POLLUTION PREVENTION IN PUBLICLY
     OWNED TREATMENT WORKS
      PROCEEDINGS FROM STATE/POTW
      GRANT RECIPIENTS WORKSHOP IN
              RALEIGH , N.C.
            FEBRUARY 6, 7,1992
               PREPARED BY
      POLLUTION PREVENTION DIVISION
 OFFICE OF POLLUTION PREVENTION AND TOXICS
   U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

              FEBRUARY 1992

-------
                              Forward
     The Environmental Protection Agency awarded grants to five states
in FY 91 to develop and implement pilot projects which will demonstrate
how publicly owned treatment works at the municipal and state level can
integrate pollution prevention into their programs.  Grants were
awarded to  Utah, New Mexico, Minnesota, Massachusetts, and North
Carolina.

      In order to provide information on current activities in this area and
to establish a pilot project network, a workshop was held on February 6
and 7,1992 in Raleigh, North Carolina.  Invited to participate in the
workshop were the five state grant recipients, the municipalities
participating in the project,  EPA Regional staff from MWPP , pre-
treatment and pollution prevention programs and headquarters  staff from
the Office of Water and the Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics.
A total of 35 people attended the workshop.

     This report summarizes the two-day workshop and identifies some
of the major issues brought out by the participants.

-------
                              PARTiaPANTS

 POTW's
 Florence Reynolds, Salt Lake City, UT
 Bob Hogrefe, City of Albuquerque, NM
 Debbie LaVergne, Millbury, MA
 Michael Downey, Springfield, MA
 Crystal Couch, Winston-Salem, NC
 Navneet Tiku, St. Paul, MN

 State Representatives
 Mary Deloretto, Dept of Environmental Quality, UT
 Paul Richard, Office of Technical Assistance, MA
 Kevin McDonald, Office of Waste Management, MN
 Trevor Clements, Dept of Environment, Health and Natural Resources, NC
 Stephanie Richardson, Dept of Environment, Health and Natural Resources, NC
 Julia Storm, Dept of Environment, Health and Natural Resources, NC
 Lindsay Mize,  Dept of Environment, Health and Natural Resources, NC
 Mahin Talebi, Orange County, CA
 Vic Young, Waste Reduction Resource Center

 EPA Regions
 Joseph Canzano,  Region I
 Alicia Suarez, Region II
 Ben Chen, Region IV
 Pete Smith, Region V
 Harold Thompson, Region VIII

 EPA Headquarters
 Deborah  Hanlon, Pollution Prevention Division
 Lena Hann, Pollution Prevention Division
 Valerie Martin, Office of Water
Mary Settle, Office of Water
Wendy Bell, office of Water
Walter Brodtman, Office of Water

(Phone Numbers and Addresses in Appendix b)

-------
         POLLUTION PREVENTION IN PUBLICLY OWNED
                      TREATMENT WORKS

                       Workshop Proceedings
                           CONTENTS
Section I

Section II
Section III
Section IV
Section V
Section VI
Introduction

Project Issues
•    Future Funding Opportunities
•    Measuring Progress and Results
•    Obstacles/Incentives
•    Publicizing Programs

Resources Required To Implement Programs
•    POTW's Resource Needs
•    States
•    EPA Regions
•    EPA Headquarters

Five State Pilot Project Descriptions
     Utah
     New Mexico
     Minnesota
     Massachusetts
     North Carolina

POTW Programs
•    Orange County

Appendices
a.    Meeting Agenda
b.    List of Attendees
c.    Wastewater Pollution PreventionCase Studies
     from the Pollution Prevention Information
     Clearinghouse

-------
 Section  1                      Introduction

 Background
      EPA, states and municipalities have made significant progress over the last 20
 years in improving the quality of the environment through  the implementation of
 the Clean Water Act requirements. Billions of dollars have been spent in the
 nation's wastewater treatment infrastructure resulting in substantial improvements
 in water quality.

       Today however, we are faced with new challenges in the areas of municipal
 growth, newly regulated pollutants and more stringent effluent limits.  These
 challenges, we believe,  must be addressed by placing an emphasis on pollution
 prevention rather than on the treatment and  control of wastewaters or on the
 expansion of the POTW.

      As the federal government's role in funding municipal wastewater treatment
 ends, there is both the need and the opportunity to adopt pollution prevention
 measures to meet the expanding demands and to prepare for new federal and state
 requirements.  Therefore, a primary focus of EPA's program is to encourage and
 support states and municipalities in developing pollution  prevention programs.

      To this end,  the Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics and the Office of
 Water have initiated a pilot pollution prevention grant program for publicly owned
 treatment works. Five states were awarded grants up to $100K, to demonstrate how
 pollution prevention could be promoted through pre-tr-eatment programs and
 MWPP.

 Purpose and Description of Workshop
      On February 6 and 7, 1992 the Pollution Prevention Division in conjunction
 with the State of North Carolina conducted a workshop for the participants  in the
 program.  Attendees included the five state grant recipients, one or more of the
 states' POTW's, EPA MWPP regional coordinators and headquarters Office of Water
 and Pollution Prevention Division staff.

      The purpose of the workshop was to develop a" network of individuals
interested  in promoting pollution'prevention in POTW's and to share information
on progress,  obstacles, and resource needs.  Agenda topics included discussions on
future program funding opportunities, measuring progress, publicizing programs
and identifying obstacles and solutions. Participants also identified resource needs
from the local, state and EPA Regional perspectives.

      This report has been developed to provide a  communication link between  all
interested  parties and to assist in the dissemination of  current information and
 activities regarding pollution prevention in Publicly Owned Treatment Works.

-------
Section II   Pilot Program Issues


      Recognizing the need to identify and explore new methods for achieving
prevention in local pre-treatment and MWPP programs,  four issues were addressed
in brainstorming sessions during this workshop.  This section describes the
suggestions and outcome of these group sessions.


Issue 1.  Future Funding Opportunities

   The state's pilot projects are the result of Federal Assistance Grants, however
states are encouraged  to begin to explore opportunities for continued funding of the
pollution prevention programs.  The alternative financing mechanisms that were
identified by the participants include the following:

1. User and pollution discharge fees

2. Penalty fines

3. Environmental taxes

4. Bonds, lotteries and state development funds

5. Clean Water Act Funds 205-j, 106

6. Trade Associations

7. Industry sponsors

8. Environmental groups and foundations

9. Revolving Loan funds
    For analysis of various funding opportunities  for environmental programs,
readers are directed to obtain a copy of the National Governors Association Report
Funding Environmental Programs: An Examination of the Alternatives, published
by the NGA, 1989. Washington DC.

-------
 Issue 2.    Measuring Progress and Results

      Measuring progress and results of the pollution prevention effort must be
 considered in the design of the Pollution Prevention pilot project. Numerically
 measuring progress can be achieved through the following activities:

 1. Baseline sampling and defining critical parameters.
 Sampling must be done at the facility (IU), at the influent and effluent point at the
 POTW.  Samples should measure quantity in pounds and in quality, constituents.

 2. TRI Pollution Prevention and  Release data

 3. Economic front end loading

 4. Hydraulic and organic loading. Measure with city water bills and quantify plant
 life extensions.

 5. Industry retention

 6. Fines, violations.

 7. Identify how the violator gets into compliance;  source reduction, treatment etc.

8. Data comparison	where is it going.

9. Disclosure of sewered hazardous waste.

10. Tech transfer of successful methodologies

11. Reduction of end-of-pipe treatment and control capitol expenditures

12. Reduction of sludge generated at POTW

13. Reduction in wastewater generated per unit product.

14. Energy costs  at POTW are reduced.



Issue 3.    Obstacles/Solutions/Incentives

   Traditionally, owners and operators of POTW's as well as state and federal
regulators have placed an emphasis on pollution control rather than on
conservation and prevention. POTW's have had pre-treatment programs,
including sampling efforts,  inspection and enforcement programs , MWPP, sludge
management programs and various water  conservation efforts.

-------
   Today there is greater concern on developing a complementary environmental
protection strategy based on conservation of natural resources and on preventing
pollution at the source. This strategy represents not only a major shift in the way a
company will do business,  but also poses substantial challenges for governments.
Some of the major obstacles facing POTW's in  the adoption of pollution prevention
programs as identified by the participants in the meeting include the following:

1.  Lack of information and data on technologies that work

2.  Concentration based effluent limits

3.  Lack of money and training

4.  Inplace equipment produces barriers to innovation

5.  Financial disincentives for IU

6.  Commercial products  that are counterproductive

7.  Reduced income to POTW

8.  No directive (mandate) from EPA to develop program

9.  Existing city codes and ordinances inhibit p2

10. Conflicting regulations

Solutions and incentives  for POTW's to adopt  Pollution Prevention Programs
include such things as:

1.  Provide education and training to industry,  government etc.

2.  Good technical information and case studies

3.  EPA assistance and incentives throughout all programs, audits etc.

4.  Develop mass based effluent limits

5.  Rewrite EPA H20 Guidelines incorporating P2

-------
 Issue 4. Publicizing Programs

    Publicizing programs and the results of pollution prevention efforts are
 important to obtain necessary political and public support.  Suggestions
 from the participants of this workshop for  publicizing programs include:

 1.  Workshops and conferences in  the community

 2. Mass mailings, H20 Bills etc.

 3. Newsletters, papers, radio, TV

 4. Working with legislators and:
 a. Economic development agencies
 b. AMSA
 c. League of Municipalities
 d. lobbyists
 e. League of Woman  Voters
 f.  WEF

 5. Utilize Public Affairs Offices

6. Attention to legislators' industries

7. Tours/outreach programs

8. Invite public to meetings and hearings

-------
Section III       Resources  Required To  Implement
                             Programs

      Aside from receiving Federal dollars to implement their programs, POTW's,
States,EPA Regions and Headquarters all have other significant resource needs vital
to the development and implementation of their projects.  Though some of these
resource needs are shared commonly among the groups, their are certain resources
that are specific to the individually  target audiences.

Representatives from the POTW municipalities and POTW's listed their
resource needs to implement the pollution prevention program.  POTW
resource needs include:
1.     Information exchange network (ask EPA to provide mini-exchange in PIES).

2.     Specific pollution prevention information on industries.

3.     Pollution prevention training.

4.     Examples of local government ordinances (mass based effluent guidelines).

5.     Management support.

6.     Outreach component.

7.     Support from industry and community for the program.

8.     Trade associations support.

9.     Help in providing new funding sources if discharge fees are reduced as a
result of implementing a pollution prevention  option.



EPA is exploring  the possibility of developing a  mini-exchange for POTW's on  its
Pollution  Prevention  Informative Clearinghouse.

-------
                                  States

The 5 States were asked to list their resource needs.  The following items were
discussed:

1.     Clear directive from EPA to allow for the incorporation of pollution
      prevention into media specific grant programs, permit and enforcement
      programs.

2.     Ability to use funds from Clean Water Act;  Section 106, 104, for pollution
      prevention programs.

3.     Provide Best Management Practice guidelines and NPDES language to
      promote pollution prevention

4.     Create options other than just Enforcement

5.     Develop a source reduction compliance schedule

6.     Need flexibility from EPA to do pollution prevention in the regulations

7.     Significant non-compliance (SNU) regulations are barriers. Need  to let
      the State and Locals have flexibility on what and who to report publicly thus
      encouraging visits and technical assistance to industry.

8.     Less focus on bean counting and more focus on the non-regulatory,
      educational and technical assistance efforts.

9.     Training to integrate pollution prevention into specific program
      sectors (pretreatment inspection and operating training).

10.    flexibility in determining when to do sampling.

11.    Empower the pretreatment inspectors to be able provide pollution
      prevention information through an Office of Water Inspector policy.

12.    Put pollution prevention into permits. Industry should be required to  have
      an assessment done.

13.    Develop methodologies to measure progress.

14.    Need EPA guidance to emphasize and integrate pollution prevention
      coordinators in each program office.

15.    Need to incorporate pollution prevention into new guidance manuals  for

-------
      municipalities;
            pollution compliance inspection
            audits
                                    EPA

EPA Regional and Headquarters needs were identified by the participants. The
following items were listed:

1.     Equivalent of bean credit for pollution prevention in enforcement
      settlements.

2.     Pollution prevention incorporated into penalty policies.

3.     Pollution prevention needs to be addressed not only as cross-media, but
      cross-agency.

4.     Resource database (outreach and training on the Pollution Prevention
      Information Clearinghouse).

5.     Communication channel dedicated to pollution prevention in POTW's.

6.     EPA needs to provide training for its consultants, contractors and operation
      specialists.

7.     Evaluate the financial repercussions on POTW's from industries
      practicing pollution prevention.

8.     Have POTW's involved in the development of guidances.

9.     EPA needs to establish a system to provide for better internal
      communication.

-------
Section IV

Pollution Prevention in Publicly Owned
Treatment Works: Project Descriptions


1. Utah and Salt Lake City

2. New Mexico and Albuquerque

3. Minnesota and St. Paul/Minneapolis

4. Massachusetts Critical Mass Project

5. North Carolina Program

-------
                    Pollution  Prevention in Publicly
                      Owned Treatment Works
                             Grant Summaries

Five States were awarded Pollution Prevention in POTW Grants in FY 91 by
EPA's Office of Pollution Prevention. The purpose of these grants are to
demonstrate how a municipal POTW ,through its pretreatment program and its
facility operations can promote source reduction activities in industrial and
business dischargers.   Activities funded under this grant will include such things
as conducting energy  audits of specific POTW's, providing education and
technical assistance to industrial dischargers and establishing water conservation
programs in the community. The demonstrations will result in the development
of a national pollution prevention in POTW's program plan  The projects will be
discussed at the 92 National pretreatment conference. The States reveiving the
grants include the following:

1. State of North Carolina, Department of Environment, Health, and
  Natural Resources.
Contact:  Trevor Clements 919 733-5083
       Linda Roderick 919 733-7015

Goal: To Incorporate Pollution Prevention in Pretreatment Program Statewide

Activities will include the following:

1.  Create a state level program structure to enhance coordination and
communication between the States Pollution Prevention Pays Program and the
states pretreatment program.

2. Establish pollution prevention technical assistance programs at a large and
small POTW and set up challenge grants for additional programs.

3. Identify specified pollution prevention solutions for targeted POTW problems.

4. Provide Education and training for POTW staff and industrial
dischargers.

2. Utah Department of Environmental Quality
  Contact: Mary De Loretto 801 538-6146
  Florence Perez 801 799-4040

Goal:  Incorporate Pollution Prevention in State MWPP Program and in the City
of Salt Lake City POTW.

Activities will include the following:

1. Expand MWPP to  incorporate water conservation and pollution prevention

-------
 technical assistance to industry to extend life of POTW.

 2. Target metal platers and other high health and ecological risk areas through
 pretreatment program.

 3. Establish strict mass based local limits for SLC POTW

 4. Target solvents for reduction and initiate awards programs

 3. Minnesota Office of Waste Management
   Contact Kevin McDonald 612 640-5744

 Goal:  Develop a pollution prevention program at the Metropolitin Waste Control
 Commission.

 Activites that will be conducted with this grant include:

 1. Integrate PP into all state POTW's using Minneapolis as a demonstration
 project and model.

 2. Target specific industrial dischargers and pollutants

 3. Develop training and conduct  workshops for POTW's and industry.

 4. Massachusetts Office of Technical Assistance
   Paul Richards 617 727-3260

 Critical Parameters Pollution Prevention in  POTW's Project

Goal: To assist POTW's statewide in utilizing  pollution prevention opportunities
 to address problems which relate  to critical parameters for operations of POTW's

 Activites include

 1. Conducting surveys of POTW's approaching critical parameters and establish
baseline measurements

2. Use pollution prevention approaches to reduce loadings

 3. Demonstrate how pollution prevention approach can address problems faced
by POTW's.

 5. New Mexico Environment Department
   Sante Fe, NM Contact:  Alex Puglisi 505 827-2799
 Project Description:  This project will demonstrate source reduction in the City of
 Albequerque's POTW. The project will include educational and techncial
 assistance to industrial dischargers and will identify and target specific
 contaminants of concern.

-------
POLLUTION PREVENTION THROUGH
                 POTWS
          Utah Division of Water Quality
     Mary DeLoretto, Pretreatment Coordinator
           Salt Lake City Corporation
   Florence Reynolds, Water Quality Administrator

-------
Achieve PP/WM from POTW Users by

   conducting wastewater assessments

   promoting water conservation

   conducting  waste   minimization
   assessments

-   establishing  stringent mass and
   technology based  local limits

-   providing information,  education
   and technical assistance

-   targeting metal finishers

-------
PROJECT TRANSFERABILITY
 Moderate sized metropolitan city
 Semi-arid/rapid growth area
 No pollution prevention legislation
 Pilot and  transfer  results  to many
 similar cities/states

-------
        ACTIVITIES
Education Initiative
Expand Chemical Clearinghouse
Metal Finishers Initiative
IU Awards System Expansion
City   Owned   Facilities   Waste
Minimization Initiative
Project Result Dissemination Initiative

-------
        MEASURES
Overall  reduction  in   multi-media
discharges of pollutants

   -(Requires establishing a baseline)
Establishment of POTW PP capacity
within DWQ and SLC

   -(Testing  knowledge before and
   after education initiatives)

-------
 EDUCATION INITIATIVE
Pollution Prevention Specialist
DWQ/SLC Staff Workshop
Metal Finishers Workshop

General Industrial/Commercial
Workshop

-------
PROJECT RESULT DISSEMINATION
            INITIATIVE
    Annual Regional Pretreatment
    Coordinators Meeting
    Annual Utah WPCA Conference
    Metal Finishers Association
    State Water Pollution Publications

-------
                SCHEDULE
Sep 91  - Initiate project

Nov 91 -  Initiate development of City-Owned facilities
          waste minimization plan

Dec 91 -  Prepare Request-for-Proposal  and   solicit
          pollution prevention specialists

Jan 92 -  Establish criteria for IU pollution prevention
          awards

Feb 92 -  Establish criteria  for  baseline for pollution
          reduction; Hire pollution prevention specialist
          contractor

Apr 92 -  Hold DWQ/SLC staff training workshop; Test
          knowledge before and after to assess pollution
          prevention awareness

May 92 -  Initiate pollution  prevention  assessments at
          industrial facilities, to be  ongoing  from then
          on

Jul 92 -  Conduct  industrial  pollution  prevention
          workshop,   targeting  metal  finishers and
          electroplaters;  Test knowledge before and
          after to assess PP awareness

-------
Aug 92 -  Implement chemical clearinghouse expansion

Sep 92 -  Conduct   industrial   pollution   prevention
          workshop  for the  general  industrial  and
          commercial  community;  Test  knowledge
          before and after

Get 92 -  Initiate analyses to determine program success

Jan 92 -  Prepare final report on program success

Apr 93 -  Disseminate   report   information;  Present
          findings at annual UWPCA meeting

-------
                  CITY WASTE MINIMIZATION PROGRAM
SOLVENT RECOVERY  Current usage minimized
PROGRAM ALTERATION
                       With the cooperation of the new administration and all city
                       departments identification of the major concerns, and
                       development of a waste minimization plan.
INITIATION
                       Documentation of current usage of all materials that may be
                       environmentally damaging. Development of alternate materials
                       and practices.
POTENTIAL OBJECTIVES
                       Road Salting Procedures and Salt Storage
                       Airport Deicing Procedures
                       Heavy Duty Equipment Maintenance Procedures
                       Fire Department Training Practices
                       Paint and Paint Cleanup Procedures

-------
              WASTE MINIMIZATION PROGRAM
INDUSTRIAL AWARD PROGRAM

                   Eligibility: all permitted industry
                   Criter ia; 95 % of all tests in compliance
                                 submission of all required reports
                                 spill prevention and control plan
                              effort and cooperation
                                 employee training
                              environmental concern
                         1989  7 award recipients
                         1990  6 award recipients (1 new)
                         1991  5 award recipients (all new)
WASTE MINIMIZATION PROGRAM

                   Eligibility:  all firms within the city, with or without waste flow
                   Criteria:  Introduction of a policy or program  which minimizes
                              the use or disposal of waste materials.
                                      demonstrable
                                    practical
                                    applicable to other firms in some way
                   Initial awards will be made in 1992.

-------
         NEW MEXICO WATER POLLUTION  PREVENTION  PROPOSAL
Background

The New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) has already initiated
a number of water pollution prevention efforts in conjunction with
Region  6 of  the  U.S.   Environmental  Protection  Agency  (EPA).
Current  efforts  are  oriented  toward the  framework  of a  pilot
program, IMPAC, developed and implemented in 1989 and 1990.  IMPAC
(Improving Municipal  Performance by  Addressing  Capacity)  is  a
compliance maintenance  program  with a  focus on  the ability  or
publicly owned  treatment works (POTWs)  to meet  the  provisions  of
the  federal  Clean   Water   Act.   It   is   designed  to   assist
municipalities  identify  and  address  those  performance  limiting
factors which have been  found to adversely impact the ability  of
POTWs  to effectively  treat  municipal   wastewater  and  produce
compliant effluent..

The NMED is proposing to utilize $100,000.00 in federal assistance
during FY 91  to  expand the scope of New Mexico's  Water  Pollution
prevention program  to  include activities  which encourage  waste
minimization  and  source reduction.  A recent  report  prepared  for
the NMED on hazardous waste minimization program planning indicated
that there is a significant potential for hazardous waste reduction
in  several  of  the  major industrial  categories  present in  New
Mexico.   Several  industries  surveyed  had  already  undertaken
important preliminary steps in the waste minimization process.  The
NMED hopes to encourage and foster continued efforts  by industry in
this arena.

The NMED initiative will focus on implementing waste minimization
and source reduction strategies at  the local  level.   In order  to
accomplish this,  the  Department will work closely with the City of
Albuquerque's Industrial Pretreatment  Program  in  establishing  a
pilot    program  to  encourage waste  minimization   at  permitted
industries.  The City of Albuquerque is the largest municipality in
New  Mexico's  in  terms  of  both  population  and  industrial  base.
Twenty-nine of the  state's   fifty  largest industries are  either
located in Albuquerque or utilize the city's sewer system for the
disposal of their effluent.  Therefore, any program targeted at New
Mexico's industrial base will have  its most  widespread  impact  in
Albuquerque.    Additionally,   the city  has  a  widely  recognized
industrial pretreatment program and  well established contacts with
local  industry.

Description

The    Albuquerque   Industrial   Pretreatment   Program   already
successfully regulates the introduction of many toxic contaminants
into the city's POTW's by mandating the pretreatment  of potentially
hazardous  pollutants.   However,   most  industrial  pretreatment
systems  transfer a  portion  of  wastewater  pollutants   to  other
environmental media  while  lowering the  concentration  of  toxic

-------
constituents in  the  waste stream  that enters the  sewer.   Toxic
pollutants still go to the sewer, albeit in lower amounts, and to
other environmental media such as the air or toxic waste landfills.
Often,  there  is no  real net  reduction in  the  amount  of toxic
pollutants discharged to  the  environment.   Additionally, new state
water quality standards and federal requirements have imposed new
regulatory and financial  pressures  on  POTW s ,  such as Albuquerque,
in  meeting  more  stringent  discharge requirements  on  both  the
effluent discharged from  their  treatment  facilities  and the sludge
produced at those  facilities.   Since  Albuquerque is implementing
mechanisms to compost and distribute  their wastewater sludge, the
presence of toxic contaminants  in this media is also of increasing
concern to city officials.

The  continued   fast  paced and  constant  growth  which  confronts
Albuquerque presently and  in the coming  decades,  makes hazardous
waste  minimization  and   source  reduction  the  most  viable  and
economical way for the city to respond to potential new hazardous
pollutant loads placed on its POTW.  The implementation of  a waste
minimization program will assist Albuquerque  in meeting the toxic
effluent discharge limitations  of its  National  Pollutant Discharge
Elimination  System  permit  while  allowing continued  industrial
growth within the city.   It will  also  assist the city in producing
an  environmentally  safe sludge  which  can  be  distributed  for
beneficial use.   Overall, the  possible positive impacts  to the
environment are significant.

    enient at ion
The majority ($70,000)  of the requested $100,000 federal  grant will
be transferred to the City of Albuquerque through a Memorandum of
Understanding  (MOU)  for the implementation of  a hazardous waste
minimization program.  This  transfer of funds has been  selected for
several reasons:

     1)   waste   minimization    programs   aimed   at    industrial
          wastewater  discharges  have  been  found  to  be  highly
          effective when implemented at the local level;

     2)   Albuquerque   has   a   well   established    Industrial
          Pretreatment   program which   provides   an  effective
          framework  for the establishment and  implementation of a
          waste minimization program;

     3)   personnel  in the  Albuquerque  Industrial  Pretreatment
          Program  are  aware  of the  needs  and waste disposal
          problems of local industry;

     4)   the city is already implementing measures to  identify and
          eliminate  "problem" toxic waste discharges; and

     5 )   the city has several  resources at  its disposal which can
          be utilized to match and support any  waste  minimization
          efforts .

-------
The city will utilize the federal funds to hire the personnel and
furnish any  resources  necessary to  work with local  industry in
exploring and implementing measures which will reduce the amounts
of hazardous or toxic  discharges to the Albuquerque  POTW.   This
personnel will  be  hired directly  by the City or indirectly through
contracts with  consultant  firms specializing in waste minimization
techniques.   The City of Albuquerque will furnish a number of in-
kind services  to  match the amount of  the federal  grant.   These
services may include but are not limited to services such as:

     1.   the  monitoring  of  industries  known  or  suspected  to
          discharge toxic or hazardous constituents to the city's
          POTW;

     2.   enforcement actions  taken,  or surcharges implemented, to
          induce  industries  to  reduce  the amounts of  toxic  or
          hazardous wastes they discharge into the POTW;

     3.   technical advice or assistance  provided  to  industry on
          matters  relating to  the  pretreatment,  minimization,  or
          elimination of toxic waste discharges;

     4.   activities  involved  in  identifying  and  eliminating
          toxicity in the wastewater  received by the Albuquerque
          POTW  such as Toxicity Reduction Evaluations;

     5.   laboratory analyses performed to identify or quantify the
          concentrations  of  toxic or  hazardous  constituents  in
          industrial wastewater discharges; and

     6.   the purchase of  equipment necessary  to perform the above
          listed tasks.

The waste  minimization  program  implemented through the Albuquerque
Industrial Pretreatment Program will be structured to achieve the
following objectives:

          Educational Outreach which will provide hazardous waste
          minimization information to industry;

          Technical  Assistance  to  help  companies  identify  and
          evaluate site-specific  opportunities for hazardous waste
          minimization;

          Identification and Targeting of specific discharges for
          waste reduction in accordance with their potential impact
          on the  ability of  the Albuquerque  POTW  to  produce  a
          compliant effluent and safe sludge;  and

          Consideration of Regulatory Alternatives which establish
          indirect inducements or  direct requirements to promote
          waste minimization (i.e., mass  balance discharge limits,
          more stringent local limits, etc...)

-------
      MINNESOTA PROPOSAL
  MINNESOTA
     OFFICE
   OF WASTE
MANAGEMENT
Metropolitan
Waste Control
Commission
       Pollution Prevention in
     Publicly-Owned Treatment
        Works Grant Program
             July 26, 1991
POLLUTION PREVENTION

-------
                       I.  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Minnesota Office of Waste Management (OWM) and the
Metropolitan Waste Control Commission (MWCC) propose to develop
and implement a pollution prevention program at the MWCC.  The
program seeks reductions, through pollution prevention, of
pollutants and wastewaters discharged to MWCC's wastewater
treatment system.  Additionally, OWM and MWCC intend to
disseminate project experiences to other publicly-owned treatment
works (POTWs).

The MWCC is the largest POTW in Minnesota, with a staff of over
1,000.  The MWCC serves 105 communities and approximately 750
industrial dischargers.  The OWM is the lead agency for
implementing pollution prevention in Minnesota, with a staff of 5
in its Toxic Pollution Prevention Program.  The OWM's Minnesota
Technical Assistance Program (MnTAP), with a staff of 15,
provides nonregulatory pollution prevention assistance to
Minnesota businesses and organizations.   MnTAP will play a role
in providing training and delivering technical assistance to
industry under this proposed grant project.

Major proposed activities include establishing a multi-media
pollution prevention training program for POTW staff, providing
on-site technical assistance and referrals for industrial
dischargers, establishing a plan for integration of pollution
prevention into MWCC programs,  measuring progress, coordinating
with other state programs, and soliciting industry and public
input.

Activities under this proposed two-year grant would start on
January 1, 1992 and extend through December 31, 1993.  Training
workshops are planned for April 1992, August 1992, and March
1993.  An internal MWCC pollution prevention staff committee
would be established in February 1992 and will meet monthly.
Quarterly meetings with other state pollution prevention programs
would be scheduled.  Input from industry and the public would be
provided at monthly meetings.

-------
                     II.  GOALS AMD OBJECTIVES

1. overall Goals

A.  Establish Metropolitan Waste Control Commission (MWCC)
programs and activities to prevent pollution at its source of
generation.

B.  Reduce, through pollution prevention methods and
technologies, pollutants and wastewaters discharged to the
wastewater treatment system.

C. Explore opportunities to realize the potential benefits of
multi-media pollution prevention activities, such as:

     * Reducing the risks inherent in the management of waste
     streams and residues that result from traditional control
     methods;

     * Avoiding the transfer or "shifting" of pollutants from one
     environmental medium to another (e.g., water to air); and

     > Addressing dispersed sources of contaminants.

2. Specific Objectives

A.  Develop and begin implementation of a comprehensive plan to
integrate pollution prevention into MWCC programs and activities.

B.  Train staff from MWCC and other Minnesota publicly-owned
treatment works (POTWs) to promote source reduction as a
preferred strategy, and to assist businesses in identifying and
implementing pollution prevention opportunities.

C.  Coordinate pollution prevention activities at Minnesota POTWs
with other programs in the state.

D.  Provide  information and referrals for technical assistance to
businesses discharging wastewater and pollutants to the sewer
system.

E.  Develop pollution prevention activities targeted at specific
dischargers and/or waste streams.

F. Using existing data sources, develop measures to determine
progress in pollution prevention.

G. Design pollution prevention actions with industry and public
input and solicit the involvement of these groups during program
delivery.

H.  Encourage other Minnesota POTWs to initiate activities based
on MWCC's pollution prevention program.

-------
          III.  SPECIFIC ACTIVITIES AMD PROGRAM ELEMENTS

1.   Provide multi-media pollution prevention training

     A. Workshops

          > WORKSHOP #1: Pollution prevention concepts,
          background on pollution prevention efforts, future
          directions, supplementing treatment and control with.
          prevention, prevention activities in MN and in other
          states, MN Toxic Pollution Prevention Act, Federal
          Pollution Prevention Act, SARA Title III, Section 313
          introduction to MNTAP and OWM

               (Audience: MWCC pretreatment program staff, MWCC
               staff committee members, other MN POTW staff, MPCA
               industrial wastewater staff, representatives from
               metro county hazardous waste programs).

          »• WORKSHOP #2: Integrating prevention into pretreatment
          inspections and other POTW programs, identifying
          pollution prevention opportunities, promoting the
          prevention approach, coordinating with MnTAP assistance
          activities, prevention success stories, industry
          pollution prevention plans and annual progress reports

               (Audience: same as Workshop #1)

          * WORKSHOP #3: Roundtable/Forum with POTW staff and
          industrial users on the topic of pollution prevention;
          Forum designed to share ideas and experiences on
          pollution prevention; items addressed in Workshops #1 &
          #2 may also be covered

               (Audience:  participants from Workshops #1 & #2,
               other POTW staff, and interested industrial users
               of sewage treatment plant system)

     B. MWCC will develop training materials for each workshop

     C. Possible tours of successful industry pollution
        prevention programs and outstate sewage treatment
        authorities undergoing efforts to integrate pollution
        prevention into programs

2.   Provide on-site technical assistance and referrals

     MWCC Pretreatment Program Staff will:

     A. Promote pollution prevention and provide information to
        industry based on skills developed in training
     B. Identify opportunities to prevent pollution during
        inspections

-------
     C. Refer industry to MnTAP and other contacts for further
        assistance
     D. Promote the availability of MnTAP information
        clearinghouse

3.    Establish staff committee to integrate prevention into MWCC
     programs

     The Staff Committee will:

     A. Recommend pollution prevention policy statement to MWCC
        management and Board
     B. Identify opportunities to integrate pollution prevention
        into programs (e.g., inspections, rulewriting, policy
        decisions, interpretation of existing regulations,
        household hazardous waste and water conservation,
        enforcement and agreements/settlements, fee structure)
     C. Recommend a clearly defined MWCC pollution prevention
        program
     D. Develop implementation plan to establish program
     E. Identify target industrial activities and facilities
        (e.g., specific waste streams, processes, businesses that
        lack information, problem cross-media transfers,
        opportunities for multi-media coordination with other
        media-specific programs)
     F. Oversee grant project
     G. Review/comment on semi-annual and final grant reports

4.    Measure progress

     A. Develop method for measuring progress
     B. Analyze existing data sources: MWCC monthly discharge
        reports, TRI, hazardous waste disclosures, and other
        relevant databases to measure progress
     C. Cross reference databases and perform other data quality
        activities to identify discrepancies
     D. Consider mail survey to solicit feedback and information
        on needs
     E. Document progress in semi-annual and final grant reports

5.    Coordinate with other programs in state

     MWCC will:

     A. Meet quarterly to communicate with other pollution
        prevention programs in Minnesota (OWM, MnTAP, MPCA, metro
        counties, Emergency Response Commission)
     B. Continue to participate on OWM's Pollution Prevention
        Task Force
     C. Participate at OWM's annual Pollution Prevention
        Conference
     D. Develop fact sheets and other materials for dissemination
        to other POTWs

-------
Proposal of Massachusetts Office of Technical Assistance for  Pollution Prevention in Publicly  Owned
Treatment Works Grant.

Title: Critical Parameters Project

Summary

This proposal is  to conduct a program to  assist POTWs in Massachusetts in  utilizing pollution prevention
techniques to address  problems which relate to critical parameters  for operation of the POTW.  Critical
parameters are those measures for which loadings to the POTW are approaching or exceeding 35% capacity,
necessitating capital expenditures to enlarge the system; those environmental parameters which if exceeded can
have a substantial economic effect on the POTW, such as prohibiting the marketing or reuse of sludge; or those
parameters of design capacity which when exceeded could cause the POTW to be in violation of its own National
Pollution Discharge Elimination System permit.

The Office of Technical Assistance (OTA) would conduct a survey of POTWs affected by loadings approaching
critical parameters and fund environmental  evaluations to establish baseline measurements.  OTA would then
draw upon in-state, national or international sources to supply pollution prevention technical assistance to address
the identified problems at these POTWs and conduct  trials of innovative approaches to reducing loadings,
working with POTW and state environmental officials. Such work would include integration of compliance in
all media, promotion of water conservation in addition to source reduction of pollutants, and pilots of changes
in regulatory procedures. The effort would also address contributions to loadings from non industry sources as
well, for example; households,  nonpoint sources, and agriculture.

OTA would then fund environmental evaluations of loadings to compare to the baselines set earlier.  OTA would
also set aside money tc be awarded in the second year of the project to a select number of POTWs to continue
work begun  as part of the critical  parameters project, to ensure the continuation of the pollution prevention
effort at those POTWs which  demonstrate  commitment, understanding, and progress in the use  of pollution
prevention principals and techniques.  OTA would  act  to facilitate coordination by POTWs, local, state and
federal officials, and community and industry groups.

At the end of the first year, OTA would create a series of case studies documenting the work done with POTWs
to demonstrate what can be achieved by the application of pollution principles to problems POTWs face. As
a condition of the award of funds for special projects in the second year, documentation of work would be
required, resulting in additional case studies by  the  POTWs themselves, reviewed by OTA. OTA would also
create videotape  documentation of each case.

Background

The  Massachusetts Office of Safe Waste Management  (OSWM, which was renamed  the Office of Technical
Assistance in 1990) began working with POTW pretreatment programs in 1989 as part of its Small Quantity
Generator program. Several POTWs joined the office  in holding  a series of workshops designed to promote
source reduction and good management of hazardous wastes by pollution sources not usually visited by any
POTW enforcement officer (e.g.;  schools, printers, typesetters, medical facilities). As a result of this program
OTA's project manager was made an honorary member of a newly created organization, the Massachusetts
Pretreatment Forum (MPF), which is a self-help group  of pretreatment officers.  OTA has continued working
with POTWs, organizing with POTWS three annual fora on silver recovery techniques, and has conducted a
series of talks to MPF members on recognizing pollution prevention opportunities when inspecting facilities.

OTA also  conducted  a program in  conjunction with  the  state's environmental enforcement  agency, the
Department of Environmental Protection,^ bring source reduction practices to the Worcester region, to try out
multi-media inspections, and to forge cooperative efforts between OTA's technical assistance program and the
enforcement program. This program, the Central Mass Pollution Prevention Project, funded by an EPA grant
and  commonly known as the  Blackstone Project,  has demonstrated not just  the success of a multi-media

-------
POTWs. He has also been a visible advocate for pollution prevention at the MPF, and has been a member of
the state's Toxics Use  Reduction Advisory Board.  He would  be  eminently suitable to oversee the critical
parameters program, with the assistance of Rick Reibstein. Rick was the originator of the Office of Safe Waste's
POTW program, and has worked with MPF members for over two years. He is an attorney and has been doing
source reduction and toxics use  reduction counseling for over three years.   With Nikki  Roy and Lee Dane,
formerly of DEP and OSWM, he developed the original idea for the Blackstone Project.

Paul is currently assigned to expanding OTA's work to the Western region of the state, where very little has been
done to date. Rick is currently overseeing the Merrimack Project, which will be located in the northeastern part
of the state.  OTA members Rich Bizzozero and Mitch Kennedy are assigned to the Southeast region, and Joe
Paluzzi is continuing the Central Mass Pollution Prevention project described above.

The critical parameters project money would be used to hire an assistant to Paul Richard, who could work in
any region where necessary, coordinating with the other programs.  This person would also be detailed to work
for periods of time at specific POTWs once a POTW has committed to work on an identified project. Some
money would be used either to fund environmental sampling by  POTWs or to hire certified analysts to do the
sampling and lab work.  Other money would be used to pay for technical assistance projects.  Such money could
be used, for example, to rent wet vacuum machines to demonstrate to a food processor an alternative to simply
washing down floors, (t could also be used to fly in experts from other states or countries, or to visit such sites
where innovative approaches  are being applied. It might be used to generate informational materials or fund
a conference or public event to educate pollution dischargers. The exact budget for the expenditure of the non-
personnel funds will depend on the  results of the evaluation of critical parameters and the research to discover
appropriate  techniques to address  critical problems has been  accomplished.  The following spending plan,
therefore, sets aside a certain amount of funding for as yet undetermined specific items.

In the second year, OTA will announce  that $12,000 is available  in a competitive award for  those POTWs that
wish to conduct special projects that utilize pollution prevention principles or techniques to address problems
concerning critical parameters.

Sept. 1991 - Sept 1992

-------
Critical Parameters Project Outline: Warren, Massachusetts

BACKGROUND: Warren, a rural community of 4,500, is located in the central region of Massachusetts.  The
major industrial discharger (user) to the POTW is a textile company.

        The wastewater treatment plant servicing the town became operational on September 16, 1989. The cost
of construction for the plant was ten million dollars. Construction was 75% federally funded and a 15% state
match with the town funded the remaining 10%. Yearly operational and maintenance costs are 5250,000.   A
three member Board of Commissioners administers the operation of the plant.  Staffing consists of three full-
time operators.  The treatment plant consists of both primary and secondary treatment.  Secondary treatment
is achieved by rotating biological contactors. Design flow for the  plant is 1.5 MGD with an average flow of .55
MOD.

        The plant discharges into the Quaboag River, a class B  Massachusetts river.   N.P.D.E.S. limitations
established  for the plant are  for conventional  pollutants such as B.O.D., suspended solids, chlorine and fecal
coliform. Additional requirements are quarterly testing for both acute and chronic toxicity.  The   last   two
analyses for toxicity failed to meet minimum survival rates.  Continued failure to meet  survival rates will result
in the mandatory requirement that the plant  perform a Toxic Reduction Evaluation (TRE). The estimated cost
for this evaluation is 570,000 based on preliminary work ddne by the town's consulting engineer. Once  the TRE
source is identified, the town would be required to reduce the toxicity through many options.  The most common
are implementing a pretreatment program or imposing limits directly against  an industrial user.  For the  user
this usually means adding end of pipe treatment to meet the new limits.

        The environmental and economic needs facing Warren are typical of many small Massachusetts towns.
The results from this study should prove that both needs can be met without extensive end of pipe treatment and
heavy costs being placed on either the  rate payers or the industrial user.

PROJECT GOALS: Reduce the toxicity of the final effluent through pollution prevention practices at the major
industrial user. Pollution prevention practices include source reduction, on-line recycling, chemical substitutions,
improved housekeeping and maintenance practices.  Implementation of these practices  will be accomplished by
voluntary participation from   the  Office  of Technical  Assistance  (O.TA.), the  Local  Board of Sewer
Commissioners-POTW plant operator, and the major  industrial user.  The results of these efforts will be
evaluated from a sampling program established at the POTW,

PROJECT WORK:

        1. O.TA. will gain voluntary support from the town, the POTW, and the major industrial user.

        2. The group will develop and implement a sampling program at the treatment plant.  This program will
establish baseline levels and detect waste load reductions  as they occur.  The program will include analytical
testing requirements. Once requirements are  established the work group will determine those tests to be  sent
to  an outside laboratory and those to be done in house by the  POTW.

        3.  O.TA. and the company  will  develop  a  systematic approach to evaluating pollution prevention
opportunities at the plant. Once done, options will be rated according to ease and some implementation will
begin.  Any prevention projects requiring additional resources will be evaluated and effected according to grant
resources and or available state T.U.R. program resources.

        4.  O.TA. will attempt to facilitate the implementation of quality pollution prevention teams at the
industrial user.  The goal is to develop whole facility support from the employees.

        5.  Specialty workshops already developed as part of the O.TA. Fall River initiative will be made
available to the  industrial user.

-------
        6.  L'nivcrsily resources will be applied where needed.


PROJECT NEEDS:

        1. A commitment 1'rom all parties to work cooperatively to achieve project goals.

        2. Schedule of progress for implementation of the project. The schedule will include milestone events.
meeting dates, etc.

        3.  Laboratory facilities to support the POTVV laboratory including containers, samplers, etc.

        4.  University intern students  to assist  in the project.

        5.  Develop resource material from national databases and other state pollution prevention programs.

        6.   Data manaccment:  for the sampling program and to track any  cost saving  the  industrial user
experiences as a result of pollution prevention  projects.


COST:    Project Grant              Project Match
                                                       In kind services
Staffing	 S 10.000                              $5000 (O.T.A. and POTW)

Laboratory	Si0,000                            STOOO (in house)

Resources
workshops
printed materials
experts
bench scale	$5,000                             Company Match (?)

Travel/Other... $5,000

Summary:

        Reports will be completed and sent to O.T.A. before June 1, September I, December 1, 1992 and March
1, 1993.  These reports will be designed as progress reports.  The final report will document the results of the
project.  It will be evaluated for pollution prevention effectiveness and waste load reductions to the P.O.T.W.
The final report will incorporate recommendations made by the group rating the project on its environmental,
economic, technical and political merits.

        The work plan is designed to be used as a guide for the project.   It is possible that other influences
could result in the need to modify the plan.  If necessary, O.T.A., The Board of Sew^er Commissioners-POT\V
operator and the Industrial User will  adjust the program to meet the underlining goals of the  project.  If any
major changes occur to this workplan O.T.A. will notify Deb  Hanlin, the grant administrator of EPA.

-------
                   CRITICAL PARAMETER PROJECT

                NON-POINT SOURCE PILOT WORK PLAN
PURPOSE:

The City  of Springfield plans to develop and implement a pollution
prevention pilot program to reduce  the non-point source pollutant
load to the City's wastewater treatment plant.   The pilot will be
divided into stages that will include measuring non-point pollution
from several sources, evaluating the effect of those pollutants on
the wastswater treatment plant,  developing a pollution prevention
outreach  education program  to  reduce  those pollutant  loads,  and
post outreach  monitoring of the  non-point  sources to evaluate the
effectiveness  of the  program.
BACKGROUND:

The City of Springfield operates a 67 million gallon per day (mgd)
regional  wastewater  treatment   plant  (SRWTP)   serving   eight
municipalities with a population of about 250,000.  The treatment
facility is  the largest activated sludge facility in  New England
and is located  on Bondi Island in Agawara, Massachusetts.  From the
1940s until  the  1970s  the  Bondi Island  facility was one  of  two
plants that  treated the City's wastewater using grit  removal  an el-
primary settling.   The plant was upgraded to a regional secondai
treatment   facility  in  1977,  adding  mechanical aeration,  air
floatation thickening  and Zimpro sludge heat treatment.  Presently
the sludge is  belt  filtered and composted.   The  treatment plant
maintains consistent compliance with its NPDES permit for discharge
to a  Class B waterway  and  the Massachusetts Land Application  of
Sludge and Septage Regulations for a Type II sludge.

In  accordance  with  EPA   pretreatment  regulations,   the  City
implemented  an Industrial  Pretreatment Program (IPP)  in 1986  to
control and limit  the discharge  of  industrial wastes to the SRWTP.
The  industrial community  is  highly  diversified  and  includes  52
Significant  Industrial Users  (SIUs)  contributing about  8  mgd  of
industrial wastewater.  The program required the SIUs to install,
operate, and  maintain a continuous  wastewater  monitoring station
for  the  purpose   of  determining  pretreatment   compliance.    A
networked, personal computer system evaluates industry compliance
and treatment  process  operation, and generates enforcement notices
and annual IPP cost recovery bills.   The IPP was audited  by  the
Environmental   Protection  Agency  (EPA)  in  1989 and  found  in
compliance with   the  conditions  of  the  National  Pretreatment
Program.

The IPP investigated the effects of conservative toxic pollutants
on the SRWTP during 1990 and 1991.  The SRWTP has approximately K
tons  of  biomass  under aeration to  absorb  the   impact of  a toxi
pollutant discharge and an  additional  179 tons  of biomass  in  the

-------
clarifiers and return channels to reseed the aeration basins.   The
data indicated that  the SRWTP biomass was not inhibited by the load
of antimony, arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, copper, chromium, nickel,
lead, selenium, silver or zinc, and that those metals did not pass-
through the SRWTP in toxic  concentrations  to the receiving stream,
In addition, the SRWTP passed the four quarterly effluent bioassays
that were recently  mandated under  the plant's revised 1991 NPDES
permit.

The  SRWTP plans  on  producing  Massachusetts Type  I  sludge  for
composting and marketing  as  a  soil conditioner.   Three metals,
cadmium,  copper and nickel were  present in  the  SRWTP sludge in
concentrations  that exceed  80% of the Type I sludge limits and were
identified as  critical parameters that must  be controlled to meet
the  compost  marketing   goal.    Cadmium  was identified  as  the
restricting   pollutant  that   prevents   the  sludge   from  being
classified as  Type  I.   Cadmium was effectively  controlled at the
industrial point sources, and presently exhibits a higher load from
non-industrial  and/or non-point sources  than from  industrial point
sources.

Approximately 1/3 of the City's sewer system is a combined sanitary
and  storm sewer system  that discharges to  the SRWTP.  The storm
sewer  portion  of that  system serves commercial,  industrial  and
residential  areas  that  generate  pollution  from  loading  docks,
parking  areas,  streets,  driveways and  lawns.   No pollutant load
data is  available   on  the  City's non-point sources,  and  flow
estimates are  based on pavement  area  and  previous  inflow  and
infiltration studies.  It is believed that the residential and non-
point  source  cadmium load  restricts  the  SRWTP sludge distribution
and  marketing  options.
 PROJECT:

 The City of Springfield  will work with  the  Office of  Technical
 Assistance   (OTA)  and  conduct  a  pollution  prevention   pilot
 consisting of monitoring, educational outreach and evaluation.  The
 effect of point source pollutants on the SRWTP is  well  documented,
 therefore  the  project will  focus on non-point source  pollutants
 that impact  the  SRWTP sludge.   The  project  will quantify the non-
 point source pollutant load of cadmium, copper and nickel to  the
 SRWTP by monitoring selected sections of the combined sewer system.
 Based on the monitoring  data the  City  will  coordinate  a pollution
 prevention educational outreach project targeted at the storm sewer
 users in the study areas.   The City will  repeat monitor the  storm
 sewer in each study area at the completion of  the  outreach program
 to evaluate  the  effect  of  pollution prevention education on  the
 load of  non-point source pollutants to the SRWTP.  The  City will
 draw  on  the  resources  of  three  Department  of  Public  Works
 divisions: the  IPP,  the  SRWTP and Engineering Division.

 The Engineering Division will identify  three storm sewer monitoring
 areas consisting of residential, commercial/light  industrial  and

-------
documenting all activities  associated with the  project  and will
report to the IPP management or delegate.

The project is scheduled to extend over a two year period and the
research intern position  will be budget for a  $10,000  per year
stipend.  The SRWTP will provide  a work  area for the intern, the
IPP will provide most of the  material support  and the grant will
provide the stipend.  A preliminary budget is delineated in Table
1.  A job number system will be established by the IPP to track all
contractual service, labor and material costs for the project.

REPORTS:

A project schedule will be developed  by the IPP  for submission to
the  OTA  and  Environmental Protection Agency  (EPA).    Progress
reports will be filed with  OTA by the IPP on  May 15,  August 15,
November 15,  and February 15.  OTA will incorporate the information
from those reports and submit progress reports to the EPA on June
1 ,• September 1, December  1  and March  1.   A  final report will be
developed by the  IPP and the OTA  upon  completion  of the evaluation
phase and recommendations  will be made to EPA on  non-point source
pollution prevention.

-------
              i  Piiot Pollution Prevention  Project
      01
recycled
                         antifreeze
                         recycled
silver

reclaimed

-------
The State of North Carolina's
      Pilot Approach to
 POTW Pollution Prevention
 Presentedat EPA Grant Recipients Roundtable Meeting

            Februarys, 1992
             Raleigh, NC

-------
                                   ibJ
ra
     Major Project Goals:


       Create State-level Program
       Infrastructure

       Establish Local-level
       Program Structure

       Execution of Pollution
       Prevention Problem-solving

       Provide for Information
       Transfer

-------
1.  Create State-level

    Program Infrastructure:


  Enhance & improve cooperative efforts
  between two established, successful
  programs
  Integrate PP evaluation techniques into
  pretreatment program elements
  Lay groundwork for new program elements
  such as TRAP
  Provide example for other states

-------
2. Establish Local-Level

   Program Structure:


  Establish pilot PP program at a large POTW

  Develop model PP program designed to
  meet needs of a small POTW

  Establish additional POTW programs
  through the award of challenge grants

-------
                                        nJ
3.  Execution of Pollution

    Prevention Problem-Solving


  Address specific pollution problem in
  model applications

  Develop mechanisms for identifying and
  reducjng uncontrollable sources through
  pollution prevention techniques

-------
4.  Provide for Information

    Transfer:


   Document pilot program experiences

   Produce and distribute guidance materials
   describing! the development of POTW
   Pollution Prevention programs at the State
   & Local Level

   Produce and distribute guidance for
   specific industries and/or specific waste
   types regarding PP techniques and their
   implementation

-------
                                           ItLJ
State Staff devoted to Project
   From Pretreatment Program: Project
   Manager and part-time services of State
   Coordinator and Environmental Engineer

   From Pollution Prevention: One full-time
   Environmental Engineer and part-time
   services of Program Director and
   Environmental Chemist
   Both programs will contribute clerical
   assistance

-------
QTRLY Status Report:

  State hired engineering staff

  Negotiating contract with
  large POTW

  Reviewing existing info for
  specific problem

-------
                     Cd Report Elledge    May  1990  -  April,  1991
 Controllable

 Metal Finishing
 Electroplater
(10 -ftunlt-HesT)


 Uncontrollable

 Industrial
 Commercial
Domestic
Septage
 Permitted    Max
Flow (MGD)
                                            klo.
                      .211
                     7.190
Cd (Max)


   .26
                                                       Average
                                                     Flow  (MGD)     Cone,  ftig/1)
                                      .1290
                                     7.1974
                                    11.61
                                      .0036
                                                                    *  .0568
                                                                      .0109
                                                                       003
                                                                       .088
                                                                                    Ibs.
                                                                .0374
                                                                .5006
                                                                .2904
                                                                .0026
Influent


Effluent
30


30
                                                      18.94


                                                      18.94
                                                                      .0061
                                                                      .0036
                                                                 .964   41*  R.
                                                                 .569
*  Arithmetic Average for this category of facility during  this  time  fram  -  not  flow weighted.

-------
Section V         Program Example
1.  Sanitation District of Orange County

-------
HIGHLIGHTS OF WASTE MINIMIZATION
                AT
THE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS
               . •> r. / ' O

                )'.„.,'..<• ."."•• '	/•        7/25/91
                '<-*'

-------
INTRODUCTION TO THE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS
                OF ORANGE COUNTY
                Service Territory

                •    439 Square Miles

                •    29 Cities

                •    9 Districts

                •    Number of Permittees:

                     Class I    =   429
                     Class II   =   337
                     Class III   «   215
                     Others    =    53
                     Total     =   1034

-------
INTRODUCTION TO THE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS
                  OF ORANGE COUNTY
                      (CONTINUED)
             Industrial Source Control

        1954 •     First Ordinance

        1970 •     Industrial Waste Division Established

        1976 •     First Waste Minimization Outreach
                   and Ordinance Revision to Include
                   Heavy Metal Limits

        1983 •     Ordinance Revision to Include
                   Enforcement of EPA's Federal
                   Categorical Limits

        1984 •     Industrial Pretreatment Program
                   Approved by EPA

        1989 •     Waste Minimization Policy Approved
                   by Board of Directors

             •     Ordinance was revised

             •     Industrial Waste Division was renamed
                   to Source Control Division

-------
INTRODUCTION TO THE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS
                 OF ORANGE COUNTY
                     (CONTINUED)

                 Treatment Plants

            Treatment Plant No. 1:

            •    Location - Fountain Valley

            •    Present Average Capacity - 97 MGD

            •    Masterplanned Expansion By Year 2020:

                 219 MGD Average              /• o -  \^   T /,•-./« dr <
                 408 MGD Maximum
                                                  V f <• iv»v <• ' • • /
            Treatment Plant No. 2:
                                                    !  „ » I'j U"* •* \
            •    Location - Huntlngton Beach

            •    Present Average Capacity • 180 MGD

            •    Masterplanned Expansion By Year 2020:

                 180 MGD Average
                 360 MGD Maximum

-------
                             WASTE MINIMIZATION ACTIVITIES
                          AT THE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS
                                    OF ORANGE COUNTY
TIER1
1984 - 1991
Enforcement of Mass Emission Rates
Promoting Wastewater Reduction
Promoting Better Housekeeping
Enforcing Waste Minimization, and
Permittee Assistance
Multi-Agency Coordination
Field Inspector Training
Workshops and Speakers
Mass Mailings
Information Clearinghouse
Results
TIER 2
1992 and Beyond
Advanced Planning
Enforcement and Implementation
Workshops
Multi-Agency Coordination

-------
                       TIER 1  - WASTE MINIMIZATION ACTIVITIES
                                         1984 - 1991
     ENFORCEMENT OF MASS
     EMISSION RATES
      JlAs/ol
[,(<.
^4
     PROMOTING WASTEWATER
     REDUCTION
                     •'7
To control and reduce the quantity of toxic
materials discharged by permittees to the
Districts' sewer system and to prevent dilution,
mass emission limits (instead of concentration
limits) were determined and enforced based on
the standard water usage at each permittee's
facility.

As part of the pretreatment program, the
Districts required the permittees to have flow
restrictors or control valves to assure
wastewater reduction  and avoid dilution. The
permittees' facilities are inspected and checked
for water conservation control equipment at least
annually.

-------
                 TIER 1 - WASTE MINIMISATION ACTIVITIES
                                    1984-1991
                                  (CONTINUED)
PROMOTING BETTER
HOUSEKEEPING AND
INSTALLATION OF BASIC
WASTE MINIMIZATION
EQUIPMENT
ENFORCING WASTE MINIMIZATION,
AND PERMITTEE ASSISTANCE
Through permitting and enforcement activities,
the Districts promoted and Implemented good
housekeeping practices and Installation of waste
minimization equipment (such as waste
segregation, installation of dragout tanks/trays,
spray rinses, and flow restrlctors) to reduce the
volume of waste generated and the cost of the
pretreatment-system and user charges
(economic incentive).

All permittees in violation with discharge
limits are required to Implement waste
minimization techniques and are provided
advice, checklists, and information In
conjunction with enforcement activities.

Permit application supplements containing plant-
wide and process-specific waste minimization
checklists will be implemented shortly.

Selected Source Control Division staff respond
to all permittee inquiries.
                                         6

-------
                 TIER  1 - WASTE MINIMIZATION ACTIVITIES
                                   1984 - 1991
                                  (CONTINUED)
MULTI-AGENCY
COORDINATION
FIELD INSPECTOR
TRAINING
WORKSHOPS AND SPEAKERS
A multi-agency county task force on
waste minimization provides Interagency contact and
coordination of workshops and technology transfer.

The Districts are voluntarily participating In a four-
county, Technical and Educational Assistance Model
Project" which Is demonstrating multi-agency
coordination of waste minimization promotion.

A training program for field Inspectors is
being developed Into ten 2-hour sessions. A
multimedia oriented training Is planned for
implementation in late 1991.

Three workshops organized In cooperation with the
University of California on "Industrial Wastewater
Treatment and Waste Reduction". A workshop on
"Switching from Solvents to Water-Based Cleaning
Processes" was sponsored.

Speakers at industry association meetings to discuss
Industrial waste ordinance and promote waste
reduction.

-------
                 TIER 1 - WASTE MINIM   TION ACTIVITIES
                                    1984-1*31
                                  (CONTINUED)
MASS MAILINGS
INFORMATION
CLEARINGHOUSE
RESULTS
Mass mailings are made to notify permittees of
government grant funds available and upcoming
meetings, conferences, and workshops on Industrial
waste minimization.

A library and supporting computer
database of over 300 publications on waste
minimization have been assembled for Districts' staff
and permittees' reference.

Reduction of toxics by the Source Control program
and enforcing mass emission rates have been so
effective that for the last three years, the InfluflQ
metals to the Districts' plant meet the effluent
standards.

The Influent heavy metals have been reduced about
50% during the past five years.

Over 95% of all the metal finishers and categorically
regulated Industries have flow restrlctors or control
valves to reduce the water usage and Installed the
basic waste minimization equipment to reduce the
volume of hazardous wastes and wastewater
discharge to the sewer system.
                                          8

-------
                 TIER 2 - WASTE MINIMIZATION ACTIVITIES
                               1992 AND BEYOND
ADVANCED
PLANNING
ENFORCEMENT &
IMPLEMENTATION
Determine pollutants of concern.
Determine sources (industrial, commercial, domestic).
Evaluate pollutant management alternative:
•    Minimization of waste materials.
•    Conversion off hazardous waste into non-hazardous or
     less hazardous waste.
•    Perpetual storage.
Evaluate economic feasibility of pollutant management
alternative and available techniques.
Evaluate effectiveness.
Establish preferred waste management alternative.
Establish pollution prevention strategies (waste
minimization techniques, product bans, recovery systems)
and standards for Implementation.

Enforce pollution prevention standards to the applicable
sources through the permitting process.
Mandate installation of waste minimization equipment.
Mandate
reuse/recycle of material and process wastewater.
Mandate product bans and material substitution.
Mandate extended water conservation for commercial and
domestic sources, if necessary.
                                         9

-------
                 TIER 2 • WASTE MINIML^FION ACTIVITIES
                              1992 AND BEYOND
                                 (CONTINUED)
WORKSHOPS
Workshops for promoting advanced technologies for waste
reduction will be held in cooperation with University
Institutes, Industrial/commercial communities, the U.S. EPA
pollution prevention technology transfer and Information
exchange, and Industrial associations.
MULTI-AGENCY
COORDINATION
The pollution prevention strategies and advance planning
will be coordinated within a multi-agency task force as
needed. Multi-agency cooperation on advanced planning
studies and technology transfer will be a goal.
                                        10

-------
                 APPENDICES



a. Agenda



b. List of Attendees



c. Case studies from PPIC

-------
             Pollution Prevention in Publicly Owned
                          Treatment Works
                EPA Grant Recipients Roundtable Meeting
 DATE:              February 6 and 7, 1992
 TIME:              9:00am-4:00pm
 LOCATION:        State of North Carolina  Archibald BIdg.
                     512 N. Salisbury St.,    Raleigh, N.C.
The purpose of this meeting is to develop a network of people and agencies that are
interested in promoting pollution prevention in POTW's, pre-treatment programs
and MWPP. The attendees will share ideas, problems, and goals associated with this
pilot project.

                               AGENDA
Feb.  6
                                Morning

 1.  States will describe the  pilot programs. Each of the five grant recipient will
have 20 minutes to discuss their approach to this project. The first quarterly report
will be presented orally by state participants .   Q&A /discussions

9:00-9:30         Welcome and Introductions           Deborah Hanlon
9:30-10:00        Utah P2 Program                    Mary DeLaretto
10:-10:30         New Mexico                        Alex Puglisi
break
10:45-11:15        Minnesota                         Kevin McDonald
11:15-11:45        Massachusetts Critical Mass P2       Paul Richards
11:45-12:15        North Carolina                     Trevor Clements
                                Lunch Break

-------
                                 Afternoon

2.  Examples and case studies from other POTW's and state programs that provide
pollution prevention technical assistance will be presented.  Participants will share
ideas on how Regions  and states can assist in training, coordination, and in
conducting joint inspections.

1:30-2:00 Sanitation District of Orange County       Mahin Talibei

2:00-2:30  Case Study from North Carolina         Stephanie Richardson
 Break
3:00-4:00 -Group Problem Solving and Discussion    Hanlon

Discussion issues:       Future funding options
                       Measuring progress and results
                       Publicizing programs
Feb. 7
                                 Morning

1.   EPA will discuss reporting requirements and expectations. Participants will
discuss needs and availability of resources.   EPA Project Officer,  regional
coordinators,  State Pollution Prevention Programs,   MWPP and Pre-treatment
program coordinators will share perspectives on this project.

9-10            What are your resource needs?   What resources are available?
                   PPIC, Grant Programs, etc.      Hanlon, Hann,
                  Southeast Waste Reduction Cente    Bob Carter

 10-12:00          EPA HQ and Regions/Perspective on Grant Projects:
                  MWPP                    Valerie Martin
                  Pre-treatment
                  Permits                   Wendy Bell
                  Enforcement               Walter Brodtman
                  Reporting Requirements     Lena Hann

 Lunch

 1:30-3:00   Tour of Raleigh POTW
 *Agenda subject to change

-------
Lindsay Mize
oil ice of Waste Reduction
Dept of Environment Health and Natural Resources
PO Box 27687
Raleigh, NC 27611-7687
919-571-4100
         Florence Reynolds
         Salt Lake City Corporation
         1530 S. West Temple
         Salt Lake City, UT 84915
    Paul Richard
    Office of Technical Assistance
    Executive Office of Environmental Affairs
    Room 1904, 100 Cambridge St
    Boston, MA 02202
    617-727-3260 ext 692
Stephanie Richardson
Office of Waste reduction
Dept of Environment Health and Natural Resources
PO Box 27687
Raleigh, NC  27611-7667
919-571-4100
         Mary Settle
         US EPA (WH-546)
         Office of Water
         401 M St SW
         Washington. DC 20460
         202-260-5810
          Pete Smith
          US EPA Region 5
          77 West Jackson Blvd
          Chicago. IL  60604
          312-886-2000
Julia Storm
Department of Environment Health and Nat Resources
Division of Environmental Management
PO Box 29535
Raleigh, NC 27626
919-733-5083
          Alicia Suarez
          US EPA Region 2
          26 Federal Plaza
          Room 837
          New York, NY 10278
          212-264-9204
      Mahin Talebi
      Sanitation District of Orange County
      PO Box 8127
      Foutain Valley. CA  92728
      714-267-9500
          Harold Thompson
          US EPA Region 8 (8WM-MF)
          999 18thSt, Suite 500
          Denver, CO 80202-2405
          303-293-1560
     Navneet Tiku
     Metropolitan Waste Control Commission
     230  E. 5th St
     St. Paul, MN  55101
     612-772-7016
       Vic Young
       Waste Reduction Resource Center
       3825 Barrett Dr
       Raleigh, NC 27609
       800-476-8686

-------
     Wendy Bell
     US EPA (EN-336)
     401 M St. SW
     Washington, DC 20460
     202-260-9534
 Walter Brodtman
 US EPA (EN-338)
 401 M St Sw
 Washington. DC 20460
 202-260-5998
     Joseph Canzano
     US EPA Region 1  (WCM-510)
     JFK FederalBuilding
     Boston, MA 02203
     617-565-3554
 Ben Chen
 US EPA Region 4 (4WMD)
 345 Courtland St, NE
 Atlanta, GA 30365
 404-347-3633
favor Clements
5ept of Environment Health and Nat Resources
ivision of Environmental Management
0 Box 29535
ialeigh, NC 27626
(19-733-5083
 Crystal Couch
 Industrial Waste Control
 2799 Griffith Road
 Winston-Salem, NC 27103
 919-765-0134
  Mary DeLoretto
  Division of Water Quality
  department of Environmental Quality
   fatt Lake City. UT  84114-4870
  601-538-6146
  Michael Downey
  SRWRP
  1600 E. Columbus Ave
  Springfield, MA 01103
      Deborah Hanlon
      US EPA (PM-222B)
      Pollution Prevention Division
      401 M St. SW
      Washington, DC  20460
      202-260-2726
  Lena Hann
  US EPA (PM-222B)
  Pollution Prevention Division
  401  M St, SW
  Washington, DC 20460
  202-260-2237
      Bob Hogrefe
      City of Albuquerque
      4201 2nd St SW
      Albuquerque, NM  87105
      505-873-7087
  Debbie LaVergne
  UBWPAD
  Route 20
  Millbury, MA 01527
  508-755-1286
      Valerie Martin
      US EPA (WH-547)
      Office of Water
      401  M St, SW
      Washington, DC 20460
      202-260-7265
Kevin McDonald
Office of Waste Management
Hazardous and Problem Wastes
1350 Energy Lane
St. Paul, MN 55108
612-649-5744

-------
Following are some of the more than 120 case studies on the PIES
database dealing with wastewater:

-------
***** DOCNO: DOCUMENT NOT AVAILABLE *****

1.0  Headline: Reuse of Water in a Woollen mill

2.0  SIC Code: 2299, Textile Goods, NEC

3.0  Name & Location of Company: Shanghai Second Woollen Mills,
     Shanghai, China

4.0  Clean Technology Category
     This technology involves the recycling and reuse of wastewater

5.0  Case Study Summary

     5.1  Process and Waste  Information: Coloured wastewater
          effluents from two workshops at a woollen mill were
          treated using dissolved  air flotation and biological
          towers.  Decolorization  was achieved by coagulation and
          adsorption with activated carbon.  After biological
          treatement and decolorization, the wastewater was diluted
          with 20% tap water.  This water was used to prepare
          dyeing liquors.  A neutral dye and a mordant dye were
          selected.  The dyeing recipe w adjusted to account for
          the effect of hexavalent chromium ion present in low
          concentrations in  the reuse water.

     5.2  Scale of Operation: Information not provided

     5.3  State of Development:  Pilot stage field experiments were
          performed

     5.4  Level of Commercialization: Information not provided

     5.5  Balances and  Substitutions:

Material Category        Quantity  Before          Quantity After
Waste Generation:        N/A                     N/A
Feedstock Use:
     A12(S04)3            120 ?/day               156 ?/day
     Activated Carbon         -                  300 ?/day
Water Use:                1450 m3/day             300 m3/day

                          4207/day                 6507/day

6.0  Economics

     6.1   Investment Costs:  Information not provided

     6  2   Operational  and Maintenance Costs:  Operational  use  of
           activated carbon reported to cost 12  Yuan/day  (1974) . An
           increase in energy use resulted in a  net cost increase of
           23 Yuan/day.   Wastewater treatment costs increased by 46

-------
           Yuan/day.   Costs  of A12(SO4)3  increased by 13 Yuan/day.

      6.3   Payback Time:  Information not  provided

 7.0  Cleaner Production Benefits: Economic benefits were calculated
      to be 90 Yuan/day (1974) and resulted  form the decreased use
      of tap water.

      Use of the technology  minimizes discharges of coloured
      wastewater

 8.0   Obstacles, Problems and/or Known Constraints

      Economic feasibility of the technology depends on the
      availability of  activated carbon, and the lack of costs
      associated with  carbon regeneration in this case.
 9.0   Date  case study  was performed: 1974 and 1976

 10.0  Contacts and Citation

      10.1 Type of Source Material: Conference Proceedings

      10.2 Citation:  A Study on Reuse of Water in a Woollen Mill.
          Hu Hiajue et al.  Purdue Universty Conference on
          Industrial Waste Treatment

      10.3 Level of Detail of Source Material: Additional
           information is available in the source material

      10.4 Industry/Pr.ogram Contact and Address:  Industry contact
          not provided

      10.5 Abstractor and  Address:  Reformatted:  Isaac Diwan, SAIC,
          8400 Westpark Dr., McLean, VA 22102

11.0 Keywords

      11.1 Waste Type: Coloured water

      11.2 Process Type/Waste Source:

      11.3 Waste Reduction Technique:

      11.4 Other Keywords:

12.0 Assumptions: None

13.0 Peer Review: Unknown

KEYWORDS:   CLOURED WATER, WASTEWATER REUSE, TEXTILES

**********!
**********

-------
Displaying item number 78
***** DOCNO: DOCUMENT NOT AVAILABLE *****

1.0  Headline:  Water Conservation in a Textile Industry.

2.0  SIC Code:  22, Textile Mill Products

3.0  Name and Location of Company:  Binny Textile Mills, Madras,
     India.

4.0  Clean Technology Category:  This  case  study focusses on reuse
     of wastewaters and water  conservation.

5.0  Case Study Summary:

     5.1  Process and Waste information:  Four areas within the
          facility are the major wastewater producers:  (1) process
          and treatment department; (2) captive power generation
          unit (coal fixed thermal power station);  (3) sizing
          department; and (4)  yarn dyeing and printing department.
          The following changes were  undertaken to  conserve water
          and reduce wastewater generation.

          Reuse of pressure filters backwash water.   Suspended
          solids that can easily settle are the main pollutants in
          pressure filter backwash water.   By  collecting the
          backwash water  in a  pond, with a  minimum  hydraulic
          retention time  of 12 hours, the  supernatant freed from
          the suspended solids can be reused for  gardening
          purposes.  Periodically, the  retained suspended solids
          are removed  from the pond and disposed  of a solid waste
          in a landfill site.   The net effect is conservation of 20
          cubic meters/day of  fresh water,  which the facility used
          for gardening purposes.

          Reuse of wastewater from the  dyeing  and finishing
          department.  About 1,200 cubic meters/day of fresh water,
           including  the evaporation loss,  was  used  for quenching
          hot ash  from the boiler house prior  to  its disposal.
          Laboratory experiments confirmed that  it  is feasible to
          reuse hard to treat wastewater from the dyeing department
           for ash  quenching  in lieu of  fresh water.  Due to
           adsorption of colors and dyes on  the ash particles, there
           is a approximately  a 20% reduction in BOD content  in the
           reused dye department wastewater. Approximately  1,200
           cubic meters per  day of  fresh water  was conserved, with
           a reduction of  552  kg.  BOD/day.

           Reuse of wastewater  from the sizing department.  In order
           to  avoid spontaneous combustion  and  to reduce the fines
           loss,  freshwater  was used to wet coal in the yard.  By

-------
          collecting  in  a  pond  the low volume, high organic
          strength wastewater from the sizing department,  all of
          the wastewater could  be reused for coal wetting.
          Appropriate facilities must be available at the pond to
          avoid septicity.  Wastewaters from the  sizing department
          were completely  reused and 27 cubic meters per day of
          fresh water were conserved.

     5.2  Scale of Operation:   Unknown.

     5.3  Stage of Development:   The technology  was fully
          implemented.

     5.4  Level of Commercialization:  Not  applicable.

     5.5  Material/Energy  Balances and Substitutions:

6.0  Economics*

     6.1  Investments Costs: Investment costs include the facility
          for pH  neutralization pumps and pipeline costs.

     6.2  Operational &  Maintenance Costs:  Savings and reduction
          in the  capital investment is Rs.  7 lakhs annually,  and
          annual  O&M  costs are Rs. 6 lakhs.  Annual savings for 300
          workings days  per year for purchase of fresh water from
          the municipal corporation totalled Rs. 4 per cubic meter.

     6.3  Payback Time:  Not reported.

7.0  Cleaner Production  Benefits:  Wastewater reused equals 2,690
     cubic meters per day  and freshwater consumption was reduced
     1.227 cubic  meters  per day. "The overall reduction in
     wastewater quantity and BOD load were  31% and 25%
     respectively.

8.0  Obstacles,  Problems, and/or Known Constraints: Not available.


9.0  Date Case Study  Was Performed:   1984

10.0 Contacts and Citation

     10.1 Type of Source Material:  Unpublished  materials.

     10.2 Citation:   Mr. L.  Paneerselvam, Director  (PC), National
          Productivity Council,  Lodhi Road, New  Delhi no 003,
          India.

     10.3 Level of Detail  of Source Material:  Unknown.

     10.4 Industry/Program Contact and Address:   Unknown.

     10.5 Abstractor  Name  and Address:  Mary L.  Wolfe, Science

-------
          Applications International Corporation, 8400 Westpark
          Drive, McLean, VA   22102.

11.0 Keywords

     11.1 Waste type:  Wastewater.

     11.2 Process Type/Waste  Source:  Textile Mill Products,  SIC
          Code 22.

     11.3 Waste Reduction Technique:  Wastewater Reduction.

     11.4 Other Keywords:
12.0 Assumptions:  The information in this case study was derived
     from abstracts provided  by the United Nations Environment
     Program (Paris).  This abstract was prepared directly from the
     abstract without access  to the case study cited.

13.0 Peer Review:

(*) - Disclaimer:   Economic  data will vary due to economic
                    climate, varying governmental regulations, and
                    other factors.

KEYWORDS:    Wastewater,   Textile  Mill  Products,  SIC  Code  22,
Wastewater Reduction
**********
Displaying item number 79
**********
***** DOCNO: DOCUMENT NOT AVAILABLE *****

1.0  Headline:  Elimination  of the Problems of Sulfides by Chemical
     Substitution in the Textile Industry

2.0  SIC Code:  22, Textile Mill Products

3.0  Name and Location of Company:  Century Textiles and Industries
     Limited, Worli, Bombay 400 025,  India.

4.0  Clean Technology Category:   This  case study presents chemical
     substitutions for sulphur dyes.

5.0  Case Study Summary:

     5.1  Process and Waste Information:   Sulphur dyes are water
          insoluble and must be converted  into a water soluble
          (leuco) form before application  to  textile materials.
          The traditional method is treatment with an aqueous
          solution of sodium sulfide.   Since  the leuco compounds

-------
     have an affinity  for cellulosic fibers and are sensitive
     to atmospheric oxygen,  they must be applied from the
     aqueous solution.  After the dye has been absorbed on the
     fiber  surface, the reduced form of the dye must be
     reconverted into  the water insoluable form.   Generally,
     this is carried out through exposure to air or by using
     a chemical  oxidizing agent.

     Black  dye is an important member of the sulfur series due
     to its fastness in washing and light and its low cost as
     compared to other synthetic dyes.  It is converted using
     the process described above.   The facility encountered
     difficulties,  however,  when the State pollution control
     board  established a 2  ppm maximum sulfide  content for
     treated effluent  from textile mills.

     Rather than attempt to reduce the sulfide  in the
     effluent, the  facility sought options to reduce or
     replace the sodium sulfide.  During studies conducted by
     the facility,  it was discovered that an alkaline solution
     of glucose  can satisfactorily reduce the sulfur colors,
     enabling the facility to substitute the glucose solution
     for the sodium sulfide.  Because the glucose solution
     prepared in the studies would be cost prohibitive,  the
     facility sought an inexpensive source of glucose.   This
     lead to the use of liquid glucose, a by-product of the
     starch industry.

     The facility replaced 100 parts sodium sulfide (50%) with
     61 parts liquid glucose (80% solids)  and 26 parts caustic
     soda in its sulfur black color dye operations.  The
   .  facility continued to have difficulties with this mixture
     because the thick glucose solution required special
     arrangements for emptying drums.   The operation was still
     cost intensive.

     The facility finally substituted an alkaline solution
     from sugar  reduction for the sodium sulfide.   A by-
     product containing 50%  reducing  sugars was
     technologically and financially  feasible.   The facility
     substitutes 100 parts sodium sulfide  (50%)  with 65 parts
     of the product (containing 50% reducing sugars) plus 25
     parts  caustic  soda.  Dye qualities were equivalent to the
     standard process for depth of shades, fastness, and other
     properties.

5.2  Scale  of Operation:   Unknown.

5.3  Stage  of Development:   The technology is fully
     implemented.

5.4  Level of Commercialization: The substitute materials are
     commercially available.

-------
     5.5  Material/Energy Balances and Substitutions:

6.0  Economics*

     6.1  Investments Costs:  No capital expenditure was involved.

     6.2  Operational & Maintenance Costs:  Not provided.

     6.3  Payback Time:  Not applicable.

7.0  Cleaner Production Benefits:  The facility met the mandatory
     effluent level for sulfide and eliminated the foul smell of
     sulfide in the workplace.

8.0  Obstacles,  Problems,  and/or Known Constraints:  The high cost
     of glucose was the main constraint in making the technology
     have practical applications.  Further, the glucose solution
     required special handling when drums were emptied and solution
     replacement was cost intensive.   These problems were resolved
     by the use of suitable by-products containing reducing sugars.

9.0  Date Case Study Was Performed:   1990.

10.0 Contacts and Citation

     10.1 Type of Source Material:  Unpublished materials.

     10.2 Citation:  Mr. Mahesh A. Sharma, Chief Chemist,  Century
          Textiles and Industries Limited, Worli, Bombay 400 025,
          India.

     10.3 Level of Detail of  Source Material:  Unknown.

     10.4 Industry/Program  Contact and Address:  See citation.

     10.5 Abstractor Name and  Address:  Mary  L. Wolfe, Science
          Applications International  Corporation, 8400 Westpark
          Drive, McLean, VA  22102.

11.0 Keywords

     11.1 Waste type:  Wastewater.

     11.2 Process Type/Waste  Source:   Textile Mill Products, SIC
          Code 22.

     11.3 Waste Reduction Technique:   Chemical Substitution

     11.4 Other Keywords:

12 0 Assumptions:  The  information  in this case study was derived
     from abstracts  provided  by the United Nations Environment
     Program  (Paris).  This abstract was prepared directly  from the
     abstract without  access  to the source material  cited.

-------
 13.0  Peer  Review:

 (*) - Disclaimer:    Economic data will vary due to economic
                     climate, varying governmental regulations, and
                     other factors.

 KEYWORDS:  Wastewater, Textile Mill Products,  SIC Code 22, Chemical
 Substitution
Displaying item number 80

**********:
**********
*****  DOCNO:  DOCUMENT NOT AVAILABLE *****

1.0  Headline:   Dye-bath Reuse in Carpet Dyeing

2.0  SIC Code:   2273, Carpets and Rugs; 22,  Textile Mill Products

3.0  Name and Location of Company:  Bigelow, USA

4.0  Clean Technology Category:  Recycle and Reuse
5.0  Case Study Summary:

     5.1  Process and Waste Information:  Carpets were dyed with
           conventional procedures and then with dye-bath reuse.
           Data  on pollution reduction showed significant
           improvements due to dye-bath reuse.   Dyeings' in Bigelow
           production runs were done on two different shades and
           styles of carpet.  A pair of conventional atmospheric
           becks were used and dye-bath was pumped back and forth
           between them.  Over twenty reuse cycles could be
           obtained.

     5.2  Scale of Operation:  Unknown.

     5.3  Stage of Development:  The technology was fully
           implemented at the facility.

     5.4  Level of Commercialization:  Not applicable.

     5.5  Material /Energy Balances and Substitutions:

6.0  Economics*:   A savings of $60,000 per pair of becks.

7.0  Cleaner  Production Benefits:  The consumption of dyes was
     reduced, thereby lowering the cost of effluent treatment.

8.0  Obstacles,  Problems, and/or Known Constraints:  None reported.

9.0  Date  Case  Study Was Performed:  1983

-------
 10.0  Contacts and Citation

      10.1  Type of Source Material:   Journal.

      10.2  Citation:   Berganthal,  J.  et.  al.,  "The Case  for Direct
           Dye-bath Reuse," Carpet and Rug Industry,  October  1984,
           p.  16.

      10.3  Level of Detail of  Source  Material:   Unknown.

      10.4  Industry/Program Contact and Address:   Unknown.

      10.5  Abstractor  Name and Address:   Mary  L.  Wolfe,  Science
           Applications  International Corporation,  8400  Westpark
           Drive,  McLean,  VA  22102.

 11.0  Keywords

      11.1  Waste type:   Dye; Wastewater.

      11.2  Process  Type/Waste  Source:   Carpets  and Rugs, SIC  Code
           2273;  Textile Mill  Products,  SIC  Code  22.

      11.3  Waste Reduction Technique:   Reuse,  dye bath reuse.
      11.4  Other Keywords:

 12.0 Assumptions:  The  information in this  case  study was derived
      from  abstracts provided  by the  United  Nations Environment
     Program (Paris).  This abstract  was prepared directly  from the
     abstract without access  to the  journal article  cited.   It is
     not known  if  the economic data  is  based  on  annual  savings.

 13.0 Peer  Review:

 (*) - Disclaimer:   Economic  data will  vary due  to economic
                    climate, varying governmental regulations, and
                    other factors.

KEYWORDS:   Dye;  Wastewater,   Carpets and  Rugs,  SIC  Code   2273;
Textile Mill Products,  SIC Code 22,   Reuse, dye  bath reuse.
**********
Displaying item number 81
**********
***** DOCNO: DOCUMENT NOT AVAILABLE  *****

1.0  Headline:  Nordic Project  on Water Used Reduction in Textile
     Industries

2.0  SIC Code:  22, Textile Mill Products

-------
3.0  Name and Location of Company:   15 textile facilities in
     Denmark, Finals,  Norway,  and Sweden.

4.0  Clean Technology  Category
     Process/Equipment Modification:  This technology involves the
     introduction  of automatic water stops  to  encourage water
     conservation.

5.0  Case Study Summary:

     5.1  Process and  Waste Information:  Between. 1976 and 1981, a
          Nordic, "water care"  project was  launched to examine
          avenues  of water conservation in  textile industries in
          Denmark,  Finland,  Norway,  and Sweden.

          The following changes were reported for batch operations:

          *    Winch dyeing:   By dropping the  dye batch and
               avoiding overflow rinsing, water  consumption could
               be  reduced 25%.

          *    High and Low Pressure Jet Dyeing:  Approximately
               50%  of  water consumption could  be reduced by
               replacing the overflow with  batchwise rinsing.

          *    Beam Dyeing:   Avoiding overflow during soaking and
               rinsing can reduce water consumption by
               approximately 60%.

          *    Jig Dyeing:  Switching to stepwise rinsing from the
               overflow practice resulted  in water consumption
               reductions of 15%-79%.

          *    Cheese  Dyeing Apparatus: A  water consumption
               reduction of  70%  can be  expected with  the use of an
               intermittent rinsing procedure.

          For continuous operations,  a savings of 20%-30% was
          reported  by  the introduction of automatic water stops.
          Counter current washing was found to be most effective.
          Horizontal washing equipment was  found to deliver the
          performance  of two vertical washing machines for the same
          water consumption.

     5.2  Scale of  Operation:   Initially,  laboratory studies were
          carried out  to ascertain potential possibilities.
          Approximately 25 setups were installed at  15 textile
          plants.

     5.3  Stage of  Development:   At the time the case study was
          reported, the technology was in the  pilot  stage.

     5.4  Level of  Commercialization:   It  is unknown whether the
          technology was  commercially available  at the time of the

-------
          case study.

     5.5  Material/Energy Balances and Substitutions:

6.0  Economics:

     6.3  Payback Time:  The only technology with a known payback
          time is beam dyeing, which has a payback time of about
          four months.

7.0  Cleaner Production Benefits:  Substantially reduced fresh
     water consumption and reduced cost of effluent treatment
     plant.

8.0  Obstacles, Problems, and/or Known Constraints.:  None reported.
9.0  Date Case Study Was Performed:  1976

10.0 Contacts and Citation

     10.1 Type of Source Material:  Conference Proceedings.

     10.2 Citation:  H. Asnes, "Reduction in Water Consumption in
          the Textile Industry," IFATCC Conference, London, 1978.

     10.3 Level of Detail of Source Material:  Unknown.

     10.4 Industry/Program Contact and Address:  Unknown.

     10.5 Abstractor Name and Address:  Mary L. Wolfe, Science
          Applications International Corporation, 8400 Westpark
          Drive, McLean, VA  22102.

11.0 Keywords

     11.1 Waste type:  Wastewater.

     11.2 Process Type/Waste Source:  Textile Mill Products, SIC
          Code 22.

     11.3 Waste Reduction Technique:  Wastewater Reduction,
          Equipment Modification.

     11.4 Other Keywords:

12.0 Assumptions:  The  information  in this  case study was  derived
     from abstracts provided by  the United  Nationals Environment
     Program (Paris) .  This abstract was prepared directly from the
     abstract without access to the conference proceedings cited.


13.0 Peer Review:

I*)  - Disclaimer:    Economic data will vary due to economic
(*}   Disclaimer.    climatBi varying governmental regulations, and

-------
                    other  factors.

KEYWORDS:    Wastewater,  Textile  Mill  Products,   SIC  Code  22,
Wastewater Reduction,  Equipment Modification.
Displaying item number  82
**********
***** DOCNO: DOCUMENT  NOT  AVAILABLE *****

1.0  Headline:  Heat Recovery  in  Textile Industry.

2.0  SIC Code:   2259, Knitting  Mills NEC; 22, Textile Mill Products

3.0  Name and Location of  Company:   Ellen Knitting Mills,  Spruce
     Pine, North Carolina,  USA.

4.0  Clean Technology  Category:   This  case  study presents heat
     recovery technology.

5.0  Case Study Summary:

     5.1  Process and  Waste Information:  The temperature of the
          dye bath water,  which was discharged to the municipal
          sewer system, was 123 Deg. F.  The water temperature
          cause breakage of the terra  cotta sewer piping.   To
          alleviate this problem, heat recovery was required.

          Spent dye water  is discharged into a holding vat from
          which it enters  a stainless  steel heat exchanger.  The
          exchanger is composed of  five 50-foot long, eight-inch
          diameter pipes.   Inside each pipe is a bundle of smaller
          tubes that allow heat transfer.   Heat recovered from the
          water is used to  preheat incoming  feed water from the dye
          tubes from 55 Deg. F  to  about 105 Deg.  F.  The preheating
          operation saves  about 52,000 gallons of fuel oil per
          year.

     5.2  Scale of Operation:  Unknown.

     5.3  Stage of Development:   The technology is fully
          implemented  at the facility.

     5.4  Level of Commercialization:   Unknown.

     5.5  Material/Energy  Balances  and Substitutions:


     6.1  Investments  Costs:   In  1981,  the  company invested
          $100,000 in  a heat exchange  system.

-------
      6.2   Operational & Maintenance Costs:   Not reported.

      6.3   Payback Time:  Not reported.

 7.0   Cleaner Production Benefits:   The  facility reduced its  fuel
      oil  use.

 8.0   Obstacles,  Problems,  and/or Known  Constraints:   Unknown.
 9.0   Date Case  Study Was Performed:   1981

 10.0  Contacts and Citation

      10.1 Type  of Source Material:   Government publication.

      10.2 Citation:  Profits of Pollution  Prevention:  A Compendium
           of North Carolina Case Studies,  North Carolina Department
           of Natural Resources and  Community Development, North
           Carolina.

      10.3  Level  of Detail  of Source  Material:   Unknown.

      10.4  Industry/Program Contact  and  Address:   Unknown.

      10.5  Abstractor Name  and Address:  Mary L.  Wolfe,  Science
           Applications  International Corporation,  8400  Westpark
           Drive,  McLean, VA  22102.

 11.0  Keywords

      11.1  Waste  type:   Wastewater.

      11.2  Process Type/Waste Source:  Textile  Mill Products, SIC
           Code 22.

      11.3  Waste  Reduction  Technique:  Heat  Exchange.

      11.4  Other  Keywords:

 12.0 Assumptions:  The  information  in this  case  study was derived
      from  abstracts  provided by the  United  Nationals Environment
     Program (Paris).  This abstract  was prepared directly from the
     abstract without access to the  publication  cited.

 13.0 Peer  Review:

 (*) - Disclaimer:    Economic data will  vary due  to economic
                     climate, varying governmental regulations, and
                     other  factors.

KEYWORDS:  Wastewater,  Textile Mill Products, SIC Code 22,   Heat
Exchange.

********!
**********

-------
Displaying item number  83
***** DOCNO: 400-121-A *****

1.0  Headline:   Zinc Recovery in the Rayon Industry in Netherlands.

2.0  SIC Code:  22,  Textile Mill Products

3.0  Name and Location of  Company:   Enka B.V., Velperweg,
     Kleefsewaard  at Arnheim,  Netherlands.

4.0  Clean Technology Category:  This case study addresses recovery
     of zinc.

5.0  Case Study Summary:

     5.1  Process and Waste Information:  The main production steps
          in the rayon industry are (1)  the reaction of cellulose
          with sodium hydroxide, followed by pressing and grinding;
          (2) the  reaction of sodium-cellulose with carbon
          disulfide; (3) the creation of a solution of reaction
          product  in water, called viscose; (4)the spinning of
          viscose  by injection through a spinning head into a
          spinning bath, where the viscose is transformed into
          cellulose yarn by coagulation; and (5) finishing of rayon
          tire cord by washing, lubrication,  and drying.

          During the spinning process, zinc sulphate is used to
          slow down the formation of the yarn.   This is necessary
          in order to obtain the desired strength and elongation of
          the yarn.   The wastewater from the spinning process
          contains mainly  sulfuric acid, sodium sulphate, and zinc
          salts.   This wastewater is treated in  the biological
          wastewater treatment plant.   Removal of zinc++ is
          effected by precipitating it to form inert zinc sulfides.

          The biological sludge containing this  zinc sulfide is
          dumped on the land.   For the wastewater, the discharge
          draft standard for zinc in some areas of the Netherlands
          is 20 kg/day. The maximum allowable amount of zinc in
          any given sample of wastewater effluent is 3 mg/liter.
          Over a 24-hour period the maximum allowable zinc content
          in the wastewater effluent is 2 mg/liter.

          The low-waste technology concerns the  recovery and
          recycling of zinc from the acid effluent of the rayon
          spinning process.  The zinc++ containing acid effluent is
          treated  with a mixture of D.E.H.P.A.  (10%) and solvesso
          150 (90%) .  The ratio of acid effluent to organic solvent
          is generally less than one.   Treatment occurs  in a tank
          fitted with agitators.  The dispersed water and organic
          solvent  is transported to a separation tank  in order to

-------
          obtain separation between water and the organic phase.
          The extraction process is carried out in three steps with
          counter-flow of  the effluent and the organic solvent.
          The reaction product of zinc++ and D.E.H.P.A.  dissolves
          in the organic phase.  This organic phase has to be
          stripped in order to recover the zinc++.

          In order to obtain high efficiency of  zinc++ removal, the
          pH of the water  phase must be controlled by addition of
          sodium hydroxide.  During the first extraction step the
          pH is greater than  2.8 and afterwards it is greater than
          3.0.  The zinc++ removal efficiency is generally more
          than 98%.  The zinc-free water phase is neutralized and
          charged together with 10 times the amount of caustic
          wastewater in the wastewater treatment plant.   The
          effluent from the wastewater treatment plant is dumped
          together with three times the amount of other wastewater
          into open water.

          To recover the zinc++ from the organic extraction
          solvent, the solvent is stripped with a water-based
          solution of sulfuric acid (20%)  and a flocculent.  This
          is, however,  a one-step process.  During stripping, the
          zinc++ is re-worked as zinc sulphate.  It dissolves in
          the waster phase.  This solution is used again in the
          spinning process.  The addition of a flocculent is
          essential in order to obtain high efficiency of zinc++
          recovery and to  prevent large losses or  organic solvent.
          This flocculent  neutralizes the cation-active substances.

          The zinc++ recovery efficiency is about 100%.

     5.2  Scale of Operation:  The plant maximum capacity for
          treatment is 40 cubic meters of effluent per hour.

     5.3  Stage of Development:  The technology is fully
          implemented.

     5.4  Level of Commercialization:  Unknown.

     5.5  Material/Energy Balances and Substitutions:  Figures
          based on tone of rayon tire cord production in the
          effluent discharge.

6.0  Economics*

     6.1  Investments Costs:  While the total investment for the
          conventional process is 2,000,000 Fl, the investment for
          the low-waste technology is 5,600,000 Fl.  The cost of
          rayon tire cord per year increases from 70 Fl for the
          conventional method to 85 Fl for the low-waste
          technology.  Zinc recovery results in savings of 225,000
          Fl per year.

-------
     6.2  Operational  & Maintenance Costs:   Unknown.

     6.3  Payback Time:   Unknown.

7.0  Cleaner Production Benefits:   Because  the  zinc removal
     efficiency  is high,  there  are economic benefits as well as
     regulatory  benefits.

8.0  Obstacles, Problems,  and/or Known Constraints: Not available.

9.0  Date Case Study  Was  Performed:  1982

10.0 Contacts  and Citation

     10.1 Type of Source  Material:  United  Nations document.
     10.2 Citation:   United Nations Economic and  Social Council,
          Economic Commission  for  Europe, Compendium on Low- or
          Non-Waste Technology,  Monograph ENV/W) .2/5/Add.l21, May
          1985.

     10.3 Level  of Detail of Source Material:   Unknown.

     10.4 Industry/Program  Contact and Address:   Unknown.

     10.5 Abstractor  Name and Address:   Mary L. Wolfe, Science
          Applications International Corporation, 8400 Westpark
          Drive, McLean,  VA  22102.

11.0 Keywords

     11.1 Waste  type:   Wastewater.

     11.2 Process Type/Waste Source:  Textile Mill Products, SIC
          Code 22.

     11.3 Waste Reduction Technique:  Wastewater Reduction, Reuse,
          Recovery.
     11.4 Other  Keywords:

12.0 Assumptions:  The information in this  case study was derived
     from abstracts provided by the United  Nations  Environment
     Program (Paris) .  This abstract was prepared directly from the
     abstract  without access to the document cited.

13.0 Peer Review:

(*) - Disclaimer:   Economic data will vary due to  economic
                    climate, varying governmental regulations,  and
                    other factors.

KEYWORDS:    Wastewater,  Textile  Mill  Products,   SIC   Code  22,
Wastewater  Reduction, Reuse, Recovery.

-------
Displaying item number 84
Document No.:   327-005-A-OOO

1.0  Headline:  Cadmium Waste Management Progam Utilizes Good
     Operating Practices to Reduce Generation of Metal Hydroxide
     Sludge at A Plating Facility

2.0  SIC Code:  3471, Electroplating,  Plating,  Polishing,
     Anodizing and Coloring

3.0  Name & Location of Company

     Bass Plating Company
     Old Windsor Road
     Bloomfield, Connecticut

4.0  Clean Technology Category:  The technology involves
     implementation of good operating practice and waste
     minimzation options such as increasing drip times, elevating
     plating bath temperatures, improving drip containment and
     redesigning plating racks.


5.0  Case Study Summary

     5.1  Process and Waste Information:  The company specializes
          in zinc, cadmium, nickel-cadmium, and tin plating and
          passivating.  Metal hydroxide sludge is generated from
          the three plating lines which all contain cadmium.  The
          company conducted a waste minimization assessment at
          the facility.

          Many of the low-cost, good operating practice and waste
          minimization options identified were implemented.
          These included increasing drip times, elevating plating
          bath temperatures, improving drip containment and
          redesigning plating racks.

     5.2  Scale of Operation:  The company employs 35 people.

     5.3  Stage of Development:  The options identified above
          have been  implemented.  Other options have been
          identified which may be implemented  in the future.

     5.4  Level of Commercialization:  The technology  is fully
          commercialized.

     5.5  Material/Energy Balances and Substitutions:

          Information not provided.

-------
6.0  Economics*

     6.1  Investment Costs:   The cost was reported  as $12,000.

     6.2  Operational & Maintenance Costs:  Savings in operating
          expenses  were reported as $96,100 per  year.

     6.3  Payback Time:  Payback period is 5.8 months.

7.0  Cleaner  Production Benefits:  120 tons of metal hydroxide
     sludge were expected to be generated in 1989,  representing a
     15% decrease  in sludge generation in 1988.

8.0  Obstacles, Problems, and/or Known Constraints:  None
     reported.

9.0  Date Case  Study Was Performed:  The project was completed in
     June 1989.

10.0 Contacts and Citation

     10.1 Type  of Source Material:  Technical assistance program
          summary

     10.2 Citation:  ConnTAP Matching Challenge  Grants - 1988-89,
          Connecticut Hazardous Waste Management Service, pp. 4-
          5.  "Summary Report, Cadmium Waste Management Program,
          Bass  Plating Company," Bass Plating Company, June,
          1989.

     10.3 Level of  Detail of the Source Material:   Additional
          information is available concerning the funding of this
          project.

     10.4 Industry/Program Contact and Address:  Rocco
          Mastrobattista, Project Manager, Bass  Plating Company,
          Old Windsor Road,  Bloomfiled, CT  06002,  (203) 243-
          2557.

11.0 Keywords

     11.1 Waste type:  wastewater, plating baths

     11.2 Process type/waste source:  electroplating, zinc
          plating,  cadmium plating, tin plating, passivating, SIC
          Code  3471

     11.3 Waste reduction technique:  drip confinement, process
          redesign, equipment modification

     11.4 Other keywords:

12.0 Assumptions

-------
     None

13.0 Peer Review: .Unknown

(*) - Disclaimer:  Economic data will vary due to economic
climate, varying governmental regulations and other factors.

KEYWORDS: wastewater,  plating baths, electroplating, zinc plating,
cadmium  plating,  tin  plating,  passivating,  SIC Code  3471,  drip
confinement, process redesign, equipment modification

                      r*******************************************
Displaying item number 85

***********************
Document No.:   327-005-A-OOO

1.0  Headline:   Pilot Scale Test of "lonnet" Electrolytic
     Recovery  Unit Plates Out Nickel from Wastewater

2.0  SIC Code:   3471, Electroplating, Plating, Polishing,
     Anodizing,  and Coloring

3 . 0  Name & Location of Company

     Pioneer Industries, Inc.
     700 Lordship Blvd.
     Stratford CT  06497

4.0  Clean Technology Category:  A pilot scale test of an
     "lonnet"  electrolytic recovery unit was conducted to plate
     out nickel from wastewater.

5 . 0  Case Study Summary

     5.1  Process and Waste Information:  The facility performs
          contract plating, utilizing both rack and barrel
          techniques and works with nickel and gold
          electroplating and electroless nickel plating.  A pilot
          scale test of an "lonnet" electrolytic recovery unit
          was conducted to plate nickel out of wastewater.  The
          metal-bearing stream enters the unit and is channeled
          downward through a eries of electrolytic chambers each
          containing an anode and a cathode.  The metal  ions
          readily adhere to the cathode due to an increase in
          mass transfer efficiency.  Solids which accumulate
          during the electrowinning process are swept to the cell
          bottom and contained for draining.  The lonnet cell can
          be used for batch recovery or continuous treatment.
          The wastewater was processed through the recovery unit

-------
          until it contained less than  20 ppm of nickel.   The
          wastewater was then further processed using existing
          technology before being discharged.

     5.2  Scale of Operation:  The company employs ten people.

     5.3  Stage of Development:  The technology  was tested  in a
          pilot scale demonstration.

     5.4  Level of Commercialization:   The technology is
          commercially available.

     5.5  Material/Energy  Balances and  Substitutions:

          Information not  provided.

6.0  Economics*

     6.1  Investment Costs:  The cost of the system is $11,900.

     6.2  Operational & Maintenance Costs:  Savings are $17,000
          in waste treatment costs.

     6.3  Payback Time:  Payback time is 8.4 months.

7.0  Cleaner Production Benefits:

     If a full-scale electrolytic recovery unit were installed,
     the generation of metal hydroxide  sludge and the need for
     off-site disposal would be eliminated.

8.0  Obstacles, Problems,  and/or Known  Constraints:

     None mentioned

9.0  Date Case Study Was Performed:  The project was completed  in
     September 1989.

10.0 Contacts and Citation

     10.1 Type of Source Material:  Technical assistance program
          summary.

     10.2 Citation:  ConnTAP - Matching Challenge  Grants, 1988-
          89, Connecticut  Hazardous Waste Management Service,  pp.
          6-7. "Electrolytic Recovery of Nickel from an
          Electroplating Process, Project P500," Precision Metal
          Finishing, Inc., September  1989.


     10.3 Level of Detail  of the  Source Material:   A diagram of
          the lonnet cell  is given  in the source document.

     10.4 Industry/Program Contact  and  Address: Jeff  Collins,

-------
          Prject Manager, Pioneer Industries, Inc.  700 Lordship
          Blvd., Stratford, CT  06497, (203) 378-6116.

11.0 Keywords

     11.1 Waste type:  wastewater, metal-bearing wastes

     11.2 Process type/waste source:  electroplating, nickel
          plating

     11.3 Waste reduction technique:  electrolytic recovery,
          lonnet cell

     11.4 Other keywords:  pilot scale test

12.0 Assumptions

     None

13.0 Peer Review:  Unknown

(*)  - Disclaimer:  Economic data will vary due to economic
climate, varying governmental regulations and other factors.

KEYWORDS: wastewater, metal-bearing wastes, electroplating, nickel
plating, electrolytic recovery, lonnet cell, pilot scale test

**********!
**********

Displaying item number 86

**********:
**********

Document No.:  327-005-A-OOO

1.0  Headline:  Waste Minimization Study Identifies Alternatives
     for Reducing Wastes at a Metal Finishing Plant

2.0  SIC Code:  3471, Electroplating, Plating, Polishing,
     Anodizing and Coloring

3.0  Name & Location of Company

     Seaboard Metal Finishing Co., Inc.
     50 Fresh Meadow Road, West Haven, CT  06516

4.0  Clean Technology Category:  A waste minimization study,
     including performing a mass balance and waste inventory,
     identified alternatives for future implementation.

5.0  Case Study Summary

-------
      5.1   Process and Waste Information:  The facility has six
           process plating lines, including copper, automatic
           nickel, barrel copper/nickel, bulk chrome, hard chrome
           and rack nickel/chrome plating.  The resulting F006
           sludge requires off-site disposal.

           A waste minimization study of the six electroplating
           lines was conducted.  A mass balance was determined  by
           analyzing the discharges for metals and determining  an
           average discharge rate.  A waste inventory was peformed
           and critical sources of waste were identified.   Waste
           minimization alternatives were analyzed for technical
           feasibility and cost effectiveness.  The proposed
           alternatives included recycling rinsewaters,  automating
           plating lines, installing evaporation technology and
           additional rinse tanks with reduction of countercurrent
           flow.

      5.2   Scale of Operation:  The facility employs 45  plant
           personnel.

      5.3   Stage of Development:  The proposed alternatives had
           not been implemented at the time the case study was
           written.
      5.4   Level of Commercialization:  The technology is
           commercially available.

      5.5   Material/Energy Balances and Substitutions:

           Information not available.

6.0   Economics*

      6.1   Investment Costs:   The cost is estimated at $13,500  for
           several new rinse tanks and evaporation unit.

      6.2   Operational & Maintenance Costs:  Annual savings of
           more than $15,000 are anticipated.

      6.3   Payback Time:  The payback period is estimated at  1.2
           years.

7.0   Cleaner Production Benefits:  If the alternatives  were
      implemented, a reduction of 75% would be achieved for
      copper,  hexavalent chromium, cyanide, and nickel wastewater.
      About 16 tons of F006 sludge,  now requiring off-site
      disposal,  would be eliminated.

8.0   Obstacles,  Problems,  and/or Known Constraints:  None
      mentioned.

9.0   Date  Case Study Was Performed:  The project was completed in
      April 1989.

-------
10.0 Contacts and  Citation

     10.1 Type of  Source Material:  Technical assistance program
          summary

     10.2 Citation:  ConnTAP Matching Challenge Grants - 1988-89,
          Connecticut Hazardous Waste Management Service, pp. 8-
          9.  "Waste Minimization Study." YWC, Inc., April  1989.

     10.3 Level of Detail of the Source Material: No additional
          information is provided.

     10.4 Industry/Program Contact and Address:  John Conroy,
          Project Manager, Seaboard Metal Finishing Co., Inc., 50
          Fresh Meadow Road, West Haven, CT  06516  (203) 933-
          1603.

11.0 Keywords

     11.1 Waste type:  wastewater, plating baths

     11.2 Process type/waste source:  electroplating, nickel
          plating, chrome plating

     11.3 Waste reduction technique:  waste minimization study,
          bath recycling, flow reduction evaporation

     11.4 Other keywords:

12 . 0 Assumptions

     None

13.0 Peer Review:  Unknown


(*) - Disclaimer:  Economic data will vary due to economic
climate, varying governmental regulations and other factors.

KEYWORDS:  wastewater,   plating   baths,   electroplating,   nickel
plating, chrome plating,  waste minimization study, bath recycling,
flow reduction evaporation
Displaying item number 87
**********
Document No.:  327-005-A-OOO

1.0  Headline:  Evaporative Recovery Systems Evaluated for

-------
     Reducing Volume  of  Hazardous Wastewater

2.0  SIC Code:   3842,  Orthopedic, Prosthetic,  and Surgical
     Appliances  and Supplies

3.0  Name & Location  of  Company

     Davis & Geek
     Danbury, CT

4.0  Clean Technology Category:   The technology  involves use of
     an evaporative recoery system to reduce hazardous waste
     produced from a  silk dying process.

5.0  Case Study  Summary

     5.1  Process and Waste Information:   The  facility
          manufactures surgical equipment,  such  as arthroscopic
          and ophthalmologic devices.  A  silk  dying process is
          used which  generates hazadrous  wastewater.

          Two evaporative methods for wastewater reduction were
          investigated.   A "CALFRAN" cold evaporation unit, which
          operated under a vacuum of 10 to 20  torr, and a
          "SAMSCO" hot evaporation unit,  which is a natural gas
          fired  air assisten water evaporator, were considered.
          The "SAMSCO" system was selected due to a lower capital
          expenditure, higher annual savings,  low maintenance,
          flexibility to add capacity and fewer  state permit
          requirements.

     5.2  Scale  of Operation:   Information not provided.

     5.3  Stage  of Development:   The system was  selected but had
          not been purchased or installed at the time of the case
          study.

     5.4  Level  of Commercialization:  The equipment is
          commercially available.

     5.5  Material/Energy Balances and Substitutions:

          Information not provided.

6.0  Economics*

     6.1  Investment  Costs:   The investment cost is $68,000.

     6.2  Operational &  Maintenance Costs:   Savings of  $51,000
          are anticipated.

     6.3  Payback Time:   The payback period is estimated as 2.1
          years.

-------
7.0  Cleaner  Production  Benefits:  The  installation of  the  system
     is expected  to  reduce  the volume of hazardous wastewater  in
     need of  disposal by at least  152,000 gallons per year.

8.0  Obstacles, Problems, and/or Known  Constraints:

     None

9.0  Date Case Study Was Performed:  The project to assess  the
     systems  was  completed-in November  1989.

10.0 Contacts and Citation

     10.1 Type of Source Material:  Technical assistance program
          summary.

     10.2 Citation:  ConnTAP Matching Challenge Grants  - 1988-89,
          Connecticut Hazardous Waste Management Service, pp.  16-
          17. "Engineering  Report  for Silk Dye Waste Reduction
          Project," American Cyanamid Company, Davis and Geek
          Division, November 1989.

     10.3 Level of Detail of the Source Material:  Additional
          information is available on the SAMSCO system.

     10.4 Industry/Program  Contact and Address:  Joseph
          Lacalamito, Project Manager, American Cyanamid Company,
          Davis and Geek Division, 1 Casper Street, Danbury, CT
          06810,  (203) 743-4451.

11.0 Keywords

     11.1 Waste type:  wastewater

     11.2 Process type/waste source:   silk dying, SIC Code  3842

     11.3 Waste reduction technique:   evaporation, hot  evaporator

     11.4 Other keywords:   volume  reduction

12.0 Assumptions

13.0 Peer Review

(*)  - Disclaimer:   Economic data will vary due to economic
climate, varying governmental regulations and other factors.

KEYWORDS: wastewater, silk  dying,  SIC Code 3842, evaporation,  hot
evaporator,  volume reduction
Displaying item number 88

-------
**********

Document No.:  222-003-001

1.0  Headline  An adsorbent-based  system for effective removal of
     low concentration  toxic  metals  from rinse waters has been
     developed and tested  in  the metal  plating industry.

2.0  SIC Code:  3471, electroplating, surface finishing, metal
     finishing

3.0  Name & Loca'tion  of Company
     Aluminum Company of America
     Alcoa Technical  Center
     Alcoa Center, PA  15069

4.0  Clean Technology Category
     A specialty activated Mg-Al oxide  adsorbent, which acts as
     an inorganic anion exchange material,  is a used as a
     wastewater treatment technology.

5.0  Case Study Summary

     5.1  Process and Waste Information:  The metal finishing
          industry performs a wide variety  of chemical
          operations.   Important among  these are metal surface
          preparation and plating  operations.  Surface
          preparation often consists of chemical etching and
          conversion  coating  with  solutions of chromium salts.
          The plating operations include both conventional
          electroplating processes and  electroless chemical
          plating of  metal films such as Ni-P, Cu, Co, etc.  The
          testing of  a  Mg-Al  oxide adsorbent-based process which
          effectively removes toxic  metals  from metal finishing
          rinse waters  is presented  in  this case study.

          The adsorbent was tested in the laboratory on
          individual  samples  from  customer's wastewater streams.
          Two tests were conducted:   a  powder treatment study and
          a granular  column study.   Then pilot scale trials were
          done to obtain material  consumption and economic data.
          Testing was done on electroless plating rinses,
          hexavalent  chromium rinses, and cyanide plating rinses.

     5.2  Scale of Operation:  The scale of operation of the
          plants from which the water was tested was not
          described.

     5.3  Stage of Development:  This treatment method has been
          laboratory  tested and pilot field tested.  The
          adsorbent is  fully  developed.

     5.4  Level of Commercialization:   The  new adsorbent is

-------
          trademarked as Alcoa SORBPLUS Adsorbent.
     5.5  Material/Energy Balances and Substitutions:

                                   Quantity            Quantity
Material Category                  Before              After

Waste Generation:
     rinsewater                    N/A

This study tested the effectiveness of various adsorbent doses by
determining the associated element concentrations in the
laboratory and in pilot field tests.   Therefore, a material
balance within a specific facility is not possible.  The study
provides the concentrations associated with different adsorbent
doses.

6.0  Economics*

     6.1  Investment Costs:  not provided

     6.2  Operational & Maintenance Costs:  not provided

     6.3  Payback Time:  not provided

7.0  Cleaner Production Benefits  The Mg-Al oxide adsorbent is a
     non-toxic, non-corrosive inorganic chemical.  The key
     benefit of the adsorbent is the selective adsorption of
     toxic .stream contaminants.  The adsorbent is highly
     effective at removing chelated nickel, copper or cobalt from
     electroless plating baths or rinses; hexavalent chromium
     from chrome plating or chromate conversion coating
     rinsewaters; and metal complexed cyanides from cyanide
     plating rinsewaters.

     This treatment technology requires very low capital
     investment and low maintenance (figures not provided).
     Furthermore, it is feasible to recycle the treated rinse
     water which can actually improve the overall system
     performance.

8.0  Obstacles, Problems, and/or Known Constraints  Spent
     adsorbent will have to pass the Toxic Characteristic
     Leaching Procedure  (TCLP) before being disposed of in a
     landfill.

9.0  Date Case Study Was Performed
     not provided

10.  Contacts and Citation

     10.1 Type of Source Material:  EPA Conference Proceedings

-------
     10.2 Citation:  American Electroplaters and Surface
          Finishers Society,  Inc.,  and  the Environmental
          Protection Agency;  "12th  AESF/EPA Conference on
          Environmental  Control  for the Surface Finishing
          Industry; January,  1991;  pp.  257-268.

     10.3 Level of Detail  of  the Source Material:  Additional
          detail  is provided  on  the results of each rinse tested,
          including the  adsorbent doses,  the concentrations of
          chemicals in the rinsewater before and after
          introducing the  adsorbent.

     10.4 Industry/Program Contact  and  Address:  not provided

     10.5 Abstractor Name  and Address:   Maria Leet, SAIC, 7600
          Leesburg Pike, Falls Church,  VA 22043.

11.0 Keywords

     11.1 Waste type:  rinsewater,  plating baths

     11.2 Process type/waste  source:  electroplating, surface
          finishing, SIC Code 3471

     11.3 Waste reduction  technique:  wastewater treatment,
          adsorption

     11.4 Other keywords:

12.0 Assumptions
     Although ALCOA is  listed above in  Section 3.0 as the
     facility, the laboratory testing was conducted on
     rinsewaters  from customer companies. It was not stated
     where the pilot field testing  was  conducted.

13.0 Peer Review
     Unknown


(*) - Disclaimer:  Economic data will vary due to economic
climate, varying  governmental regulations and other  factors.

KEYWORDS:  rinsewater,   plating   baths,  electroplating,  surface
finishing, SIC Code 3471,  wastewater treatment,  adsorption

*****************************************************************
**********

Displaying item number  89

*****************************************************************
**********

Document No.:  222-003-001

-------
1.0  Headline  A Metal Finishing Plant Tested Silver Reduction
Process To Replace The Existing Treatment Plant and Also Tested
On-site Silver Reclamation To Replace Off-site Reclamation.


2.0  SIC Code: 3471, electroplating, surface finishing


3.0  Name & Location of Company
     not specified


4.0  Clean Technology Category;  The clean technologies initiated
     in the case study consisted of the modification of air-
     knives, electrolytic recovery cells and flow restrictors to
     reduce silver drag-out and the installation of reverse
     osmosis units as in-line reuse systems.


5.0  Case Study Summary

     5.1  Process and Waste Information:  Two examples of waste
          minimization at a metal finishing plant are presented
          in this case study.  In the first example, the rinse-
          wastewater treatment plant was frequently violating the
          discharge standard for silver.  The major sources of
          the silver were rinses following silver-cyanide plating
          in the reel-to-reel lines.  The plant evaluated whether
          or not to modify the treatment system or introduce
          waste minimization in the production line.  A strategy
          to reduce silver drag-out was initiated, including:
          efficient air-knives installed at the rinse tanks, more
          efficient electrolytic recovery cells installed on the
          dead rinses following the silver plating baths, and
          flow restrictors installed on all rinses.

          In the second example, to replace off-site silver-
          reclamation, on-site silver reclamation was initiated
          to reclaim silver from the silver dead rinses.  This
          in-line reuse system consisted of 6 reverse osmosis
          units.  The installation would involve conversion of
          the dead rinse and Dl-Water rinse stations to a two-
          stage counter flow rinse, conductivity control of DI
          Water supply, and recirculation pumps for rinsing to
          reduce the flow rate.

     5.2  Scale of Operation:  Information not provided.

     5.3  Stage of Development:  The clean  technologies are fully
          developed.

     5.4  Level of Commercialization:   The  clean technologies  are
          fully commercialized.

-------
     5.5  Material/Energy Balances and Substitutions:


                                    Quantity           Quantity
Material Category                   Before             After

Waste Generation:
     silver drag-out reduction:
          rinse-wastewater         240,000  gpd        155,000 gpd
          silver concentration
            in  influent             5 mg/1            0.5 mg/1
          silver concentrations
            in  effluent             N/A               below 0.15
                                                  mg/1
6.0   Economics*

      6.1   Investment Costs:    In the first example, the capital
           investment for the silver drag-out reduction was.
           $12,000.

           The capital cost to install the reverse osmosis units
           was estimated at $525,000.

      6.2   Operational & Maintenance Costs:  Information not
           provided.

      6.3   Payback Time:  without expanding the capacity of the
           plant,  the payback period for installing the capacity
           of  the  plant, the payback period for installing waste
           minimization in the production line was projected to be
           less than  one month.

           The marginal payback period for the in-line reuse
           system  as  compared to the existing off-site reclamation
           was projected as 5 months.


7.0   Cleaner  Production Benefits:  For the first example, the
      operating savings of silver drag-out reduction versus
      treatment is $470,000 per year.  For the first six months
      after implementation of the reduction process, all discharge
      standards were  being met.

      In the second example,  the net savings of the in-line reuse
      system versus the off-site reclamation were estimated at
      $825,000.  According to laboratory tests, more than 90%
      recovery is  feasible with the reverse osmosis units.
8.0  Obstacles,  Problems,  and/or Known Constraints  There  are

-------
     fiscal and organizational limits to implementation of waste
     minimization for these processes.  The silver drag-out
     reduction program required considerable attention from
     production Q/A personnel.  Despite initial improvements from
     waste discharge standards, by the end of a year, silver
     violations had returned to their former level.  This was due
     to significant changes in production and inadequate new
     treatment plant and not continue with the waste minimization
     efforts.
     Due to the large capital cost needed for the in-line-reuse
     system,  the facility also decided not to adopt the in-line
     system.


9.0  Date Case Study Was Performed

     Information not provided.


10.  Contacts and Citation

     10.1 Type of Source Material:  EPA Conference Proceedings

     10.2 Citation:  American Electroplaters and Surface
          Finishers Society, Inc., and the Environmental
          Protection Agency;  "12th AESF/EPA Conference on
          Environmental Control for the Surface Finishing
          Industry"; January, 1991; pp. 59-69.

     10.3 Level of Detail of the Source Material:  Further detail
          is provided on the silver drag-out reduction strategy
          and additional cost data is provided.

     10.4 Industry/Program Contact and Address:  John Rosenblum,
          Rosenblum Environmental Engineering, 3502 Thorn Road,
          Sebastopol, CA 95472.  Mazen J. Naser, Plating and
          Waste Management Consulting, 96 Lycett Circle, Daly
          City, CA 94015.

     10.5 Abstractor Name and Address:  Maria Leet, SAIC 7600
          Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22043.


11.0 Keywords

     11.1 Waste type:  rinsewater, wastewater

     11.2 Process type/waste  source:  electroplating, SIC Code
     3471, electroplating baths
     11.3 Waste reduction technique:  reuse, reclamation, reverse
          osmosis, electrolytic recovery, process modification,

-------
          silver recovery drag-out  reduction.

     11.4 Other keywords:   economics, payback period, economic
          evaluation, return on  investment.
12.0 Assumptions

     None

13.0 Peer Review

     Unknown
(*) - Disclaimer:   Economic  data will vary due to economic
climate, varying governmental  regulations and other factors.

KEYWORDS:  rinsewater,  wastewater,  electroplating,  SIC  Code  3471,
electroplating   baths,  reuse,   reclamation,   reverse   osmosis,
electrolytic  recovery,  process   modification,  silver  recovery
drag-out reduction, economics,  payback period, economic evaluation,
re
Displaying  item  number  90
**********
Document No.:   222-003-001

1.0  Headline   Use  of  Simple Material  Balances Solves Problems in
     A Circuit  Board Manufacturer's  Waste Water Treatment Plant.

2.0  SIC Code:  3672, printed circuit board manufacturing, 3471,
     electroplating, surface finishing

3.0  Name & Location of  Company

     Teradyne Connection Systems
     4 Pittsburgh Avenue
     Nashua, NH 03062

4.0  Clean Technology  Category

     After conducting  a  material balance, the company implemented
     technologies including process  modification, equipment
     redesign,  and  water conservation.  Recycling,  incineration,
     minimizing landfilling, equipment modification, on-site
     treatment,  ion exchange, neutralization, electrolytic
     recovery were  also  used as clean  technologies.

5.0  Case Study Summary

-------
5.1  Process and Waste Information:   This circuit board
     manufacturing facility used conventional precipitation
     for waste treatment.  After monitoring the compliance
     data from the waste treatment effluent with respect to
     copper concentration,  it became evident that the system
     was incapable of providing repeatable results.   There
     were copper spikes in the effluent that were apparently
     caused by non-settleable particles in the clarification
     process.

     A water material balance was conducted to verify the
     flow rates from the process area and the flow rates
     into the waste treatment area.   To reduce the hydraulic
     loading on the waste water treatment system, non-
     contact cooling water and scrubbing water were
     eliminated by installing closed loop systems.
     Equipment washdowns were also reduced 80% by installing
     automatic shut offs on the washdown hoses and devising
     and implementing strict water conservation
     specifications.  In addition, to reduce the water flow
     rate supplying the process equipment, rinsing
     specifications were determined and flow restrictors
     were installed.  Electronic controls were also
     installed to shut down the water flow to production
     equipment when unattended.
     A material balance of hazardous waste was also used to
     attempt to understand the type and amount of waste
     material that was being disposed of from the waste
     treatment process.  Strategic plans for waste
     management were then made, including:  recycling,
     incinerating all organic material, and minimizing or
     eliminating materials that are landfilled.  Therefore,
     two changes were made in waste handling at the
     facility:  (1) a sludge dehydrator was installed to
     increase the solids content of the F006 metal hydroxide
     sludge and reduce the amount of material that is
     disposed of at hazardous waste landfills and (2) the
     copper pyrophosphate material was to be treated in-
     house and not shipped off-site for disposal.

     To minimize hazardous waste generation, ion exchange
     can be coupled with electrolytic recovery.  A material
     balance was used to investigate the feasibility of such
     a system.  Depending on the concentration of the
     process waste water entering the collection system,
     either conventional treatment  (precipitation), or
     neutralization should be used.  It was discovered that
     one line entering the collection system, which has a
     flow rate of 15.5 gpm, would benefit from an ion
     exchange/electrolytic recovery system.

-------
     5.2  Scale of  Operation:  There are 275 employees.  Water
          usage at  the  facility is  100,000 gpd.

     5.3  Stage of  Development:   The technology is fully
          developed.

     5.4  Level of  Commercialization:   Information not provided.

     5.5  Material/Energy  Balances  and Substitutions:
Material Category

Waste Generation:

     copper pyrophosphate
Assumptions
below)
     metal hydroxide sludge
Feedstock Use:
Quantity
Before
2,764 Ibs
410,000 IbS
25% solids

N/A
Quantity
After
2,500 Ibs (see
12.0
101,675 Ibs
95% solids
    N/A
Material Category
Quantity
Before
Quantity
After
Water Usage:

   Process rinsewater          176 gpm

   Mechanical scrubber  water   118 gpm

   Non-contact cooling  water    42 gpm

   Equipment washdowns          10 gpm
                    106 gpm

                     -0-

                     -0-

                     -0-
Energy Use:                      N/A                 N/A

6.0  Economics*

     6.1  Investment  Costs:   Information not provided

     6.2  Operational & Maintenance Costs:  Information not
          provided
     6.3  Payback Time:   Information  not provided

-------
7.0  Cleaner Production Benefits

     Process water flow rates were reduced approximately 40%.
     The results of the flow rate reduction proved effective in
     increasing the repeatability of the effluent stream and
     resulted in a treatment confidence level  of  99.45%.

     The installation and operation of the sludge dehydrator
     increased the solids content of the F006  sludge from 25 to
     95% and decreased the volume by 75% which reduced disposal
     by 308,325 pounds per year.  In addition, by drying the
     sludge, the leaching capability and thus  the toxicity is
     reduced.

     The process to treat the copper pyrophosphate was designed
     and installed in-house.  This reduced the outside waste
     disposal by approximately 2700 Ibs per year.

     Subsequent to a materials balance of the hazardous waste,
     for a relatively small capital investment, a significant
     portion of the metal hydroxide sludge generation could be
     shifted to the production of non-hazardous metal products.

8.0  Obstacles, Problems,  and/or Known Constraints

     Information not provided

9.0  Date Case Study Was Performed

     The date was not provided, however, the case study was
     published in a January 1991 document.

10.  Contacts and Citation

     10.1 Type of Source Material:  EPA Conference Proceedings

     10.2 Citation:  American Electroplaters and  Surface
          Finishers Society, Inc., and the Environmental
          Protection Agency; "12th AESF/EPA Conference on
          Environmental Control for the Surface  Finishing
          Industry"; January, 1991; pp. 113-129.

     10.3 Level of Detail of the Source Material:  No further
          details were provided on material balances, and  flow
          charts of the plant processes.

     10.4 Industry/Program  Contact and Address:   David A.  Wood,
          P.T., Teradyne Connection Systems,  4 Pittsburgh  Avenue,
          Nashua, NH 03062.

     10.5 Abstractor Name and Address:  Maria Leet,  SAIC,  7600-A
          Leesburg Pike, McLean, VA 22043-4317.

-------
11.0 Keywords

     11.1 Waste type:  waste  water,  sludge, metals, copper

     11.2 Process  type/waste source:  SIC  Code 3672, printed
          circuit  board manufacturing,  SIC Code 3471,
          electroplating,  surface finishing

     11.3 Waste reduction  technique:   ion exchange, electrolytic
          recovery,  process  modification, equipment redesign

     11.4 Other keywords:  wastewater reduction, materials
          balance

12.0 Assumptions

13.0 Peer Review

     Unknown
 (*)  -  Disclaimer:   Economic data will  vary due to economic
 climate,  varying  governmental  regulations and other factors.

 KEYWORDS:  waste  water,  sludge,  metals,  copper,  SIC Code  3672,
 printed circuit board manufacturing,  SIC Code 3471, electroplating,
 surface  finishing, ion  exchange,  electrolytic  recovery,  process
 modification,  equipment  redesign,  wastewater reduction,  mater
**********

Displaying  item  number 91

**********1
**********
Document No.:  222-003-001

1.0  Headline  The  Removal of Certain Metals Can Be Accurately
Monitored with Oxidation Reduction Potential  (ORP) Probes in The
Metal Plating Industry

2.0  SIC Code: 3471,  electroplating,  surface finishing

3.0  Name &  Location  of Company

     Nalco Chemical Company
     Naperville,  Illinois

4.0  Clean Technology Category

     The clean technology used in these metal  plating plants is
     precipitation.   This case study  evaluated Oxidation

-------
     Reduction Potential (ORP) probes to measure metals removal.


5.0  Case Study Summary

     5.1  Process and Waste Information:  A research study was
          done to evaluate Oxidation Reduction Potential (ORP)
          probes as sensors in metal ion precipitation at Nalco
          Chemical Company.  Wastewater samples were tested using
          this method from four plants including, two printed
          circuit board plants, a zinc plating plant and a brass
          plating plant.

     5.2  Scale of Operation:  Information not provided

     5.3  Stage of Development:  The use of ORP probes as process
          sensors in ion precipitation is still in the testing
          phase.

     5.4  Level of Commercialization:  ORP probes are fully
          commercialized as they are commonly used in the plating
          industry to automate control of cyanide destruction  and
          chromium (VI) reduction processes.

     5.5  Material/Energy Balances and Substitutions:

                                   Quantity            Quantity
Material Category                  Before              After
Waste Generation:
Feedstock Use:                       N/A
Water Use:
Energy Use:

-------
6.0 Economics*
     6.1  Investment  Costs:   Information not  provided.

     6.2  Operational &  Maintenance Costs:  Information not
          provided

     6.3  Payback Time:   Information not provided


7.0  Cleaner Production  Benefits

     Removal of certain  metals  can  be accurately monitored with
     ORP probes.  In  laboratory studies,  marked response of ORP
     was seen at the  equivalence  point (dosage corresponding to
     metal ion disappearance) for a copper-bearing wastewater, a
     synthetic copper-nickel  wastewater,  and  a copper-zinc
     wastewater.  ORP responds  to the disappearance of certain
     metal ions such  as  copper  and  nickel, that are active at the
     electrode.

8.0  Obstacles, Problems,  and/or  Known Constraints

     In one sample  of circuit board plating wastewater, the
     presence of an interference  predicted severe product
     overfeed and under  ORP control.   The need for waste stream
     equalization or  removal  of the suspect stream from the
     continuous process  was suggested.

9.0  Date Case Study  Was Performed   Information not provided

10.  Contacts and Citation

     10.1 Type of Source Material:   EPA Conference Proceedings

     10.2 Citation:   American Electroplaters  and Surface
          Finishers Society,  Inc.,  and the Environmental
          Protection  Agency;  "12th  AESF/EPA Conference on
          Environmental  Control for the Surface Finishing
          Industry";  January, 1991;  pp.  309-316.

     10.3 Level of  Detail  of  the  Source Material:  Specific
          details of  the experimental procedure and the responses
          of the ORP  probe to metals removal  are provided.

     10.4 Indus try/Program Contact  and Address:  Kristine s.
          Siefert and Kerstin Lampert,  Nalco  Chemical Company,
          Naperville,  Illinois.

     10.5 Abstractor  Name  and Address:   Maria Leet, SAIC, 7600-A
          Leesburg  Pike, McLean,  VA 22043-4317.

-------
11.0 Keywords

     11.1 Waste type:  wastewater

     11.2 Process type/waste source:  electroplating, plating,
          SIC Code 3471, printed circuit board manufacturing,
          zinc plating, brass plating

     11.3 Waste reduction technique:  metal ion precipitation,
          metal recovery

     11.4 Other keywords:  oxidation reduction potential (ORP)
          probes

12.0 Assumptions
     None

13.0 Peer Review
     Unknown
(*) - Disclaimer:  Economic data will vary due to economic
climate, varying governmental regulations and other factors.

KEYWORDS:  wastewater,   electroplating,  plating,  SIC Code  3471,
printed circuit board manufacturing, zinc plating, brass plating,
metal  ion  precipitation,   metal   recovery,  oxidation  reduction
potential (ORP) probes


Displaying item number 92
**********
Document No.:  222-003-001

1.0  Headline:  Metal Recovery Systems Installed in an
Electroplating Facility Reduces Waste Generation, and Disposal
Costs, and the Potential for Wastewater Treatment Upsets

2.0  SIC Code: 3471, electroplating, surface finishing

3.0  Name & Location of Company:  Von Duprin, Incorporated,
     Indianapolis, Indiana.

4.0  Clean Technology Category

     The metal recovery systems involve spray rinses, a
     reciprocating bed ion-exchange system, atmospheric
     evaporation, a stagnant rinse, and reverse osmosis.

5.0  Case Study Summary

     5.1  Process and Waste Information:  Von Duprin conducts

-------
automated hoist rack plating of copper cyanide, satin and
bright nickel,  decorative chromium,  brass  cyanide and
barrel plating  of  alkaline non-cyanide  zinc.

Previously  implemented waste reduction  measures include
the following:   modifying rack designs  to  minimize
cupping; adjusting automatic hoist parameters  to include
extended drip times;  using two-stage and three-stage
counterflow rinses; using  stagnant baths for recovery of
dragout from bright  nickel and chrome baths; using
alkaline non-cyanide  zinc bath to minimize use of
cyanides; and eliminating vapor degreasing.

New technically and  economically optimal processes
selected for the facility include five  metal recovery
system:

      (1) Cyanide copper - The chosen technology includes
a combination of spray rinses to minimize  dragout and
atmospheric evaporation to allow space  in  the bath for
added water.  These  technologies result in maximum
recovery of solution  with minimal capital  and operating
costs.  They also result in less operator and maintenance
attention than  other  minimization options.  However,
because of  the  use of the atmospheric evaporator on a
cyanide bath, there  is an increased  rate of buildup of
potassium carbonate  in the bath.

      (2) Nickel -  Installation of a  reciprocating bed
ion-exchange system  for recovery and reuse of a nickel
chloride/nickel sulfate mix was •recommended.  Nickel can
be recovered from both the satin and bright nickel baths
without fear of bath  contamination associated with
recovery of bath brighteners.   The reciprocating bed
design offers the direct ability to  reuse  recovered
solution without further processing  to  remove excess
water.  Although the  system has a relatively high capital
cost, the payback period on the capital investment was
less than two years.

      (3) Chrome - A combination of spray rinsing,
atmospheric evaporation and a stagnant  rinse to minimize
dragout and recover solution captured in the first rinse
was selected. This system greatly improved recovery with
a minimal capital  investment.   The system  is also
applicable  to atrivalent chrome processing. The system,
however, causes the buildup of impurities  from reuse of
the dragout.  The ability of the existing  tank steam
coils to handle the heat loss from the  evaporator was
also found  to be a problem after the system was
installed.

      (4) Brass  - Reverse osmosis to  capture dragout and
return to clean water for rinsing was  selected.  This

-------
          system allows for closed-loop rinsing which eliminates
          cyanide discharges.  This does have a high capital and
          operating costs.  Buildup of carbonates is also a
          concern, but this has not been observed at the plant.

                (5) Non-cyanide alkaline zinc:  Reverse osmosis
          captures dragout from this barrel line and atmospheric
          evaporators make room in the bath for reuse of  all of the
          recovered solution.  This allows for a closed-loop system
          thus  eliminating zinc discharge.  Reverse osmosis also
          allows for recovery and  reuse of the zinc, unlike ion
          exchange systems, which  were designed to recover a zinc
          metal which would be shipped off-site.   The main
          disadvantage was the lack of vendor in-plant experience
          with  the system.

          In addition to the five  processes described above,
          process water for bath makeup and rinsing in the plating
          area was upgraded through the installation of a reverse
          osmosis water treatment  system.  In addition,  water use
          was achieved through reactive rinsing.   Rinsewater from
          acid  activation steps was pumped to rinse parts after
          alkaline steps.

     5.2  Scale of Operation: Information not provided

     5.3  Stage of Development: While all systems are not fully
          operational on a continual basis,  some reduction in
          sludge volumes has been  seen.   Metal usage in the third
          quarter of 1990 was less than half of that in the first
          quarter of 1990.

     5.4  Level of Commercialization:  The clean technologies are
          fuXly commercialized.
     5.5  Material/Energy Balances and Substitutions:

                                   Quantity            Quantity
Material Category                  Before              After

Waste Generation:                  N/A                 N/A
Feedstock Use:                     N/A                 N/A
Water Use:                         N/A                 N/A
Energy Use:                         N/A                 N/A

6.0  Economics*

     6.1  Investment Costs:  Costs were not provided although costs
          were considered in their evaluation of selecting waste
          reduction processes.  For example, it was stated that the
          reciprocating bed design has a "relatively high capital
          cost".

     6.2  Operational & Maintenance Costs:  Costs were not provided
          although costs were considered  in the selection of waste

-------
           reduction processes.

      6.3   Payback Time:  The  reciprocating bed ion-exchange system
           for recovery and reuse of a nickel chloride/nickel
           sulfate  mix has a payback period of under two  years.

7.0   Cleaner Production Benefits

      The  systems provide a cost-effective means to reduce  waste
      generation and disposal  costs,  enhance community and customer
      relations, and reduce the potential for wastewater  treatment
      upsets.  Significant reductions in metals and cyanides are
      expected to result and metal usage by the plant is  already
      decreased over 50%.  Drastic reductions in sludge volume are
      expected when the zinc recovery system operates consistently
      and  bath dumping is minimized.

8.0   Obstacles, Problems,  and/or Known Constraints

      Some .of the problems related to each process are discussed
      above in Section 5.1.

           During the installation of the equipment, there were some
      problems, including a lack of constant adequate water pressure
      to feed the reverse osmosis unit, resulting in system
      shutdowns.  During the installation of the nickel recovery
      ion-exchange  system,  piping contractors inappropriately
      mounted several transfer pumps outside of the diked area
      provided for  the equipment.  The major problems associated
      with the ion-exchange system included the control logic, which
      had  to be modified to allow smooth operation,  and the
      variations rinse conductivities, which was resolved by
      reducing the  acid amounts and adjusting the conductivity
      control loop.
           To install the brass and zinc reverse osmosis  systems,
      substantial time was spent cleaning rinse tanks to  remove
      hardness salts which could foul the reverse osmosis membranes.

      Extra costs were incurred to provide additional electrical
      noise isolation to protect system components.

           Several  problems were found in the first few months of
      operation of  the reverse osmosis systems.   A diatomaceous
      earth (DE) prefilter included in the zinc system repeatedly
      became plugged with a hard deposit that also clogged  the
      piping to the  DE filter.  This clogging caused several failed
      prefilter pumps.  It was determined that it was a result of
      calcium carbonate in the system, coming from the use  of
      insufficient  quality water before installation of softeners
      and  reverse osmosis membranes on the water supply.  The
      calcium carbonate also apparently passed through the  DE
      filter,  plugging one set of reverse osmosis membranes.

9.0   Date Case Study Was Performed

-------
     The case study was conducted  in  1989-1990.   Dates  of
     installation of technologies  was not provided.

10.  Contacts and Citation

     10.1 Type of Source Material:  EPA Conference Proceedings

     10.2 Citation:  American Electroplaters and Surface Finishers
          Society, Inc., and the Environmental  Protection Agency;
          "12th AESF/EPA Conference on Environmental Control for
          the Surface Finishing Industry; January, 1991;  pp. 51-57.

     10.3 Level of Detail of the Source Material:  Additional
          information is available  concerning the equipment and its
          operation.

     10.4 Industry /Program Contact and Address:  James  Smith and
          Michael Bayman,  Von Duprin, Inc., Indianapolis, IN.
          Daniel Reinke, Capsule Environmental  Engineering, Inc.

     10.5 Abstractor Name and Address:  Maria Leet, SAIC, 7600-A
          Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA   22043.

11.0 Keywords

     11.1 Waste type:  wastewater, rinsewater

     11.2 Process type/waste source:  electroplating, SIC Code
          3.471,  plating baths

     11.3 Waste reduction technique:  evaporation, ion-exchange,
          metals recovery, drag-out recovery, reverse osmosis,
          closed-loop recycling, rinsing techniques

     11.4 Other keywords:   wastewater reduction

12.0 Assumptions

     None

13.0 Peer Review:  Unknown

(*) - Disclaimer:  Economic data will vary due to economic climate,
varying governmental regulations and other  factors

KEYWORDS: wastewater, rinsewater,  electroplating,  SIC Code 3471,
plating baths, evaporation, ion-exchange,  metals recovery, drag-out
recovery,   reverse   osmosis,   closed-loop  recycling,   rinsing
techniques,  wastewater reduction
Displaying item number 93

-------
**********
Document No.: 222-003-001

1.0  Headline
     Closed-loop Recycling Reduces Metal Finishing  Wastewater
     Discharges

2.0  SIC Code: 3471,  electroplating,  surface finishing

3.0  Name & Location  of Company

     Pratt & Whitney  Aircraft,  North  Haven,  CT

4.0  Clean Technology Category

     Striving toward zero discharge, a closed-loop recycling system
     using good operating  practices has been installed.

5.0  Case Study Summary

     5.1  Process  and Waste Information:  This facility produces
          major metal-finished  rotating parts such as discs, hubs,
          and shafts.  In 1987,  they were discharging approximately
          1,000,000 GPD of treated wastewater,  400,000 of which was
          generated by metal-finishing operations.  Implementation
          of a "zero  discharge" program involved  6  phases.

               In Phase One good operating practices were defined.
          These include defining minimum water quality standards;
          using countercurrent  rinses to reduce water usage; using
          continuous process purification versus batch purification
          to maintain consistent process quality  (i.e., dummy
          plating and carbon and particulate  filtration); using on-
          line process monitors to control solution additions;
          optimizing  process solutions  to control dragout;
          optimizing  preplate rinsing to control  dragin of
          contaminants;  installing automatic level controls on all
          heated processes; training operators  to understand proper
          rinsing  and work transfer techniques to reduce dragout
          and dragin;  and  treating small concentrated batches as
          opposed  to  high  volume dilute wastestrearns.

               Phase Two is to implement Phase  One.  Phase Three is
          designed to verify closed-loop technology on a single
          process.  This was conducted  on an existing nickel
          plating process  encompassing  a Woods nickel strike and
          four sulfamate nickel plating tanks.

               Phase Four incorporates good operating practices and
          closed-loop technologies in the design  of planned and
          appropriated new plating lines.   Mew plating lines,
          encompassing (l)  nickel and chromium plating, (2)
          cadmium, chromium, and nickel  stripping, and (3) titanium

-------
          descaling were already on the drawing boards.   Initial
          plans were revised to incorporate countercurrent rinses,
          ion exchange  (nickel strike, nickel strip, cadmium strip,
          and chromium strip);  atmospheric evaporation (hard
          chromium, and sulfamate nickel); and deionized water in
          all critical  rinses and softened water in all noncritical
          rinses and noncritical evaporation makeup.

               Phase Five was to  install the plating lines.  Phase
          Six involved renovating remaining existing  processes,
          including cadmium cyanide plating and chromating.

     5.2  Scale of Operation:   The facility encompasses  1,000,000
          square feet.  It was discharging 1,000,000 GPD of treated
          wastewater, 400,000 GPD of which was generated from metal
          finishing operations.

     5.3  Stage of Development:   Implementation of Phase Three is
          fully developed and was completed in August, 1989.  The
          plating lines (Phase Five) are also completely developed
          and were installed by October,  1990.

     5.4  Level of Commercialization:  The new processes are fully
          commercialized.

     5.5  Material/Energy Balances and Substitutions:
          Material Category        Qty. Before    Qty. After
          Waste generation:             N/A            N/A
          Feedstock Use:                 N/A            N/A
          Water Use:               Shown in process schematics
          Energy Use:                   N/A            N/A

6.0  Economics*

     6.1  Investment Costs:  Information not provided

     6.2  Operational & Maintenance Costs:  Information not
          provided

     6.3  Payback Time:  The anticipated payback time  is less than
          two years.

7.0  Cleaner Production Benefits

     The metal finishing contribution to the total wastestream
     volume has been reduced from 40% to 5%.

          Raw material costs have been reduced  by approximately
     90%.  Transportation  and disposal costs and associated
     liabilities have  also been reduced by the  same order of
     magnitude due to the decreased sludge production and decreased
     shipments of  concentrated solution wastes  to a treatment
     facility.  Product  quality has also  improved and operator
     acceptance has  been very good despite  initial skepticism.

-------
8.0  Obstacles,  Problems, andyor Known Constraints

     None mentioned

9.0  Date Case Study Was Performed

     The  date  the case study was not provided, however, the initial
     conception for the zero-discharge plan began in 1987.

10.  Contacts  and Citation

     10.1 Type of Source Material:  EPA Conference Proceedings

     10.2 Citation:   American  Electroplaters and Surface Finishers
           Society,  Inc., and the Environmental Protection Agency;
           "12th AESF/EPA Conference on Environmental Control for
           the  Surface Finishing Industry; January,  1991; pp. 75-89.

     10.3 Level of Detail of the Source Material:   Additional
           details on the process description, nickel concentration,
           conductivity,  workload and water usage are provided in
           graphs.

     10.4 Industry/Program Contact and Address:   Industry contact
           not  provided.

     10.5 Abstractor Name and Address:  Maria Leet,  SAIC, 7600-A
           Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA  22043.

11.0 Keywords

     11.1 Waste type:  wastewater, metal finishing wastes,
           rinsewater

     11.2 Process type/waste source:  electroplating, SIC Code 3471

     11.3 Waste reduction technique:  closed-loop recycling,
           counter-current rinsing, ion exchange, evaporation,
           housekeeping

     11.4 Other keywords:  wastewater reduction

12.0 Assumptions

     None

13.0 Peer Review
     Unknown

(*) - Disclaimer:  Economic data will vary due to economic  climate,
varying governmental regulations and other factors

KEYWORDS:   wastewater,   metal   finishing  wastes,   rinsewater,
electroplating,    SIC    Code    3471,    closed-loop   recycling,

-------
counter-current rinsing, ion exchange, evaporation, housekeeping,
wastewater reduction
**********
Displaying item number 94
**********
Document No.: 222-003-001

1.0  Headline
     Printed Circuit Board Manufacturer Reduces Air Emissions,
     Wastewater Discharge, Sludge, and Chemical Wastes through
     Process Changes, Equipment Modifications, and Recycling

2.0  SIC Code:  3672, printed circuit board manufacturing; 3471,
     electroplating, surface finishing

3.0  Name & Location of Company

     Bull HN Information Systems Inc., Brighton, MA.

4.0  Clean Technology Category

     The technologies include: changing from solvent-based to
     aqueous-based processes; recycling through ion exchange;
     installing filter presses into the effluent waste treatment
     process to reduce sludge volume; and recycling of waste
     chemicals.

5.0  Case Study Summary

     5.1  Process and Waste Information:  This printed circuit
          board manufacturer produces four types of waste:  air
          emissions, wastewater discharge, sludge, and chemical
          disposals.  The company is attempting to reduce and
          recycle these emissions.

               Air emissions:  The facility previously used 1,1,1-
          trichloroethane and methylene chloride as stripping and
          cleaning agents.  The solvent-based stripping process was
          converted  to an aqueous base stripping process by
          substituting aqueous materials  for  the chlorinated
          solvents.

               Wastewater discharge:  The wastewater  treatment
          system  installed  in the 1970's  consisted  of one giant
          tank for neutralizing wastewater.  Several problems arose
          with this  system  because  the  system could not
          satisfactorily  remove  all insoluble contaminants  due  to
          equipment  corrosion.  The equipment began to malfunction
          due to  age.

-------
               A new  industrial  wastewater treatment system was
          installed consisting of three parts:   segregated rinse
          waters (allowing recycling through ion exchange),
          combined rinse  waters  (treated through a  large ion
          exchange system and discharged directly to the sewer),
          and effluent  treatment systems which  concentrate metal
          bearing solution streams from ion exchange backwash.
          Regenerant  wastes combined with metered bath dumps are
          also treated  through two identical conventional effluent
          treatment systems.

               Sludge disposal:   In the 1970's,  the by-product of
          the effluent  waste treatment process  was  the
          precipitation of metal  hydroxides or "sludges."  The old
          system produced a large volume of sludge  which was
          difficult to  dewater and had to be manually collected.
          After the installation  of  several plate and frame filter
          presses in  the  new  effluent treatment system and the use
          of coagulation  and flocculation,  the  operation improved
          considerably  and the sludge volume was significantly
          reduced.

               Chemical Disposal:  Previously, chemical wastes were
          transported,  treated,  and  disposed of off-site.  Most of
          the waste  is  now either treated on site or returned to
          the manufacturer who in turn recycles the chemical.

     5.2  Scale of Operation:  The industrial wastewater treatment
          system can  process nearly 250,000 gallons of combined
          treated rinse and wastewater per day.

     5.3  Stage of Development:   Conversion to  aqueous-based
          stripping was completed in 1987. The installation of the
          wastewater  treatment system was completed in 1984.

     5.4  Level of Commercialization:   The processes are fully
          commercialized.

     5.5  Material/Energy Balances and Substitutions:
          Material Category        Qty. Before    Qty. After
          Waste generation:             N/A           N/A
          Feedstock Use:                 N/A           N/A
          Water Use:                     N/A           N/A
          Energy Use:                   N/A           N/A

6.0  Economics*

     6.1  Investment  Costs:  Conversion to the  aqueous-based
          stripping process cost  $1.8 million (1987 dollars).  The
          cost of installing the wastewater treatment system was
          greater than  $2.5 million.

     .6.2  operational & Maintenance Costs:  Information not
          provided.

-------
     6.3  Payback Time:  Information not provided.

7.0  Cleaner Production Benefits

     Greater than 20% of the company's industrial waste water is
     recycled.  The sludge volume was "significantly" reduced.
     Chemical recycling reduced trucking-out of wastes by 90%.
8.0  Obstacles, Problems, and/or Known Constraints

     Information not provided.

9.0  Date Case Study Was Performed  Information not provided.

10.  Contacts and Citation

     10.1 Type of Source Material:  EPA Conference Proceedings

     10.2 Citation:  American  Electroplaters and Surface Finishers
          Society,  Inc.,  and the Environmental Protection Agency;
          "12th AESF/EPA Conference on Environmental Control for
          the Surface Finishing Industry;" January, 1991; pp. 91-
          99.

     10.3 Level of Detail of the Source Material:
          Additional information is provided on equipment and
          future steps to be taken by the facility..

     10.4 Industry/Program Contact and Address:
          Solomon Roditi, Bull HN Information Systems, Inc.,
          Brighton,  MA.

     10.5 Abstractor Name and Address:  Maria Leet, SAIC, 7600-A
          Leesburg Pike,  Falls Church, VA  22043.

11.0 Keywords

     11.1 Waste type:   sludge,  organic chemicals, volatile organic
          compounds, wastewater

     11.2 Process type/waste source:  printed circuit board
          manufacturing, SIC Code 3672, electroplating, SIC Code
          3471

     11.3 Waste reduction technique:  process redesign, equipment
          modification, recycling, ion exchange,

     11.4 Other keywords:  sludge, volume reduction

12.0 Assumptions

     None

13.0 Peer Review:  Unknown

-------
(*) - Disclaimer:  Economic data will vary due to economic climate,
varying governmental  regulations and other  factors

KEYWORDS: sludge,  organic chemicals,  volatile organic compounds,
wastewater,  printed circuit  board  manufacturing,  SIC Code 3672,
electroplating,   SIC   Code  3471,  process  redesign,  equipment
modification, recycling,  ion  exchange,  sludge, volume reduction
**********

Displaying item number  95

*****************************************************************
**********
Document No.: 222-003-001

1.0  Headline:  Treatability and Pilot Tests have Successfully
Reduced Effluent  Toxicity  from a Metal Finishing Facility

2.0  SIC Code: 3471,  electroplating,  surface finishing

3.0  Name &  Location  of Company

     Har-Conn Chrome  Company
     603 New Park Avenue
     West Hartford, CT   06110

4.0  Clean Technology Category

     The company  initiated a toxicity reduction program including
     a pilot study that incorporated  pH adjustment (to pH 11)  for
     metals  precipitation,  followed by filtration and final pH
     adjustment.  In  addition,  as part of  a waste minimization
     program, water conservation efforts have begun and pollution
     prevention techniques,  including evaporation, ion exchange,
     electrowinning,  and recovery of  metals, are being or will be
     installed to enhance the reduction of toxic effluents from the
     facility.

5.0  Case Study Summary

     5.1  Process and Waste Information:

          Har-Conn conducts the following  metal finishing
          operations:  cleaning (acid and alkaline), electroplating
          (chromium,  nickel,  copper,  cadmium, tin and silver),
          electroless plating (silver),  anodizing (titanium and
          aluminum),  phosphating (zinc and manganese), and
          chormating.   Rinsewater from these operations are
          discharged  to a  treatment system which consists of
          cyanide destruction,  chrome reduction, pH adjustment,
          equalization  and pressure filtration.

-------
     A toxicity reduction program was initiated in August 1989
     and was continuing at the time this case study was
     prepared.   A successful pilot study was conducted that
     incorporated elevated pH adjustment for metals
     precipitation,  filtration and final pH adjustment.
     Microfiltration is currently being evaluated as a means
     of upgrading the current pressure filtration system.

     Har-Conn is also undertaking the first phase of a
     comprehensive waste minimization program. The purpose of
     this program is to identify,  evaluate and  implement
     applicable techniques for the conservation  and/or
     recovery of process chemicals and water.  The first phase
     consists primarily of water conservation efforts.  As an
     initial step, the  company has installed flow restrictors
     on all running  rinses.   In addition,  conductivity
     controllers were being  installed at various areas of the
     plant to reduce rinsewater discharge rates.   To further
     reduce flow rates, a  portion of the final effluent will
     be recycled for use in non-critical rinsing applications.

     This will  be done  after an upgraded treatment system is
     installed.

     A second phase of waste minimization is planned to reduce
     releases of toxic metals.  The company plans to implement
     (1) process techniques to reduce chemical drag-out and
     (2) evaporation, ion  exchange and electrowining
     technologies for point source treatment and recovery of
     chemicals.  Based  on  results of toxicity evaluation
     procedures,  source reduction efforts will  initially
     concentrate on  cadmium and copper.  Nickel,  although
     relatively less toxic than these metals, will also be
     included in these  efforts due to its high contribution of
     the total  metals load and potential for economic recovery
     of nickel  salts.

5.2  Scale of Operation:

     Approximately 60,000  gallons per day of effluent are
     discharged from the facility.

5.3  Stage of Development:

     The pilot study for metals precipitation and filtration
     has been completed.   Under the waste minimization
     program, flow restrictors have been installed and
     conductivity controllers were being installed at the time
     of the case study  report.  The  evaporation, ion exchange
     and electrowinning technologies have not yet been
     implemented.

5.4  Level of Commercialization:  Information not provided.

-------
     5.5  Material/Energy Balances and Substitutions:

                                    Quantity           Quantity
Material Category                   Before             After
Waste Generation:                   90,000 gpd         60,000 gpd
                                    rinsewater         rinsewater
                                    (Aug, 1990)        (Sept, 1990)
Feedstock Use:                           N/A                N/A
Water Use:                               N/A                N/A
Energy Use:                              N/A                N/A

6.0  Economics*

     6.1   Investment Costs:   Information not provided.

     6.2   Operational & Maintenance Costs:  Information not
           provided.

     6.3   Payback Time:  Information not provided.

7.0  Cleaner Production Benefits

     Toxicity has been reduced through the treatability of
     rinsewater by pH adjustment and  filtration.  The installation
     of flow restrictors  on running rinses has reduced water use at
     the  facility by 33%.  In addition, conductivity controllers
     which were being installed at the time of the case study, are
     expected to reduce the rinsewater discharge rate from 60,000
     to 45,000 gpd.   Recycling of rinse waters should reduce
     effluent flow to less than 30,000 gpd.  Finally, there is the
     potential for economic recovery of nickel salts.

8.0  Obstacles,  Problems, and/or Known Constraints

     To achieve compliance with the chronic toxicity limits, flow
     reduction and waste  minimization efforts aimed at point source
     reduction of specific toxic metals will be required.

9.0  Date Case Study Was Performed:  Information was not provided.
     The  case study  was presented at  a Conference in January  1991.

10.  Contacts and Citation

     10.1 Type of Source Material:  EPA Conference Proceedings

     10.2 Citation:   American Electroplaters and Surface Finishers
           Society, Inc., and the Environmental  Protection Agency;
           "12th AESF/EPA Conference on  Environmental Control for
           the Surface Finishing Industry;" January,  1991; pp. 101-
           111.

     10.3 Level of Detail of the Source Material:  Additional
           toxicity data  are provided.

-------
      10.4 Industry/Program Contact and Address:  Scott Backus, Vice
          President, Har-Conn Chrome Co., 603 NewPark Avenue, West
          Hartford, CT  06110; Bill Willams,  P.E., Vice President,
          Paul  Schaffman, Project Engineer,  Consulting-
          Environmental Engineers, Inc.,  100 Shield  Street, West
          Hartford, CT  06110.

      10.5 Abstractor Name and Address:   Maria Leet,  SAIC, 7600-A
          Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA  22043.

11.0  Keywords

      11.1 Waste type: rinsewater, metals,

      11.2 Process type/waste source:  electroplating, metal
          finishing, SIC Code 3471

      11.3 Waste reduction technique:  toxics reduction, filtration,
          ion exchange, precipitation, source reduction, water
          conservation, evaporation

      11.4 Other keywords:  wastewater reduction

12.0 Assumptions

13.0 Peer Review
     Unknown

(*) - Disclaimer:  Economic data wi'll vary due to economic climate,
varying governmental regulations and other factors

KEYWORDS: rinsewater, metals,  electroplating, metal finishing, SIC
Code   3471,   toxics   reduction,    filtration,   ion   exchange,
precipitation, source reduction, water conservation, evaporation,
wastewater reduction
Displaying item number 96
Document No.  453-001-A-OOO

1.0  Headline:  Recovery and Use of Methane From Sugar Beet
Processing Effluent

2.0  SIC Code:  2063, Beet Sugar

3 . 0  Name and Location of company

     British Sugar pic
     Oundle Road
     Peterborough PE2 9QU, England

-------
4.0  Clean Technology Category

     This technology uses  an  anaerobic  stage  to recover
     methane from sugar  beet  effluent for  use as a process
     fuel.

5.0  Case Study Summary

     5.1  Process and Waste Information:   The facility
     processes sugar beets generating a wastewater effluent
     with a high chemical  oxygen  demand.   Traditionally, this
     effluent was dealt  with  aerobically by a water treatment
     plant and its  organic content  wasted.  The clean
     technology was to add an anaerobic stage to the water
     treatment section to  convert the organic content of the
     effluent to usable  methane.  The fermentation takes place
     in the digestion vessel, the off-gas  consists largely of
     methane with some carbon dioxide.  Key features of the
     process are the pre-heating  of the incoming stream using
     low-grade heat, careful  control of the pH and the
     recirculation  of sludge.   The  methane provides process
     heat to dry the pulp  for use as an animal feed.

     5.2  Scale of  Operation:   British  Sugar  operates 12 beet
     factories and  employs 3,000  people.   The Peterborough
     facility produces 100,000  tons of  sugar  per year.

     5.3  Stage of  Development:   The technology is fully
     implemented.

     5.4  Level of  Commercialization:   No  information
     provided.

     5.5 Material/Energy Balances and Substitutions:  No
     information provided.

6.0  Economics*

     6.1  Investment Costs:   The  capital cost of the
     technology is  750,000 English  Pounds.

     6.2  Operational and  Maintenance Costs:  Annual savings
     in lower sewage charges  are  26,000 English Pounds and
     8,000 English  Pounds  in  electricity cost savings.  The
     value of recovered  gas is  25,000 English Pounds.

     6.3  Payback Time:  Payback  time is 12 years.

7.0  Cleaner Production  Benefits

     The technology resulted  in reduced chemical oxygen demand
     in the wastewater effluent.  Recovery and use of methane
     from organic matter in the waste water effluent were
     achieved.  Lower operating costs and  energy conservation

-------
     were added benefits of the technology.

3.0  Obstacles, Problems and/or Known Constraints

     None were identified.

9.0  Date Case Study Was Performed

     Unknown.

10.0 Contacts and Citation

     10.1  Type of Source Material:  Government Publication.

     10.2  Citation:  Clean Technology,  Environmental
     Protection Technology Scheme, Department of the
     Environment, 2 Marsham Street, London SW1P 3EB, 1989,
     p. 21.

     10.3  Level of Detail of the Source Material:  No
     additional detail is provided.

     10.4  Industry/Program Contact and Address: Mr. J.N.
     Smith, Chief Safety and Environment Officer, British
     Sugar pic, Oundle Road, Peterborough PE2 9QU, England,
     Telephone (0733) 63171.

     10.5  Abstractor Name and Address:   John Houlahan,
     Science Applications International Corporation, 7600-A
     Leesburg Pike, Falls Church Virginia 22043.

11.0 Keywords

     11.1  Waste type: chemical oxygen demand, wastewater
     effluent, sugar beet processing effluent

     11.2  Process  type/waste source:  sugar products,
     agricultural processing

     11.3  Waste reduction technique:  anaerobic  digestion

     11.4  Other keywords:  methane, United Kingdom, SIC 2063

12.0 Assumptions

     It is assumed  that  the economics cited  in  the  source
     document are on a per plant  basis and not  the  total of
     all  12 British Sugar plants.

13.0 Peer Review

     Unknown.

(*) -     Disclaimer:  Economic data will vary  due  to

-------
          economic climate,  varying governmental
          regulations  and  other  factors.

KEYWORDS: chemical oxygen  demand,  wastewater effluent, sugar beet
processing  effluent,  sugar  products,  agricultural  processing,
anaerobic digestion, methane,  United Kingdom,  SIC  2063
                  :**:
                     Case  Study  Literature Search  Menu

    E  ....  Enter keyword  for search        S 	 Scan abstract
keywords
    Q  	Quit  (Return to main menu)    # ....  Select abstract to
display
    H  ....  Help                               A  	 Display all
abstracts
    G  .... Goodbye  (Logoff)                 ... Display next
abstract
 (88 nin.  left)  (S) ,  {#) ,   (A),  (E) ,  (H) ,  (X) ,  (M) ,  (0),  (V) ,  (Q) ,
 (G)
 (Enter =  Next  Item)?

-------