checked By 	
Sheet _J_ of _1_    Page	of	
                                 Begin the Waste Minimization
                                     Assessment  Program
                               PLANNING AND ORGANIZATION
                                      • Get management commitment
                                      • Set overall assessment program goals
                                      • Organize assessment program task fore*
                         Assessment organizaton
                        and commitment to proceed
                  Select new
               assessment targets
                and reevaluate
                previous options
             • 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

                         Assessment report of
                           selected options
                               FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS  PHASE
                                       • Technical evaluation
                                       • Economic evaluation
                                       • Select options for implementation
                                                  Final report, including
                                                  recommended options
                Repeat the process
              • Justify projects and obtain funding
              • Installation (equipment)
              • Implementation (procedure)
              • Evaluate performance
                                     Successfully operating
                                  waste minimization projeete

Site .
   Waaie Minimization Aattasment
   Pro). No.
    Prepared By	
    Checked By	,
    Sheet JL of J_ Page	of _
Program Manager
SNe Coordinator
Atsessment Team Leader
                         Organization Chart


Waste Minimization Assessment
Pro) No



pared By
set 1 of 1 Page of

Assessment Team
Site Coordinator
Materials Control
Quality Control


Telephone f






Site .
 Waste Unlmlatton Atteument
Pro). No.
Prepared By	
Checked By	
Sheet J_ of J_ Pace _ of  __
Street Address:
State.7iP Code:
Telephone:  (
Major Products;
SIC Codes:
EPA Generator Number
Major Unit or;
Product or:
 Facilities/Equipment Age:

Site _

Wast* Minimization Aeeeeement
Pro) No



toared By
ปet 1. of .1, Page of

Total Staff
Direct Supv. Staff
Average Age, yrs.
Annual Turnover Rate %
Seniority, yra.
Yra. of Formal Education
Training, hra^yr.
Additional Remarks


Waste Minimization Assessment

Pmj Mn

Prepared By
Checked Bv
Sheet J_ of J_ Page of

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


Process Description
Operating Manuals
Equipment List
Equipment Specifications
Piping & Instrument Diagrams
Plot and Elevation Plan(s)
Work Flow Diagrams
Hazardous Waste Manifests
Emission Inventories
Annual/Biennial Reports
Environmental Audit Reports
Permit/Permit Applications
Batch Sheet(s)
Materials Application Diagrams
Product Composition Sheets
Material Safety Data Sheets
Inventory Records
Operator Logs
Production Schedules




Used In this
Report (Y/N)





Waste Minimization Assessment
Pmj No



•oared By
•dead By
wtj_of J_ Page of


Component/Attribute of Concern

Annual Consumption Rate
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)

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.

Site .
 Waste Minimization Assessment
 Proj. No.
Prepared By	i	
Checked By	
Sheet J_ of _1_ Page	of ___


Component/Attribute of Concern

Annual Production Rate
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.

Stream No. 	

Stream No.

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

                                Wast* Minimization Assessment
           Pro]. No.
                Prepared By	
                Checked By	
                Sheetฃ_ of J_  Page	of  	
       1.     Waste Stream Name/ID:.
             Process Unit/Operation.
                                             Stream Number.
             Waste Characteristics (attach additional sheets with composition data, as necessary.)
D solid      HH  mixed phase
                      Density, to/cutt 	
                      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  -
                         Batch Size-
                                         fes per year
                                         Its per	
                                         batches per


Waste Minimization Assessment
Proc UnR/OoAr
Praj No



reoared By
Backed Bv
teet.2_of A. Page of

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.


"ite _

Waste Minimization Assessment
Prac UnH/ftnar
Pro] No


Ute*tซ Sfrnam
spared By
eel A_ of 1_ Page of

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
      commercial TSDF
D   own TSDF
D   other (describe)

LJ   direct use/re-use
D   energy recovery
D   redistilled  	
D   other (describe)  -
                              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.)

Site ,
   Waste Minimization Assessment
Prepared By.
Checked By .
Sheet JL of
Page	of  	
   Waste Minimization Assessment
  Proc. Unlt/Oper.^	
  Proj. No	
Prepared By	
Checked By	
Sheet J_ of J_ Page	of 	
Waste ID/Name:
Component/or Property of Concern
Annual Generation Rate (units )
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

Sum of Priority Rating Scores
Priority Rank
Stream No. 	

Rating (R)


Stream No. 	

Rating (R)


Stream No. 	

Rating (R)


Notes: 1. Stream numbers, If applicable, should correspond to those used on process flow diagrams.
2. For example, sanitary landfill, hazardous waste landfill, onslte recycle, Incineration, combustion
with heat recovery, distillation, dewaterlng, etc.
3. Rate each stream In each category on a scale from 0 (none) to 10 (high).

   Waste Minimization Assessment
  Pro]. No.
Prepared By	
Checked By	
Sheet J_ of J_  Page	of 	
Meeting formal (e.g., transforming, nominal group technique)
Meeting Coordinator	
Meeting Participants	
            List Suggested Options
                        Rationale/Remarks on Option

    Waste Minimization Assessment
   Pro]. No.
                    Prepared By	
                    Checked By	
                    Sheet J_ of J_ Page	of
     Option Name:
     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
                      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?—
no.   by:
     Reason for Acceptance or Rejection



Waste Minimization Assessment
PfOC Unil/Opr
Proj No



pared By
ecked Bv
jet 1 of 1 Pane 1 ol 1

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
Short Implementation period
Ease of Implementation



Sum of Weighted Ratings ฃ (W x R)
Option Ranking
Feasibility Anar/sls Scheduled for (Date)
Options Rating (R)
•1 Option



92 Option



ff3 Option



14 Option



ซ5 Option



Firm ,
Site .
                                  Waste Minimization Assessment
                                 Proc. Unil/Oper..
                                 Proj. No	
Prepared By	
Checked By	
Sheet J_ of .ฃ_  Page	of 	
                              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?
         Describe closest industrial analog
         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.

Site .
                            Waste Minimization Assessment
                           Pro). No.
Prepared By	
Checked By	
Sheet 2- of .ฃ_ Page	of
                           TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY
WM Option Description
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)
                                  CH no
   Number of test runs:.
   Amount of materlal(s) required:
   Testing to be conducted:
                                     D m-plant
   Facility/Product Constraints:
      Space Requirements	
      Possible locations within facility

I Firm
Site .
                   Waste Minimization Assessment
                  Proc. Unlt/Oper	
                  Proj. No	
          Prepared 3y	
          Checked By	
          Sheet ,3_ of JL Page	of 	
  WM Option Description
  2.  Equipment-Related Option (continued)
      Utility Requirements:
           Electric Power      Volts (AC or DC)
Process Water
                             Quality (tap, demln, etc.)	
           Cooling Water      Flow	      Pressure.
                             Temp. In
           Coolant/Heat Transfer Fluid —
                                    Temp. Out,
                  Temp. In .
                  Duty —
                                               Temp. Out
 - Flow

           Plant Air.
           Inert Gas.
     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.


                            Waste Minimization Assessment
                           Proc. UnH/Oper.
                           Proj. No	
Prepared By	
Checked By	
Sheet^_ of _fi_  Page	of
                          TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY
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.

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?

Firm ,
Site .
    Waste Minimization Assessment
   Proj. No.
Prepared By	
Checked By	
Sheet .ฃ_ of JL  Page	of  	
     WM Option Description.
     3.  Equipment-Related Option (continued)

        Describe any additional storage or material handling requirements.
        Describe any additional laboratory or analytical requirements.
        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	

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


Wastt Minimization Assessment
PTC MnK/Ormr
Proj No



oared By
acked By
set 1 of 6 Paoe of

WM Option Description.
     CAPITAL COSTS • Include all costs as appropriate.
        LJ Purchased Process Equipment
               Price (fob factory)                 	
               Taxes, freight, Insurance           	
               Delivered equipment cost          	
               Price for Initial Spare Parts Inventory	
        EH Estimated Materials Cost
               Piping                            —
               Electrical                         —
               Instruments                      —
               Structural                        —
               Insulation/Piping                  —
            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
        I— I  Site Preparation
            (Demolition, sKe clearing, ate.)
            Estimated Installation Costs
               In-house Staff


Waste Minimization Assessment
Pmc IMt/Opflr . . ,
Pmj Mn



pared By I
jet 2 of 6 Paoe of .
vPSfr P™ fcj ^\
^^^r ••• 1 •ป
    Engineering and Procurement Costs (In-house ft outside)
       Planning                      _
       Engineering                   _
       Procurement                  _
       Consultants                   _
CD Start-up Costs
CD Training Costs                    	
CD Permitting Costs
       In-house Staff Costs           	
CD Initial Charge of Catalysts and Chemicals
CD Working Capital [Raw Materials, Product, Inventory, Materials and Supplies (not elsewhere specified)].
                              hem ง3.
CD Estimated Salvage Value (If any)

 Waste Minimization Assessment
Proj. No.
Prepared By	
Checked By	
Sheet JL of _&_ pซ8e	ฐ* 	
                         COST INFORMATION
Cost Hem
Purchased Process Equipment
Utility Connections
Additional Equipment
Site Preparation
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



Waste Minimization Assessment
Prr>rป llnH/npar
Pro! No



spared By I
ecked By L
eet 4 of 6 Pace of
D Estimated Decrease (or Increase) In Utilities
Cooling Process
Process Water
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

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	
       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

Unit Cost
$ per unit

Reduction In Quantity
Units per time

Decrease In Cost
$ per time


                           Waste Minimization Assessment
                          Proc. UnK/Oper	
                          Proj. No	
Prepared By	
Checked By	
Sheet J5_ of _6_ Page	of 	
                          COST INFORMATION
Estimated Decrease (or Increase) In Ancillary Catalysts and Chemicals

Unit Cert
f ptrunlt

DOCTMM (or IncrMM) In Quantity
Unit per time

Total DaerctM (or IncrttM)
$ pซr time

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


Waste Minimization Assessment
Pror Mnft/Oopr
Pm] Nn



ipared By I
ปet 6 of 6 Paoe of _
      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



Waste Minimization Assessment
Pme Unit/finer
Pmj No

Preoared By
r.hซ*Prt Ry
Sheet J_ o! J_ Page of


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

Site ,
    Waste Minimization Assessment
   Proc. Unlt/Oper..
   Pro). No	
                     Prepared By	
                     Checked By 	
                     Sheet J_ of J_ Page	of _
      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.
   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)
0.571 B
                      (20% dlaoount)
                      (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.
  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

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


Task Leader








Approval By	
Authorization By	
Project Started (Date),



Wast* Minimization Assessment
Pme Unh/0per
Pro] No


Dared By I
acked By '
ret 1 of .1 Pape of .
] Baseline
(without option)
(a) Period Duration
(b) Production per Period .
D Projected
D Actual
      (c)    Input Materials Consumption per Period
                   PoundsUntt Product
      (d)    Waste Generation per Period
             Waste Stream
                   Poundsllnlt Product
      (e)     Substance(s) of Concern • Generation Rate per Period
Waste Stream
Pounds/Unit Product

                                          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
        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

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.

Waste Minimization Assessment
Simplified Worksheets
Proi. No.
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet 1 of 1 Pape of
                            Begin the  Weete Mlnlmlzetlen
                                Assessment Progrem
                          PLANNING AND  ORGANIZATION
                                 • Get management commitment
                                 • Set overall assessment program goals
                                 • Organize essessment progrem task force
                       Assessment organization
                      and commitment to proceed
             Select new
          assessment targets
            end Devaluate-
            previous options
            • 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
                                            Assessment report of
                                              •elected options
                           FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS PHASE
                                  • Technical evaluation
                                  • Economic evaluation
                                  • Select options for Implementation
                        Final report, including
                        recommended options
           Repeat the process
             • Justify projects and obtain funding
             • Installation (equipment)
             • Implementation (procedure)
             • Evaluate performance
                                Successfully  operetlng
                              waste minimization projects


                             Waste Minimization Assessment
                                 Simplified Worksheets
Proj. No.
Prepared By	

Checked By	

Sheet J_ of J_ Page	of 	
Street Address:
State7lP Code:
Telephone:  (
Major Products:
SIC Codes:
EPA Generator Number :
Malor Unit or;
Product or:
Facilities'Equipment Age:

Wast* Minimization Aaaatamant
Simplified Worksheets
Pm| No

Prepared By I
	 *- 1
Checked Bv 1
Sheet _1_ of J_ Page of

Process Unit/Operation:	
Operation Type:    D Continuous
                  D Discrete
D Batch or Semi-Batch    D Other	

Process Flow Diagram
Material/Energy Balance
Flow/Amount Measurements


Process Description
Operating Manuals
Equipment List
Equipment Specifications
Piping & Instrument Diagrams
Plot and Elevation Plan(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




Used In this
Report (Y/N)






Waste Minimization Assessment
Simplified Worksheets
Pro) Nrป


pared By
set 1 of 1 Page . of


Component/Attribute of Concern

Annual Consumption Rate
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)

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.

Site _

Waste Minimization Assessment
Simplified Worksheets
Pmj Mn



•oared Bv 1
wtj_ot J_ Pa0e of

Component/Anrlbute of Concern

Annual Production Rate
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)


Stream NO. 	

Stream No.

Stream NO. 	



Site _

Wait* Minimization Assessment
Simplified Worksheets
Pmr Unk/Qnftr
Pmj MA



ipared By
aet 1 of J_ Page of

Waste ID/Name:
Component/or Property of Concern
Annual Generation Rat* (unHa 	 )
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

Sum of Priority Rating Scores
Priority Rank
Stream No.

Rating (R)


Stream No. 	

Rating (R)


Stream No.

Rating (R)



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).


Watt* Minimization Aaaeaament
Simplified Worksheets
Pmr Ifnft/Ontf . .
Pmj Nn

Prepared By 1
r- ป 	 |
Sheet J_ or _1_ Page of

Meeting format (e.g., bralnttormlng, nominal group technique)
Meeting Coordinator	
Meeting Panielpants	
           List Suggested Options
                      Rationale/Remark! on Option

[ Firm
    Waste Minimization Assessment
     Simplified Worksheets
                   Prepared By	
                   Checked By	
                   Sheet J_ of J_  Page	of  	
                           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
                      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?—
no,   by:
      Reason for Acceptance or Rejection

Site .
 Waste Minimization Assessment
     Simplified Worksheets
Proc. Unlt/Oper	
Proj No.       .	
Prepa-ed By	
Checked By 	
Sheet JL of J_ Page	of
     Capital Costs
           Purchased Equipment
           Utility Connections.
           Start-up and Training.
           Other Capital Costs -
                 Total Capital Costs
     Incremental Annual Operating Costs
           Change In Disposal Costs —
           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

                                         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.

Table C-1.  Electroplating Solution Analyaea
Tabla C-2.   Waatawater  characterlatlca
Brass Plating
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
0.3 oz/gal

8.0 oz/gal
7.52 oz/gal

16.65 oz/gal
Reporting period

Total flow In
Total flow out
Peak flow

Suspended solids
Total cyanide
Total chromium

Oil and grease
July -87 to August *7

15 gallons par minute

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

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
   • Increasing plating solution temperatures.
   - Lowering the concentration of plating solution
   - Increase the recovery of drag-out with drain

•  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.
   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

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.

•  Segregate hazardous waste  from nonhazardous

Feasibility  Analysis

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

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

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

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.


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

                                            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
Loading docks, incoming
  pipelines, receiving areas

Tanks, warehouses, drum
  storage yards, bins,

Melting, curing, baking,
  distilling, washing, coating.
  formulating, reaction
Support Services    Laboratories
                   Maintenance shops



                   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,

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

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).

 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
 Heat exchanger
 Metal parts
  Metal surface
  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
• 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
• Deposit formation
• Use of chemical cleaners

• Disposal of spent solvents,
  spent clesning solution, or
  cleaning sludge
• Dragoul
• Disposal of spent treating

• 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
 ' Exosssivs cooling watsr
• Indiscriminate use of solvent
  or water
• Poor rack maintenance
• Excessive rinsing with water
• Fast removal of workpieoe

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

                                      Appendix E
                          Waste  Minimization Techniques

The tables in this appendix lists techniques and practices for waste reduction In operations that are
applied in a wide range of Industries. Most of the techniques listed here are source reduction techniques
   Table E-1.   Waste Minimization Options for Coating Operations
   Table E-2.   Waste Minimization Options for Equipment Cleaning Operations
   Table E-3.   Waste Minimization through Good Operating Practices
   Table E-4.   Waste Minimization Options In Materials Handling, Storage, and Transfer
   Table E-5.   Waste Minimization Options for Parts Cleaning Operations
Source: Jacobs Engineering Group

    Table E-1.   Waste  Minimization  Options for Coating Operations
                  Waste Reduction Measures
      Coaling overspray   Coating material that fails
                         to reach the object being
Maintain 50% overlap between spray pattern
Maintain 6* - 8* distance between spray gun
and the workpiece
Maintain a gun speed of about 250 feet/minute
Hold gun perpendicular to the surface
Trigger gun at the beginning and end of each
Proper training of operators
Use robots for spraying
Avoid excessive air pressure for coating
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.

     Stripping waste*     Coating i
     Solvent emissions
                         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.




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

                                                                                                       Minimizes solvent consumption.
                                                                                                       Prevents hardening of scale that requires
                                                                                                        more severe deaning.
        sludges, spent
        acidic solutions
                                                   • 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 Ionฎ tubes.
*Superscrubberฐ. for example.

Table E-3.   Waste Minimization through  Good  Operating  Practices
     Good Operating Practice
                 Program Ingredients
  Waste minimization assessments
  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)
• 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.
These audits are conducted to monitor
 compliance with regulations.
SPCC plans are required by law for oR
  storage facilities.
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.

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

                                                                                        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 Reduction Measures
  Material/Waste tracking and
   inventory control
• Avoid over-purchasing
• Accept raw material only after inspection
• Ensure that inventory quantity does not go to
• 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
• 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.
            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 Reduction Measures
  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
  Provide adequate lighting in the storage area
  Maintain a dean, even surface in transportation
  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
  Follow manufacturers* suggestions on the storage
  and handling of afl raw materials
  Insulation and inspection of electric circuitry for
  corrosion and potential sparking
• 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 Reduction Measures
         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
This could eliminate the need for solvent
                                                                                                          A single, larger waste that b more
                                                                                                           amenable to recycling.
                           Solvent toss Irani
                                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
                                                         •  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

                           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.

                                      Appendix E

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.


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.

                                            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

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

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

   Alternative Technology Section
   Toxic Substances Control Division
   California State Department of Health Services
   714/744 P Street
   Sacramento, CA 94234-7320

   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

   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

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

   Illinois Waste Elimination Research Center
   Pritzker Department of Environmental Engineering
   Alumni Building. Room 102
   Illinois Institute of Technology
   3200 South Federal Street
   Chicago. IL 60616

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

   Indiana Department of Environmental Management
   Office of Technical Assistance
   P.O.Box 6015
   105 South Meridian Street
   Indianapolis. IN  462064015

   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

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

   Bureau of Waste Management
   Department of Health and Environment
   Forbes Field, Building 730
   Topeka. KS 66620

   Division of Waste Management
   Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet
   Frankfort. KY 40601

   Department of Environmental Quality
   Office  of Solid and Hazardous Waste
   P.O. Box 44307
   Baton  Rouge. LA 70804
   (504) 342-1354

   Maryland Hazardous Waste Facilities Siting Board
   60 West Street.  Suite 200A
   Annapolis. MD 21401

   Maryland Environmental Service
   2020 Industrial Drive
   Annapolis. MD 21401
   (600)492-9168  (in Maryland)   •

   Office  of Sale Waste Management
   Department of Environmental Management
   100 Cambridge  Street. Room 1094
   Boston. MA 02202

   Source Reduction Program
   Massachusetts  Department of Environmental Quality
   1 Winter Street
   Boston. MA 02108

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

   Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
   Solid and Hazardous Waste Division
   520 Lafayette Road
   St Paul, MN 55155
AV/nnesote  (eontlnv9d)
   Minnesota Technical Assistance Program
   W-140 Boynton Health Service
   University of Minnesota
   Minneapolis. MN 55455
   (800) 247-0015 (in Minnesota)

   Minnesota Waste Management Board
   123 Thoreon Center
   7323 Fifty-Eighth Avenue North
   Crystal, MN 55428

   State Environmental Improvement and Energy
     Resources Agency
   PO Box 744
   Jefferson City, MO 65102

Mew Jtrtty
   New Jersey Hazardous Waste Facilities Siting
   Room 614
   26 West State Street
   Trenton, NJ 08608

   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

 North Caroff/M
   Pollution Prevention Pays Program
   Department of Natural Resources and CommunRy
   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

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

   Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management
   Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
   P.O. Box 1049
   1800 WaterMarK Drive
   Columbus. OH 43266-1049

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

   Industrial Waste Elimination Program
   Oklahoma State Department of Health
   P.O. Box 53551
   Oklahoma City .OK 73152

   Oregon Hazardous Waste Reduction Program
   Department of Environmental Quality
   811 Southwest Sixth Avenue
   Portland. OR 97204

   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

   Center of Hazardous Material Research
   320 William Pin Way
   Pittsburgh. PA 15238

Rhodt l$lind
   Ocean State Cleanup and Recycling Program
   Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management
   9 Hayes Street
   Providence. Rl 02908-5003
   (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

   Center lor Industrial Services
   102 Alumni Hall
   University of Tenneeeee
   Knoxville.TN 37996
   (615) 974-2456

   Orfce of Policy and Planning
   Virginia Department of Waste Management
   11th Floor, Monroe Building
   101 North 14th Street
   Richmond. VA 23219

   Hazardous Waste Section
   Mail Stop PV-11
   Washington Department of Ecology
   Otympia.WA 98504-8711

   Bureau of Solid Waste Management
   Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
   P.O. Box 7921
   101 South Webster Street
   Madison. Wl 53707

   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

                                            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.

                                          Appendix H
                              Economic Evaluation Example
The following example presents a profitability analysis
for a relatively large hypothetical waste minimization
project.  This project represents the installation of a
package unit that Improves plant production  while
reducing raw material consumption and disposal costs.
The analysis was done on a personal computer using a
standard spreadsheet program.  The salient data used
in this evaluation are summarized below.

Capital  Costs

• The delivered price of the equipment Is quoted by
  the vendor at $170,000.  This includes taxes and

• Materials costs (piping, wiring, and concrete) are
  estimated at $35,000.

• Installation labor is estimated at $25,000.

• Internal  engineering staff costs are estimated at
  $7,000.  Outside consultant and contractor costs
  are estimated at $15,000.

• Miscellaneous environmental permitting costs are
  estimated at $15,000.

• Working capital (including chemical inventories, and
  materials and supplies) is estimated at $5,000.

• Start-up costs are estimated by the vendor at

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

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


• The  project  will  be financed 60% by retained
  earnings and 40% by a bank loan.

• The bank loan will be repaid over 5 years of equal
  Installments of principal, plus Interest at an annual
  percentage rate of 13%.  Interest accrued during
  installation will be added into the total capital costs.

• All capital costs, except working capital and interest
  accrued  during construction, will  be depreciated
  over  7 years using the double-declining balance
  method,  switching to the straight-line method when
  the charges by this method become greater.
• The marginal income tax rate is 34%.

• Escalation of all costs Is assumed to be 5% per year
  for the life of the project.

• The firm's cost of capital is 15%.

Operating  Costs and Revenues

• The WM project Is estimated to decrease raw
  materials consumption by 300 units per year at a
  cost of $50 per unit. The project will not result in an
  Increased production. However, 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
Costs per ion of wasle
   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%

•  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.


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.

Waste Minimization
Profitability Program

Capttal Coat Factor*

Capital Cost
Plant Engineering
Permitting Costs
Working Capital
Start-up Costs

Interest Rate on Debt. %
Debt Repayment, years

Depreciation period
Income Tax Rate. %

Escalation Rates. %





Cost of Capital (tor NPVN 15.00%

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


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





Operating Labor
Operator hours/shift
Operating dajrs/year
Wage rate. $/man-hour

Operating Supplies
(% of Operating Labor)

Maintenance Costs
(% of Capital Costs)

Other Labor Costs
(% of OSM Labor)
(% of OftM Labor + Sui
Plant Overhead
Home Office Overhead
Labor Burden






Construction Year

Capital Expenditures
Plant E ng ineering
Pormrtting Costs
Start-up Costs
Depreciable Capital
Working Capital
Interest on Debt

Equity Investment
Debt Principal
Interest on Debt
Total Financing




Figure H-1. fc-.put Information and Capital Investment


Operating Year Number
Escalation Factor

Increased Production
Marketable By-products
Annual Revenue

Raw Materials
Disposal Costs
Maintenance Labor
Maintenance Supplies
Operation Labor
Operatina SuDDies
Labor Burden
Plant Overhead
Home Office Overffieejo





_f 11 7,600
(! 7.176)






1 7.914)
(! *.407)l ($6.731)1 f! 7.066)
($5.126)1 ($5.384)1 (< 5.653)
$82.1331 $862781 $90580












($3.084) ($3.238)
($19.009)1 ($19.958)
($7.792) ($8.183)
($6.234) ($6.546)
$99.891 1 $104.895



Figure H-2. Revenues and Operating Costs


Construction Year
Operating Year

Book Value
Depreciation (by straight-l
Depreciation (by doubteDE

Debt Balance
Interest Payment
Principal Repayment


v/onsiruciion Tear
Operating Year

•*• 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












2 .


































I $110.138

! 180,125
! 57.349








Construction Year
Operating Year

DepreciatKMi (by straight-!

Depreciation (oy double c


ConstnicHon Yaw
Operating Year

4. Operating Savimn
Net Rovenuas
Taxable Income
• Income Tax
Profit after Tax

• ueprecunion
After-Tax Gash How

Cashflow for FKM
Net Preaent Value
R0fufn on IvivMflnMflt



















($2183451 ($155.868)1 ($103.090)
fNUMI 1 -30.04X1 -7.76%
1 1




$95.1 18






















FipUW H4. CaMR FlOWS tof Rmllfffl Ofl •WMtfTMfll