EPA/600/2-88/025
April 1988
The EPA Manual for
Waste Minimization Opportunity Assessments
by
Gret?or> Lorcon, et al
Jacobs Engineering
Pascdena» CA 9ll0i
EPA Contract 68-01-7053
EPA Project Ofiicer
H. Freeman
HAZARDOUS WASTE ENGINEERING RESEARCH IABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION A'-ENCY
CINCINNATI, OH 45268
-------
PB88-2130C4
EPA (Environmental Protection Agency)
Manual for Waste Minimization
Opportunity Assessments
Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc,, Pasadena, CA
prepared for
Environmental Protection Aqencv, Cincinnati, OH
Apr 88
-------
No1lc0
This document has been revievttd In accordance wit!i U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency policy and approved for publication. Montion of trade
names or cornroerc ial products does not constitute endorsement or
reccjaniendation for use.
Th* manual « not copyrighted 'JMn are encouraged to duplicate thoe* uortions of the manual as
r>*»
-------
Fo'twaro
7ne term, "waste minimization- fe hoard increasingly al meetings and conferences of individuate working in
the Meld of iia/ardous wast9 management. Waste minimization fc an umbrella term that includes the first
two categories of the EPA's preferred hazardous waste manager,writ strategy which is 3hoy/n below:
1 Source deduction: Reduce the amount of waste at the source, through changes ir industrial
processes.
.2 Recycling: Reuse and recycle wastes for ttv. original or some other purpose. sjch as naterials
recovery or energy proJuctior.
2- IncineratiyVTreatment. Destroy, delox'iy, and neutralize wastes into less harmful subsiancas.
4 Secure Land Disposal. Deposl* * co land using volume reduction, encapsulation, leachate
containment, monitoring, and a.r and surlace/subsbrface waste rekta »e&.
In general, the idea undeMy;ng ihe prcr.ioiOM & watts minimization is that H makes far more sen*;: for *
generator not to produce was:?) rat-wr th^r develop exiensive treatment schemes to insure that the '.vasie
stream poses no threat to the
-------
Contents
Pig#
Forward i
Acknowledgements vit
1 Introduction 1
2 Planning and Organizaiion 6
3. Assessment Phase 10
4. Feasibility Analysis 19
5 Implementing Waste Minimization Options 24
Appendices
A. Was*e Minimization Assessment Worksheets A1
B. Simplified Waste Minimization Assessment Worksheets B-1
0 Example Waste Minimization Assessment C-1
D Causes and Sources ol Waste D-1
E Waste Minimization Technique E-1
F. Government Techncal/Financial Assistance Programs F 1
G. Option Rating: Weighted Sum Method G-1
H Economic Evaluation Example H-1
Preceding pay.-: L>!arsk
V
-------
List of Workshops
Page
Appendix A
1 Assessment Overview
A3
2. Program Organization
A-4
3 Asse-ismem Team Make-up
A-5
4 Siti Description
A-6
5 Personnel
A-7
6. Process Information
A-a
7 Input Materials Summary
A-9
ft Products Summary
A-10
9- Indlvkjual Waste Stream Characterization
A-11
1C. Waste Stream Summary
A-15
11. Option Generation
A-16
12. Option Description
A-17
13. Options Evaluation by Weighted Sum Method
A-18
14. Technical Feasibility
A-19
15. Cost Information
A-25
16. Profitability Worksheet #1: Payback Period
A*31
17. Profitability Worksheet #2: Cach c!ow tor NPV and IRR
A-32
1R Project Summary
A-33
19. Option Performance
A-34
Appendix B
S1 Assessment Overview
B-2
S2 Site Description
B3
S3. Process Information
a-4
S4. Input Materials Sumnary
B-5
S5. Products Sumn'i&ry
B-6
S6 Waste Stream S». mary
B-7
S7. Option Generation
B-8
S8 Option Description
B-9
S9 Profitability
H-10
vi
-------
Acknowledgements
Tho following people are member? of thy advisory committee that contributed valuable
comments and insights to the preparation of this manual.
Denny J. 8ero«
Genera' Dynamics Pomona Division
Elaine Etoy
OH ice of Solio Waste
JS Environmental Protection Agency
Jonn Frick, PhO
Directorate of Supply Operations
Defense Logistics Agency
Kevin Ga6hl
-------
Sictlon 1
Introduction
Waste minimization {WM\ has been successful for
many organizations By following the procedures
outlined in this manual, a' *as:e generator can:
• Save money by reducing waste treatment and
disposal costs, raw material purchases, and other
operating costs.
• Meet state a"* national wast* minimization policy
Qoals.
• deduct? potential environmental liabilities.
• Protect public health and woefcer health and safety.
• Protect the environment.
Waste minimization is a policy specifically mandated by
the U. S Congress in thj 1964 Hazardous and Solid
Wastes Amendments to the Resource Conservation
anc Recovery Act (RCRA;. This mandate, coupbd
with other RCRA provisions that have led to
unorecedented increases in ths costs of waste
moPigement, h3*e heightened general interest in
waste minimization. A strong contributing factor has
been a desire on the pan of generators to reduce thAir
environmental impairment liabilities under the
crovisionu of the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liabilities Act
(CERCLA, or "Supertund"). Because ol these
increasing costs and liability exposure, waste
minimization has become more and more attractive
economically.
The icilewing terms, used throughout this m?nu?.l. are
defined below:
Waste Minim zztion In the wording definition
curreruty used by 9.PA, waste minimization consists of
source reduction and recycling. This concept of was?e
minimisation is presented in Figure 1-1. Of the two
approaches, source reduction is usually preferable to
recycling from in environmental perspective. Source
reduction and 'ecyding each are comprised of a
number ol practices and approaches which are
illustrated in Figu'e 12.
The present focus of WM activities is on hazardous
wastes, as defined in RCRA. However, it is important
that all pollutant emissions into air, water ana land be
considered as part of a waste minimization program.
The transf6f of pollutants from one medium to another
is not waste minimization. For example, the removal c'
o'ganics from wastewater us'ng activated carbon, n
and of itself, is not waste minimization, since thu
pollutants are merely transferred from one medium
(wastewater) to another (ca toon. as solid waste)
Wasm minimization onarzm tWMP) The RCRA
regulations require that generators ot hazardous waste
"have a program m place to reduce thd volume and
toxicity of waste generated to the extent trat >s
economically practical * A waste minimization program
is an organized, comprehensive, and continual effort
to systematically reduce waste generation. Generally,
a program is established for the organization as a
whole. Its components may include specific waste
minimization projects and may use waste minimisation
assessments as a tool for determining where and how
waste can be reduced. A waste minimization program
should reflect the goals and policies for waste
minimization set by the organization's management.
Also, the program should be an ongoing effort and
should strive to make waste minimization part of the
company's operating philosophy. While the main goal
of a waste minimization program is to reduce or
eliminate waste, it may also bring about an
improvement in a company's production efficiency.
EPA will publish separate guidance on the elements
of effective waste minimization programs. This
guidance will discuss the following elements likely to
be found in an effective WM program:
- Top management support
• Explicit program soope and objectives
• Accurate waste accounting
- Accurate cost accounting
• Pervasive waste minimization philosophy
• Technology transfer
IVast* minimization *asa*sment (WMAL A waste
minimization assessment is a systematic planned
procedure with the objective of identifying ways 10
reduce or eliminate waste. The steps involved in
conducting a waste minimization assessment ar/j
outlined in Figure 1-3. The assessment consists of a
careful review of a plant's operations and wasie
streams, and the selection ol specifc areas to assess
After a specific waste stream or area is established as
the WMA focus, a number of options with the potential
to minimize waste are develop 3d and screened. Trii-d.
the technical and e. om'c Nasibility ol the selected
options are evaluated. Finely, the most promising
options are selected lor imclen mentation.
1
-------
WASTE MINIMIZATION
J
SOURCE REDUCTION
RECYCUNQ
FIRST
HIGH
ORDER OF EXPLORATION
RELATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL DESIRABILITY
LAST
LOW
WASTE MINIMIZATION
The reduction, to the extent feasible. of hazardous ntuti thai is 9«n«rvttid cr sufeeequentty treated, st©r#& or
dieposed of It include* any source 'eduction rr recycling activity undertaken by a generator that reeutts in
(1) the reduction o! totml volume or quantity at hazardous waste or (2) the reduction of toxicity of the
hazardous waste, or both, so long as tuch reduction 4 consistent with Ate goal of minimizing present and
future ttuetfi to human heafih and tt* environment (EPA'i Report to Congreee, 1986, EPA/530-SW-86-033).
SOURCE REDUCTION
Any activity thai reduce* or eliminnee the generation of hazardous weete as the source, usually within a
~rocasa (op. crt ).
RECYCLING
A material is "recycled" it ft iS used, reused, or reclaimed (40 CFR 261 1 (c) (7)}. A material ie *usad or 'eused"
if it is either (1) employed aa *ii ingredient friending its use «a an intermediate) to make a product; however a
material wilt not satisfy thin ooMftHin if ditunci oomoonems ol the material are recovered aa separate end
products (as when m#»Ji art recovered from fneui containing secondary materials) or (2) employed in a
particular function aa an affective cubatitute foi a commercial product (40 CFR 261.1 {c) (S». A material is
'reclaimed* I n ia processed to r#rx>ver a useful product or if it is regenerated. Exampiee include me recovery
of lead vaJuee from spent batteries a,id the regeneration of spent soivents (40 CFR 261,1 (c) |4)).
Figure 1-1. Watts Minimization Definitions
2
-------
WASTE MINIMIZATION TECHNIQUES
SOURCE REDUCTION
RECYCLING
(ONSITE AND OFFSITE)
CO
PROOUCT CHANGES
- Product autoetituuon
• Product oonaarvation
- Chang® in product
csfwceton
SOURCE CONTROL
USE AND REUSE
Fitfurn to original procaa*
Raw malarial tubatana
for anoitar p«ocaa«
RECLAMATION
ProctMid tor
raaounca raoovafy
Procattad — a
by-product
INPUT MATERIAL
CHANGES
• Malarial punhcatKy
- Material autoatiution
TECHNOLOGY
CHANGES
Procata changaa
Eqtapmant. p*>*v or
layout changaa
Additional aulomtf ion
Changaa in opar*»naJ
aatlinga
GOOD OPERATING
PRACTICES
Procadu al maaauraa
Lou pravarrtion
Managamant practioaa
Waata atraam aagragaiion
Malarial handling
impipvan>anta
Producton acftadulng
Figure 1-2. Waste Minimization Techniques
-------
Figure 1-3. Tlia WuU Minimization Aas
"The recognized need to minimize wm(«
i f#
i
PLANNiNG AND 0RQANIZAT10N
• Get management commitment
• Set overall tiMiiment program goals
• Organize aaaa *ment program task force
Aaaeeament organization
and commitment
denization
to proceedX
ASSESSMENT PHASE
• Collect proceea and facility data
• Prioritize and aelact aaaeeament targets
• Select people for assessment taama
* Review data and inspect eite
Select new
• Generate optbne
aaaeeament targets
* Screen and select options for furthar sfcjdy
and reevaluate
Aaaeaament report of 1
VW\JS
•elected optiona ~
1 FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS PHASE
1 • Technical evaluation
1 • Economic evaluation
1 • Select optiona for implementation
Final report, including 1
recommended optiona y
4 IMPLEMENTATION
1 * Juattfy project* and obtain funding
Repeat the proceea ^
1 • Installation (aquipmam)
1 • Implementation (procedure)
1 • Evaluate performance
Successfully implemented
waate minimization projects
-------
Incentives lor Wasta Minimization
There are a number of compelling incentives for
minimizing waste. Tabie 1-1 summarizes some of
these incentives.
Table 1-1. Wait* Minimization Incentives
Economics
• Landfill disposal coat icrtaaee.
• Cosily aftArnatTve treatment technologies.
• Savings in taw malarial and manufacturing rout,
n-^ubtions
' Cert.4icatton of a WM program cr the hazardous wast*
manifest.
• Biennial WM program reporfriq.
• Land diepeaai restrictions 'ir>d bint.
• Increae'iiig permitting requirement* tor watie handling
and treatment
UabiHty
Polant.ii reduction in gererator liability for environmental
problem* ai both onslia and offeite treatment, storage,
and CLspostl .'acil'liet,.
• Potw.itial reducton m liability tor worker safety.
Public .ma$« and EnwonminUI Concern
• imprcvAd image in the community and from employees
• Concern for improving the environment.
EPA intends to pubiish a nunual entitled "Waste
Minimization Benefits Handbook" which wHI discuss in
detail the oost/beneflt analyses of WM options.
About this manual
This manual has been prepared for those response
for planning, managing, and implementing waste
minimization actrvitida at tne plant and corporate levels.
The manual concentrates on procedures that motivate
people to search, screen, and put into practice
measures involving administrative, material, or
technology changes that resort in decreased waste
generation. It is also a source of concepts and ideas
for developing and implementing a waste minimization
program.
The manual is organized as follows:
• Secton 2 outlines the planning and organizational
aspects that provide a necessary foundation for a
waste minimization assessment
• Sect-on 3 describes the assessment phase,
including collecting information, selecting
assessmts.it targets, selecting assessment teams,
and identifying potential WM options.
• Section A discusses the methods lor evaluating
options for technical and eocromic feasibility.
• Section 5 describes the implementation of attractive
options: obtaining funding, installation and
implementation, and measuring the effectiveness
of implemented options.
A set of worksheets useful in carrying out assessments
is included in Appends A. Because individual
generators' circumstances and needs vary widely,
users of this mama! are encouraged to modify the
procedures and worksheets to fit their unique
requirements. The manual is intended to serve as a
point of departure, rather than as a set of rigid
requirements. Accordingly, Appendix B presents a
simplified set of worksheets that are designee* to assist
generators who are interested in performing only
preliminary assessments These worksheets also
provide a useful framework for conducting
assessments for srr^l businesses and smali quantity
generators.
A sample assessment is presented in Appendix C
Appendix 0 describes waste streams from common
industrial operate*. Appendix E is a catalog and bne
description of wiste minimization technique*
applicable in a number of comrv>on waste-intenV m
operations. Appendix F is -i list of address ;
telephone numbers cf state programs for tec' cal
assistance in waste minimization Apper < G
presents describes a method tor screening ant ating
potential waste minimization options lor turthrr study.
Finally, an example of an economic feasibility analysis
of a large waste minimizition projoct is presented in
Appendix H.
5
-------
Section 2
Planning and Organization
Tharacogn 4-ed naad to minimize wasts
PLANNING AND ORGANIZATION
• Get managam*«t commrtmaot
• Sot overall aaiiiifnini program goals
• Orgamzaaaier.nait program task force
Succeesfull* tmplemantad
wti!« minimization projecta
This suction discusses factors that aie important to the
*uiA,vu* yi' a pfcflrarrs. B^c&js* *
ctvnpreivinsive WM program aFects many functional
groups within a company, the program needs to bring
these different groups together to reduce wastes
Th® formality of the program depends upon the size
and complexity of the organization and its waste
problems The program structure rn^st be flexible
enough to accommodate unforeseen charges. The
developmental activities of a WM program include:
* getting management commitment
* setting WM goals
* staffing the program task tome
Getting Management Commitment
The management of a company wilt support a waste
Tirainaation program if it ia convinced that tm benefits
of such a program will outweigh the costs. The
potential benefits include economic advantages,
compliance with regulations, reduction in liabilities
associated with the generation of wastes, improved
pufcJic image, ami reduced environmental impatf,
The objectives of a WM program are best conveyed to
a company's employees through a formal policy
statement or management directive. A company's
upper management is responsible for establishing a
formal commitment throughout a:! divisions of the
organization, The person In charge of the company's
environmental affairs is responsible to advise
management of the importance of waste minimization
and the need tor this formal comvtmenr An example
of a formal policy statement follows:
CORPORATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY
[A major chemical comply]...'* oommmad to coniinua
#*caJlanea, iaadarship, and ttar/ardship in prottetmg th*
•nvirer.ment. Environmamai prot*ction is a pnmary
managamant ra*ponaib*li!y, as wall as tha r«a^r«>biiity of
every amployaa.
In Neaping with th* policy, our obfecthtt as a company a to
radwca wtata and achieve minimal arfvaraa impact on th* sir,
watar, *jkJ land through axcaNanca in anviranmentaJ comrei.
Tha Environmsmat Qu»d*lina* include the following pomta:
- Fnvironmantal protection ia a Hna raaponaibillty and an
important measure of employe* performance. In addi-
tion. every employee is reasonable for anvironmintai
protection in tha tame marntar ha or aha in for tafaiy.
• Minimizing or aiiminating tha ganaraiton of wasta has
been and continues to be a prime consideration m
raaaarch, procaaa »od plant oparattons; and ia
viawad by managamant lika safaty, yi»td, *«
-------
Cm\i$0 ChMtr.piont
Any WM program needs one or more people u
champion the cause. These "cause champions" help
overcome the inertia present when changes to an
existing operation are proposed. They also lead the
WM program, either formally or informally. An
snvironmentai engineer, production manager, or plant
process engineer may be a good candidate tor this
role. Regardless of who takes the lead, this cause
champion r.iust be given enough authority to
affectively carry out the program.
Organizing a WM Program:
The Program Task Fore*
The WM program will affect a number of groups within ?
company. Forthis reason, a program task force should
be assembled- This group should include members of
any group or department in the company that has a
significant interest in the outcome of the program.
Table 2-4 at the end of this section and Worksheet 3 in
Appendix A lists departments or groups of a typical
manufacturing company that should be involved in the
program.
The formality or informality of the WM program will
depend on the nature of the company. The program in
a Urge highly stnjctured company will probably
develop to be quite formal, in contrast to a small
company, or a company in a dynamic industry, where
the organizational structure changes frequently.
Table 2-1 liats the typical responsibilities of a WM
program task force. It will draw on expertise within the
company as 'equired. The scope of the program will
determine whether full-time participation is required by
any of the team members.
Tabic 2*1. Responsibilities of the WM Program
Task For&e
• Get commitrrent and a statement of policy from
management.
• Eitaolnh overall WM program goeta.
• Estaol ah a was2a tracking systam.
• Prioritize the waate atreame or facility iraaa for
assessment.
• Seier.1 asaeaament teama.
• Conduct (or supervise) aaeeesmenta.
• Corduct {or monitor) technical/economic: feasibility
analyses o' favorable options.
• Se'ect and juatrfy lesaibie optiona for implementation.
• Obtain funding and establish schedule for
implementation.
" k/ionrtor (and/or direct) implementation progress.
' Monrior performance of the opion, once a
-------
Table 2-2. Attributes of Effective Qoele
• ACCEPTABLE lo those who w* wc*«-*) achieve them.
• FLEXIBLE end edesUoHfcteche^. ^ equ»emei*e
• MEASURABLE r//0« Mm.
• MOTIVAtONAl.
• SUITABLE io the ovr stl corporate gv v \< d miestfn.
« UNDERSTANDABLE.
• ACHIEVABLE w*h ai tracheal level ot 1 .
Sourer: Pil'Ci and flobinson. Stratec . "antrr'iol
(1985)
material supplies, environmental regular. \ and
economic climate
Overcoming Berrlers
As it sets goats for waste minimization and then defines
specific objectivos that can be achieved, the program
task force should recognize potential barriers.
Although wastn minimization projects can reduce
operating costs and Improve environmental
compliance, they can lead to conflicts between
different groups within the company. Table 2-3 lists
examples of junsdkaional conflicts that can arise during
the implementation of a waste minimaauon project.
In addition to jurisdictional conflicts related to these
objective barriers, there are attitude-related burners
that can disrupt a WM program. A commonly held
attitude is "H H aim broke, donl fix itl" This attitude
stems from the desire to maintain the statu* quo and
avoid the unknown It is also based on the lear that a
new WM option may not work as ad/ertised. Without
the commitment to carefully conceive and implement
the opt:on, this attitude can become a self-fulfilling
prophecy. Management must declare that "It is broker
Another attitude-related barrier is the leeling that "It
just wont workl* This response is often given when a
person does not fully understand the nature ot the
proposed option artJ its impact on operations. The
danger here is that promising optionr. may be dropped
before they can be evaluated. One way to avoid tt.is is
to use idea-generating sessions (e.g., brainstorming}.
This encourages participants to propose a large
number of options, which are individually evaluated on
their merits.
An often-encountered barrier is the lear that the WM
option will diminish product quaiHy. This is particularly
common in situations where unused teed materials are
recovered from the waste and then recycled back to
the process. The deterioration of product quality can
be a valid concern if unacceptable concentrations of
waste materials build op in the system. The best way to
allay this concern is to set up a small-scale
demonstration in the facility, or to observe the
particular option in operaiicn at another facility-
Table 2-3. Examples of BerrUre to Jfsete
Minimization
P*oductib/»
• A now operating procedure will reduee waate but may also
be a bottleneck that decreeees the ove'e'' production
rate.
• Production will be stopped while tht new process
equipment ie installed.
• A new piece of equpment Km not been demonstrated in a
similar service. K may not work here.
Factiitit/kUin fsnance
• Adequate space is not available for the installation ot .*w
equipment.
• Adequate utilities ars not available for ths nsw
equipment.
• Engineering or construction manpower will not bs
available m time to meet the protect schedule.
• Extensive maintenance ffley be required.
Control
• More mtenawe QC may be needed.
• More rework may be required.
Cl'met R*tMKxtvtAirk*tinQ
• Changee in product char acta hat lea may affect customer
acceptance.
Inventory
• A program to reduce inventory (to avoid material
deterioration and reproceeeing) may leed to stockouts
during high product demand.
finance
• There ie not enough money to fund the project.
Pureeing
• Existing stocks (or binding contracts) will delay the
replacement of e hazardous material with s non-
hazardous substitute.
Snvironmenta/
• Accepting another plant's waste as a feedstock may
require a lengthy resolution of regulatory issues.
(Vaafe Treatment
• Use of a new nonhazardoua raw material will adversely
impact the existing wastewater treatment fac^
Planning and Organization Summary
Table provides a summary of the staps involved in
ptarinlnj r id oryanuing a waste minimization program.
Assessment Worksheets
Appendix A includes a set of worksheets for use in
planning and carrying out a waste minimization
assessment, and implementing the selected op tons.
Worksheet 1 summarizes the entire assessment
procedure Worksheets 2 and 3 are used to record the
organization of the WM program task force and the
8
-------
individual assessment teams, respectively. Worksheet
3 includes a list ol functions and departments that
should be considered when organizing the
assessment teams.
Table 2-4. Planning and Organisation Actlvltlea
Summary
SETTING UP THE PROGRAM
Get management commitment to:
• Estaoish wait* rr.mmiz&tton at a company goal.
• Estaoliah a wast# minimization program to maat thu
goal.
• &va authority to tha yrogrim task force to
implement this program.
Sat ovarall goals fof tha jjrogram. These goals should oe:
• ACCEPTABLE to ihoaa who will work to achieve
them.
• FLEXIBLE to adapt to changing requirements.
• MEASURABLE overtime.
• MOTIVATIONAL
• SUITABLE ;o tha ovarall corpcrata goala.
• UNDERSTANDABLE.
• ACHIEVABLE with a practical lava1 of effort.
STAFFING THE PROGRAM TASK FOPCE
Find a "cauia champion", with tha following attributes:
• Familiar with tha facility, its production processes,
and its waste management operations.
• Familiar with tha paopte.
• Familiar with quality control requirement*.
• Good rapport with management.
• Familiar wrth naw production and watta
management technology.
• Familiar with WM prindplaa and tachniqu*e. and
environmental regulations.
• Aggressive managerial style.
Gat people who know the facility, processes. and
procedures.
Gat peopia from tha atfactad departments or groups.
• Production.
• FacMias/Maintenancs.
• Procass Engineering.
• QuanJy Control.
• Environmantal.
« Research and Development.
• Salaty/Health.
• Marketing/Client Relations.
• Purchasing.
• Matanal Control/Inventory.
• LegaJ.
• rinnt>ce/Aocounting.
• Information Syttama.
GETTING COMPANY-WD6 OOMMITMENT
Incorporata tha company's WM goats into departmental
goats.
Soiicrt employee cooporatcn oarticipaticn.
Deveop incantivaa and/or awarda for manage a and
employaes.
-------
Section 3
Assessment Phase
The recognized r.q«4 to minimize watt*
Planning and
Organization
ZJZ
ASSESSMENT PHASE
• Collect process and facility data
• Prioritize and seiect assessment targets
• Select people for assessment teams
• R*vi*w data and inspect sit*
• Generate options
• Screen a no select options for tuth*r study
Successfully implemented
waste minimization projects
I
The purpose of the assessment phase is to develop a
comprehensive set ot wa:*te rTi.nimization options, anc
to identify the attractive options that deserve
additional, more detailed analysis- in order to develop
these WM optiors. a detailed understanding of the
plant s wastes and operations is required The
assessment should begin by examining information
about tK.e processes, operations, and waste
management practices at the facility.
Collecting and Compiling Data
The questions that this informal n gathering effort will
attempt to answer include the fo'.owing
• What are the waste streams generated *rem ths
plani? And how much?
• Which processes or operations do these waste
streams come from'5
• Which wastes are classified ?s hazardous and which
a'e not? What mckes them hazardous?
• What are the input materials used that generate Ihe
waste streams of a particular process or plant area?
• How rr.jct-i of .t particular input material enters eacn
waste stream?
• How much of a raw mater>al can be accounted tor
tnrough fugitive losses''
• How eff;cient is the process0
• Are unnecessary wastes generated by mixing
otherwise recyclable hazardous wastes wi*.h other
process wastes?
• What types cf housekeepirtg practices are used to
lim.i the quantity of wastes generated9
• What types of process controls are used to improve
process efficiency?
Table 3-1 lUts information that can be useful in
conducting the assessment. Reviewing this
information will provide innportant background 'or
understanding the plant's oroduction and
maintenance processes and will allow priorities to be
determined. Worksheets 4 through 10 in Appendix A
can be used to record the information about site
characteristics, personnel, processes, input materials,
products, and waste* streams. Worksheets $2 through
J- S in Appendix B a'e designed to recori the same
intorniaton. but in a mrire simplified approach.
W*8t§ Stream Records
One of the llrst tasks of a waste minimisation
assessment is to identify and characterize the faci ity
waste streams. Information about waste streams can
come from a variety ol sources. Some information on
waste quantities readily aviiiabte frgrr, the completed
hazardous waste manifests, which include tne
description and quantity of hajardous waste snipped
to a TSOF. The total amount of hazardous waste
shipped during a one-year period, (or example, is a
convenient means of measuring waste generation and
waste reduction efforts. However, manifests often lack
such information as chemical analysis of the waste,
specific source of the waste, and the time period
during which the waste was generated. Also,
manifests do not cover wastewater effluents, air
emissions, or nonhazardous solid wastes.
Other sources ot information on waste str earns include
biennial reports and NPDES (National Pollutant
10
-------
Table 1-1. facility Information for WM
Aeeeaarnentt
C*s#n Information
« Proceis f'ow diagrams
~ N'cts'^i ar- fist balance ,botn distgn balances and
actua ba ancdi) ?&r
proouctiC.n processes
poliwton COH'O processes
• Operarxg manua.s and process aesciptior.s
* Equprr.entl.sts
. Eq-io^#nt specification* arid cata sweats
* P ping and .r.strurrmni diagrairs
4 Picf and eiavaf.cn pjans
~ Equ.p.-nen layouts ird worn flow diagrams
Bnvronm^n'aJ Information
• Hazardous waste manifests
* Emission inventories
* Biennial ha*ardous waste reports
* Waste analyses
* Environmental repots
• Permits and/or permit applications
Raw MMfriMl/Ptvduccion /nfermaftpn
¦ Product compoaft;on and batch shetia
* Materia) application diagram*
• Material safety data sheets
• Produc* and raw materia; inventory records
¦ Operator data logs
• Operating procedures
• Production schedule
Economic Information
• Waste treatment and disposal *osta
• P'OdLCt utiiity, and raw ma'enai costs
* Operas? an difference
between solvent put into the tank and solves
removed from it e tank.
fo characters® waste streams by maseriaf balance can
require considerable effort. However, doing so, a
mors complete picture of the waste situation esuits
This helps to establish the focus of the WM activities-
and provides a baseline for measuring performance
Appendix 0 tists potential sources ot w&sie iron
specific processes and operations.
Sources sf Materiel Selanca information
By diif>iition, the material balance includes both
materials entering *nd leaving a process, Table 5 2
lists potential sources of material balance informtio.''.
1 1
-------
Table 3*2. Scurcaa of Materiel Balanee
Information
• Sampiaa. analyiaa, and flow measurement* of fead
stdcxt. products, and *aata atraama
• Paw material purchaae racorda
• M'itanal mvantonaa
• Emission ir.vantonaa
• Equipniant cleaning and validation ,vocadurea
• Batch m*ka»up racords
ProddCt ioacitcaticns
- Design mrtonsl calancea
• Production racorda
• Ocsntmg -oga
- Standard operating procedures ana operating manual*
• W3*ia rr.anifasta
Material balances are easier, more meaningful, and
more accurate when they are done for individual units,
operations, or processes. For this reason, \ is
imporiant to define the material balance envelope
properly. The envelope should be drawn around tne
spec ifc area of concern, rather than a larger group of
areas or the entire facility. An overall m-itarial balance
for a facility can be constructed from individual unit
material balances. This effort *11 highlight
interrelationships between units and will help to point
out areas fcr wasto minimization by way of cooperat on
between different operating units or departments.
Pitfalls In Preparing Material Balance*
There are several factors that must be considered
when preparing material balances in order to avoid
errors that could significantly overstate or understate
waste streams. The precision of analytical data and
flow measurements may not allow an accurate measure
of tne stream. In canicular, in processes with very large
inlet and outlet streams, the absolute error in
measurement of these quantities may be greater in
magnitude than the actual waste stream itseii In this
case, a reliable estimate of the waste stream cannot be
obtained by subtracting the quantity of hazardous
material in the product from that in the feed.
The time span is important when constructing a
material balance. Material baia-xes constructed over a
shorter time span require more accurate and more
frequent stream monitoring in order to close the
balance. Material balances performed over the
deration of a complete production run are typically the
easiest to construct and aie reasonably accurate. Time
di/, ration also affects the use of raw mat a rial purchasing
records and onsite inventories for calculating input
material quantities. The quantities of ma'erials
purchased during a specific time period may not
necessarily equal the quantity of materials usad n
production during the same time period, s nee
purchased materials can accumulate in warehouses or
stockyards.
Developing material balances around complex
processes can be a complicated undertaking,
especially if recycle streams are present. Such ta^ks
are usually perlormed by chemical engineers, often
with the assistance of computerized process
simulators.
Material balances will often be needed to comply with
Section 313 of SARA (Superlund Amendment and
Reauthorization Act of 1986) in establishing emission
inventories for specific toxic chemicals. EPA's Office
of Toxic Substances (OTS) has repared a guioance
manual entitled Estimating Rf..aasa* and Waste
ieatmant Efficiencies for the Toxic Cham.cais
Invantarv Form (EPA 56Q'4-88-02) The OTS manual
contains additional irfon^ation )r developing material
balances for the Hsted toxc chemicals The information
presented in this manual applies to a WM assessment
when the material balances are lor individual
operations being assessdc father than an overall
facility, when the varla;icn$ in flow over time is
accounted for. and when the data is used from
separate streams rather than irom aggregate streams.
Tracking Waatee
Measuring waste mass flows and compositions is
something that should be done periodically. By
tracking wastes, seasonal variations in waste flows or
single large waste streams can be distinguished fron
continual, constant flows. Indeed changes in waste
generation cannot be meaningfully measured unless
the information is collected both before and after a
waste minimization option is implemented
Fortunately, it is easier to do material balances the
seco.td time, and gets even oasier as more are done
beciusu of the 'learning curve" effect. In some larger
companies, computerized database systems have
bef n used to track wastes. Worksheets 9 ard 10 in
Appendix A (and Worksheet S6 in Appendix 6]
provide a means of recording pertinent waste stream
characteristics.
Prioritizing Wast* Streams and/or
Operations to Assts*
Idseity, all waste streams and plant operations should
be assessed. However, orioritizing the waste stteams
and/or operations to assess is necessary when
available funds and/or personnel are limbed. The wM
assessments should concentrate on th/j most
important waste problems first, and then mc*e on to
the lower priority problems as the time, personnel, and
budget permit.
Setting the priorities oi waste streams or facility areas to
assess requires a great deal of care and aieniion.
sinco lh;s step focuses the remainder ol the
12
-------
assessment activity. Table 3-3 lists importsn? ruena to
ronsioer when setting these priorities.
Table 3 3. Typical Considerations for
Prioritizing Waste Stream to Assess
• Compliance wrth current and future regulations.
' Costs of waste management (treatment and drtoos&ij.
• Potent di environm#ntai and safety liability
• Cusnt ty of waste.
• Haza aous propen.es of ths waste (inckdino toxicfcv
flarr.mib' ity, corrosivity, arc reactivity).
• Other safety nazaros :o employees.
• Potent ai for (cr ease of) minimization.
• Poten'.dl for removing bottler.ecxs m production or waste
trea'.nent.
• Potential recovery of valuable by-products.
• Avuiaole budget for the waste mimm-zation assessment
program and p'oject*.
Worksheet 10 in Appendix A (Worksheet S6 in
appendix B) provides a means lor evaluating waste
stream priorities tor the remainder of the assessment.
Small businesses or large businesses with only a few
wasts generating operations should assess their entire
•acility. it is also beneficial to look at an entire facility
when there are a large number ol similar operations.
Similarly, the implementation of good operating
practices that involve procedural or organizational
measures, such as soliciting employee suggestions,
awareness-building programs, better inventory and
maintenance procedures, and internal cost accounting
changes, should be implemented on a facility-wide
basis. Since many of these options do not require
large caoital expenditures, they should be
implemented as soon as practical.
Selecting the Assessment Teams
The WM program task force \* concerned with the
whole plant. However, the focus of each of the
assessment teams is more specific, concentrating on a
particular waste stream or a particular area of the plant.
Each team should include people with direct
responsibility and Knowledge oi the particular waste
stream or area of the plant. Taole 3-4 presents four
examples ot learns fc plan'.s of various sizes in
different industries.
in addition to the internal st-ift, consider using outside
people, especially in the assessment and
implementation phases They may be trade
association representatives, consultants, or experts
'rom a different facility of the same company. In large
muhi-division comoanier, a centralized staff of experts
at the corporate headquarters may be available. One
or moru "outsiders" can brirg in new ideas and provide
an objective viewpoint Ar. outsider also is more likely
to count'.'act bias thought about by "inbreedirg", or
Table 3-4. Example* of WM Assessme/it Ttims
1. Me*al finishing department >n a large deten-ie contractor
• Metal finishing department manager
• Process engineer responsible for metal finishing
processes
• Facilities engineer responstole 'or metal finishing
department'
• Wastewater treatment department supervisor
• S;yt environmental engmse'
2 Smal' p€Sticide formulafor.
• Production manager*
• Envi'onmental manager
• Ma ntinance supervisor
• Pericide induiu7 consuitr.nt
3. Cyanide plating operation ant a miliary facility
• Internal assessment team
Environmental coordinator*
• Environmental engineer
Electroplating facility engineering supervisor
• Metalluigist
• Materials science group chemist
• Outside assessment team
• Chemical engineers (2)
Env ronmental engineering consultant
Piatu.g chemistry consultant
* Large ottsat priming facviy.
• Internal assessment earn
Plant president
Film processing supervisor
Pressroom super/isor
• Outside assessment team
Cnemioal engineers (2)*
Environmental scientist
• Printing industry tecnnical consultant
' • Team leader
'he "sacred cow" syndrome, such as when **n o'd
process area, rich in history, undergoes an
assessment.
Outside consultants can bring a wide variety o'
experience and expertise \a n waste minimization
assessment. Consultants mjy to especially useful to
smaller companies who may not have in-house
expertise in the relevant waste minimization
teenmques and technologies.
Production operators and "ine employees must not be
overlooked as a source of WM suggestions, since they
possess firsthand knowledge and experience with the
procr/ss. Their assistance is especially useful in
assessing operational cr procedural changes, or in
equ:pment modification*, that affect tfm w«?y they do
their work.
"Quality circles" hav«* beer, ir.si.vjted by many
companies, particularly in manufacturing industnes. to
13
-------
1
improve product quality and production efficiency.
These quality circles consist o! meetings of workers
and supervisors, where impl ements are proposed
and evaluated. Quality circles are beneficial in that they
involve the production p:«? who are closely
associated with the operations, and foster participation
and commitment to improvement Several large
companies that have quality circles have used them as
a means of soliciting successful suggestions for waste
minimization.
Silo Inspection
With a specific area or waste stream selected, and with
t»e assessment te?m in place, the assessment
continues with a visit to the site. In the case where the
entire assessment team is employed at the plant being
assessed, the team should have become very familiar
with the specific area in the process of collecting the
operating and oesign data. The member of the
assessment team should familiarize themselves with
the site as much as possible Although the collected
information is critical to gaining an understanding of the
processes involved, seeing the site is important in
ordtir to witness the actual operation, for e* ample, in
many instances, a process unit is operated differently
from the method originally described in the operating
manual- Modifications may have been made to the
equipment that were not recorded in the flow diagrams
or equipment lists.
When people from outside of the plant participate in
the assessment, it Is recommended that a formal site
inspection take place Even when the team is made up
ontlreiy of plant employees, a site inspection by all
team members is helpful after the sit® information has
been collected and reviewed. The Inspection helps to
resoive questions or conflicting data uncovered during
me review. The site inspection also provides
additional information to supplement that obtained
earlier.
When the assessment team includes members
employed outside of the plant, ihe team should
prepare a list of needed information ami an inspection
agenda. The list can be presented in m form of a
checklist detailing objectives, questions ard issues to
be resolved, ano/or fu.iher information requirements.
The agenda and information list are given to the
appropriate plant person-el in the areas to be
assessed early enough befce the visit to allow ihem to
assemble the information in advance. Of course. It may
be that the assessment tea.ti members themselves are
in the best position to coiiect and compile much of the
data. By carefully thinking oui the agenda and needs
list, important points are less likely to be overlooked
during the inspection. Table 3-5 presents useful
Guidelines 'or the site inspection.
Table 3*5. Quldallnaa for the 3'te Inspection
• Prepare an agenda in advance that covers all points that
•till require clarification. Provide staff contacts m the
area ba»ng assessed **ith the agenda several days
before the inspection.
« Schedule the inspection to coincide with the particular
operation mat is of interest (e.g., rc*ke-up chemical
addition, bath sampling, sat* dumping, start-jp,
shutdown, etc.).
• Monitor the operation at different times during the shift,
and if needed, du-ing all three shifts, espeaailv when
went# generation is hignty dependent on .luman
involvement {eg., >n painting or pans ciearvng
operations).
• Inti"1 iew the opera'ors, shift supervisors, and forerie.i m
the assessed area. Co not hesitate lo questior rru<-e
one person 1 an answer is not forthcoming. Assess
the d©era*o/s' and their supervisors' awareness ot the
«aste generate i lepects of the operation. Note their
farnriiarity (or lac* thereof) with the impacts the»r
operation may hav« on other operations.
• PMogfa&h the area of interest, if warranted.
Photographs are valuable in the absence of plant layout
drawings- Many detaila can be captured in photographs
that otherwise on id be forgotten or inaccurately recalled
at a tatei date.
• Observe the "housekeeping* aspects of the opeohon.
Check for signs of spills or teaks. Visit the maintenance
shop and ask about any problems n keeping the
equipment leaMree. Aaaesa tht overall cleanliness ot
the site. Pay attention to odora and fumes.
• Asses* the organizational structure and level of
coordination of environmental activities between var.ous
departments.
• Asset* administrative oonlrols, such as cost accounting
procedures, material purchasing procedures, ana *aste
collection procedures.
In performing the site inspection the assessment t»am
should follow the process from the point where taw
materials ent*3r the area to the point where ti*e
products and the wastes leave the area. The team
should identify the suspected sources of waste. This
may include the production process; mairtenance
operations; storage areas for r?w materials, lir.ished
product, and work-in-process. Recognize that the
plant's waste treatment area itself may atso offer
opportunities to minimize wast). This inspection often
results in farming preliminary conclusions about the
causes of waste generation. Full confirmation of these
conclusions may require additional data collection,
analysis, arid/or site visits.
14
-------
Generating WM Options
W$9t* Minimization Option $
Qnce the origins ard causes oi waste generation are
understood, the assessment process enters the
creative phase. The objective oi this step is to
generate a comprehensive set ol WM options for
further ccnside^iion Following the collection ot data
and s to inspect ens. the members of the team will
have b';jun to u-Jent.fy possible ways to minimize
waste in the assessed area. Identifying potential
opiions relies both on the expertise anc creativity of
the team members. Much o! tne requisite Knowledge
may come from their education and on-the-job
experience, however, the use of technical literature,
contacts, and oth*r sources is always helpful. Some
sources of background information for waste
minimization techniques are listed in Table 3-6.
Table 3-6. Source* of Background Information
on WM Options
Trad* a$sociMtion$
As part of their overall function to assist oompaniee
within their industry, (race associations generally
provide assistance and information about environmental
regulations and various available techniques lor
complying with these regulations. The information
provided is especially valuable since it ia industry-
specific.
P/a.v eng/r»eerj and operators
The employees that are intimately familiar with a facility's
operations are otten the best source of suggestions for
potential WM options.
aublish0t1 httratur*
Tec^n.cal magazines, trade journals, jovernrent
renorts, and research &r ets often contain information
mat can be u*eo as wars rrirumizaton optione.
Srafe and '.ocal anvirormontal agwncles
A number cf states and local agencies have, or are
developing. pron ams that include technical assistance,
information on industry-specific waste minimization
tocn.-icues, and compiled bibliographies. Appendix E
provioes a "St of addresses for state and federal
programs for WM assistance.
Equipment vendors
Meetings with equipment vendors, as well aa vendor
literature, are partcularly useful in identifying potential
equ prrent-onentea options Vendors are eager to ass*t
cc.TDan.dj sensitive materials, and
proper storage conditions, l.oss prevention minimizes
15
-------
wastes by avoiding leaks from equipment and spills.
Waste segregation practices reduce the volume of
hazardous wastes by preventing the mixing of
hazardous and nonhazardous wastes. Cost
accounting practices include programs to allocate
waste treatment and disposal costs directly to the
departments or groups that generate waste, rather
than charging these costs to general company
overhead accounts In doing so. the departments or
groups that generate the waste become more aware of
the effects of their treatment and disposal practices,
and have a financial incentive to minimize their waste.
By judicious scheduling of batch production runs, the
frequency of equipment cleaning and the resulting
waste can be reduced.
Example: Goad Operating Prarticos
A large consumer product company in California
adopted a corporate pobcy to minimize the
generation of hazardous waste. In order to
implement the policy, tne company mobilized
quality circles made up of employees representing
areas within the plant that generate* hazardous
wastes. The company experienced a 75%
reduction in the amount ci wasiea generated by
instituting proper maintenance procedures
suggesteo : y the Quality circle teamr,. Since the
team member* were also line supervisors and
operators, iht* n:ade sure the procedures were
followed.
Source Reduction; Technology Changes
Technology changes are oriented toward process and
equipment modifications to reduce waste, primarily in a
production setting. Technology changes can range
from minor changes that ran be iiiiplemented in a
matter of Days at low cost, to the replacement of
processes involving large capital costs. These
changes include the following;
• Changes in the production process
• Equipment, la/out, or piping changes
• Use of automation
• Changes in process operating conditions, such as
Flow rates
Temperatures
• Pressures
Residence times
Fittmn.'«: Technology Charges
A manufacturer of fabricated metal products
cleaned nickel and titanium wire in an alkaline
chemical bath prior to using the wire m their product.
in 1986, the company began to experiment w. i a
mechanical abrasive system The wire was passed
through the system which uses silk and carbide
oads and pressure to brighten the metal. The
system worked, but required passing the wire
through the unit twice for complete cleaning, in
1937 The company bought a second abrasive ur.n
and installed it >n series with the first unit. This
system allowed the company tj completely
eliminate the need for the chemical cleaning oath.
Source Reduction: Input Material Changes
Input material changes accomplish waste minimization
by reducing or eliminating the hazardous materials that
enter the production process. A'.so. changes in input
materials can be made to avoid the generation of
hazardous wastes within the production processes,
inpcl malerial changes include*
• Material purification
• Material substitution
frampftt; Input Material Vianges
An eloctronic manufacturing facility of a large
diversified corporatton originally cleaned printed
ctnjit boards with solvents. The company found that
by switching from i solvent-based cleaning system
to an aQueous based system that the same
operating conditions and workloads could be
maintameo The aqueous-based system was found
to doan six times more effectively. This resulted in a
lower prcducr reject rate, and eliminated a
hazardous waste.
Source Reduction. Tiuauct Changes
Product ch?r»ges are performed by the manufacturer
of a product with the intent of reducing waste resulting
from a product's use. Product changes include:
• Producv substitution
• Product conservation
• Changes in product composition
Example: Product changes
In the paint manufacturing industry, water-based
coatings are finding increasing applications where
solvent-based paints were used before. These
prcducts do not oontain toxic or flammable solvents
that make sclent-based oaints hazardous when
they are disposed of. Also, cleaning the apple?tor*
wth solvent is not necessay The use ot water-
16
-------
based paints instead of solvent-based paints also
greatly reduces volatile organic compound
emissions to the atmosphere.
Recyclirg; Use and Reuse
Rocyciirg via use and/or reuse involves the return of a
*aste mater-.al either to the originating process as a
substitute for an input materia:, or to another process;
as a.\input material.
Example: Reus*
A printer of newpaper advertising in California
purchased ar> ink recycling unit to produce black
newspaper tni< from its various waste inks. The unit
blends the dfferent colors of waste ink together
with fresh black ink and oiack toner to create the
black mk. Ths ink is then filtered to remove flakes of
dried mk. Ths ink is used in place of fresh biack ink.
and eliminates the need for the company to sNp
waste ink oisite for disposal. The price of the
recycling uni' was paid off in 18 months based onty
on the savings in fresh black ink purchases. The
payback improved to 9 mcnths when the costs for
disposing of nk as a hazardous waste are included.
Recycling: Reclamation
Reclamation is he recovery o' a valuable material from
a hazardous waste Reclamation techniques differ
from use and r«u?.e techniques in that the recovered
catena! is not used .n the facility, rather it is sold to
another company
Example: Reclamation
A photoprocvssmg company uses an electrolytic
deposition ceif 10 recover silver out of the rinsewater
from film processing equipment. The silver is then
sold to a sma'l rocycler. By removing the silver from
this wastewater, the wastewater can oe discharged
to the sewer without additional pretreatment by the
company. This unit pays tor itself in less than two
years with the value of silver recovered.
The compary also comets used film and sells it to
the sane recyder. The recyder burns the film and
collects the silver from the the residual ash. By
removing tte silver from the ash. the ash becomes
nonhazardous.
Appendix E lists many WM technioues and concepts
applicable to common waste generating operations
(coating, equipment cleaning, parts cleaning, and
materials handling). Additionally, a list of good
operating practices is provided
Methods of Generating Option*
The process by which w?ste minimization options are
identified should occur in an environment that
ertcourages creativity and independent thinking by the
members of the assessment team. While the individual
team members will suggest many potential options on
their own. the process can be enhanced by using
some of the common group decision technique?
These techniques allow the assessment team to
identify options that the individual members might not
have com® up with on their own. Brainstc.ming
sessions with the team members are an effective way
ot developing WM options Mosi management or
organizational behavior textbooks describe group
decision techniques, such as brainstorming or the
nominal group technique.
Worksheet 11 in Appendix A is a form for listing
options that are proposed during an option generation
session. Worksheet 12 in Appendix A is user* to
briefly describe and document the options that are
proposed Worksheets S7 and S8 in Appendix R
perform the same function in the simplified set ot
worksheets.
Screening and Selecting Options tor Further
Study
Many waste minimization options will be identifiec \:i a
successful assessment. At this point, it is necessary to
identify thosa options that offor real potential tj
minimize waste and reduce costs. Since detailed
evaluation ot technical and economic feasibility is
usually costly, the proposed options should be
screened to identify thosa that deserve further
evaluation. The screening procedure serves to
eliminate suggested options that appear margiral,
impractical, or inferior without a detailed and mc re
cosily feasibility study.
The screening procedures can range from an informal
review and a decision made by the program manager or
a vote of the team members, io quantitative dec'isor-
making tools. The informal evaluation is ar
unstructured procedure by wh'Ch the assessment
team or WM program task force selects the options mat
appear to be the best. This method is especially useful
in small facilities, with small management groups, or in
situations whGre only a few options have been
generated- This method consists of a discussion ar-d
examination of eacn option.
The weighted sum method is a means o". quantifying
the important factors that affect waste management at a
17
-------
particular tacitly, and now each option will perform with
respect to these factors. This method is
recommended when there are a large number of
options to consider. Appendix G presents the
weighted sum method in greater detail, along with an
example. Worksheet 13 in Appendix A is designed to
screen and rank options using this method
The assessment procedure is flexible enough to allow
common group decision-making techniques to be
used here. For example, many large corporations
currently use decision-making systems that can be
used to screen and rank WM options.
No matter what method is used, the screening
procedure should consioer the following questions.
• What is the main benefit gained by implementing
this option? (e.g.. economics, compliance, liability,
workplace safety, *"• \
• Does the necessary technology exist to develop
the option?
< How much does it cost? is it oost effective?
• Can the option be implemented within a reasonable
amount of time without disrupting production?
• Does the option have a good track record"? 1 not,
is there convincing evidence that the option will
work as required?
• Does the option have a good chance of success?
(A successfully initiated WM program will gain wider
acceptance as the program progresses)
• What other benefits will occur?
The results of the screening activity are used to
promote ihe successful options tor technical and
economic feasibility analyses. The number of options
chosen tor the feasibility analyses depends on the
time, budget. and resources available for suci'i a study
Some options (such as procedural changes) may
involve no capital costs and can be implemented
quickly witn little or no further evaluation. The
screening procedure should account for ease of
implementation of an option. If such an option « ciearty
oesirabie and indicates a potential cost savings, it
should be promoted for further study or outright
implementat.on.
-------
Section 4
Feasibility Analysis
Trie '*00gazed need to minimize waste
Planning and
Organization
FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS PHASE
• Technical evaluation
• Economic evaluation
• Select options for implementation
—H—
Implementation
J
Successful^ implemented
waste minimization protects
The final product of the assessment phase is a list of
WM options tor the assessed area- The assessment
wti; have screened out the impractical or unattractive
options. The next step is tr determine if the remaining
options are technically ind economically feasible.
Technical Evaluation
;rv; technical evaluation determines whether a
proposed WM option will work in a specific application.
The assessment loan should use a "fast-track"
approach in evaluatirg procedural changes that do not
involve a significant capital expenditure Process
testing of materials can be done relatively quickiy, if the
options do not invoke major equipment installation or
moo flicat ions.
For oQuipment rola ed options or process changes,
visits to see existing installations can be arranged
through equipment vendors and industry contacts.
The operator's comments are especially important and
should be compared with the vendor's damns Bench-
scale or pilot-scale demonstration is often necessary.
Often it is possible to obtain scale-up data using a
rental test unit for bcncn-scale or pilot-scale
experiments. Some vendors will install equipment or a
trial oasis, with acceptance and payment attar a
prescribed time, rf the user is satisfied.
The technical evaluation of an option also must
consider facility .onstraints and product retirements,
such as those described in Table 4-1. Although an
inability to meet these constraints may not present
insurmountable problems, correcting them will likely
add to the capital andor operaling costs
Tabla 4*1. Typical Technical Evaluation Criteria
• hi tha system safe for workers?
- Will product quality be maintained?
• le space available?
• la the new equ pment, materials, or procedures
compatible with production operating procedural. *o.'k
(low, and product;cn ratee?
• la additional latior equired?
• Are utilititiee available? Or must they b« insuilat!.
thereby raising ccpital costs'?
• How long will production be stopped in order to install the
system?
• Is special expertise required to operate or maintain the
new system?
• Does the vendor provide acce.itable serve '
• Does the system create other environmental problems?
All affected groups in the facility should contribute to
and review the re suits of the technical evaluation. Prior
consultation and review with the aflected groups [e g .
production, maintenance, purchasing) is needed to
ensure the viability and acceptance of an option. If the
option calls for a change in production methods or
input materials, I he project's effects on the quality ol
the final product must be determined. II after tha
technical evaluation, the project appears infeasible or
impractical, it snould be dropped. Worksheet 14 in
Appendix A ts a checklist ol important Items to consider
,tion
Economic Evaluation
The wonomic evaluation is carried out usi'">g standard
measures of profitability, such as payback period,
rptum on investment, and net present v.iLe. Each
organisation has its own economic criteria for selecting
projects for implementation. In performing tr.e
'Economic evaluation, various costs and savings
K# considered As in any projects, the oost elements
of a WM project can be broken down into r-apital costs
and operating costs. TTie economic ana;/s#» described
in this section and in the associated worksheets
represents a prelimir.ary. rather than detailed, analysis.
For smaller facilities with only a few processes, the
entire WM assessment procedure will tend to be much
-------
•1
Table 4-2. Capital Investment for a Typical
Large WW Project
Diract Capital Coaia
Site Development
Demolition and alteration wort*
Sita clearing and grading
Waikwaya. roede. and fencing
Procaae Equipment
AH equipment list ad on ftewv ahaata
Spara paria
Taxaa, freight, naurance, and dutiae
Materials
Piping and dueling
Insulation and painting
Electrical
inetrLmentation and oontroia
Buildinga and itructoree
Connectiona to Exiating Utilrtiaa and Servicee (water,
HVAC. power. ttearm, rothg«raton. fuala, plant air
ind inert gat, lighting, and fira control)
New Utility and Service Facilltiee (aame Kama aa above)
Othar Non-Procaai Equipment
Construct ion/lnatallation
Conetruction/lnetallation labor aelariee and burdan
SupervieioA, accounting, timekeeping, purchaeing,
safety, and expediting
Temporary feciiitiee
Conatruction tooia and aquipment
Taxaa and inauranca
BuUding perm it a, fMd taata. lictneae
Indiract Capital Coati
!n«houae enginaertng, procurement, and othar horna
office ooa:a
Outage engineering, daaign, and coneurting Services
Permitting ooeta
Contractor! taaa
Start-up coata
Tiaining ooata
Contingency
Intereat accruad during cunetruction
TOTAL FIXED CAPITAL COSTS
Working Capital
Raw materiale inventory
Finished product inventory
Matansls and tuppliee
TOTAL WORKING CAPITAL
TOTAL CAPTAL INVESTMENT
Sourca: Adapted f ont Parry. Chamieal Enotnear'L
Handbook (19S5;; And Patera and Tlmmerhaua, Plant Daaion
and Economics for Chami*! Enain—r* {1980).
less formal. In this situation, several oovtoi j WM
options, such as installation of flow control artel good
operating practices may be implemented with uttle or
no economic evaluation. In these instances, no
complicated analyses are necessary to demonstrate
the advantages of adopting the selected WM options
A proper perspective must be maintained between the
magnitude of savings that a potential option may offer,
and the amount of manpowar required to do the
technical and economic feasibility analyses.
COtil
Table 4-2 is a comprehensive list of capital cost items
associated with a Urge plant upgrading project. These
cost, include not only the fixed capital costs for
deigning, purchasing, and installing equipment, but
also costs for woifcing capital, permitting, training, start-
up, and financing charges.
With the increasing level of environmental regulations,
initial permitting costs are becoming a significan:
portion of capital costs for many recycling options (as
well ts treatment, storage, and disposal options).
Many source reduction techniques have the
advantage of not requiring environmental permitting in
order to be implemented.
Op+rvtlng Coefe and SeWnge
The basic economic goal of any waste minimization
project is to reduce (or eliminate) waste disposal costs
and to reduce input material costs. However, a variety
of other operating costs (and savings) should also be
considered. In making the economic evahjation. it is
oonvenlem to use Incremental operating costs in
comparing the existing system with the new system
that incorporates the watte minimization option.
{'Incremental operating costs" represent the
difference oerveen the estimated operating costs
associated with the WM option, and the actual
operating cost* of the existing system, without the
option.) Table 4*3 describes incremental operating
costs and savings and Incremerrtal revenues typically
associated with waste minimization projects.
Reducing or avoiding presont and fut':;a operating
costs associated with waste treatment, rtriage, and
disposal are major elements of ^ WM project
economic evaluation. Companies have tended to
ignore iheso costs in the part 6*. ce siee land disposal
was relatively Inexpensive. Hcwaver, recent regulatory
requirements imposod on fjerierators and waste
management facilities have cau^v'the costs of waste
management to increase to lis point where it is
becoming a significant factor in a company's overall
cost structure. Table 4-4 presents typical external
costs for odsite waste treatment and disposal in
addition to these external coe*s. there are significant
Internal costs, including the labor to store and ship out
wastes, liability insurance costs, and onaite treatment
costs.
20
-------
Tab I* 4-J. Operating Cost* «nd S«vlnp*
Aaaielatad wlt^ WM Projects
R+iuctyj w*:ta managamant coata.
fins mciudaa radvcttona m costs for:
Offstta iraatmant. storage, and dispoaal faaa
Stata faat and taxaa on hazarcoua waste ganaiaton
Transportation coal a
Oniita trastmart. stcraga. and handling coata
Parmitting, raportirg, and fecordkaaping costs
Input rr ooarating and maintenance supplies.
An option may rssult incraasa or decrease (ho usa of
OiM supplies.
Changas in ovarhaad costs.
Larga WM projscts nay affect a facility's ovarhaad
costa.
Changaa in revenues from increased for decreased)
production.
An opt™ may raaufi in an incraaaa in tha productivity of
a unrt. Th.s will result m a changa in revenues. (Note that
operating costs ma; also change accordingly.)
hicfasad ravanuas from by^prvlucta.
A WM option may produca a o-piaduct that can b* so id
to a racycibr or so»d to anott.*n company a* ~ 'iw
material. Thia wnl increase ;ha company's revenues.
Tabla 4*4. Typical Coete of Offslte Industrial
Wiata Management"
Disposal
Drummad hazardous waste*
Soiida
Liquids
Bulk waste
Solids
Liquids
Lab pacxa
Analysis (at disposal sita)
Transportation
$75 lo $110 par drum
$ti5 to $120 par drum
$120 &er cube yard
$0 60 to $2.30 par gallon
$110 par drom
$200 to $300
$65 tc $&5 par hour @ 45 m.;e*
paf hour (round trip)
Doss not include internal coata. such as tanas and te«s
and labor for manifast preparation. storage, handling, ard
recordkeeping.
Baaad on 5S gallon drums. Theae prices ara for larger
Quantitiaa of dnjmmed waataa. Disposal of a small
numbar of drums can be up to four timaa highar par
drum.
f-c the purpose of evaluating a project to reduce
.ante quantities, some types of costs are larger and
nore easily quantified. These include:
< disposal lees
• ^asportation costs
- u-d'sixsal treatment o>sts
' ra^- materials oosis
• operating and maintenance costs.
It is suggested that savings in these costs be taken
into consideration first, because they have a greater
etloct on project economics and involve less effort to
estimate reliably. The remaining elements are usually
secondary in their direct impact and should be
included on an as-needed basis in line-tuning the
analysis.
Profitability Analyst a
A project's probability is measured using the estimated
net cash flows (cash incomes minus cash outlays) for
each year of the project's life. A profitability analysis
example in Appendix H includes two casti flow tables
(Figure H*3 and H-4).
if the project has no significant capital costs the
project's profitab;lity can be judged by wh^ner an
operating cost savings occurs or ot. I' such a project
redrces overall operating costs, it should be
implemented as soon as practical.
21
-------
Table 4«3. Operating Coc*a and Savings
A:\aociated with WM Projects
Redktced wMSte management corns.
Tin includes reductions m costs for:
Offsite treatment. storage. and disposal faas
State faas and taxes or haiardous waste generators
Transportation cost*
On»rt« treatment. atoraga. and handlir>g costs
Permitting, report ng. and recordkeeping costs
Input material cost savings.
An option t-iut re*iu,ea wast'. usually dacraasas tha
cemand ior nput maten^U.
insurance a/*3 liability savings.
A WM optcn m*y be significant anough to reduce a
company's insurance payrranu. It may alao lower ;
company's potantial liability aasociai^ with remedial
cleanup©'TSDFs and workplace safety
magnitude of liability savings « ditficutt to determine).
Chang* in jomIs associated with quality.
A Wl» option may have a poaitiva or negative effect on
product QuJ'ity. thia could raaolt in higher (or lowar)
coats for rawjfk, scrap, or quality control functiona.
Changes in utilities ooata.
Utilitiea coats ¦•nay increase oi dacraasa. This s will nc>easa tho company's revenues
Tsble 4«4. Typical Coata of Offalte Industrial
Waate Management*
Disposal
Drummed hajardoua waste1
Solids
Uquics
Bulk waste
Solids
Ltqutds
Lab packs
$75 to $110 per c ojm
$65 to $120 per rum
$120 per cube yard
$0 60 to $2.30 per galion
$110 per drum
Analysis (at disposal site) $20C to $300
Transportation $65 to $&S par hour @ 45 nr. les
per hour (round trip)
- Does not include internal coats, such as taxes and fees,
and labor for manifest preparation, storage, handing, and
recordkeeping.
**- Baaed on 55 gallon drums These prices are for larger
9.iantitiea of drummed wastes Disposal of a small
number of drums can be up ic -our timea higher per
drum.
For the purpose of evaluating a project '.o reduce
waste ruantities. ssrm types of costs are larger and
more easily quantified. These include'
disposal fees
transportation costs
predisposal treatment costs
raw materials costs
operating and maintenance costs.
It is suggested that ravings in these costs be laken
-------
For projects with significant capita costs, a mora
detailed profttabiiy analyst* * necessary. The three
standard profitability measures am;
* Payback period
• Internal rale of return (iRR)
- Net present value
The payback period for 3 pro; id is the amount of time H
takes to recover the initial cash outlay on the project
The formula for calculating th& payback penod on a
pretax basis is the following:
Payback paind Caprtjl iwaatwnt
(in yetni Annual operating vo%\ saving*
For example, suppose a waste generator installs a
piece of equipment at a total cost of 1120,000 If the
piece of equipment » expected to save $48,000 per
year, then the payback perioO is 2.5 yearn.
Payback periods are typically measured in years.
However, a particularly attractive project may have a
p ,yback oeriod measured r months. Payback periods
in the range of three to four years are usually
considered acceptable to' low-risk investments. This
method is recommended for quick assessments of
profitability. ff targe capftai expenditures art? Involved, it
is usually followed by rare detailed analysts.
The internal rate of return {IRR) and the net present
value (NPV) are both discounted cash flow techniques
for determining profitability. Many companies use
these methods for ranking capita! prefects that are
competing lor funds. Capital funding for a project may
well hinge on the ability of the protect to generate
positive cash flows beyond the payback pe-iod to
realize acceptable return on Investment Both the
NPV and IRR recognize the time value of money by
discounting the projected future tet cash flows 10 the
present. For investments with a low level of risk, an
aftertax IRA of s 2 to 15 percent is typically acceptable.
Most of the popular spreadsheet programs for
personal computers wi automtttcaHy calculate IRR and
NPV tor a series of cash flowe- Refer to any financial
management, cost accounting, or engineering
economics text for more information on determining
me JRR or NPV. Appendix H presents a profitability
analysis example for a WM protect using 5RR and NPV.
Adjuwtrvanta tor Rlvk* §n* UMM*/
As mentioned earlier, waste minimization projects may
reduce trie magnitude environmental and safety
risks for a company. Although these risks can be
identified, it is difficult to predict if problems occur, the
nature of the problems, and their resiling magnitude
One way of accounting for the reduction of theso risks
is to ease the financial performance requirements of
the project. For example, the acceptable payback may
be lengthened from four to five yrara, or the required
internal rate of return may be lowered from 15 percent
to 12 percent. Such adjustments reflect recognition of
elements that affect the risk exposure of the company,
but cannot be included directly in the analyses. These
adjustments are judgmental and necessarily reflect the
individual viewpoints of the people evaluating the
project for capital funding. Therefore, it is important
that the financial analysts and the decision maker* in
iha company be ware of the risk reduction and other
benefits of the WM optterw Aa a policy to encourage
waste minimisation, some companies ht*e set lower
hurdle rates for WM projects
While the profitability Is important in deciding whether
or not to Implement an option, environmental
regulations may be even more important A company
operating in violation of environmental regulations can
face fines, lawsuits, and criminal pemKies for the
company's managers. Ultimately, the fac^ly may even
be forced to shut down. In this case the total cash flow
of a company can hinge upon implementing the
environmental project.
Work*h*9(a for Economic Evaluation
Worksheets 15 through 17 In Appendix A are used to
determine the economic evaluation of a WM option.
Worksheet 15 is a checklist of capital and operating
cost items. Worksheet 16 is used to find a simple
payback period for an option that requires capital
Investment. Worksheet 17 is used to find the net
present value and internal rate of return for an option
that requires capital investment. Worksheet S9 in
Appendix B is used to record estimated capital and
operating costs, and to determine the payback period
in the simplified assessment procedure,
Final Report
I "he product of a waste minimization assessment is a
report that presents the results ot the assessment ana
the technical and economic feasibility analyses, The
report alio comalnes recommendations to implement
the feasible options,
A good final report can be an important tool for getting
a project implemented. It is particularly valuable in
obtaining funding for the project. In presenting the
feasibility analyses. « is often useful to evaluate the
prefect under different scenarios. cor example,
comparing a projects* profitability under optimistic and
pessimistic assumptions (such m increasing waste
disposal costs) can be beneficial Sensitivity analyses
that the effect of key variables on profitability
are also useful.
-------
The report should include lot only how much the
project wiH cost and its expected performance, but also
how K wiH be done. It is important to discuss;
• whether the technology is established, with
mention of succesful applications;
• the required resources ard how they will be
obtained;
• estimated construction period;
• estimated production oowntime;
• how th* performance of the project can be
evaluatod after it is implemented
Before the report is finalized, it is important to review
the results with the affected departments and to solicit
thei' support. By having department representatives
assist in preparing and reviewing the report, the
chances are increased that the projects will be
implemented. In summarizing the results, a qualitative
evaluation of intangible costs and benefits to the
company should be included Reduced liabilities and
improved image in the eyes of *he employees and the
community should be discussed.
23
-------
Stctlm $
lmpl§m»nting Wast* Minimisation Options
Tha racognized na&d ta minima* wasta
i
Planning and
Organization
T
I Assessment
Phaaa
T
j Faasibilrty
| Anatyaia Phw
IMPLEMENTATION
• Justify proiacta and obtan fufKiirg
• Installation (aqutpmanr)
• lnoIatDantatcn (fcnacedura)
• Evnl -ata parf'-xmiinca
j_—
Succaaafgtv impiamamad
wi*ta minimization projects
The WM assessment report provides the basis tor
obtaining company funding of WM projects- Because
projects a*e not always sold on their technical merits
atone, a clear descriptor; ol both tangible and
intangible benefits can help »dge a proposed project
past competing projeas tor binding.
The champ:ons of the WM assessment program
should be flexible enough to oevttop alternatives or
modifications. They should also be committed to the
point of doing background and support work, and
should anticipated potential problems in implementing
the options. Above all, they should keep in mind that
an id*a will not sell rf the rponaor* are not sold on it
themselves
Obtaining Funding
Waste reduction projects generally involve
implements in process efficiency and/or ^eductions
in operating costs of waste management However, an
org*filiation's capita! resources may be prioritized
toward enhancing future revenues (for example,
mov-ng into new lir%e& of business, expanding plant
capacity, or acquiring other companies), rather than
tow#*d cutting current sostt. If th# is I he case, then a
sound waste reduction project could be postponeo
until the next capital budgeting period. It is then up to
the project sponsor to ensure that the project is
reconsidered at that time,
Knowing the level within the organization that has
approval authority for capital projects will help in
enlisting me appropriate support, n large
corporations, smaller projects are tvpcal
-------
Installation
Waste minimization options that involve ooeratlonal.
procedural, or materials cnanges (wilhout additions or
modifications to equipment) should be implemented
as soon as the potential cost savings have been
determined. For projects involving equipment
modifications or new equipment, the installation of a
waste minimization project is essentially no different
from any other capital improvement project. Ti»e
pnases of the project include planning, design
procurement, anc consiruction
Worksheet 18 is a form tor documenting the progress
of a WM project througnthe implementation phase
Demonstration and Foliow«up
After the waste minimization option has been
imolemerted. it remains to be seen how affective tne
option actually turns out tc be. Options that don't
measure up to their original pe'formance expectations
may requre rework or modifications. It is important to
get warranties from vendors prior to installation ot the
equipmen:
The documentation provided through a follow-up
evaluation represents an important source ol
information for future uses of the rption in other
facilities- Worksheet 19 is a form tor evaluating the
performance of an implemented WM option. The
experience gained in implementing an option at one
'aciiity can be used to reduce the protlems and costs
of ;mp:emen:ng ¦'ptions at subsequent facilities.
Measuring Waste Reduction
One measure of et!ectiveness for a WM projectis the
projects effect on t'-.e organization's cash f'ow The
project sro/d pay for iiseif through reduced waste
management costs and reduced raw materials costs,
however, it is a so important 10 measure the actual
red'-ct'On of waste accomplished by the Wm project.
The easiest way 10 measure waste reduction is by
recording tne quantities of waste generated before
and a*ter a WM project has been implemented. The
a.fference. d^id.ed by the ordinal waste generation
rate, '^presents the percentage reduction ,n waste
quant'ty. However, this simpie rT.easurement ignores
ether factors that also affect the quantity o'. waste
generated.
In general, wasto generation 15 Jirectly dependent on
the production rate. Thereto'*, the ratio of waste
genera'ion ra^e to production 'die is a convenient way
cf measuring waste reduction.
Expressing waste reduction in terms ot the ratio of
waste to production rates is not free ot problems,
however. One of these problems is the danger of
using the ratio of infrequent large quantities to the
production raid. This problem is illustrated by a
situation where a plant undergoes a major overhaul
involving equipment cleaning, paint stripping, and
repainting ^uch overhauls are fairly infrequent anc
are lypically ^rformed every three to five years. The
decision to include this intermittent stream in the
calculation of the waste reduction index, based on the
ratio of waste rate to product rate, would lead to an
increase in this index. Thi9 decision cannot be
justified, however, since the intrequent generation cf
pair*ir>$, wastes is not a function of production r?te In
a situation like this, the waste reduction pn.gress
should be measured in terms of the ratto of waste
quantity or materials use to tne square footage of tne
area painted, tn general, a distinction should be mace
between production- related wastes and maintenance-
related wastes and clean-up wa?tes.
Also, a few waste streams may be inversely
proportional to production rate. For example, j waste
resulting from outdated input materials is i.kely to
increase if the production rate decreases. 1 '.lis is
because the age-dated materials in inventory are more
likely tj exp;:when their use in production
decreases.
For these reasons care must 'oe tai
-------
1
Measuring waste minimization by using a ratio of waste
quantity to material throughput or product output is
genorally more meaningful for specific units or
operations, rather than for an entire facility. Therefore,
it is important to preserve the focus of the WM project
when measuring and reporting progress. For those
operations not involving chemical reactions, it may be
helpful to measure WM progress by using the ratio of
irput material quantity to material throughput or
production rate.
Waste Minimization Assessments for
New Production Procss&e'j
This manual concentrates on waste minimization
assessments conducted in ex sting facilities.
However, rt is important that waste minimization
principles be applied to new projects. In general, it is
easier to avoid waste generation during the research
and development or design phase than to go back and
modify the process after i* has already been installed
The planning and design team for a new product,
production process, or operation should address
waste generation aspects early on. The assessment
procedure in this manual can be modified to provide a
WM review of a product or process in the planning or
design phase. The earlier the assessment Is
performed, the less likely it is that the project will
require expensive changes. All new projects should
be reviewed by the waste minimization program task
force.
A better approach than a pre-prc;ect assessment is to
include one or r*ore members of the WM program task
force on any new project that will generate waste, in
tl"is way. the new project wiN benefit from the "built-in"
presence of a WM champion and his or her influence to
design the process to minimize waste At a California
facility of a major defense ocntractor, all new projects
and modifications to existing facilities and equipment
are reviewed by the WM program team. All projects
that have no environmental Impact are quickly
screened and approved. Those project?* that do have
an environmental impact are assigned to a team
member who participates In the project kick-off and
review meetings from inception to implementation.
Ongoing Wast# Minimization Program
The WM program is a continuing, •ather than a one-
time effort. Once the highest priority waste streams
and facility areas have been assessed and those
projects have been implemented, the assessment
program should look to area* and waste streams with
lower priorities. The ultimate coal of the WM program
should be to reouce the generation of waste to the
maximum extent achievable. Companies that ha**
eliminated the generation of hazardous waste should
continue to look at reducing industrial wastewater
discharges, air emissions, and solid wastes.
The frequency with which assessments are done will
depend on the program's budget, the company's
budgeting cycle (annual cycle in most companies), and
special circumstances. These special circumstarces
might be:
• a change in raw material or product requirements
• higher waste n tanagement costs
• new regulations
¦ new techr\ck>gy
• a major event with undesirable environmental
ounsftquences (such as a major spill)
Aside from tt>e ipocial circumstances a new series ot
assessments should be conducted eacn fiscal year.
To be truly effective, a philosophy of waste
minimization must be developed in the organization
This means that waste minimization must be an integral
pirt of tr* company's operations. The most
successful waste minimization programs to date have
all developed this philosophy within their companies
26
-------
Appendix A
Wast* Minimization Assessment Workshsits
Tne workaheets ttat ollow are deaigned to facilitate the WM %sseeament procedure TaWe A-1 lieu the workeneets.
acccrdng to tht paitcuiar p^ase o* the program, and a brief Secretion of the purpoaa of the worXaheeta
Appendix 8 presents a ser et of simplified worksheets for jmall buainesses o. for t.elimmaiy ataessmenta.
Tabla A«1. LIU of Waate Minimization Aaaeaamant Workahaeta
Phaaa Number and Title Purpoae'Remarke
1. Assessment Overview
Sum mania* tha ovarali assesamert procedure.
Planning and Organisation
(Sactlon 2)
2. Program O.ganization
Reooriii key members in tna WMA program task foroa and tha WM
aaeesiim* nt teams. Also records tha relevant organization.
3. Aaaeesment Tsam Make-op
Aaaaaamant Phaaa
(Sactlon 3)
4. Sita Daacnptcn
Lists na^es of aaaessment team mambera aa waH aa dutiee. includes
a :«t of f otential dapartmanta lo oonaidar whan selecting tha teama.
Uata background information about tha facility, including location,
products, and operabone.
5. Personnel
Record* in'orrnation about tha personnel who work m tha araa to ba
aaaaaaad.
6. Procaaa Information
Thia ia a checklist of uaaful prooeas information to look for before
starting tha assessment.
7. Input M*;enafc Summary
Recorda input material information for a specific production or process
araa. This ixiudea nam a, supplier. hazardoua componant or
oropertiee. coat, delivery and shelf-lile mformalcn, and possible
substitutes
B Pioduca Summary
Wentiliee hajardoua comoonants. production rata, revenue. and
othur information about producta.
9. Indrvidual Waate Straam
Characterization
Racorda source. hazard, ganaration rata, dwpoaai coat, and mathod
of treatment or disposal for each waate street.
10. Waste Straam Summary
Summarize* all of the information collected to* each waate stream.
This sheet ie also used to prioritize waste streams to aaaeas.
(continued)
A-1
-------
Tabla k"\. llat of Waata Minimization A^«nm«n: WorkaMats {tontinuadl
Phaaa
Numbar and Tltl#
Purpoaa/Ramarka
Aaaaaamant Phaaa (centlnuad)
(Sactlon 3)
1 1. Option Ganaration
12. Option Oaacfiption
13. Optiona Evaluation by
Waightad Sum Mathod
Faaatblllty Analyala Phaaa
(Sactlon 4)
u Tach >ical FaaaibMrty
15. Coal Information
6. Profitability Workshaat 11
Payback Panod
17. Profitability Workahaat *2
Caah Flow for NPV and IRR
Raoxda optiona propoaad during brainatorming or nominal group
tacftntqua aaaaona. '.ncluCaa tha 'ationaia for propoaing aach opton.
Datcnbaa and tummarirei irformaton about a propoaad option Alar
not* approva' of p.omaing optiona.
Uaa* ?o< acr^anng option* uaing tha waightad aum meinod.
Datailad chackliat for uarforminf; a technical avaluation oi a WM oaon.
*>11* *orkahaat ia divioad into aacbona for aquipmant-rataad opitona.
i»raonn*fofccadural-ralatad optiona, and matariala-ralmad optena
Datailad liat of capital ar>d operating coat information for uaa in tha
aconomic avaJuaion of in ofticn.
Baa ad on tha capital and i>f«rtting coat information davatopad from
Worttahaat 15. thia workahaat ia uaad to oalculata tha payback panod.
Th« workahaat ia uaad to davalop caah flow* for calculating NPV or iRR
Implamantitlon
(3actlon 9)
18. Projact Summary
19. Option Parformanca
Summarizaa important taakf to be partormad during tha
imptamantation of an option Th« mdudaa dalivara-Dia, raapon%fcla
oaraon. budgat. and achaduia.
Raairda matanal baianca imbrmatton for avaluating tha
parformanca oi an
-------
Firm
Waste Minimization Asaeaamant
Workaheata
Pro, No.
Freoared Bv
Site
Checked Bv
Datp
Sheet _j_ of Page of _
WORKSHEET
1
ASSESSMENT OVERVIEW
<> EPA
Begin the Watt* Minimization
Assessment Program
I
Work iheeta used
PLANNING AND ORGANIZATION
* Gat management commitment
* Sat overall assessment program goals
* Organize assessment program task force
I
lAsmsament organizaton
| and commitment to proceed
$e act «ev*
assessment la-gets
and reevaluate
previous options
ASSESSMENT PHASE
• Compile process ani facility data
• Prorit>?e and solect assessment targets
• Select people for assessment teams
• Review data and insp*>ct site
• Generate options
• Screen and seletf options for!u.ther slucy
I
Assessment report of
selected options
FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS PHASE
• Tech'tica! evaluation
• Economic evaluation
• Saiect options for implementa'.on
I
Pinal report, including
recommended ODt ons
IMPLEMENTATION
Repeat the pocesa
• Justtf) projects and obtain funding
• installation (equipment)
• Implementation (procedu*e)
• Evaluate perlcmance
i
Succetefully operating
watte minimization projects
4.6.7.8 9.
10
3
1 M2
13
M
5. "¦6.17
16
18
19
A-3
-------
Firm
Site
Date
Watt* Minimization Asutsgment
Proj. No.
Prepares By
Checked By
Sheet J_ of j_ Page of
WORKSHEET
2
PROGRAM ORGANIZATION
&EPA
FUNCTION
NAME
LOCATION
TELEPHONE#
Program Manager
Site Cooitllnator
Assessment Team Leader
Organization Chart
(sketch)
A-4
-------
PirtTi
RAm
Waste Minimization A»Mtam*nt
Prnj No
Prep?J*d Bv
Chocked Bv
natA
Sheet J_ ol J_ Page of
WORKSHEET
ASSESSMENT
TEAM MAKE-UP
<>EPA
1
Location/
Telephone #
Manhours
Required
Outlet
Function/Department i
Name
Load
Support
Review
Asstfiemen! Team
Lead'ir
Site Coordinator
Operations
Engl "waring
Maintenance
Scheduling
Matorlaii Control
Procurement
Shtpplng/Recalvlng
Facilities
Quality Control
. -
bnvlronmental
„ j
h~
Accounting
Personnel
i
r~r—
R&D
Legal
Management
Contractor'Consuftant
Safsty
_
1
-
i
A-5
-------
Firm
I Site
| Dan
Dale
Waste Minimization Assessr'ant
Prepared By
Checked By
Proj. No
Sheet J__ of J__ Page of
WORKSHEET
c:
-------
Firm
Site
Date
WORKSHEET
5
Wast* Minimization Autssment
Pro]. No
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet _1 _ o* _1_ Page ol
C
PERSONNEL
&EPA
Oapertment/Area
Attribute
Overall
Total Staft
Direct Supv. Staff
Management
Average Age, yre.
Annual Turnover Rate %
Seniority, yre.
Yrs. of Formal Education
Training, hrs^yr.
Additional Smarts
!
-------
Pirm
| Waste Minimization Assessment
Prepared Bv
Situ
*
Checked By
DatR
Proi No
Sheet J_ of _t_ Page of
WORKSHEET
6
PROCESS INFORMATION
&EPA
Process Unlt/Operatlov
Operation Type: |_J Continuous
I I Batch or S*nl.Hatch Q Other-
1
Status
Document
Complete?
Current?
Last
Used in this
Document
(V7ni
(Y/N)
Revision
Report (VN)
Number
Location
Process Flow Diagram
Material/Energy Balance
Dtslgn
Operating
ciow/Amount Measurements
Stream
Analyses/Assay*
Stream
Process Doscrlptlon
Operating Manuals
Equipmert List
Equipment Specifications
Piping & Instrument Diagrams
Plot and Elevation Pian(s)
Work Flow Diagrams
Hazardous Waste Manifests
Emission Inventories
Annual/Biennial Reports
Environmental Audit Report*
Permit/Permit Applications
Batsn Shoet(s)
Materlas Application Diagrams
Product Composition Sheets
.
Material Safety Data Sheets
1
Inventory Records
Operator Logs
i
F'roduct on Schedules
1
A-8
-------
Firm
Site
Waste Minimization Asseasnent
Pfft| Nft
Prepared By
Checked Bv
DatB
Sheet gi j_- ^age of
WORKSHEET
7
INPUT MATERIALS SUMMARY
Sepa
Description1
Attribute
Stream No.
Stream No.
Stream No.
NameviD
Source/Supplier
Component/ Attribute of Concern
Annuel Consumption Rata
Overall
Component(s) of Concern
Purchase Prlca. S par
Ovarall Annual Cost
Delivery Mod-*1
Shipping Container Size & Type1
Storage M Oder4
Transfer Mode'
Empty Container Disposal/Management*
Shell Llfa
Supplier Would
• accept expired material (Y/N)
- accept snipping comalners (Y/N)
- revise expiration date (Y/N)
Acceptable Substitute^)., if any
Alternate Suppliers)
\
stream numbers, If applicable, should correspond to those used on process flow diagrams.
1 e.g., pipeline, tank car, 100 bbl. tan* truck, truck, etc.
1 e.g., 55 gal. drum, 100 lb. paper bag, tank, etc.
4 e.g., outdoor, warehouse, underground, abovegrourvl, etc.
1 e.g., pump, forkllft, pneumatic transport, conveyor, etc.
9 e.g.. crush ana landfill, clean ana recycle, return to supplier, etc.
A-9
-------
Firm
Site
Date
Waste Minimization Assessment
Pro). No.
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet J__ oi J_ Page of
WORKSHEET
8
PRODUCTS SUMMARY
Sepa
Attribute
Description1
Stream No.
Stream No.
Stream No.
Name/ID
Component Attribute of Concern
Annual Production flats
Overall
Component(s) of Concern
Annual Revenues. S
Shipping Mode
i
Shipping Container Size 4 Type
OnsHe Storage Mode
Containers Returnable (Y/N)
Shell Life
Rework Possible (Y/N)
Customer Would
- relax specification (Y/N)
• accept larger containers (Y/N)
•
i
stream numbers, if applicable, should correspond to those used or, once** flow 'diagrams.
A-10
-------
Firm
Site
Date
Wast* Minimisation Assessment
Proj. No.
Prepared By
Checked fly
Sheet Z_ $ 4_ Page __ of
WORKSHEET
9a
INDIVIDUAL WASTE STREAM
CHARACTERIZATION
A EPA
1. Waste Strnam Nama/ID:
Process Unit/Operation
Stream Number
Waste Characteristics (attach additional sheets with composition '.fata. t•> necessary.)
~
gas
~
liquid
[ -rAta d)
mixed phase
Density. Ib/cuft
High Heating Value. Btu/lb
Viscosity/Consistency
pH .Flash Point ; % Water
3. Wast* Leaves Process as:
~ aii omission ~ wastewater lD solid waste ~ hazardous waste
4. Occurrence
[ZH continuous
~ discrata
d'sr.harge triggered uy ~ chemical analysis
~ other (describe)
Type: a periodic length c( re nod:
l-H sporadic (irregular occu'renjf)
~ non-recusant
5. Generation Rate
/nnual ibs per y$ar
Maximum its per
Averago lbs per
rrequency batches per
Batch Size average enge
A-11
-------
Firm
Site
Dale
WORKSHEET
9b
Waste Minimization Assessment
Proc. Una/OjMf.
Proj No.
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet 2 of 4 Page
nf
INDIVIDUAL WASTE STREAM
CHARACTERIZATION
<>EPA
6. Waste Origins/Sources
Fill out this worksheet to Identity the origin of the ware, if the waste Is a mixture waste
fttrtamr, fill out a sheet fcr each of the individual waste streams.
Is ths waste mUed with other wastes? Q Yes Q
No
Oescribe how the wsste Is generated.
Example: Formation and removal of an ui)detirabie compound, removal of an unconverted
inpw material, depletion of s key component (e.g., dreg-out), equipment cleaning
waste, obsolete Input material, upolled batch and production run, spill or leak
cleanup, evaporative toe, breathing or vent ng losses, etc.
A-12
-------
Firm
Site __
Date
Waste M^iimiutlon Assessment
Prcc. Urtf/Oper
Proj No.
Prepared 8y
Checked By
Sheet 3 ot 4 Page
o t
WORKSHEET
9c
INDIVIDUAL WASTE STREAM
CHARACTERIZATION
&EPA
Waste Stream
Management Method
Leaves site In
~
~
~
~
bui*
roll O'f bins
55 ga. drums
other (describe)
Disposal Frequency
Applicable Regulations'
Regulatory Classification2
Managed
Recycling
| | onaite
I I oommerciai TSDF
~ own TSDF
~ other (describe)
~ dir ect use/re-use
n energy recovery
~ redistilled
n other ^describe) -
| | offsite
reclaimed material returned to site?
~ Yes C] No n by others
residue yield
residue dispoaal/repos'riory
Note'
Note*
ist le^eral, state 4 local regjlations, ^e.g , f*CRA, TSCA, otc j
i si pertinent regulatory classification !e g , RCRA - Liated K011 wjsto, ex.)
A-13
-------
Firm
Site
Date
Waste Minimization Assessment
PfOC. Unit/Oper. _
PfOj. No-
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet 4 of 4 Pagt
of
WORKSHEET
INDIVIDUAL WASTE STREAM
CHARACTERIZATION
(eeatiriuftd)
Waste Stream
7.
Management Method (continued)
x>EPA
Treatment : biological
oxidation/reduction
incineration
pH adjustment
precipitation _
solidification —
othef (describe)
residue dispesa^reposrtory
Final Disposition landfill
i pond
lagoon
deep welt
©CCin
other (describe)
Costs as of {.,uarter and year)
Cost Element;
Unit Price
$ oer —_
Reference/Source:
Onsrte Storaae & Handling
Pretreatment
Container _
Transportation Fee
Disposal Fee
Local Taxtfs
State Tax
Federal Tax
Total Disposal Cost
A-14
-------
Firm
Site _
C at# _
Waste Minimization AsMisimnt
Proc. Unit/Oper
Proj. No.
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet J ol _l__ Page of
WORKSHEET
10
WASTE STREAM SUMMARY
&EPA
Description1
Attribute
Stream No.
Stroam No. _
Stream No.
Waste ID/Name:
Source/Origin
Component/or Property of Concern
Annual Generation Hate (units _
)
Overal!
Component(s) of Concern
Cost of Disposal
Unrt Coat <1 per: )
Overall (per year)
Method of Management*
Priority Rating Criteria'
Relative
Wt.iWl
Rating (fi)
RtW
R^ing (R)
RxW
Rating (R)
RxW
Regulatory Compliance
Treatment/Disposal Cost
Potential Liability
Waste Quantity Generated
Waste Hazard
Safety Hazard
Minimization Potential
Potential to Remove Bottleneck
Potential By-product Recovery
Sum of Priority Rating Scores
&R * W)
* W)
I(R < W)
Priority Rank
Notes: 1. Stream numbers, If applicable, should correspond to those used on process flow diagrams.
2. For example, sanitary landfill, hazardous waste landfill, cnslte recycle, Incineration, combustion
with heat recovery, distillation, dswaterlng, etc.
3. Rate each stream i« each category on a scale from 0 (none) to 10 (high).
A-15
-------
Firm
Site
Date
Wait* Minimization Asaassmant
Proc Ur.it/Opar
Proj. No.
°r*pared By
Checked By
Shaat J_ of J_ P.ige erf
WORKSHEET
11
f OPTION GENERATION
oEPA
Meeting format (a.g., brainstorming, nominal group tachniqua)
Maatlng Coordinator
Moating Participants
Lis* C jggastad Opt tons
nationala/Ramarks on Option
— —
— —
-
— _
A-16
-------
Pirm
Waste Minimization Assessment
Proc. Unit/Oper. ~
Prnj Kin
Prepared By
Situ
natfl
Checked By
Sheet i_ of _1_ Page of
WORKSHEET
12
OPTION DESCRIPTION
A EPA
Option Name:
Briefly describe the option
Wast# Stream(s) Affected:
Input Materials) Affected:
Product(s) A tract oo:
Indicate Type:
~ Sourca Re* action
_ Equipment-Related Changa
Personnel/Procedure-Related Changa
Materlals-Aeiaieo Changa
~ Racycling/Rausa
Onslta _
Ortshe
Mat a rial reused tor original purpose
Material usad for b, lower-qualHy purposa
Material sold
Materia; bumad lor heat racovary
Originally proposed by: . . DM#:
Raviawad by. D*
-------
full
Waste Minimization Assessment
Preparea By
Sits
kroc Uan/Oper
Checked fiy
Date
Proi No.
She^t 1 ol 1 f^uqe 1 of 1
mttKSHI-ET
13
OPTIONS EVALUATION BY
WEIGHTED SUM METHOD
Sepa
>
a>
Criteria
Reduction m irasti's hazard
Reduction ol tceatment'disposai costs
Reduction of safely hazards
Reduction of Input material costs
Extent of current use In Industry
CSiect on product quality (no effect = 10)
Low capital cost
Low OAM cost
Short implementation period
Ease of Implementation
Weight
-------
Firm
Waste Minimization Assessment
pro^ Unl/Op*'
Prepared By
Sit*
Checked Bv
Hatp
Prnj Mo
Sheet J_ of Page of __
WORKSHEET
14a
TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY
WM Option Description
1. Nature of WM Option
2. 'f the option appears technically
Equlpment*Relarftd
Personnel/Procedure-fi Mated
Materials- Relfi/jd
feasible, state your ratlona'e for this.
4»epa
is further analysis reiji.!r?£? ! Yeal_. No. If yss, continue with this
worksheet. If not, skip ic worksheet ii.
*3. Equipment • Related Option
YES NQ
Equipment available comnwrcialty?
Demonstrated commercially?
In similar application?
Successfully? .
Describe closest industrial analog
De:
-------
Firm
S.le
Date
Waste Minimization Assessment
Proc. Unlt/Oper
Proj. No.
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet Page ol
WORKSHEET
14b
L
TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY
Sepa
(vMimiMd)
WM Option Description
1 Equipment-Related Option (continued)
Performance infonnatloii required (describe parameters):
Scaleup Information required (describe):
Testing Required: CH y*a O no
Scale: Q bench CD pilot CH
Test unit available? Cj y« CD no
Test Parameters (list)
Number o< test runs:
Amount of mst#rtal(s) required:
Testing to be conducted: CI] in-plant
~ _
Faclllty'Product Construlntf:
Space Requirements
Possible locations ivlthln facility
A-20
-------
Firm
Waste Minimization Assessment
Pmr 1
Prepared 8y
Sita
Checked Bv
nate
Pmj No
Sheet 3 ol 6 Page of
WORKSHEET
14c
TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY
WM Option Description
2. Equipment-Related Option (continued)
Utility Requirements:
Electric Power
Process Water
Volts (AC or DC)
Flow
KW
Pressure
Quality (tsp, demln, Mc.)
Cooling Water Flow Ptessure
Temp. In Temp. Out
Coolant/West Transfer FlukJ
Steam
Tamp. In
Duty - -
Pressure
Duty
Temp. Out
Temp.
- Flow
<&EPA
Fuel
Plant Air
Type
inert Gas
Flow
Flow
Flow
Duty
Estimated delivery time (after award of contract).
Estimated Installation time
installation datea
Estimated production downtime
Will production be otherwise effected? Explain the effect and Impact on production.
will product quality affected? Explain the effect on quality. -
A-21
-------
Firm
Site
Date
Watt* Minimization Asaeaament
Proc. Unit/Oper
Proj No.
Pi spared By
Checked By
Shaet 4 of 6 Page
of
WORKSHEET
14d
TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY
4>epa
WM Option Description
3. Equipment.Related Option (continued)
Will modlflcatlona to wortc flow ;
-------
Firm
Site
Date
Waste Minimization Assessment
Proc Unrt/Oper
Proj No
Prepared By
C necked By
Sheet 5 of 6 Page of
WORKSHEET
14e
TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY
<>EPA
WM Option Description
3. Equipment-Related Option (continued)
Describe any additional storage or material handling requirements.
Describe any additional laboratory or analytical requirements.
4. Personnel/Procedure-Related Changes
Affected Departments/Areas
Training Requirements
Operating instruction Changes. Describe responsible departments.
Materials-Related Changes (Note. H substantial changes In equipment are required, then handle the
option as sn equipment-related one ) Xii
Has the new material been demonstrated commercially? ~ ~
in a similar application? I—I —
Successfully? !Ij uJ
Describe closest application. _ .
A-23
-------
Firm
Site
Onte
WasH Minimization
Proc. Unrl'Oper.
P'Oj. No.
Prepared By
Checked Dy
Sheet JL of Page of
WORKSHEET
14f
TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY
Sepa
Is'OOUfHMMi)
WM Option Description
Materlais*Related Changes (continued)
Affected Department a/Aroas
Will production da affacted? Explain the etleci and Impact on production.
Will product quality ba a fleeted? Explain the iffect and the Impact on product quality
Will additional storage, handling or other ancillary equipment be required? Explain.
Describe any training or procedure changaa that are requlrel.
Decrtbe any material testing program that will be required.
A-24
-------
Firm
Site
Oate
wast* Minimization Aasessm«nt
Proc Unit/Gper
Proj. No.
Prepared fry
Checked f.ry
Sheet 1 c' €
Page of
WORKSHEET
15a
COST INFORMATION
v>EPA
WM Option Description
CAPITAL COSTS • Inclufi? alt costs ;is appropriate.
[U Purchased Process Equipment
Price (lob factor/)
Taxes, freight, insurance
Delivered equipment cost _
jgials
Price tor Initial Spars Parts Inventory
Estimated Matorlals cost
Piping
Electrical
Instruments
Structural
Insulation/Piping
~ Estimated Costs for Utility Connections and New Utility Sysvems
Elect'lclty
St tarn
Cooling waior
Process Water
Refrigeration -
Fuel (Gas or Oil)
Plant Air
inert Gas
HH Estimated Costs for Additional Equipment
Storagn & Material Handling
Labors ory/Anatytlcal
Other
~ Site Preparation
(Demolition. H:*oearUg, isc.)
I Estimated installation Costs
Vendor
Contractor
In-house Stafl
A- 2 5
-------
Firm
Site
Date
Watte Minimization Assessment
Proc. Unrt/Oper
Proj. No.
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet _;2_ of _£_ Page
of
WORKSHEET
15b
COST INFORMATION
[earlir*u«dl M
&EPA
CAPITAL COSTS (Cent.) TOTALS
I ! Engineering and Procurement Costs (In-house & otfs'de)
Planning
engineering
Procurement
Consultants
CD Start-up Costs
vendor
Contractor
In-ltouse
Cj Training Cos;s
i I Permitting Costs
Fees
In-house Staff Costs
~ tnnial Charge cf Catalysts and Chemicals
item #1
Item *2 _.
f~~1 Worklnfl Capita [Ray* Materials, Product, Inventory, Materials and Supplies (rvjt elsewhere specrtied)]
item #1
Item #2
Kem«3
ttem«4
~ Estimated Salvage Value (It any)
A-26
-------
Firm
Site
2ate
Waste Mlnimatlon Assessment
Proc Urtf/Oper
PfOj. No.
Prepared By
Checked £>•
S^eei of _6__ Page ol
WORKSHEET
15c
[
COST INFORMATION
(cenllAy«4 —
>Sepa
CAPITAL COST SUMMARY
Cost Item
Cost
Purchased Procest Equipment
Materials
Utility Connections
Addttloniil Equipment
Stta Preparation
Installation
Engineering: ana Procurement
Start-up Cosi
Training Costa
Permitting Costs
initial Charge of Catalytta and Chemical*
Fixed Capital investment
Working Capital
j Total Capital Investment
J Salvage Value
A-27
-------
Firm
Site
Date
Wast* Minimization Assessment
Ftoc. Unit'Oper
Proj. No.
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet 4 of 6
Pase
of
WORKSHEET
15d
COST INFORMATION
Sepa
Estimated Decrease (or Increase) lr> Utilities
Utility
Unrt Coat
S par unit
Decraaea (or Incrtaae) In Quantity
Unrt par time
Total Dacraaae (or Incraaaa)
$ per tlma
Electricity
Steam
Cooling Proceae
Proceea Wait?
R«frlgaration
Fuel (Oaa or Oil)
Plant Air
Inert Air
INCREMENTAL OPERATING COSTS • include ail relevant operating savings. Estimate these costs on an incre-
mental basis (i d., as decreases or increases over existing costs).
O BAbiC CJR COSTS Annual Quarterly Monthly Dally Other
~ Estimated Disposal Cost Saving
Decrease In TSDF Fees
Decrease In State Fees and Taxes
Decrease in Transportation Costs —
Decrease In Onstte Treatment and Handling —
Decrease In Permitting, Reporting and Recordkeeping —
Total Decrease !n Disposal Costs —
I | Estimated Decrease Ir Raw Maierials Consumption
Materials
Unit Cor.
$ per unit
Reduction In Quantity
Units per time
Decrease In Cost
$ per time
A-28
-------
Pirrn
Waste Minimization Assessment
FYoc. Un*/Oper
l*m) No
Piepared By
Sit«
Checked By
Hal®
Sheet 5_ of J3_ Page of
WORKSHEET
15e
COST INFORMATION
Sepa
Estimated Decrease (or Increase) in Ancillary Catalysts and Chemicale
Cauiyat/ChemlcaJ
Unit Coat
$ p#f unit
Dtcrnu (or Increaee) In Ouanllty
Un« per time
Toul Decreeee (or IncriaM)
S per lime
- - - — -
.
! i Estimated Decrease (or Increase) In Operating Coats and Maintenance Labor Costs
(Inciuce cost ol supervision, benefits and burden).
I i Estlrnatad Decrease (or inert as#) In Operating and Maintenance Supples and Costa.
lZI Estlrnatad Decrease (cr Increase) In insurance and Liability Costs explain).
Lj Estlrnatad Docrense (or Increase) in Other Operating Costs (explain).
INCREMENTAL REVENUE')
1 Estimated Incremental Revenues from an Incraasa (or Decrease; in Production or Marketable
By-products (explain).
A-29
-------
Fir n
Silt
Date
Waste Mlnimlxat on Aateaament
Proc. Unll'Oper
?f0|- No.
Prepared I
Checked t
Sheet
By
By
of Pago ct
WORKSHEET
15 f
COST INFORMATION
<»EPA
S par year
INCREMENTAL OPERATING COST AND REVENUE NUMMARY (ANNUAL BASIS)
Decreases in Operating Coti or increaaea in Revenue are Positive.
Increases in Operating Cot or Decrease in Revenue are Negative.
Operating Coat/Revenue Item
Decrease in Disposal Coat
Decrease In Raw MateHals Coat
Decrease (or Increase) In Utilities Cost
Decrease (or Utcreaae) In Catalyste end Chemicals
Decrease (or increase) In 0 4 M Labor Coats
Decrease (or increase) in Q a M Supplies Costs
Decrease (or increase) in insuranci»jllabliitii'a Coats
Decrease (or increase) In Other Operating Coste
Incremental Ravenuee from Increased (Decreased) Production
Incremental Revenues from Marketable By-producti
Net Operating Coat Savings
A-30
-------
Firm
Site
Date
Watt* Minimization Aaaaaamant
Proc Unit/Opar
Proj. No
Prepared By
Checked By
Sh*at J_ of Page of
WORKSHEET
16
PROFITABILITY WORKSHEET # 1
PAYBACK PERIOD
&EPA
Total Capital Invaatment ($) (from Workahaat 15c)
Annual Nat Oparatlng Coat Savlnga ($ par yaarl (from Worttshaat I5f)
Total Capital Invaatmant
'ayback Period (in yaara) •
Annual Nat Oparating Corn Savlnga
A-31
-------
Firm
3'tft
Date
Watt* Minimization Assessment
Proc. Unit/Oper
Proj. No.
Prepared By
Checked By
Sheet J_ of J__ Page of
WORKSHEET
17
PROFITABILITY WORKSHEET #2
CASH FLOW FOR NPV, IRR
4>epa
Cash Incomes (su:h as net operating cost savings and salvaga value) are shewn ss positive
Cash outlays (such as capital Investments and Increased operating costs) are shown as negative.
Cen*tr
Operating1 Year
A Fixed Capital Investment
B ~ Working Capital
C Tot*' Capital Investment
D Selvage Value1
Net Operating Coete Sevlnge
Interest on loene
Depreciation
Taxable noome
I • Income Tex1
J Aftertax Profit*
Depreciation
Repayment of Loan Principal
Capita! Investment (Una C)
~ Salvaga Value (line 0)
0
Caeh Flow
p
Preeent Valua o» Caah Flow1
o
Net Preaant Valut* (NFV?
Praaent Worth* (ft% dlecount)
1.0000
0.9524
0.9070
O.KiS
0.S227
0.783d
?74v'2
0.7107
0.67 RS
<10* Recount)
1.0000
0.9091
0.8264
0.7513
o.6sy>
0.6209
0.5641
0.;,*'»2
0.4665
(1X% dlerjour><)
1.0000
0.B694
0.7581
0.6575
0.S718~
0.4972
0.4323
0.3759
X 32bi
(20% discount)
1.0000
0J333
0.6944
0.5787
0.4823
0.4019
0.3340
0.2791
0.2326
(25% discount)
1.0000
O.SOOO
0.6400
0.5120
0.40V6
0.3277
0.2621
0.M7
0.1*V78
1 Adjiet Ubi'i aa nacaaeary If the anticipated project life le less then or more then S years.
2 Salvaga vt.U,a Include* scrap value of equipment plue eele ol working capital mlnue demo-
lition dor a.
3. The wor>* reeulte In a net preaant value of zaro ovar tha Ufa of tha
pro|ect.
A-32
-------
WORKSHEET
18
Goals/Objectives
Waete Minimi cation Aaaesament
Prcc. Unit/Opar
Proi. No.
Prepared By
Checked ey
Sheet 1 nf 1 Paoe
of
PROJECT SUMMARY
&EPA
Task
Deliverable
Task Leader
Manhours
Budget
Ouatton
Reference
Wka
Z\ar.
Fmith
1.
2.
3
4.
5.
6
n
8
9
10
; r
L__I
12.
13.
14.
15.
16
j
17
f
18.
19
20
21
22
23
TOTALS
I
Approval By
4uthor:z*tton By
Project Started tOate)
Date
Date
A-33
-------
Firm
Waste Minimization Asaeaament
Pror tlnit/nper.
Prepared By
SilM
Checked By
Data
Pmj Mo
Sheet of !_ Page _ _ ot
WORKSHEET
19
OPTION PERFORMANCE
*>EPA
WM Option Description
~ Baseline
(fvihout option)
~
Projected
(a)
-------
Appendix B
Simplified Waste Minimization Assessment Worksheets
The worksheets that follow art designed to facilitate a simplified WM asae*»ir.cr* prooedure Table B-llist* the
worfcsneeta. according to the partner phase of tha program, and a br»ef deacretion o( tne purpoee of the
workaheeta. Tha worksheets here are presented as supporting only a preliminary effort at minimizing waste,
w in a Muation where a more formal rigorous assessment it not warranted.
Tabla B-1. Lit! ol Simplified WM AiMNmint Workahseta
Phaaa Numbar and Title
PurpoesAemarke
S1 Aasesament Overview
Aaaaaamant Phaaa
(Sactlon 3)
S2. Sita Descnpton
Summarizes tha ovaralt aaaaaamant procedure
lists background information about tha feolrty. including location,
product*, and operations.
S3. Procaaa Information
^ta ¦« a checklist U uaaful procaaa information to look for before
starting tha aaaaaamant.
S4. input Materia Summary
Records input matarial information for • specrfic producer or procaaa
area. Thia includaa nama. suppler. hazardous component or
properties, coat, delivery and shelf-lite information, and possible
substitutaa.
S5. Products Summary
Identifies hazardous components, production rata, ravanuaa. and
othar information about products.
36 Waste Straam Summary
Summarizes all of tha information oollected for aach wasta stream
This sheet >s alio usad to prioritize waate streama to aama
S7 Option Generation
Records options propoaed dunng brajnatorming or r>ominal group
technique aeaaona. Includes the rationale tor propoeing aach option.
S8. Optcn Deacnption
Descnbes and summarizes information about a proposed option A'*o
notes approval of promiaing optona
Feaalblllty Analyala Phaae
(Sactlon 4)
S9. Profitability
This worksheet « used to identify capital and operating ooets and to
calculate the payback ^rcd.
B-1
-------
Firm
Watt# Minimization Aswtimtnt
Slmplllltd Worfceheeti
Proi No
Preoared Qv
Site
Checked Bv
Date .
Sfieel _J_ of _J_ Page of
WORKSHEET
S1
ASSESSMENT OVERVIEW
&EPA
8*gln the Watt* Minimization
Aaaeaament Program
I
Worheheeta
PLANNING AND ORGANIZATION
• Get management commitment
• Set wvtraii asaeaament program goa*
• Organize aaaesament program urn lorce
JUld
Auaisrnant organization
and commitment to oroceed
S« ec? raw
assessment targets
arvj reevaluate
previous options
ASSESSMENT PHASE
• Compile proceta and'aolity data
• Prior it 2a and leiect aiaeiament targets
• 3ai«ci people tor assessment teaTS
• Review data anc inspect lite
• Oenerata opt«na
• Screan and select options for further study
S5
S2 S.J S4
SO
S7.-3
sa
S8
I
I Assessment report of
| selected options
FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS PHASE
• Technical evaluation
• Economc evaluation
• Select options for implementation
S9
1
Final report, including
recommended ootons
Repeat the proceas
IMPLEMENTATION
• Just:ty projects anc obtain funcmg
• installation (equipment)
• Implementation (procedure)
• Evaluate performance
i
Successfully operating
watt'j minimization projects
B-2
-------
Fi#m
tVaata Iflntfr-.uatton Aaaaaamtm
Slmpliriad Workahaata
Prof Mh
Praparad By
ChackadBv
&ita
Snaai j_ of _l_ Paga o( _
40JIMHCIT
S2
SITE DESCRIPTION
«>EPA
Firm:
Plant:
Dapanmant:
Arts
3tr—t Add rasa:
5*11
SlaiattIP Coda:
Tataphona: t
Major Product!:
9IC Codas-
EPA Gartaraior Numbar
Major Unit or:
Product or:
Operations:
F
-------
firm
Silt
Oat*
Waete Mktifniatioii Ameeamcnt
Simplified Worts!.eete
Proj. No.
Prepared B> _
Checked By __
Sheet 1_ ol 1
Pag« of
wouksmcit
S3
PROCESS INFORMATION
4>epa
Procasa Unit'Operation:
Operation Type: ~ continuous
~ Diecrete
~ Batch or SemhBatch CD Other
Document
Statta
Complete?
(V*)
Current?
(Y/N)
Last
Revision
Used In thie
RtpOft (Y/N)
Document
Number
Location
Proeesa Flow Diagram
Material/Energy Balance
Design
Operstlng
Flo*/Amount Measurements
Stream
Ans!yas*Aseaye
Stream
Procaaa Description
Operating Manusts
Equipment List
Equipment Specifications
Piping 4 Instrument Diagrams
— —
1
P ot and Elevation Pian(a)
—
Work Flow Diagrams
Hazardoua Waste Mantt»*ta
Emiselon irvarnorlea
1 Annual/Blannlal Reporta
Environmental AudK Reporta
Permit/Permit Applications
Baton Sheet(a)
Materials Application Dlagrama
Product Composition Sheets
Material Safety Oata Sheets
inventory Records
Operator Logs
°roduction Schedules
B-4
-------
Pirm
ctiim
/'Ml* Minimization AMium«nt
Simplified Workahaata
Pro) No
Prepared By
Checked Bv
njla
Sheet j_ of J__ Pao*i of
WORKSHEET
S4
INPUT MATERIALS SUMMARY
&EPA
Attribute
Daae'lptlon
Streem No. 1 Stream Mo.
Straam No.
Name/ID
i
Sourc*'Suppiie%*
Coupon**/Attribute of Concern
Annul Consumption Hate
Overall
Componem(s) of Concern
Purchase Price, $ per
Overall Annual Cost
Delivery Mode'
Shipping Container Size & Typo*
Storage Mod*3
Transfer Mod#4
Empty Container Dlepoeal/Manaftement*
Shelf (.He
Supplier Would
- accept expired matartaJ (Y/H)
• accapt shipping containers (Y/H)
- revise expiration data (Y/N)
Accaptabla Substitute^), If any
Afternete Suppliers)
1 a.Q., pipailna, ank car, 100 bbl. tank tr.jck, truck, ate.
1 «.Q., '59 flaL drum, 100 lb. papar bag, Utik, ate.
1 a.g., outdoor, warehouee, underground, aboveg round, ate.
4 a.g., pump, tor*lift, pnaumatlc transport, convayor, ate.
1 a.g., cruah and Mindflll, clean and recycle, ratum to auppllar, ate.
B-5
-------
Pirrr^
Weete IMnlmixatlon Amttmini
Simplified Worksheets
Pmj Nfi
Pr&pared By
ftit-
Checked Bv
Data
Sheet 1 of 1 Page of
ffOftfcSHKBT
S5
PRODUCTS SUMMARY
&EPA
Attribute
Deecriptlon
str«em No.
Stream no.
Stream No.
Name/ID
Component/Attribute ol Concern
Annuel Production Rate
OvereH
Component^) of Concern
Annuel Revest*, 5
Shipping Mode
Shipping Container Size & Type
Onette Storage Mode
Containers Returnable (Y/N)
Shell Life 1
Rework Possible (Y/N)
Customer would
- relax epectflcation Of'N)
- accept larger containers (Y/N)
U-6
-------
Firm
Sit*
Data
WORKSHEET
S6
Waata Minimization Aaaaaamant
Simplified Workah«ata
Proc. Urwt/Opar
Pro| No.
PraparadBy
Checked By
Shaat J__ of j_ Paga of
WASTE STREAM SUMMARY
4»EPA
Attribute
Daacrtotion f
Stream Mo.
Stream No.
Straam No.
waata ID/Nama:
Sourca/Ortgln
Componant/or Property ol Concam
Annual tf*.watton Rata (unrta )
Ovarii
Componint(a) of Concam
Cctf of Diapnaa<
Unit Cam 4* p*r: \
Ovarall (par yaar)
Mathod of Manaoamanf
Prtorltv Ratlna Crftarla1
mmsssm
RsW
Rating (R)
RiW
Rating (R)
RxW
Ragulatory Compliance
Traatmant/Dlapoaal Coat
Potantial Liability
Wasta Quanttty Generated
_
Waste Hazard
Safety Hazard
Minimization Potantial
Potantial to Ramova BottUoack
Potantial dy-product Recovery
] Sum of Priority Rating Scorea
IlAxW)
KR*W)
I(R*W)
] Priority Rank
I
1
I 1
Notea; 1. For example, unitary landfill, hazardoua wsrta landfill, onaNa racycla, Incineration, combuatlon
v ith heat recovery, dlatirnlon, dewata'lng, ate.
2. Rata each rtraam In aach category on ti acala from 0 (nona) to 10 (high).
B-7
-------
Firm
Site
Date
Waste Mlftlr,izatfton Aaaanment
Slmollfia'' .Vorkaheet*
Proc. UoHOp»f.
PfOj. NO.
Prepared By
Checked By
Sh%#» 1 o< 1 Page of
WORKSHEET
S7
OPTION GENERATION
&EPA
Meeting format (e.g., brainstorming, nominal group technique)
Meeting Coordinator
Meeting Paitlclpants
List Suggested Options
Rattonaie^Remartts on Option
B-8
-------
Firm
Sit6
Datti
Warn MirimJiauon Asa**sm*nt
Simplified Worfcah**ta
Pw. Un*/Op*r
Ho.
Praparad By
Ch4c*dd By
Sh**t 1 of i Pag* ol
WORKSHKT
S8
OPTION DESCRIPTION
4>epa
Opvlon Nama:
tfrlirty d*acrlb* th* option
WW* St7»«m(i) AlfiCtrt:
input Mat*rlal, by
B-9
-------
F'-n
Site
Date
Waste Minimisation Assessment
Simplified Worksheets
Proc UnfOper
Proj Nc
Prepared fiy
Checked B/
Sheet j_ ct J_ Pag* 01
WORKSHEET
S9
PROFITABILITY
&EPA
Capital Costs
Purchased Equipment
Materials
installation
Utility Connections
Engineering
Start-up and Training
Other Capital Costs
Tot*! Capttai Costs
incremental Annual Operating Costs
Change In Disposal Costs
Change In Raw Material Costs
Change In Other Costs
Annual Net Operating Cost Savings
Total Capital Costs
Payback Pertod (In years), ^SSfNal op.r*tlng Cost Savings "
B-10
-------
Appendix C
Waste Minimization Assessment Example
Amalgamated Metal Re finishing Corporation
The foUowing case study is an example of a waste
minimization assessment of a metal plating operation.
This examp,e js reconstructed from an actual
assessment, but uses fictdicjs names. The example
presents the background process and facility data, and
then describes the waste minimization options that are
drntified and recommended for this facility.
Amalgamated Metal Refinishing Corporation is in the
business of refinishing decorative items. Tha
corporation owns and ope;di«s a small lacility in
Severty Hills, California. The principal metals plated at
t^ts facility are nickel, brass, silver, and gold.
Preparing for tha Assessment
Since the facility Is a small one with a rather small
nurrter of employees, an assessment learn was
assembled that included both oompany personnel and
outside consultants. The team was made up of the
following people:
• Plant manager (assessment team leader)
• First shift plating supervisor
• Corporate process engineer
• Plating chemistry consular*
• Environmental engineering consultant
"Pie assessment team chose to look at all of the plating
operations, rather than focusing on one or two specific
plating processes
The assessment began by collecting recent
production records, input material information,
equipment layout drawings ana flow diagrams, waste
records, and plant operator instructions. After each of
the team members had reviewed the information, a
comprehensive inspection of the plating room was
carried out. The following process, layout, and waste
descriptions summarize the information that was
collected for the assessment.
Process Description
items brought in for refinishing are cleaned,
electroplated and polished The basic operations
include paint strippirig. cleaning, electroplating, drying,
and polishirg.
In silver plating, the original plated metal is stripped off
the item by dipping it into a sodium cyanide solution
with the system run in reverse cunent. This is followed
by an acid wash in a 50% muriatic acid solution The
item is then polished to a bright finish. The polished
item is then cleaned with caustic solution to remove
dirt, rinsed with a 5% sulfuric acid solution to neutralize
any remaining caustic solution on the item, and rinsed
with water. The item is now ready for electroplating.
After the item is immersed in the plating tank for the
squired amount of time, it is rineed In a still rinse tank,
'ollowed by a continuous water rinse. Tap water \s
used tor both the still and continuous rinsing steps
Solution trom the stiN rinse tank is used as make-up for
the plating baths.In places where two stiN rinse tanks
are used, water from the second tank is used to
replenish the first still rinse tank. Overflow from the
continuous rinse tank is discharged as wastewater.
The item « polished following the plating step.
Gold plating fleneralty does not require stripping. Vter
the initial cleaning operation, the hem Is etectrop.ated
Nickel and brass plating are aUo done in a similar
manner. Vapor decreasing using 1.1.1-
trichioroethane is often perfomed on trass- arvJ nk^sei-
plated items to renrwve oil and grease, ir soma :?$e3.
items are first nickei-plated arc) then plated with gokl
silver, or brass.
For electroplating operations, the constituent. M the
cyanide solutions must be kept at an optimum
concentration. The solutions are analyzed twice a
month by an outside laboratory. A representative
sample from a tank is obtained by dipping a tube to the
bottom of the plating tank. The sample is analyzed and
recommendations for make-up are made based on the
test results. Table C-1 shows a typical analysis for
brass and nickel electroplating solutions, respectively
This table also shows the optimum concentrations lor
each constituent in the baths, as well as ihe
recommended make-up and/or dilution requirem&ms
All plating operations at the facility are performed
manually. The facility operates one shift per day and
employs eight operators.
Equipment Layout Description
Ail plating, cleaning, and rinse tanks are located In one
room at th* plating shop, while an adjacent room
houses all equipment used for buffing and polishing.
C-'
-------
Table C*1. Electroplating Solution Anelysae
Table C*2. Weatewater cheracterlatlca
Coneantftiona
Optimum Actual
Brtss Pitting
Copper maul
•
7.52 02/gal
Zjoc m«t«J
0.3 oz/gal
o.ao
Sodium cyanide
6.0
3.54
Sodium hydroxide
80
7.50
Coppa* cyan.de
10.0
10.60
Zinc cyanide
0.5
1 45
Rochalie salts
2.0
3.59
•i Pitting
Nickel matal
-
16.65 oz/gal
Nickel chlonde
8 0 oz/gai
*5 66
Done acid
6.0
6 92
Nickal sulfate
40.0
57 26
A *5
2.5%
2.86%
SA-1
t.2%
1 38%
PH
4.0
4t*
Sampling date
AuguatS. 1967
Sampling location
Claritier Sample Box
Typa of sampie
Time Composite
Reporting pared
July 87 to Auguet '87
Total flow in
322 Qaftone
Total flow out
290gaiona
Paak flow
1.5 gallons per mmuta
Suspended solids
10 mg/L
pH
7.5
Total cyanide
1.0 mg'L
Total chromium
L-42 mg/L
Copper
1 30 mg/L
Nickel
>93 mg/L
Silvar
<0.05 mg/L
Oil and graaaa
0.2 mg/L
Tamper alure
70 F
Figure C-1 is a plan of the facility The area north ot the
butting room is used for drying and storage purposes.
Finished goods, as well as raw materials, are stored in
the front ol the building.
Thirty ta**ln are used in cleaning and electroplating
operations. Figure C-1 include* the names and normal
wording volumes of thine tanks. The configuration of
a typical plating unrt includes a plating bath, followed by
one ore two still tanks and a continuous rinse tank.
Except for nickel platlrg, all piating and stripping
solutions used at the facility are cyanide-based.
Waste Stream Description
Cyanide waste is generated from silver strippi.-^; from
silver, gold, brass, and copper electroplating; and frotn
the associated rinsing operations. The principal waste
streams are wastewater from the continuous rinse
tanks and from floor washings, and plating tank filler
waste.
Aqueous streams generated from paint stripping, from
rre'ai stripping and electroplating, and from floor
wp things are routed io a common sump. This sump
discharges to the sanffary sewer Table C-2 presents
the results of a typical arWysis on the wastewater
Metal sludges accumulate in the olating tanks. This
sludge is tillered out of the plating solution once a
.iionth using z portable dual cartridge filter. Two litter
cartridges are used for e?ch plating tank. Cartridges
are typically replaced every two to .hree months.
The sump 's pur->o:*d out and disposed ol as
hazardous was:- once every six months When
punped out the su
-------
\*imJ [_*w
P"S»6nQ 3oom
Buff ng am Pumtorni Poom
Figure C-1. PLANT LAYOUT
Amalgamated Metal Reflnlahlng Corporation
Worldwide Headquartera and Production FaelHtiea
BavarKy Hills, California
C-3
-------
The team members each independently reviewed the
optio s and then met to decide which options to study
further. The team chose the following options lor the
feasibility analysis:
• Reduce drag-out by using drain boards.
• Extend bath lile using deionized water for make-up.
• Use spray rinsing to reduce rinsewater usage
• Segregate hazardous waste from nonhazardous
waste.
Feasibility Analysis
The assessment team conducted technical and
economic feasibility analyses on each of the four
options.
Sefr*0«f* Hazardous Waatas
The assessment team recognized that segregating
hazardous wastes from nonhazardous wastes could be
implemented at virtually no cost and would save money
immediately. There were no identified technical
problems.
I'm Drain Board* to Reduce Drag-ovt
Drain boards are used to collect plating solution that
drips ofl the rack and the worfcpiece atte- they are
pulled out of *he plating tank. The plating solution
drairs back into the plating tank. This option reduces
the amount of dilute rinse water waste, but impurities
huiti up faster in the plating solution. Since drag-out is
reduced. ncke up chemical consumption is reduced.
The purchase price of drain boards is estimated at
$115, with installation costs of $200. for a total capital
cost of $315 This option is expected to reduce rinse
water disposal costs by $500 per year, and reduce
make-up chemicals costs by $400 per year The
resulting payback period is 0.35 years, or about 4
months.
Usa Daionizad Watar tor Maka-up Solution*
and Bins* Watar
Using Dl water will reduce the build-up of impurities in
the plating solutions. In particular, the build-
uphardness minerals from tap water will be avoided,
rtvs. m turn, will avoid the precipitation of carbonates in
the plating tanks
the drain boards, the total capital cost of this option is
$582 The deionizer is rjntod and serviced by an
outside water treating service company for $450 per
year. The savings in disposal costs and make-up
chemical costs is $900 per year. Therefore, the annual
net operating cost savings is $450 per year. The
payback period is 1 3 years.
tnataH Spray Rlnaaa
Installing spray rinses will reduce the amount of rinse
water reoutred to clean the items. With spray nnse
nozzles and controls, rinsing can be done on demand
Rinse water usage was estimated to be reduced by
50%. The resulting rinse wastewater is more
concentrated and some can be returned to the plating
tanks as a water make-up.
The assessment team determined that four spray rinse
units would cost $2,120. plus an additional $705 tor
piping, valves, and installation labor. The total capital
cost was $2825. The reduction in disposal costs were
estimated at $350 per year, based on a 50% reduction
in rinse wastewater. This resulted in a payback of over
8 years.
Implementation
The procedures for segregating hazaraous wastes
from nonhazardous wastes was implemented before
the feasibility analysis was completed for the other
three options. The installation of drain boards and the
purchase of a water deionizer were made shortly after
the feasibility analysis was completed The Dl water
system was online two months later. The assessment
team decided not to implement the spray nnse option
because of the long payback psnod.
Future WM Assessments
During the next cycle of waste minimization
assessments, the assessment team will review
previously suggested options in the plating area and
will look at ways to reduce the generation of metallic
dus* in tho buffing and polishing area, in the
meantime, .he assessment team will continue to look
for addition,*) opportunities to reduce waste
throughout the facility.
The assessment team decided to combine the
evaluation of this option with the previous option of
using drain boards The initial purchase and installatioi
of the deionizer was $267 When adding the cost of
-------
Appendix D
Typical Causaa and Sourcas of Wast a
in order to develop a comprehensive list of waste minimization options tor a facility, it is necessary to
understand the sources, caires. and controlling factors that influence waste generation The tables
in this Appendix list this information for common industrial operations
Table 0*1 Typical Wastes from Plant Operations
Table D-2. Causes and Control'lng Factors of Waste Generation
Table D-1. Typical Wastes from Plant Operatlona
Plant Function Location/Operation Potential Wtete Material
Material Racaiving
Loading docks. incoming
ppelinas, receiving a/eaa
Packaging malaria's, off-spec matariala. damagad contamara,
inadvertent spills, transfer hose smpty.ng
Raw Material and
Product Storage
Tanks, warehouses. drum
storage yards, bina,
store rooms
Tank bottoms; oW-spec and «ixcaea materia*; spill raaiduaa;
laaking pumps, valves, taniis. and pipee; damagad containers,
empty containara
Production
Matting, curing, baking,
distilling, washing, coaling,
formulating, reaction
Waanwattr; rinse water; sobtente; still bottoms, off-spec
products; catalyets:empty oontainera; awaepinga; ductwork
clean-out; additives; oil; fibers; spill residue. encase matenais;
process solution dumps; hiak.ng pipes, valves, hoses, tanks,
and process equipment
?wDPort Ssrvces
laborttoriaa
Reagents, otf-sp*^ chemicals, samptas. empty sample and
chemical containers
Maintenance shops
Sclents, cleaning agents, degreaaing sluogee, sand-blast.ng
waate, cauatc. scrap meial. oils, greases
Garagas
Oils, filters, advents, actdt. caustics, clsaning bath sludges,
batteries
Powerhoueeefcoilers
Fty aan. slag, tuba dean-out material, chamicai additives. oil
empty containers, boiler Slowdown. water-treating chemcai
wastes
Cooling 'owerv
Chemcal addrtivas. empty containers, cooling tower bottom
sediment, cooling tower bbwdcwn. fan lube oile
Sourc*: adapted *rom Gary Hunt and Roger Schacter. 'Minimization of Hazardous Waate Generation*,
Standard Handbook of Hazardous Waste Management. Hwy Freeman. editor, McGraw-Hill. New York (currently :n press).
D-1
-------
Tabla D»2. Ciumi and Controlling Factors In Waata Ganaratlon
Wast#Origin Typical Cauaaa Oparmional Factors
Oaaign Factors
Chai^cai Reaction
Contact b«tWMn
aquaoua and
organic phaaaa
Procaia aquipmant
claening
Haat axchartgar
cleaning
• Inoomplata convaraion
• By-product formation
• Catalyst daactivaton
(by poiaon»ng or aintaring)
• Condanaata from staam
i at aiactura
• Fraaanca of watar aa a
reaction by-product
• Uaa of watar for product
rinaa
• cquipmant ciaaning
• Spill daan-up
• Praaanca ot cling
• Dapoaft formation
• Uaa of filtar aida
• Uaa of chamical ctaanara
< Praaanca of cRng (procaaa
aida) or acala (cooling
waiar aida)
»Dapoa4 formation
• Uaa of chamical claanara
• madaouats tamparatura control
• Inadaguata mixing
• Poor faad flow control
• Poor faad purrty control
«lr>dtacnm>nata uaa of watar for
ciaaning or waahing
Drainaga prior to ciaaning
Production achaduling to
raduca claaning fraquancy
Inadaquata cooling watar
traatmant
Excaaaiva cooling watar
tamparatura
Propar raactor daa*gn
Propar cautyat aalaction
Cfcoiea of prooaaa
Choica of raacten condition*
Vacuum pumpa mataao of
at*am ial ajactora
Cho»ca of procaaa
Uaa of raboilara mataad of
staam stripping
Oatign raactor* or tanka
wparbiadas
Had uca ding
Equipmartt dedication
Oaaign for lowar film tamoarjtun
and high turtukanoa
Controla to pravant cooling
watar froa\ ovarhaating
Matal parta
ciaaning
Metal surtaca
traatmg
OisposjI of
unusabla raw
mattriaia or
off-spsc products
Claan«up of api'ls
and laaKa
• Oiapoaal of spant sotvanta.
spam ciaaning aoiution, or
ciaaning aludga
• Oragout
• Oiapoaal of apant traating
solution
• Obaolata raw matariala
• Off-apac producta cauaad
by oontaminMion. impropar
raactant oontrola. inadaouata
pra-daanlng of aquipmant or
workpiaca, tamparatura or
praaaura axcuraions
• Mtinuai malanaJ tranafar and
handling oparatcna
• Laaking pump aaala
• Laaking ftanga gaakata
• Indiacnminata uaa of aolvartt
Of
• Poor radt mamtananca
• Excaaaiva nna'ng with watar
• Faat ram oval of workpic ca
• Poor oparator framing 01
auparviaion
• Inadaquata quality control
« Inadaquata production planning
and mvantory oornro! of
faadatocfca
»Inadaquata mamtananca
• Poor oparator training
• Lack ot attanton by oparator
• Excaaaiva uaa of watar m
ciaaning
• Chotoa batwaan oohd dip tank or
vapor dagraaaing
• Chc-ca bateaan aotvant or
aquaoua ciaaning solution
• Countarcurrant rinaing
• Fog rinaing
• Oragout oollaction tanka or trays
• Uaa ot automation
• Maximiza dadicaiion of
aquipmant to a aingta function
• Chotoa o> gsskating matanala
• Chotca of aaala
• Uaa of wattle c. saaJ-watiad
conatructon
Sourca: Jacobs Enginaanng Group
D-2
-------
Appendix £
Wist* Minimization Ttchnlquts
The tables in this appendix lists techniques and practices for waste reduction in operations that are
applied in a wide range of industries. Most ol the techniques listed here are source reduction techniques
Table E-1 Waste Minimization Options lor Coating Operation
Table E-2. Waste Minimization Options tor Equipment Cleaning Operations
Table E-3. Waste Mnimizatic. through Good Operating Fractions
Table E-4. Waste Minimization Options in Materials Handling, Storage, anri Transfer
Table E 5 Waste Minimization Options lor Parts Cleaning Operations
Source: Jacobs Engineering Group
E-1
t.
-------
Table fc-1. Waste Minimisation Options lor Coatirg Operations
Waste
Source/Ongin
Waste Heducton Measures
Remarks
rtii!a*£r.ca^
Coating overfpray
Coating matenal lhal lailu
to recsch the ob}*ci being
coated
Maintain 50% overlap between spray paHern
Maintain 6* • 6" distance between spray gun
and the workplace
Maintain a gun speed ot about 250 feet/mmute
ttold gun perpendicular to the *urtace
ir^ger gun at the begnrung aoC end ot each
pass
Proper training ot operators
Use robots tor spraying
Avoid excessive aw pressure lor coating
atomizauon
Recycle overspray
Ust» *lec!rc«idiic spray systems
Use atf assisied airiess MMay guns in place of
air sp.ay guns
The coated object does not look
streaked, aitd wastage ot cua!v»g
material is avoided It the spray
gun s arched 45*. the overspray
can be as hgh as 651*
By air pressure adjustment,
aversptay ran be reduced to 40%
Overspray can be reduced by 40%
Increases uan&Jer ettic.ency.
1.2
Stripping wastes
Solvent emissions
Equpment cioann
WjfJes
Coating removal from pans
before appi/'.nq a new coat
tvaporalive losses from
process equipment and
coaled parts
Process equipment cleaning
*ith solvents
Overall
Avoid adding excess Ihmner
Use abrasive media stripping
Use bead-fetasitng for paint snipping
Use cryogenic stripping
Use cMnitc stripping solutions
Clean coating equipment after each use
Keep sokent soak tanks away Irom heat sources
Use high-solids lormulaiions
Use powder coalings
Use water-ba^ed lormulaiions
Light- to-dark batch sequencing
Produce larg* batches ol similarly coaled
objects instead of smalt batches ot difleremry
doins
Isolate solvent-based oamt spray booths from
waier-based paint spray booths
Reuse cleaning &«.>kjl«ori/&olvent
Standardize M>tvent usage
(Reexamine the neoage
10,11
4.12
IS
20
-------
Table E-2. Waste irfinimization Options tor Equipment Cleaning Operations
Waste
Sourca/Origin
Waste Reduction Measures
Remarks
References
solvent - or
inorganic Sa^ed
cleaning solutions
lank cieartftg operations
Maximize dedication of process equipment
I 'io sqi eegee* to recover cimg oi product
prior lo rmsing
Avoid unnecessary cleaning
Closod storage and transfer systems
Provide sufficient fine for liquids
Lining the equipment to prevent cling
Tigging" process Snes
Use high-pressure spray routes
Use ^intercurrent rinsir/j
Use clean-in-place systems
Clean equipment immedialely after use
Reuse cleanup solvent
Rework cleanup sofeent inio useful products
Segregate wastes by solvent type
Standardize solvent usage
Reclaim solvent by distillation
Schedule production lo tower cleaning
frequency
Seating and drying op can prevented
Minimizes leftover material.
Reduces ding.
Minimizes solvent consumption.
Prevents hardening of scale thai requites
more severe cleaning.
t8
19
Wastewater Heat exchamjei cleaning • Use bypass control or pumped recyde 10 Onsite or olfbite recyc!.r.g.
s'udges. sp^nt mainiain turbulence during turndown
acio'.'f solutions • Use smooth heal exchange surfaces Electroplated or Te'lontfr ;ubes. 20
• Use on-stream deaning techniques "Superscrubber*. tor example. 21
• Use hydroblastmg over chemical cleaning
where possible
-------
Table E-3. Waute Minimization through Good Operating Practices
Good Operating Practice
Waste minimization assessments
Environmental aodfls/revuws
Program Ingredients
Remarks
References
t orm a team of qualified iridivrtuats
Establish praclic.il short term and long term goals
A'locate resources and budget for ihe program
£slabhsh assessment targets
Identify and select options to rr»nimize waste
PenoGfC^iy monitor the program's effectiveness
Assemble peniront documents
Conduct environmental process reviews
Carry out a site impaction
Report on anc foUo v up on the findings
These programs are conducted to reduce
22
waste h
. a iduiHiy.
These audiis are conducted to monitor
compliarce wilh regulations
23,24
Loss prdv jnhon programs
f-.»tablrr. Spill Prevention, Control, and
Counter measures (SPCC) plans
Conduct hazaid assessment in ihe design and
operating phases
SPCC plans are requi d by law tut o4
storage facfciies
3.25.26
m
Waste Segregation
Prevent meting o) hazardous wastes with
nonhazaidous wastes
isolate hazardous wastes by contaminant
Isolate liquid wastes from soM wastes
These measures can 'OMift iri lower waste
haulage volumes and easier disposal of
the hazardous wastes
Preventive maintenance programs
Use equipment data cards on equipment location,
characteristics. a;td maintenance
Maintain a master preventive maintenance (PM)
schedule
Deferred PM reports on equipment
Maintain equipment history cards
Maintain equipment breakdown reports
Keep vendor maintenance manuals handy
Maintain a manual or computerized repair history I
These proyanrs are conduced to cut
produciio.'i co^is and docrease
aqiirvr.dnt downtime, »n addition
to prevcntrip waste ralttases due
ic equipment failure
27.20.29
-------
Table E-3. Waste Minimization lltruiiyr* Good Operating Practices (continued)
Cood 0pe;an.i<3 Prast»ce
Program Ingredients
Remarks
References
Ti d»ning/A waren^rs -building
programs
Effective supervisor!
Employee participation
Production scheduling/planning
Provide training for
• Sale operation of the equipment
• Proper materials hanging
• Eoonomic and environmental ramifications of
hazardous waste generation and disposal
- Detecting release*, of hazardous materials
- Emergency priced ures
\Jz* oi safety gear
Closer supervision may improve production efficiency
and reduce inadvertent waste generation
Management by objectives (MBO). with goals tor
waste reduction
"Ouairty circles" (free forums between employees
and supervisors) can identify ways to reduce waste
3ol«al employee suggestions lor *aste reduction Jeas
Maxima* belch size
Dedicate equipment to a single product
After batch sequencing to minimize cleaning frequency
(lighl-to-darfc batch sequence, for example)
Schedule production to minimizing cleaning frequency
These piograms are conduced to reduce
occupaiooai health and safety
hazards, in additkm to reducing
waste generaiion due to operator
or procrcjmal errors.
increased opportontfy fur early detection
of mistakes
Better coordination among the various
parts of an overall operation
Employees who intinr.atefy understand i.«e
operations can identify ways to reduce
waste.
Altering produr.
-------
Table E-4. Waste Minimization Options In Materials Handling, Storage, and Transfer
Waste/Source
Waste Reduction Measures
Remarks
References
30.31
Maierial/wa&le tracking and
inventory control
Avoid over-purchasing
Accept raw material only alter inspector
Ensure thai inventory cjuantity does not 90 to
waste
(insure that no containers stay m inventory
k. iger than a specrftod period
Review materialprocurement ^pealtcations
Rotuin expired material to supplier
Validate sheM-We expiration dales
Test outdated material fe conservation ven'u on tixcc* roof tanks
* Use vapor recovery vysfems
-------
Table E 4 Waste Minimization Options in Materials Handling, Storage, and Transfer (continued)
W
-------
Table E-5.
Waste Minimuation Options lor Paris Cleaning Operations
Wjste
.'oorre/Orif)»n
Waste Reducion Measures
Henurks
References
Spoilt solvent
Conlam>nate1 solvent from
• Use water-soluble cuttv>g fluids instead
This could eliminate thu neod tor solvent
parts cleaning operations
of o4-based fluids
• Use peel coatings in place of protective oils
• Use aqueous cleaners
• Use aqueous paint snipping solutions
• Use cryogenic stripping
• Use bead blasting tor painl striping
• Use roult stage oountercurrenf cleaning
• Prover.l cross contamination
• Prevent drag-in Irom other processes
« Prompt lemoval of sludge from the tank
• Reduce the nunber ol different solvents
used
cleaning
A single, laigei waste that is more
amenable to recycling.
6
7
6
Air emissions
Solvent loss Irom
« Use roM lype covers, not hinged covers
24 to 50% reductcn in emissions.
15
degreasers and cold tanks
• Increase freeboard height
• Install freeboard chillers
• Use silhouette entry covers
• Proper equipment layout
33% reduction in solvent emissions
• r
I j
15
• Avoid rapid i-*s*f*ion and removal of terns
The speed that turns are put inlo Ihe
tank should be less than 11 feet/mm
16
• Avoid inserting oversized objects into
Cross sectional area of the ilem should
17
the lank
be less that 50% ol lank aiea in reduce
piston effect
• Alow tor proper drainage hetore removing
item
• Avoid wM." oor.-ominaiion of solvent
¦r degreas«*s
Rinse water
Water rinse to remove
• Reduce sofvont dragout by proper design and
fhe dragout can be 0 4 gal/1000 sqtt.
15
solvent carried r,ul with
operation ot rack system
versus 24 gaV1000 sqft lor poorly
the pails leaving the
drained parts.
cleaning tank
• Install a>r fets to blow pans dry
• Use fog no/iles on nnse tanks
• Proper design ^nd operation of bairel system
• Use cojnleicurrent nnse tanks
<5
IS
- Use wdter sprays on rmse tanks
More efficient naming is achieved
15
-------
1
Appendix E
R*f0r0nc0S
1. Kohl. J., J. Pearson, and P. Wright. Managing and Recycling Solvents In the Furniture Industry
North Carolina State University, Raleigh, 1986.
2 lenckus. D 'Increasing productivity". Finishing Wood and Wood Products Managing Vol. 87. No
4, May 1982. pp 44-66
3. Campbell. M. E.. and W M. Glenn. Profit from Pollution Prevention. The Pollution Proba
Foundation. Toronto, Canada, 1982
4 Kohl, J . P Moses, and B. Trlplett. Managing and Recycling Solvents: North Carolina Practices
Facilities, and Reflations. North Carolina State University, Raleigh, 1984.
5 Durney. J J. "How to improve your paint stripping". Pioduct Finishing. December 1982, pp 52-53.
6. Higgins, T E. Industrial Process Modifications to Reduce Generation a/ Ha^ardo^a Waste at POD
Facilities: Phase I Report CH2M HiH, Washington, D C., 1965.
7. "Cryogenic paint stripping'. ProAjet Finish December 1982.
8 Mallamee. W. M 'Paint and varnish removers". Kirk-Othmer Encvdooedla of Chemical Technology
3rd edition, Volume 16, pp 762-767, 1981.
9. Sandberg, J. Final Report on the Internship served at Gage Tool Company. Minnesota Technical
Assistance Program, Minnesota Waste Management Board. Minnesota. 1965
10. Powder Coatings Institute. Information brochure. Washington, D C., 1983.
11 Cole. G. E. "VOC emission reduction and other benefits achieved by major powder coating
operations'. Paper No. £4-36.1 presented at the Air Pollution Confoi Association. June 25, 1984
12 California State Department of Health Services. Alternative Technology for Recycling and Treatment
of Hagardous Waste. 3rd Biennial Report. Sacramento, 1986.
13. California State Department of Health Sen/ices. Guide to Solvent Waste Reduction Alternatives.
October 1986, pp 4-25 to 4-49.
14 Kenson. R. E. "Recovery and reuse of solvents from VOC air emissions". Environmental Progress.
Augusi 1985. pp 161-165.
15 Durney. L J , e^Kor. Electroplating Engineering Handbook. 4th edition. Van Nostrand Reinhold.
New York, 1984
16 American Society cl Testing Materials. Handbook of Vapor Decreasing. Special Technical
Publication 310-A., ASTM, Philadelphia, April 1976
17. Smith, C "Troubleshooting vapor degreasers" Product Finish November 1981
18. Loucks, C M. "Boosting capacities with cnemicals". Chemical Engineering Oeskbook Issue. Vol
80. No. 5. pp 79-84. 1973.
19. Corporation Ideas ¦ A Compeivtium of 3M Success Stories. St Paul. MN.
E-9
-------
20. Fromm, C. H., S. Budaraju, and S A. Cordtry. "Mi limization of process equipment cleaning waste"
Conference proceedings of HAZTECH Imer^ttorui!, Denver, August 13-15. 1986, up 291-307.
21. Versar, Inc. and Jacobs Engineering Group. Waste Minimization- iasnAa and Options Vol II. U. S
Environmental Protection Agency. Washington, D. C , October 1986.
22. Fromm, C. H. and M. S. Callahan "Waste reduction audi procedjre* Conference proceedings of
the Hazardous Materials Control Research Institute. Ar!«/na, i960, pp 427-435.
23 North Carolina Pollution Prevention Pays Program cm-iror nental Auditing Ncrth Carolina
Department of Environmental Hearth. 1985.
24 Baumer, R A. Making environmental audits" Chamiea? £¦ ginaannq. Vol 89 No 22 SovembeM.
1982. p 101.
25. KletZ, T. A. "Minimize your product spillage" Hydrocgftoon Processing n ol F'i, Nc 3, 1982. p 207
26. Sarokin, D. "Reducing hazardous waste* at the source: Case studies of organic comical plants in
New Jersey. Paper presented at Source Reduction ot Hazardous W^ste Conference, Rutgers
University, August 22. 1985.
27. Singh, J. B. ano R. M. Allen 'Establishing a preventive maintenance pmg(am". Plant Enpjnaarinc
February 27, 1986. p 46.
28. Rimberg, D. "Minimizing maintenance makes money". Pollution Engineering, Vol 12, No 3,
December 1983. p 46
29 Parker. N. H. 'Corrective maintenance and oerlormance optimlzrtton" Chamical Engineering vol
91, No. 7, April 16. 1984. p93.
30. GeKenan. E. "Keeping chemical records on track" C.hamical Business. Vol 6. No. 11. 1984. d 47
31. Hickman, W E. and W. D. Moore. "Managing the maintenance dollar*. Chamical EoHinaarin^ Vol.
93, No. 7, April 24, 1986. p 68.
E-1 0
-------
Appanau F
Government Tachnlcal/Financht Assistance Programs
The EPA's Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response has set up a telephone call-in service to answer
questions regarding RCRA and Superfund (CtRCLA):
(800) 424-9346 (outside the District of Columbia)
(202) 362-"*000 (in the Oistrict ol Co'umbia)
The following status have programs that offe>* technical and/or financial assistance in the areas cf waste
minimization and treatment.
Alabama
Hazardous Material Management and Refcjjrce
Recovery Program
University of Alabama
P.O. Box 6373
Tuscaloosa. AL 354673373
(205)346-8401
Alaaka
Alaaka Health Project
Waste Raduction Aaaiatanca Program
431 We*t Saventh Avenue. Suite 101
Ancnocaae, AK 99501
(907)273.2854
Arkanama
Arkansas Industrial Development Commsaon
One State Capftol Mall
LWe Rock. AR 72201
(501)371-1370
California
Alternative Technology Saction
Toxic Substancea Control Diviscn
California State Department of Health Strvcas
714/744 P Street
Sacramento. CA 94234-7320
(916) 324-1807
Connactteut
Connecu:u1 Hazardous Wasta Management Service
S'Jita J60
900 Asyium Avenue
Hastford, CT 06106
^03) 244-2007
Connecticut Department ol Economc Development
210 Washington Street
Harford CT 06.06
(203)566-7198
Gaorgln
Hazardous Waste Teehncal Assistance Program
Georgia Institute of Technology
Georgia technical Rutaarch Institute
Environmental Health and Safety D>visnn
OKeefe Building, Rocn 027
A^anta. GA 30332
(404) 894-3*06
Georgla (contlnuad)
Environmental Protection Divieon
Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Royd Towers East. Suite 11$4
206 Butter Street
Atlanta CA 30334
(404) 656-2833
Itllnoia
Hazardous Waste Rsaearch and Information
Illinois Department of Energy and Nalural Ret >oea
1808 Woodfietd Drive
Savoy, IL 61874
(217)333-6940
Illinois Wan« Elimination Research Carter
Pnrzker Department of Environmental Enginsenng
AJumni Building. Room 102
Illinois loetiiute of Technology
3200 South .'udersi Street
Chicago, IL 60816
(312) 567-3535
Indiana
Environment Management and Education Program
Young Graduate House. Room 120
Purdue University
West Latayette. IN 47907
(317)494-5036
Indiana Department of Environmental Management
Office of Technical Assistance
P O Box 6015
105 South Meridian Street
Indianapolis. IN 46206-6015
(317) J32-8172
Iowa
Iowa Department of Natural Reeources
Air QualT/ and Solid Waate Protection Bureau
Wallace State Office Building
900 East Grand Avenue
Dee Mer es. IA 50319-0004
(515) 261-6690
Center 1o; Industnal Research ^nd Service
205 Engineering Annex
Iowa State Univenrty
* mes. IA 50011
(515) 294-3420
F-1
-------
Kanaaa
Buraau o( War# Managamam
Otpvtm*flt of H#a*h and Environrrtant
Fortaa F"*W. Building 730
Topaka, KS 66620
(913) 296-1607
KsntucJty
Division of Wasta Managamam
Natural Rasourcss snd Environmental Prcitaction Cabinat
<8Rei»y Rom
Franklon. KV 40601
(502) C64-6716
Lou's/ana
Dspartmant of En"ironmantalOuality
Of1»oa of SoUd and Hazardous Wasta
P O Box 44307
Baton Rouga, LA 70804
(504) 342*1354
Maryland
Maryland Hazardous Waata Facilitias Siting Board
6C Watt Straat, Suita 200A
Annapolis. MO 21401
(301) 974-3432
Maryland Envtronmantal Sarwica
2020 Industrial Drivt
Annapolis. MO 21401
(301) 269-3291
(800) ;92-9l88 (in Maryland)
JUaaateftuaafU
OWica of Sata Waata Managamant
Dspartmam of Environmantal Managamant
100 Ctmbridga SUast Room 1094
Bolton. MA 02202
(617) 727-3260
Sojrca Raduetion Program
Maasacnusatts Ospartmant of Environmantal Quality
Enginaaring
1 Wirtar Straat
Boston. MA 02108
(617) 292-5982
Michigan
Resource Rscovary Sactbn
Oaoartmant of Natural Raaourcaa
P O. Box 300?8
Lansing. Ml 48909
(517) 373-0640
Mlnnaaota
Minnesota Pollution Control Agancy
Sold and Hazardous Waata Drv»cn
520 Lafayatt# Road
St. Paul, MN *5155
(612) 296*6300
yiwots (CirttUW**)
Mtnnaaota Tacmtcal Asaistanca Program
W-140 Boymon Hatfth Sarv*»
University c* Mmnaaou
Mtnn«apo4». MN 55455
(612) 625*9677
(800) 247-001S (in Minnaaota)
MJnnasou Wasis Managamant Board
*23 Thoraon Canta*
7323 Fiftv-Eighft Avanua North
Cry«*. MN 554,*
(61k!) 536-0816
M'atouri
Stata Environmantal Imorovamant and Enargy
Raaourcaa Agancy
P.O. Box 744
Jaflarson City, MC 65102
(314)751-4919
Nair Jar%ay
Naw Jarsay Hazardous Waata FaeWa: ting
Commission
Room 6U
28 Wast Stfta Straat
Trtrton. NJ 08606
(609) 292-1459
(609) 292*1026
Hazardous W&ata Advtsamant Program
Bur*au of Ragulrtion and Claaa^icaiion
Na* Jarsay Oapatlmant of Environmantal Protadion
401 East Stata Straat
Tranton. NJ 08625
Rlak Raductton Unit
Offca of S6«noa and Raaaarch
Naw jara#y Dav>artmant of Environmental Proracxcn
401 Eaat Stata Straat
Tranton, NJ 08625
Ma mp York
N«tf York Sttta Environmental Facilities Corporation
50 Wolf Road
A1bary, NY 12205
,318) 457-3273
N.jrth Carolina
Pollution Pravantion Pays Program
Department of Natural Raaouroaa and Community
Development
?0. Box 27687
512 North SalwtKjry Straat
Raleigh. NC 27611
(919) 733-7015
Governor's Waata Managamsrrl Board
325 North Sa'.iebury Straat
Raiagh. NC 27611
(919) 733-9020
F-2
-------
Uorffi Caro/ta* (cxHitlnutd)
Techn**! Ataiatanca Unit
Sohd and Hazardoua Waata Managamarv Branch
North Carolina Department of Human Raaou.cea
P.O. Boa 2091
306 Nonh Wilmington Street
Ratogh. NC 27602
(919) 733-2178
O/i to
Qrvacn of Solid and Huardoua Wasta Management
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
P.O. Box 1049
1600 WaterMar* Drrve
Columbua. OH 43266-1049
(514) 481*7200
Ohio Teshnotog> TraneferOrganuation
Surta 200
65 Eaat Stale Straat
Columbua. OH 43266-033C
(614) 466-4286
Oklahoma
Induatrial Waata Elimina* on Program
Oklahoma Stata Dapart mant of Health
P O. Box S3651
Oklahoma City. OK 73152
(406)271-7353
Oregon
Or agon Hazardoua Waata Reduction Program
Department of Environmental Quality
811 Southwaat $ixth Avanua
Portland, OR 97204
(503)229-5913
Farinaytvanla
Pennayivama Tachnical Aaaittance Program
501 F. Orvia Keller Buikoing
Univararty Pari, PA 16802
(814) 865-0427
Bureau of Waata Management
Pennaykania Department of Environmental Raaourcaa
P.O. Box 20fi3
Fulton 8uikdi>
-------
Appendix Q
Option Rating
Weighted Sum Method
The Wealed Sum Method is a Quantitative method
for screenirg and rankmq waste minimization options
"nis method provides • means of quantifying the
¦mponart criteria tha: attect waste management in a
carticu'ar facility This method involves three steps
Determine what the important criteria are m terms
of the WM assessment program goals a
constraints, and the overaii corpoiate goals an
constraints, examples of criteria ore the following;
• Reduction in waste quantity
• Reduction in waste hazard (eg., toxicity,
fiarnrraoilfty. reactivtv. cornsivity, etc )
• Reduction in waste treatment/disposal costs
• Reduction in raw material costs
• Reduction in liability and insurance costs
• Previous successful jse within the company
• Previous successful use in industry
• Not detrimental to product quality
• Low caoitai cost
• lyw operating and maintenance costs
• Short implementation period (and minimal
disruption ol plant operations)
• Ease of implementation
Tha weights ^cn a scale ol 0 to '0. for example) are
determined tor each cf the criteria in relation to
the-r importance.For example, if retention \r, waste
treatment and disposal costs are very important,
while previous successfu use within the ;ompany
is cf minor importance, then the reduction in waste
ccsts is given a weight of 10 and the previous use
within the company is given a weight ot 1 or 2.
Criteria ihat are not important are not inc.jded (or
Qiven a weight cf 0).
2 Each cptiot. is then rated on each ol the cntena
Agam, a scale of 0 to 10 can be used (0 for low and
10 for high).
3 Finally, the rating ol each option from particular
cnteria is multiplied by the weight of the criteria. An
option s overall rating is the sum ot the products ot
rat ng times the weight of the criteria.
The options with the fce&t ovorail ratings are ther
selected lor the technical and economic feasibility
analyses. Worksheet 13 in Appendix A is used to rate
cpnci's using the Weighted Sum method. Table G-1
presents an example using the Weighted S«jm Method
'or screening and ranking options.
Tibia G-1. Simn'i Calculation using h#
Weighted Sum MaV'od
ABC Corporation ha* datermmad '.hat reduction n wast*
Jreaimant cost! is the most important criterion, with a wtig-t
factor ot 10 Othar s»gnitcant cri'.era mc:uda reason n
safety hazard (weight ot 8). raducton in liaonity (wt^ni c*
and ease of -'mplamontaticn (wetgM of S). Options X. V. a*, a
Z thar each assigr.ee e4'ectivenass factcs For
example, ootion X •* axpaciad to reduca waste t,v near <
ar%. and is giv«n an rating of d. ft is g;vsi'. a rv».ng o* 5
*^Cjc:ng safety hazards. 4 lor raducinq iiaC:..t>, ?ra
o'jeausa
-------
Apfandlx H
Economic Evaluation Exampla
Vhe following example present* a profitability an/jty*is
for a relatively large hypothetic*! waste minimization
protect This protect represents th* installation of a
package unit that improves plant *,roGiiclk>ri while
reducing raw material consumption and disposal costs
The analysis was done on a personal computer using a
standard spreadsheet program. The salient data used
¦n this evaluation are summarized below.
Capital Coats
• The delivered price ot the equpment is Quoted by
the vendor ai f-170.000. This include* taxes and
insurance.
• Materials costs (piping, wiring, and concrete) are
estimated at $35,COO
• Installation Later is estimated at $25,000
• internal engineering st*tf costs are estimated at
$7,000 Outsde consultant and contractor costs
are estimated at $15,000
• Miscellaneous environmental permitting costs are
estimated >:t $15,000.
- Working capital (including chemical inventories, and
materials and supplies) is estimated at $5,000.
• Start-up costs are estimated by the vendor at
$3,000.
• A contingency of $20,000 for unforeseen costs
anchor overruns is included.
• Planning design, and installation are expected to
ta*12.50 per hour.
• Operating supplies expenses are estirrated at 30%
of operating labor costs.
• Maintenance labor costs are estimated at 2% ot 'he
sum of the capital costs for equipment, mate'ialr.,
and installation. Maintenance supplies costs are
estimated at 1% of these costs.
• Incremental supervision costs are estimated at 3C%
of the combined costs of operating and
maintenance labor
• The following overhead costs are estimated as a
percentage of the sum of operating and
rrnintenance labcr and supervision coats
Labor burden and tonefit 28%
Plant overhead 25%
Headquarter overhead 20%
H-1
-------
• Escalation ot al costs is assumed ',o be 5% per year
for the We of the oroject.
• The project We is expected to be 8 years
• The salvage vatua ot the project is expected to ba
laroafior eight years.
R«tulti
Tha four-paga printout in Figures H-1 through H-4
presents the WM project profitability soreadsheet
program. Figure H-1 represents the input section of
the program. Each of *hc numbers in the first three
columns repreaents an input variable in tha program
Tha righthand side of Figure H-1 is a summary of the
capital requirement. Thia includes a calculation ot the
interest accrued during construction and the financing
structure of the project-
Figure H-2 ia a table of the revenue* and operating
cost hems tor each ot the eight years of the project'*
operating Me. Theee costs are oscatated by 5% each
year tor the life of the project.
Figure H-3 presents the annual cash flowt for the
project The calculation of depreciation charges and
tite payment of interest and repayment of 'oan principal
is also shown herb The calculation of the internal rate
of return (IRR) and the net present value (NPV) are
based on the annual cash flows Since the project is
leveraged (financed partly by a bank loan), the equity
portion ol the in*estm*nt is used as the Initial cash
flow. TN> NPV and the IRR are calculated on thia basis
The IRR calculated this way is referred to as *he "return
on equity*. The program is structured to present the
NPV and IRR after each year of the project'' operating
life. In the example, after six yean, the IRR ia 19-92%
and the NPV is $27,227.
Figure H-4 is a cash flow table based entiiety on equity
financing. Therefore, there are no interest payments
or cieb principal repayments. The NPV and the IRR in
this cane are based on the entire capital investment in
tha project. The IRR calculated thia way ia referred to
as the 'return on investment'
The re&utts ot the profitability analysis for this project
are summarized below:
Method of Financrtg flR WV
60% equity/40% dew 26. *7% $84.&4A
100% •quity 23.09% (81.625
The IRR values are greater than the 15% cost of
capital, and the NPVs are positive Therefore. the
project is attractive, and should b* implemented
-------
f
t
y
Waste IMmtaaUon
j
started 5r22W I
1
Profltobittv Program
—
last charmed 8/1/8/ I
I
|
1
MPOT I
i
1
CAPITAL REQUREMENT
CMulCort Factor*
t
OpaHhoCo^towmFirtflw
i
i
Construction Year
1
Capital Coei
r
$170000"
Increased Production
I
Operatirv: Labor
Eqwpmeot
lncvees*d Rate. urt«»^«ar
, 0
Operaio. haurs/shfl
1
Capial Enpfntftiures
Materials
$35.0U>
Pnoa. lA/nit
Shifts/day
3
Cqupment
J1701000
235.000
Installation
$25,900
Operalino daysA/ear
350
Materials
Plant Enoineerita
$7.01X5
Marketabb By-products
Wage rste. VmM hour $13 50
)
Installation
$25,000
Contractor^naineenna
$15000
Rata. urvfr/year
200
1
Plant Enameerinc
Contractor^ cgnearina
$7,000
Permitting Coats
$15,000
Price, $/unt
$40
Operating Suppiiee
30%
$15,000
Contiraaftcy i $20,000
(% at Operrfmn Labor)
Pei fitting Cc*l»
$15,000
WoikinQ C*p*a! $5,000
Decreased Raw Matenate
COrtiiiptincv
$20,000
$3,000
Start-up Coats
$3,000
Decreased Rat*, units/year
300
Maintenance Costs
£tafl-up Cobis
Pnce. Vurtf
*5°
(%ol Capita Coals)
Depreciable Capiat
$290.000
$295,000
% Fqutv
60%
Labor
2 00%
YkxtuncCwM^
7. Csbt 40%
Decreased Waste Disposal
Materials
1.00%
SU*Xal
Inte ist Ratj on Debt, *
1300%
Reduced Waste, tonsftear
200
inlerest on Debt
$U,?30
$309,230
Debt Repar/nert. years
5
Offstfe Fees, $Aon
$500
Other Labor Costs
Total Caotfal Requirement
State Taxes. $ton
$10
(% at O&M LMjcr)
Depreciation period
7
Transportation. $/ton
*25
Supervision
30 0%
Enui* tnvesinient
$185,538
Lxxxne Tax R*te, %
34 00%
Other D»2ota< Costs. $/lon
*25
(%ofO&ML4ior* Sk
ervtsjon
Dete Principal
$109,462
Total Csposat Costs, $Aon
$560
Plant Overhead
25.0%
Interest on Debt
_|14^J0
Et^'ation Rales. % !
jtnwi
Home Office Ovrrtead
20.(1%
Total Financing
$309,230
Labor Borden
ir6!>%
(Cos! ot Cao«?l (tor NPV>
1500%
i
1
f iQcre H 1 InpL'i lolorrn.iiion and C«^>Udl InveMmeni
-------
REVENUE AND COST Ml
TORS
I -
T
\ -
Opartfina Year rfcunbar
1
2
3
4
5
1.277
6
1 34f
7
. 8
1.478
Escalation Faaor
1.000
1060
1.103
1 158
1.216
1.40C
MCREASED REVENUES
Voaaaad Production
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
Marketable By-producta
! $8,400
$8.«24
$9,264
19.728
$10,216
$<0,728
$11,264
$11,824
JLijuriRmarua
(8.400
S0.824
$9,264
$9,728
$10.2:6
$10,728
$11,264
$f 1.824
OPERATMG CGST/SAVI
KSS
Raw Materials
*15.750
$16,545
$17370
$16,240
_^19,l55
$20,115
$21,120
$22,170
DtapoeaJ CoaU
$117,600
$123,536
$•29,696
$136,192
$14?.024
$150,192
$157,696
$165,536
Maintenance Labor
{$5,074)
($5,327)
{$5,594)
(tif.874)
($6,189)
($6.4/7)
($6 799)
Maintenance Suppkaa
(*2.537)
($2,663)
($2,767)
($2,937)
($3,064)
($3,238)
($3,399)
Operating Labor
($14,884)
($15>3S)
($16,415)
ft 17.237)
($18,101)
<$19.0C9)
($19,958)
($20.9511
Operating Supplag
($4.4651
($4,691)
($4 92d)
($6,171)
($5,430)
($5,703)
($5,987)
($6.2*-;
Supervision
($S.9U)
WJM}
i$6.&23i
;$7.193)
($7,553)
($7,931)
fS5.i25|
UborBurdan
($7.17*)
($7 538)
*
s
rsT
*>
($8,310)
l$3.7?71
($y.16J>|
($10,101)
Plant Overhead
($6,407)
($6,731)
($7,056)
(*7.420)
($7,792)
($8,542)
($9,019)
Home Offic» Overhead
($5.1261
($5.364|
($5,653)
{$5,936)
($6,234)
($6,546)1 ($6,873)
($7,215)
Total Operetta Coata
$82,133
$86,278
$90,560
$95,116
$90,691
$104.8951 $110,118
$115,612
f igure H 2 He*enjes and Operating Costs
-------
flETUHNOWEOUHY/nn
URN GN ASSETS
- —
8™
Cons:ructiofi Y«ar
_ J _
OpwatiX) V99.544
$104,646
$1)0.107
$115523
$12!,402
$127,436
- D#of«ciMton
$59,164
mm
$41,429
$41,429
$22,627
SO
$0
• smaraai on Dab!
$16.CS0
$12,664
$9,646
$6,432
$3,216
10
l_ M.
$0
TuafaW fnconta
{$8,404)
$23,054
$47,922
$56,965
$6*-,462
$92,796
$121,402
$127,436
¦ IncomaTax
Prat 1 rfter lai
($2,857)
$7338
$18,293
$19,375
$22,257
$31,551
#41,277
$43,328
115.547)
$15,2ic1
$31,629
$37,610
$43,206
861.245
$60,125
_ _*P-
POm* 09
$0
~ Oeexedafioo
$62,657
$59,164
J42,274
$41,429
$41,429
$22,627
¦ Dab! Racovmont
$24,736
$24,738
$*4,736
$24,736
$24,738
$2
m
$64,108
^Rc-Tn Caafc Fto#
552.572
$49,662
$49,165
$5^1
$69 626
$84,070
$49JI65
Cash Fcwlor HOE
($185,536)
$52.57^
$49,662
mm*
$S9,696
$64,070
$60,125
$84 J 06
Not Preftanl Valua
($165,536)
Mmm
8NUMI
11102,2721
#09,945)
{$36,836)
$27,227
HJ5L349
$84,644
Ratum on Equity
26.47%
-3ic 19%
-9 62%
4.24%
12.95?
1992%
23 65%
2647%
1
t igufa * l- .l Cash J lows lot Return on Equrty
-------
RETURN CNMVE3TM9I
1 ! 1
Cooelructiofi Year
1
OpMC^g Yur
1
I 2 I 3
4
5
6
/
8
~$»7l43
($147,950
1
book Value
i $290,000
< $105,685
$64^56
$22,827
$0
$0
JO
IDepfaaauott (by stfaflht l ne)
$41,429
$41.42* t^.429
$41,429
$41,422
$41.429
$0
$0
Depreciation (by double C B)
$82,857
$59,1C? 1 $42,274
$30,196
$18,359
$6,522
$0
Oepraciatrii
$82,857
'*59.184! $42,274
$41,429
$41,429
$22,827
$0
$0
CASHFLOWS
1
r
Construction Yw
1
I
0
Optcatiio Ymt
4
t
2
3
4
5
6
7
Revere *e&
$8,400
l~. |8,824
$9,264
$9728
"~$ro^rc
I 510.728
$11,264
$11,824
f Cperatinc Savtoot
$32,133
*ae^7«_
$90,580
$95,118
$99,891
$104,895
$110,138
$115,612
Net Ravanuea
$90,533
$05,102
$99,84-*
$104,846
$110,107
$ii5.e?3
I $121,402
$127,436
• Depracitfbfi
$82,857
$59.1fi4
; $42,274
$41,429
$41,429
$22,827
fO
L *>
Taxable Income
$7,676
$35,918
r $57,570
$63,417
: $68,078
$92,796
$1*1.402
$127,436
hcome Tax
$2,610
$12,212
1 11937V
$21,562
$23,351
$31,551
$41,277]
$43,328
*84.108
r wft tUtf Tax
1
$5,065
$23,708
$37,998
$41,856
$45,327
$51,245
$80.125*
~ Oapfacialior
$82,857
$59,194
$42,274
$41,429
$41,429
t22.S27
_$0
19
Afar-Tu CnA How
$87,923
$82,890
$80,270
$83,264
•*6.756
$84,072
$60.125
$S4aiqe
i
I
$60,125
Ca&h Flow for ROI
($295,000)
$67,923
$82.8901 $80.2701
$83^84
J86t756
^>4,0 72
$24,008
$84,108
Nat Praaant Value
($295/JOOi
($218,545)
($56,472)
($12,339)
$54.130
20.97%
$81.625
23.09%
Return on kive«iT.«>nf
fNUMf I -30.04% -7 76%
526*
13.21%
1799%
23.09%
I
- - L.
figure H 4 Casfi Hoas lur Relum on Investment
-------
T1CHNICAL REPORT DATA
frieosj rtvi fmirvax-ni on tht ttvtnt Ixfore compimtnf;
V REPORT NO 5.
ErA/600/2-88/025
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION no.
P&Iif- J / } A 0 f
4. TIT 1.6 ANl> fttJ»TITLE
THE r^A. MANUAL FOR WASTE MINIMIZATION OPPORTUNITY
ASSESSMENTS
& RERORT DAT!
April 1988
1 PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7 AU1 HORtSJ
Gregory Lorton, et al
B PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO
9. BFOftMiNG ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Ts-obs Engineering Group
Pasadena, CA 91101
10 PR JON AM El EMENT NO.
Ti. contract-grant no.
6S-01-''053
12 SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
HAZARDOUS WASTE ENGINEERING RESEARCH LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CINCINNATI, CH 45268
13. TYPE Of *
------- |