alternatives to solvents

d

i University of Wisconsin-Extension

SOLID AND HAZARDOUS WASTE EDUCATION CENTER

PRESENTS

ALTERNATIVES TO SOLVENTS

Degreasing for the '90s

A Program of Waste Reduction Options for Solvent Cleaning Operations

Produced by The Cleveland Advanced Manufacturing Program

February 11,1993 1:OO - 3:30 P M

Co-Sponsored by: Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources

- - 610 Langdon Street, Rm. 529 I - Madison, WI 53703

university

Phone: 608/262-0385 Fax: 6081262-6250

WELCOME !

On behalf of your County Extension Office, the University of Wisconsin-Extension Solid and Hazardous Waste Education Center, Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce, and the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources we’re glad you could be here.

Alternatives to Solvents-Degreasing for the ’90s is being brought to you as part of Wisconsin’s effort to reduce industrial hazardous waste and emissions. These program materials contain much valuable information to help you reduce waste from degreasing operations in your company. Please feel free to copy and distribute them.

We want to know how you liked this program and what improvements can be made in future programs. Please remember to fdl out the evaluation form and leave it at the downlink site. If

. you would like non-regulatory assistance for hazardous waste reduction, call the SHWEC pollution prevention specialists at 608/262-0385 or 414/475-2845. .

of Wisconsin-Extension m

Collaborating UW Institutions: U W-Green Bay, 4* SHWEC and UW- Extension provide equal opportunities U W-Madison, U W-Stevens Point \a . in employment and programming.

Printed on recycled paper

UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN 9 EXTENSION Program Evaluation

ALTERNATIVES TO SOL VENTS: DEGREASING IN THE 90’s

Company:

Location:

Products:

We are asking for your response ana encouraging you to explain your feeliags. Please be specific and take the appropriate amount of time to give us the open-ended feedback we need. Ideally, we’d like to receive a sentence or two for each question indicating things you liked and did not like about the program. Please do not answer with a simple yes or no! We need specific comments that will help us improve the course and learn how we can help you best.

1. What did you learn from the program that will be most useful to you?

2. List examples of actions you will take back on the job tomomw, or describe how you will use techniques you learned in this program

3. What were the two best parts of the program?

4. What two things would you suggest to improve the pmgram?

5. On a Scale of 1 to 10 (10 being the highest and 1 king the lowest score) how would you rate:

The Course Materials *

6. What other hazardous waste topics would you like information on ?

7. Are you willing to participate in future satellite teleconferences of this kind.

8. Other Comments:

PLEASE COMPLETE THIS FORM AFTER THE PROGRAM AND LEAVE IT WITH THE SITE COORDINATOR

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

SECTION 1 - Pertinent Environmental Legislation Updates

SECTION 2 - Biographies of Participants

SECTION 3 - Presenters and Case Studies

Principles of Cleaning - Terry Foecke Cleaning with Water - Randy Brent What you can do now - David Burch Case Study - Crown Equipment Corporation Case Study - Eaton Corporation Case Study - TRW

SECTION 4 - General Cleaning Information

SECTION 5 - Chemical and Equipment Suppliers

SECTION 6 - Bibliography

SECTION 7 - Wisconsin's Pollution Prevention Resources

SECTION 8 - Acknowledgements

INTRODUCTION

On December 31,1995, President Bush's Executive Order, under provisions of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments, will ban the useand sale of Class I ozone-depleting chemicals in the United States. Two of these solvents, CFC-113 and methyl chloroform (1,1,1 trichloroethane) are used extensively as cleaning agents by thousands of manufactcrmrsacmss the nation. However, by the end of 1995, .these manufacturers must have alternative cleaning agents in place. In other words, U.S. manufacturers must replace nearly 300,OOO metric tons of 1,1,1 trichloroethane and 75,000 metric tons of CFG113 with alternative cleaning agents.

*

3

For manufactures who use CFC-113 or methyl chloroform as cleanmg solvents, the 1995 legislation has widespread implications affecting their businesses. The national phaseout of these chemicals will be one of the biggest arld most difficult transitiis that you, as a manufacturer, will ever have to face. Your business will have to find new methods, and convert to new technology without significantty disrupting your current business operations. You must take steps NOW to find new cleaning methods. As a manufacturer, you may think that you have time to wait, but consider these facts:

0 After May 15,1993, any product that comes into contact with CFCs or methyl chloroform must carry a c h l y legible and conspicuous label stating that the product contains, or is manufactured with, "a substance which harms public hsalth and mWonment by destroying ozone in the upper atmozrphe".

Companies who manufacture ozone-depleting solvents are already phasing out their production. For example, DuPont already has reduced its global production and sales of CFCs by 50 percent of their 1986 production.

a

0 If manufacturers wait, the task of building and installing new equipment and procedures will be overwhelming. Currently, equipment suppliers do not have the vdume to replace the equipment and processes that now exist. If you wait, demand for equipment will be high, and prices may rise drastically.

By acting now, you can make an economical transition, avoid l e g i t e d federal tax increases on ozone depleting solvents, and establish your company as a community and industry leader in environmental change.

1

Some manufacturers may feel that they can switch to other chlorinated or non- chlorinated solvents that are not scheduled for phase-out. Such thinking may be short-sighted. Other chlorinated solvents, such as trichloroethylene, perchloroethylene and methylene chloride, are regulated under other sections of the Clean Air Act Amendments and have adverse effects on worker health. In addition, OSHA is currently trying to reduce work place exposure to methylene chloride from 500 ppm to 25 ppm. Other common solvents, alcohols, ketones, and hydrocarbons pose health and safety hazards in terms of their flammability, and are still subject to EPA and OSHA regulation.

This teleconference provides a look at water-based alternatives to using methyl chloroform, CFC-113 or other solvents in cleaning operations. Using actual case studies from companies that have implemented water based cleaning methods, we trust that this teleconference will give manufacturers valuable information for finding alternative cleaning solvents, reducing waste, improving health and safety, increasing profitability and limiting liibility from regulations. If your company uses solvents in its cleaning operations, the information at this teleconference will help your company:

.Reduce hazardous waste and emissions from its cleaning operations. *See the success of other companies have had in eliminating solvents from

Evaluate your cleaning requirements and improve product quality. Understand why water-based alternatives may be best for your operation.

.Avoid product labeling regulations and improve your corporate image as an

their plants.

environmentally aware business.

The Cleveland Advanced Manufacturing Program would like to thank the following organizations for funding this teleconference:

The Great Lakes Protection Fund The Joyce Foundation

2

SECTION 1

PERTINENT ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION UPDATES

OVERVIEW The 1984 Amendments to the Resource

Consemation and R e oven Ac t, and t h e m ardous and Solid Waste h e ndments (HS WA) 9f 1984, specifically mandated Wrst- m a s a n objective forthenation’s environmental managementprogram. Onemeans ofimplement- ing this directive has been the encouragement of source reduction and recycling approaches for both industry and the public. In response to the HSWA, the United States Environmental Protec- tion Agency (USEPA) developed an industrial waste minimization program which has sought to assesswastepracticesandidentifywasteminimi- d o n opportunities. In early 1989, source r a i w tion wasassigned the highcstpnontywithin EPA followed by secondary emphrrir 011 recycling. Thus, through the m t i o n prrymtiaabrtn[ leea it will be EPA’s policy to aggressively implement pollution prevention through sou~cx reduction and environmentally-sound recycling as an integal part of its programs to protect dl ~tsofourll.tion’senvironment--rir,wPta, land and poundwater.

Possibly the most sweeping environmcn- t?l regulatory program ever to be off& in the United States is the new m t s of 1peQ. The Clean Air Act Amendments arc supplemental goals that call for the reduction of emissions and establish a time frame within

Air

which these goals are to be accomplished. Never in the history of clean air legislation has a law had more potential impact on this nation’s business andthequalityofairwebreathe. Twoprovisiond titles of this Act that are of concern are stratospheric ozone protection and air toxics.

The stratospheric ozone protection keeps tht UnitedStatesincompliancewiththeFlontrerll

otocol on S u w e s tha t Dede te the Ozone m. TheMontreal Protocol and the Clean Air Act impose limits on the production and con- sumptionofthe followingournedcpletingchetni- calsaccordingtospecifiedscWles: chlomfluo- ~ h a k l r w , ~ t e t r a c h l o r i & a n d m e d r y l ChIOmfOrm. ThiSphaSe-out diedulemay possibly be as soon aa 1997.

Pcrhapsthcm~across-the-boardchange in the Clean Air Act A ” t s of 1 990 is with a to- Theorigindphilosophyrcgardingair toxics from the US EPA’s National Emission Standards for Hnzardous Air Pollutants was a limited admissicmofairtoxicsandtheircontrol. It has evolved to a sweeping congressionally-in- spired listing of 189 air toxics which must be regulated. Thio legislation requires the EPA to establish emission standards for each category and subcategory of major and area sources; a major s ~ p c e is defined as one emitting 10 tons per year of any listed air toxic or 25 tons per year

assessing compliance with sources. Prior to EPA’s issuance of a particular MACT standard, sources can undertake voluntary reduction measures making them eligible to apply for a 6 year extension in their date for compliance with the MACT. Any source making a 90% reduction in its toxic volatile organic compound emissions and a 95% reduction in its toxic particulate emissions compared to 1987 baseline levels would be eligible for the extension. It is obvious that the new Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 require much greater source emission reduction now and in the future.

The EPA has been working on national emission standards for eight major hazardous air pollutant sources, and may propose them in the next two years. Issuance of these rules would set MACT standards foralargemajorityofthepo~t- ants on the list. One of these rules would set standards for emissions from organic dven t degrcasing operations. Another propored rule involveshazardous organiccompapnd~ssioar from synthetic organicrmnuhtmhgplants, including emissions fnnn storage tmlsr, procaa vents, equipment leaks and waste water trcrit- ment. The hazardous organics rule alone could set emission standatda fat about 400 source categories and 140 of the 189 sabrtances on the toxics list. To issue this rule, the agency must identify every chemical process or product of a chemical process that wts or productr 8 substance on the list.

Additionally, the EPA has established a voluntary pollution prevention initiativealso &led the 33/50 Pr-. This program was initiated

tion of listed air toxics. Reductions

will be achieved utiliz- i n g - m ‘ V

Control Technology ”. The requirement for

the MACT Standards, although in- cipient in new source review for the

recent years, now hasbecomeamandate for

in the hope ofreducing national pollution releases and off-site transfers of 17 toxic chemicals 33% by the end of I992 and 50% by the end of 1995. The EPA is trying to encourage companies to use pollution prevention practices xather than endsf- pipe treatment to achieve reductions. Pollution prevention is often cost effective because it may reduce raw material losses, reduce reliance on expensive “cnd-of-pipe’ ’ treatment technologies and disposal practices, consme energy, water, chemicals and other inputs, and is environmentally desirable for thee very same reasons: pollution itself is reduced at the source while resources are consmrcd. Some of the 17 chemicals that are covered in this voluntary program are as follows: Carbon Tetrachloride, Methylene Chlo- ride, Tetrachlorocthyiene, l,l, 1 -Trichloroethane, and Trichloroethylene. The EPA will use the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) to track these reductions using 1988 data as a baseline, as required bythe Pollution Revention Act of 1990. TheTRIinduslrialrepOrtingrequi~tswillbe expauded beginning in calendar year 1991 to include information on pollution prevention.

It is imperative that facilities evaluate their need for compliance to these regulations. One rcC0”cndation is to mducta “compr&ensive d s S i ~ ~ d w a s t t i n v ~ t o r y ~ ’ . On~~thtpollu- ti~sourcd~ssionsartutegorizad,anovdl air quality rrnd pollution prcvatiodwaste management program should be created and include:

1 fitid a s w m m t of emissions/

2 . h ideo of what to expect out of the pollution sources;

~raoryprocess; and

regulations. 3.systuudc way ofmeeting the

- ~ _ _ - - - _ _ -

EPA’S 33/50 PROGRAM EPA has established a voluntary pollution

prevention initiative to reduce national pollution releases and off-site transfers of 17 toxic chemicals 33 % by the end of 1992 and 50 % by the end of 1995. The EPA has invited companies to participate in this voluntary program by examin- ingtheirindustrialprocessestoidentifyand~~ ment cost-effective pollution prevention practices for these chemicals. Company participation in the 33/50 Program is completely voluntary. The Program aims, through pollution prevention activities, to reduce releases andoff-site transfers of a targeted set of 17 chemicals from a national total of 1.4 billion poundsin 1988 to 700 million pounds by 1995, a 50% o v d reduction. The Toxic Release Inventory (nu) will be wed to trackthcscsuiuctionsusing 1988datauabaseline. As required by the Pollution ptcvcntion Act of 1 9 9 0 , T € U i n d u s t r i a l r ~ r t i n g ~ t s ~ expanded beginning in calendar year 1991 to include information on pollution prevention.

WhileEPAissetkingtorcduccaggrcgate ~ti~nalenvironmentalr~l~a~~~ofthese 17chd- cals 50% by 1995, individual wmpanies are encouraged to develop their own reduction goals to contribute to this national effort. TheEPA has also asked companies to reduce releases of other TRI chemicals and participate in this national pollution prevention initiative. EPA will pcriodi-

cally recognize those companies that commit to reduce their releases and transfers of the targeted chemicals and the pollution prevention successes companies subsequently achieve.

The overall goal of the 33/50 Program is to promote the benefits of pollution prevention while obtaining mcasurabiercductions in pollution. Pollution prevention is the use of materials, processes, or practices that reduce or eliminate the creation of pollutants or wastes. Pollution prevention should be considered the first step in a hierarchy of options for reducing the generation of pollution. The next step in the hierarchy is

reduced or eliminated at the source. Wastes that cannot be recycled should be treated in accor- dancewitharvirornnentalstandards. Finally,any wastes that remain affcr treatment should be dis-

~~~lerecyclingof~ywastesthatcarmotbe

p o d of srrfely.

EPA is promoting pollution prevention because it ir often the most cost-effective option to reduce pollution, and the enviroiunental and health risks associated with pollution. Pollution prevention is often cost effective because it may reduce raw material losses, reduce reliance on expensive “md-of~ipe” treatment technologies and disposal practices, w n w e energy, water, chemicals, and other inputs, and is environmen-

the 17 target chemicals from 1988 levels 33 %by the end of 1992 and 50 % by the end of 1995. Second, EPA is encouraging companies to use pollution prevention practices ratherthan end-of- pipe treatment to achieve these reductions. Third, EPA hopes that this Program will help foster a pollution prevention ethic in American business in which companies routinely analyze all their operations to reduce or eliminate pollution before it is created.

The 17 chemical groups are:

Benzene Methyl Ethyl Ketone

Cadmium&CadmiumCompoun& Methyl Isobutyl Ketone Carbon Tetrachloride

Nickel & Nickel Compounds chloroform

Tetrachloroethylene Chromium & Chromium Compounds

Toluene Cyanide &Cyanide Compounds

1 , 1 , 1 -TriChloroethane Lead&Lcadcompounds

Xylcnes

Trichloroethylene Mercury & Mercury Compounds

Methylene Chloride

These 17 chemicals were selected for targeting in the 33/50 Program because: a) they are produced in large quantities and subsequently releasedinto the environment in large quantities; b) they are generally identified as toxic or hazardous pollutants and thus there may be significant environmental and health benefits from reducing their releases to the environment.

THE CLEAN AIR ACT AMENDMENTS LABELING PROVISION

STRATOSPHERIC OZONE PROTECTION

WARNING, THIS PRODUCT WAS MANUFACTUREDWITH A SUBSTANCE WHICH HARMS PUBLIC HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT BY DESTROYING OZONE IN THE UPPER ATMOSPHERE.

MANUFACTURED GOODS PRODUCED WITH "HE USE OF OZONE DEPLETING CHEMICALS WILL CARRY PRECEDING WARNING AS OF MAY 15,1993.

The stratospheric ozone layerprotects the earth from the penetration ofharmfal ultraviolet radiation. Anational and i n t d o d CONICIISUS has determined that certain mdustridy pduccd halocarbons (including chlorofluorocarbons [CFCs], halons,carbcm~oridk,methylc~ roform and hydrochloroflwmbons WCFCh]) can transport chlorine and bromine to the -to- sphere. There, photodecomposition of these materials occurreleasing elemmtalchlorineand bromine into the atmosphere which catalytically converts ozone to clcmental oxygen. This mc- tion contributes to the depletion of the ozone layer. Eighty percent of stratospheric chlorine is man-made, approximately 55% comes from CFC's. To the extent depletion occurs, penetra-

resulting in potential health and environmental hum including increased incidence of certain skin canccfs and cataracts, suppression of the immune system, damage to crops and aquatic organisms, increased formation of ground-level ozone and mcrcascd weathering of outdoor pias- tiU.

In 1987, the EPA evaluated the risks of ozone depletion and concluded that m interna- tionalappmachwasnecessarytoeffectively safe- guard the planet's ozone layer. Because releases of CFCs mix in the atmosphere to affect stratospheric ozo~le globally, efforts to reduce emis- sionsframspecificprodwts by only afew nations would have potentially been offset by increases in emissions from othernations, leaving therisks to

of3

the ozone layer unchanged.

Recognizing the 7 global nature of this issue, the EPA participated in negoha-

tions, organized by the United Na- tions Environment Programme (”EP)

to develop an international agreement to protect the ozone layer. In September 1987,

the United States and 22 other countries signed the Montreal Protocol o n Substances tha t Dmlett &e ozo ne Lave r. The 1987 Protocol called for a freeze in the production and consumption of CFCs and halons at 1986 levels, and a phased reduction of the CFCs to 50 percent of 1986 levels by 1998. Currently, 75 nationsrepresenting over 90 percent of the world’s consumption are party to the Protocol.

TheEPApromulgatedregulationsimple- menting the requirements of the 1987 Protocol through a system of tradable allowances in Au- gust of 1988. On January 1, 1990, the United States Congress levied an excise taxon the sale of CFCs and other chcmicals which deplete the ozonelayer. Thistax hasraidthecostsofusing virgincontrolledsubstancesaMi~~anaddad incentive for industry to shift away from these materials. The result has becn an increase in recycling activities and has scrvdto provide the technical community impetus to develop altcmative chemicais and processes.

The parties to the Protocol held a second meeting in London on June 29, 1990, due to concern about new overwhelming scientific evi- denceofgreaterthanexpcctcdstratosphcricozone depletion. This meeting revised the Protocol to requireafuilphasesutoftheregulatadCFCsand halons by the year 2000, a phase-out of carbon tetrachloride and “other CFCs” by 2000, and a phase-out of methyl chloroform by 2005.

On November 15,1990, the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 were signed into law. The requirements of the new Title VI include phase- out controls of ozone depleting substances similar to those contained in the London Amendments of the Protocol. The Clean Air Act Amendments, unlike the Montreal Protocol, also requiresregu- lations restricting uses of controlled ozone depleting substances, banning nonessential products, mandating warning labels, and establishing a safe alternatives program.

Ozone depleting substances have been divided into two distinct classes. “Class I” is comprised ofCFCs, halons, carbon tetrachloride andmethyl chloroform and ‘‘Class 11” of HCFCs. Section 61 1 of the Clean Air Act Amendments specifies labeling requirements for containers of and products containing or manufactured with class I or class Il substances.

Subsection 61 l(b) mandates that effec- tivelllry15,1993, “no container in whichaclass I orclass~~bstanceisstoredortransported,and no product containing a class I substance, shall be i n ~ m t o i n ~ c o l r n n e r c e u n l e s s i t b e a r s a clearly legible and conspicuous label stating:

“WARNING: CONTAINS (INSERTNAME OFSUBSTANCE) ,ASUCEWHICH

MENTBY DESTROYING OZONEINTHE UPPER ATMOSPHERE.”

HARMSPUBLICHEAL”HANDENMR0N-

Subsection 61 l(d)(2) mandates that this same labeling requirement “shall apply to all products mandhctured with a process that uses such class I substance”. The label for products manufactured with a class I substance is required to state:

of 3

“ W A R N I N G : MANUFACTURED

WITH [INSERT NAME OF SUBSTANCE], A SUB-

STANCE WHICH HARMS PUBLIC HEALTH AND E M -

RONMENT BY DESTROYING OZONE IN THE UPPER ATMO-

SPHEREl”

Although an explicit definition of “manufactured with” is not provided, the EPA proposes that this shall mean a product which was manufactured using a controlled substance but does not contain the substance at the point of sale to the ultimate consumer. Therefore, products that have components that have been cleaned using a class I substance must bear a label which will be seen by the ultimate mnSUmCT of the product. In addition, the EPA has provided no “de minimis” use level, (no matt- how small the amount of Ozone Depleting Chemical used duringthemanufacturingpcess, it is not exempt from the labeling requirement.)

Section 61 1 of the Clean Air Act Amend- ments allows a temporary exemption to the labeling requirement foraproductmanufadured withaclass I substance if the EPA determines that there are no substitute products or manufacaaing processes for

such product that; ( 1) do not rely on the use of such class I substance, (2) reduce the overall risk to human health and the environment, and (3) are currently or potentially available. Manufacturers must submit a petition to the EPA to exempt their product from the labeling requirement but must continue to label until their petition is granted.

It is anticipated that the use of class I substances in the manufacturing process of many products will ccase in the near future particularly in the areaofsolventuse. Thescarcityofclass1 substances created by the phaseout, and the increasing costs addcdbythefederal excisetaxarealreadyproviding a continuing incentive for manufacturers to use alternatives wherever possible.

POLLUTION PREVENTION ACT OF 1990

The Pollution Prevention Act of 1990 was enacted to encourage rather than mandate industry to reduce the amount of hazardous wastc created during manufacturing. In accordance with this policy, the EPA is seeking to integrate pollution prevention as an ethic throughout it’s activities.

Under Section 6602(b) of the Pollution Re- vention Act of 1990, Congress established a national policy that:

*pollution should be prevented orredudat the source whenever feasible;

*pollution that cannot be p r c v d shoafd be recycled in an mvironmcntaIly safe mannrr whenever feasiblc;

*pollution that cannot be prevented or recycled should be treated in an mvinmmcntally safe manner whenever feasible; and

*disposal or other release into the environment shouldbeemployedonly asalastrtsorr and should be conducted in an environmentally safe manner.

Pollution prevention means “source reductions”, asdefinedunderthePollution Prevention Act, and other practices that reduce or eliminate the creation of pollutants through increased efficiency in the use of raw materials, energy, water, or other resources. Protecting natural resources by consmation is also considered a type of pollutionpreventian.

Sourcereduction, asdefinedbytfiePollution Prevention Act, is any practice which:

%duccsjhe amount of any hazardous sub- stancq poilutan: or mtaminant entering any ~strumorotherwiserelcasuiintothcenvi- tonment (including fugitive emissions) prior to recycling, trertmmt, or disposal; and

%iuccsthchrrzardstopublicheslthmdthe environment d a t e d with the release of such substancer,pollutants,orcantaminants.

Source reduction can include equipment or technology modifications, proctss or procedure modifi~~~refonnulationorredesignofprod- ucts, substitution of raw materials, and improve- “in housdcecping, maintcnarce, training, or inventon control.

significant opportunities forindustryto

reduce or prevent pollution at the source through

cost-effective changes in production, operation and raw mate-

rials use. Such changes offer industry substantial savings in reduced raw

material, pollutioncontrol andliabilitycosts as well as to help protect the environment and

reduce risks to worker health and safety.

The Pollution Prevention Act also directs the EPA to establish a “clearinghouse” of information on source-reductionapproaches. In addition, beginning with the 1991 submission, facilities that have been required to file annual reports on toxic-chemical releases under Title III Section 313 of the 1986 Superfund Amendments & Reauthorization Act (SARA) mustinclude information on the quantities of chemical wastes generated prior to recycling, treatment, or disposal, and the amounts released into the environment. Separate data must be individually reported for each chemical, along with year-to-year percent-

niquts used to identify so~rcduction Oppartu- nities.

agechangs, ~ ~ u r ~ ~ - n d u c t i ~ n ~ ~ ~ ~ , d t e c h -

Pollution prevention requires a cultural change - one which encourages more anticipation and internalizing of d environmental costs by those who generate pollution. This has required theEPA to build anew relationshipwith industry to find the most cost-effective means to achieve those goals. As the EPA looks at the “big picture” in setting strategic directions for the decadeahead,it isclearthatprtventionisthe key to solving the problems of environmental pollution.

SECTION 2

BIOGRAPHIES OF PARTICIPANTS

WATER-BASED ALTEXNATIWS TO SOLVENT CLEANING

Biographical Sketches of Q & A Session Participants

FAYE ERIC BENTLEY

Faye Bentley is a Manufacturing Engineer at Philips Lighting Company in Bath, New York. Philips Lighting manufactures High Intensity Discharge Lighting Products. Along with providing technical assistance in the manufacturing processes, Faye is responsible for supporting the cleaning and degreasing operations.

Mr. Bentley and an associate are presently in charge of replacing their Freon Degreasers. In May of 1992, an alkaline cleaner in an ultrasonic bath with several deionized rinses was chosen as the replacement system. Installation of the system was finished in December of 1992.

Mr. Bentley was previously employed with Parker-Hannifin Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Division in Lyons, New York. He graduated from The State University of New York at Utica/Rome with a Bachelor's degree in Industrial Engineering.

LAWRENCE C. BOYD JR.

Lawrence C. Boyd Jr. is the Manager of the Environmental Services Program (ESP) within the NIST Great Lakes Manufacturing Technology Center (GLMTC). The GLMTC is a joint effort between the Cleveland Advanced Manufacturing Program (CAMP) and the National Institutes of Standards and Technology with the mission to assist small and medium sized companies in adopting technologies to improve their operations and increase their competitiveness in the marketplace.

Among the activities of the ESP are seminars related to pollution prevention and waste reduction, in-plant waste reduction assessments performed by a cadre of trained CAMP engineers, an internship program with local universities and a hotline service. Support for this program is provided through grants from the Gund, Joyce and Cleveland Foundations; The Great Lakes Protection Fund; the Ohio Environmental Education Fund; and the Ohio Department of Development through the Edison Technology Center Program.

r:

Prior to joining CAMP, Mr. Boyd had over sixteen years of experience in the chemical industry as a process engineer, production superintendent, process engineering manager, and technical superintendent in specialty chemical manufacturing operations. Mr. Boyd received B.S. and M. Engr. degrees from Cornel1 University in 1971 and 1972, respectively, and an MBA from Cleveland State University in 1984.

RANDALL J. BRENT

Randy Brent is the Vice President of Technical Affairs at Man-Gill Chemical Company in Euclid, Ohio. Man-Gill produces a wide variety of cutting fluids, coatings and water-based cleaning chemicals; cleaning equipment; and equipment to recycle the effluent from water- based cleaning systems.

Mr. Brent joined Man-Gill as a Technical Service Chemist and has held increasing responsible positions as an engineer and as a manager in field customer service, quality assurance, research and development, and environmental services.

Mr. Brent is a member of the Society of Automotive Engineers and the Society of Tribologists and Lubrication Engineers. He received a B.S. in Biology from Cleveland State University in 1981 and an MBA from Baldwin Wallace College in 1990.

DAVID J. BURCH

David J. Burch is Director of Governmental Affairs and Industrial relations for the National Screw Machine Products Association (NSMPA) located in Brecksville, Ohio. The NSMPA represents more than 530 companies in the precision turned parts manufacturing industry.

Mr. Burch’s current responsibilities bclude all aspects of EPA and OSHA compliance. He advises on and develops specialized programs for small businesses dealing with human resource management, monitors federal legislation and regulations, and coordinates the Association’s political and government af‘fairs activities.

Mr. Burch began his career in Washington D.C. with the National Constructors Association, serving first as Government and International Affairs representative and later as Assistant to the President. Prior to joining the NSMPA Mr. Burch served as Director of Public Relations and as Washington representative for Jacobs Engineering Group, Pasadena, California. Mr. Burch is a 1973 graduate of the University of Notre Dame.

JOHN M. BURKE

John Burke is a Senior Program Manager in the Corporate Environmental Engineering group at Eaton Corporation’s Manufacturing Technologies Center, located in Willoughby Hills, Ohio. He is responsible for assisting Eaton manufacturing facilities in complying with environmental laws and regulations and in insuring the protection of the natural environment.

Mr. Burke was responsible for the design of a fluid recycling process which allowed Eaton to receive the Oovemor‘s Award in the States of Tennessee and Ohio for significant waste minimization technology and to receive a citation from President Bush under the President’s Environmental and Conservation Challenge awards.

*

Mr. Burke has over 20 years of experience in environmental engineering. He holds five U.S. Patents and has published over 10 technical papers in the environmental field. He received a Bachelor's degree in Industrial and Systems Engineering from the University of Dayton in 1971.

BRIAN DUFFY

Brian Duffy is the Corporate Environmental Manager for Crown Equipment Corporation in New Bremen, Ohio. Crown is a world leader in the manufacture of narrow aisle lift trucks. Mr. Duffy was responsible for managing Crown's solvent replacement project at the New Bremen facility. Crown has recently received the Governor's Award for Outstanding Achievements in Pollution Prevention from the State of Ohio and was runner-up in the USEPA's Region V Administrator's Award Program.

Receipt of these awards resulted, in large part, from the elimination of 1,1,1 trichloroethane from Crown's manufacturing processes. The solvent removal program was unique in that Crown manufacturers a wide variety of parts composed of different materials, making the replacement project a challenge.

Mr. Duffy holds a Masters degree in Environmental Planning from Arizona State University. He is a Registered Environmental Manager, a Certified Hazardous Materials Manager and has over thirteen years of experience in industrial environmental affairs.

TERENCE L. FOECKE

Terry F a k e is the President and Co-founder of the Waste Reduction Institute for Training and Applications Research, Inc. (WRITAR), a non-profit organization dedicated to facilitating implementation of innovative strategies, techniques and technologies that prevent pollution at the source.

Terry spent thirteen years managing the operations of an electroplating facility before entering the environmental field. Before founding WRITAR, Terry was a scientist and waste reduction specialist for the "sots Technical Assistance Program with responsibilities for education, research and evaluation in the areas of waste reduction and management, specializing on the metal finishing industries.

Terry has extensive experience in developing and leading pollution prevention training programs for government agencies and industry audiences nationwide. He is a member of the editorial board and contributing columnist to the Pollution Prevention Review. He is also a member of the State and Local Programs Committee and Advisory Board of the National Advisory Council on Environmental Policy and Technology in Washington D.C.

Terry received a BS. Degree in Technical Communications from the University of Minnesota.

SECTION 3

PRESENTERS AND CASE STUDIES

PRINCIPALS OF CLEANING Presented by Terry Foecke

of m A R

How Does Cleaning Work?

Cleaning is defined as the removal of soil or unwanted matter (including moisture) from a surface to which it clings

Actions include

m Mechanical: wiping, brushing, spraying, machining, abrading

Solution: soil dissolved in solvent

Chemical reaction: soluble or non-interfering products formed

Detergency: lifting the soil by displacement with surface active materials that are attracted more to the surface than the soil

Haw Clean is Clean?

Cleanliness may range from sterility in an inert environment, to selective removal of contaminants, to allowing accumulated residues to remain.

The goal of cleaning should be the minimum level of cleanliness acceptable to meet performance requirements.

Compatibility Issues

Substrate Corrosion:

- Conducting Submersion Tests - Conducting Surface Analysis Studies

. Degradation of Handling Materials

. Testing of Gloves, Wipes, and Dispensers

..

Soils to be Removed

Oils and soils with fluidity

Soils with waxy film, oxidized rosin, paste or other soft film

- may contain chlorinated paraffhs or sulfurized oils 0

q u i r e elevated temperature - higher concentrations (higher cost $)

Soils with abrasives, hard carbonized film, buffing compounds, smut, rust, and heat

- job matched specialized chemicals scale

Are the soils:

J Received as raw materials?

J Produced in general machining operations?

J Produced in forming/stamping operations?

J Produced in subassembly?

J Received with vendor parts?

J Any combination of above?

Cleaning Needs Reduction

F o r m i n g ~ r i c a n t s ; ~ fluids

PolWng/buf6ng compounds

Plain/sulfurized mind/fatty

cutdng fluids oils; solubk oils; water-solubk

Miueral oils and emulsions oil/water w/abmsives or d@"q grrasc w/&& or wax

cutting/griuding fluids Plain and sdfurkd m i n d and fatty oils

Oxidation; scale sale water scale co-deposidonprocesses; - Quenching oils Heat mtrnent

Lube oils; hydrauIic fluids

Paints; inks Pigment and bmdu surface protecdon; ID markings

Moisnnr Water Handling storage

Fingerprints BOdy0ils;particUlates Handling

Cleaning Processes

Preparation for surface coating ting; convexsion coatings;

Solvent Tv_~es

II I Example

Alcohols Isopmpanol; methanol. ethanol; isobutanol

Ketones

Ester solvents

Aliphatic solvents

Aromatic solvents Toluene; xylene

Chlorinated solvents Methylene chloride; trichloroethylene;

Fluorinated solvents F"

Acetone; methyl isobutyl ketone; methyl ethyl ketone

Ethyl acetate; isobutyl bobutyrate; isopmpyl acetate; glycol ether acetate

Hexanes; mineral spirie heptane

1,lJ uichloraethane; perchloroethylene

*

Process Flow Diagram

Facility : A large manufacturer of metal products. Cleaning units are located in repair shops throughout the facility

Equipment: 30 gallon cold dip tank

Solvent: 1 ,I ,1 Trichloroethane

Use: Tank is used to clean both new and used parts for inspection, repair, or installation.


Inputs

-solvent

mew parts machining oils dust

mold parts oil grease paint chips metal fnes dirt

.gloves and paint brushes . (used for cleaning parts)

Inputs

solvent \

new parts

gloves a/ brushes


Unit Operations

.operators use a paint brush to scrub parts

.operators wear gloves when working with the solvent

.solvent is added to the tank as needed

.tank is covered when not in use

.tank is drained and cleaned irregularly

Unit Operations

\ I solvent

new parts

gloves &/ brushes I


outputs

.clean parts

.contaminated solvent

.solvent vapors lost to evaporation

.contaminated gloves

.paint brushes soaked with solvent

.sludge

3

outputs

lean parts

air emissions solvent

old parts ...................................

*dirty solvent

dirty gloves &

sludge

gloves & brushes brushes


Output Dispostion

d e a n parts are repaired or installed

.contaminated solvent is sent off site to be recycled (recycled solvent is bought back by the facility)

.contaminated gloves and paint brushes are shipped for off-site disposal as hazardous waste

.sludge is shipped for off-site disposal as a hazardous waste

output Disposition

installed or

lost to the air emissions- atmosphere

,dirty solvent-off-site recycling

brushes I shipped as haz. waste w sludge

AQUEOUS CLEANING: ALTERNATIVES TO VAPOR DEGREASING Presented by Randy Brent

of Man Gill Chemical

1. What is aqueous cleaning?

A. Solution of water, builders, detergents, and surfactants used to release sdils from parts.

B. Kinds of aqueous cleaners include alkaline, neutral and acid.

2. Benefits of aqueous cleaning.

A. Reduction of toxic air emissions. B. Improved operator environment. C. Quality results - more forgiving. D. Economical. E. Versatile - cleans wide variety of soils. F. Removes chips and fines. G. Available rust protection. H. Allows use of synthetic lubricants.

3. How and why are aqueous cleaners formulated?

A. Why are there different aqueous cleaners?

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

mixed metal compatibility soil detergency (oils versus soaps) floating versus emulsifying spray versus immersion (application technique) short cleaning time versus long waste treatment temperature soil loading

B. Types of soils.

C. How to combine components.

1. Inorganic components.

a. caustic (hard surface cleaning) b. c. borates (corrosion protection) d. chelators (water softening)

phosphate (water softening and rinsing)

2. Organic components.

a. detergents b. emulsifiers c. demulsifiers d. defoamers e. wetters f. chelators 9. amines

D. The key is to combine the variety of components in such a way as to perform the required operation. Products can be combined to perform almost any kind of cleaning operation.

4. Acid Cleaning.

A. Advantages

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Removes metal oxides and scale. Can be used to deposit phosphate coating. Can help to split out soils. Can be economical to operate. Removes soils not typically cleaned by alkaline cleaners.

B. Disadvantages

1. 2. Usually require higher maintenance. 3. Usually requires inhibitors. 4. 5. 6. May solubilize heavy metals. 7. Can embrittle some parts.

Not recommended for removal of soaps and synthetics.

Can contain SARA reportable chemicals. Can produce washer scale and sludge.

5. Alkaline cleaning.

A. Advantages

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.

Economical. Cleans wide variety of soil. Non-corrosive to ferrous metal. Low maintenance. Wide temperature range. Can be compaiible with a variety of substrates. Normally does not contribute to VOC emissions. Versatile. Low toxicity. Often recyclable.

B. Disadvantages

1. May be difficult to rinse. 2. Formulas require optimization. 3. Can foam under certain conditions. 4. May not be compatible with some electrical components.

6. Key factors in selecting the proper chemical.

A. lime

1. 2.

Different parts and soils require different cleaning times. Time cycles may be dictated by cleaning equipment.

8. Temperature

1. 2.

Cleaning often improves at elevated temperatures. Certain soils can only be removed at high temperatures.

C. Chemical

1. Acid, alkaline, solvent. 2. 3.

Certain soils require certain cleaning chemicals. Choice of chemical will impact on cleaning results.

D. Concentration

1.

2.

Concentrations of cleaning chemicals range widely, depending on the soil. More difficult soils generally require higher concentrations.

E. Mechanical action

1 . 2. 3.

Mechanical agitation improves cleaning. Increasing mechanical action can have impact on cleaning. Most difficult factor to change due to set piece of equipment.

7. What are the different application techniques?

A. Immersion

1. 2. 3. 4. Low volume production.

Good for large parts without a lot of blind holes or recesses. Relies on chemical action only. Usually requires longer time to clean.

B. Agitated immersion

1. 2. 3. 4.

Good for larger volume of smaller parts. Cleans well when nesting can be a problem. Better for soil removal from threads, holes or recesses. Mechanical action aids in cleaning.

C. Electrocleaning (anodic)

1. Produces gaseous oxygen bubbles that scrub metal. 2. Usually used on ferrous surfaces. 3. Susceptible to soil contamination. 4. Usually used as a polish cleaning after immersion cleaning. 5. Good electro mechanical cleaning.

D. Ultrasonic

1.

2.

3. 4. Usually slows down production. 5. Provides good mechanical cleaning.

Not unlike electrocleaning instead of using scrubbing bubbles it uses a cavity created by sound waves to create a scrubbing action. Good for small parts and where up and down agitation is not practical. Not good on nested parts or difficult holes.

E. Spray

1. 2. 3. 4. Very economical. 5. 6.

Higher volume, larger rackable parts. Usually tied to continuous production conveyor systems. Not good for shielded areas.

Requires fair amount of floor space. Spray impingement provides good mechanical cleaning.

8. Key factors in selecting the cleaning process.

A. Size

1. 2. Material handling method.

Weight and overall dimension of part.

B. Shape

1. Configuration of part. 2. Nesting parts, blind holes, flat surfaces, irregular surfaces.

C. Surface

1. Typeofmetal.

D. Soil

1. Type of soil. 2. Difficulty in removing soil.

E. Subsequent process

1.

2. Drying.

what follows cleaning process, i.e., parts dried, parts painted, length of storage.

9. Aqueous waste considerations.

"CHLORINATED SOLVENT VAPOR DEGREASING: THE C M C K IS TICKING"

David J. Burch Director, Government Affairs

National Screw Machine Products Association

Companies in the precision metalworking indu6try have traditionally faced many challenges to their ability to compete and succeed. Possibly the greatest challenge facing these companies today i s balancing customer demands for clean parts with the regulatory burden inflicted on those companies who continue to use chlorinated solvent8 in vapor degreasing operations.

Historically, chlorinated solvent vapor degreasing has been the cleaning process of c h o i c e for job shop metalworking companies. Chlorinated solvent vapor degreasing has always been the "all things to all people" parts cleaning process, guaranteeing oil-free and chip-free parts, regardless of raw material and part configuration, Today, however, users of chlorinated solvents are faced with a seemingly unending set of regulatory barriera which, in my opinion, will ultimately eliminnte chlorinated solvent vapor degreasing as a viable parts cleaning process for small metalworking companies.

Let's take a minute to quickly review what some o f the major barriers are

Users of chlorinated eolventa are currently subject to the reporting provision8 of the Emergency Planning & Community Right-to-Know Act, Title 111 of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization A c t . In particular, Section 313 of that Act requirea chlorinated solvent users to f i l e annual report8 detailing the amount o f solvent escaping to the environment. Anyone with experience in filing the Section 313 Form R Report know8 the costs and headaches involved in preparing that form.

Under the Clean Air A c t Amendments of 1990, all 02 the chlorinated aolvents typically used in metalworking part8 cleaning are listed as hazardous air pollutants, and 8ubject to new, confusing and costly permitting requirements.

Also under the Clean A i r A c t , EPA is hard at work developing a new Natfonal Emission Standard for Hazardou8 A i r Pollutants (NESHAP) for vapor degreasing emisaione. 1993 what ehape that proposal will take, it's safe to say that it will require substantial investment8 in control technology, and new productivity work practices.

Although we won't know until November of

Speciflc to the use of methylene chloride, OSHA is currently considering a nine-fold reduction in the employee PermiUBible exposure limit, from t h e current PEL of 500 parte per million down to 25 ppm.

In addition to the regulatory burdens, users of chlorinated solvents

are facing increased costs to purchase, manage, treat, and dispose of the wastes from chlorinated solvent vapor degreasing.

Another cost , which all user8 must account for somehow, ia the on-going "cradle-to-grave" liability imposed on generators of hazardous waste. Even with the best recycling and recovery efforts, there comes a time when still bottoms have to be disposed of, and sending that waste off-site represents a potential liability the generator may have to live with for all time.

There le a separate set of immediate pressures facing Companies who use ozone depleting substances, such as Freon 113 or methyl chloroform, in vapor degreasing operations. After 1995, these ptaducta will no longer be available. And, in the interim, users of ozone depleting chlorinated solvents will have to deal with the labeling requirement8 of the Clean Air Act, a6 well a8 pay excise t a m 8 on those products which, in 1993, are about 21 ceht8 per pound for methyl chloroform and $2.68 per pound for Freon.

The bottom line, from where I aft, is that these's j u s t no future in chlorinated solvents for parts Cleaning. Freon and methyl chloroform will be gone after 1995. For the other papular chlorinated solvent8 - trfchloroethylene, methylene chloride, and perchloroethylene - the end will not come this year or next year or even five year8 from now. But, I believe, the end is in sight. The handwriting is on the wall, and the clock is ticking away, marking time until the regulators achieve their goal o f making chlorinated solvent vapor degreasing a totally uneconomic parts cleaning option fog small job shop metalworking companies.

For the 70 per cent or so OF precirion metalworking companies who do not use chlorinated solvent8 to clean parts, congratulation8 on being in the right place at the right time.

For the 30 per cent who are currently using chlorinated 6olvent8, and, more importantly, the 51 per cent of thoae who currently w e either freon or methyl chloroform, the time to act ir now. And, a8 fmportant 86 i t f u to be doing umethfw, it's equally important that the ateps taken are the xiah& eteps, the one8 that will set a company on a clear path toward an economically sound, technologically advanced, and environmentally benign alternative parta cleaning syetem capable of cleaning parts to increa8ingly 8trlngent customer cleanliness demands.

then being able to afford it, 1 8 , I believe, one of the greatest COmpetltive issues facing the precision metalworking industry.

The fact i s that the finest cleaning 6y8tem conceivable i 8 of no long- term value If it pollutes, or ie unsafe, or ie designed to use a chemical which i s targeted by EPA f o r elimination,

The challenge o f identifying a syatem that meets these parameters, and II.

Similarly, the most environmentally benign part6 cleaning system is of no use and no value to a company if it cannot clean parts to the customer's satisfaction.

What are the options for companies who are currently using chlorinated solvents and who have read the handwriting on the wall?

First of all, for companies currently using freon or methyl chloroform, we need to look at some short term options - what I call "bend aid'' scheduled for phase-out in 1996. Companies may even find that their customers will demand that they atop using these products even earlier. Depending on the final Clean Air Act labeling regulations, which are due out shortly, companies may very well be faced with a choice of discontinuing use of freon or methyl chloroform, or loaing a customer.

- 8olutions. A8 I mentioned earlier, both of these solvents are

The easiest answer f o r these companies, the one which buys the moat time, is to simply substitute another chlorinated solvent, either trichlor, perchlor, or methylene chloride.

This option doesn't relieve the company of any regulatory burden or liability, but it doe8 enable you to continue - f o r b time anyway - to use an existing vapor degreaeer, and to use a product with similar chemletry 80 the learning curve iantt quite so steep.

Aside from that pa~ticular, short-term answer, f o r companies currently using chlorinated solvents in vapor degreaaing operations, there are three major answers to the question: "What do I do now?" They are, first, engineering and work practice controls to minimize solvent loss; uecond, investigate chemical sub8titUtionS; and, third, bite the bullet and consider investing in an alternative parts cleaning process.

Emission controls are a logical first step for any company uuing chlorinated solvents, regardlea8 of the long-term outlook. Aside from the dollar cost of lout aolvent, the amount.of solvent eain8ionn from your degreaeer appears to be the cornerstone for all of the Clean Air Act regulations. The higher your emisaion levels, the greater the pressure - and Cost, to reduce them.

B r k Practice coarola are the easiebt and most cost-effective methods of reducing uolvent emissions.. A degreaser in good working condition reduces emissions, improves working conditfons and aaves money. Conduct daily inspections of your degreaser; check for. leaks, make %ure

monitor the contamination level of your solvent. Don't f a l l into the trap of cleaning out your degreaeer on a f ixed schedule. Clean out the degreaser and replace contaminated solvent w i t h freuh 8olvent only when it's required. Testing can extend the life o f the aolvent and reduce disposal coats. Make sure your operators are well trained in efficient operating procedures. Minimize use of the spray wand. If needed, u8e a steady liquid stream to add cleaning power for heavily Boiled parts.

3 the free-board ratio la correct, and keep the cover closed. Closely

Make sure the cleaning is done in or below the vapor zone, and wait until condensation has totally stopped before removing the parts. When adding solvent to the degreaser, make sure the solvent flow is low enough to prevent splashing. Remove parts slowly to reduce drag-out. Do'nt overload the degreaser; and rack parts for best drainage. Always store fresh and used solvent in closed containers.

A variety of maineer ina controu are available t o reduce 6olvent emissions to the ambient environment. These controls can of ten result in aubstantial reductions in solvent emissions, although there will be 8ome expense involved.

F o r example, reducing room drafts by creating an enclosed environment, either by locating your degreaser in a separate room or through a properly deeigned enclosure, can produce a control efficiency of approximately 90%.

Another engineering control option would be retrofitting with a cover t o control emiurions during down-time and working time. Simply covering an open top vapor degreaser during down t i m e should produce a 40% decrea6e in emissions. Similar efficiencies can be achieved by closing the cover during working time.

Adding a refrigerated free-board chiller, either above-freezing or below-freezing, can produce control efficiencies o f 40%.

Automated or programmable hoiat8 are the most effective control meaaurea for solvent losses caused by work entering and leaving the degreasez, and can reduce drag-out loss88 significantly.

While theae control measures can help reduce emiesions, they do not address the more ~erious long-term question o f alternatives to the use of chlorinated solvents for part8 cleaning. For the company looking for alternatives, either short-term oz long-term, current technology only O f f e r 8 two options: chemical substitution or procesa aubatitution.

There are a variety of che mica1 aubatltu- options available to colapaniea wi8hing to move away from the use of chlorinated rolvento. As I mentioned earlier, a "band aid" option for companies using freon or methyl chloroform would be to 6witch to another chlorinated solvent, either trichlor, perchlor or methylene chloride. Each of those presents pzoblers of their own, both fn the short term and in the long term.

All chlorinated solvents are heavily regulated, both by EPA and by OSHA. All are auapected carcinogens, and are classified a8 hazardoun air pollutants under the Clean Air A c t . a VOC, and the OSHA PEL for methylene chloride may be dropped from t h e current SO0 ppm to 25 ppm. dogrearing NESHAP being developed by EPA under the Clean Air Act, and, depending on the amount of emissions, will be considered either major

Trichloroethylene is listed a8

All will be 8UbjeCt to the solvent

or area sources subject to new and costly permitting requirements.

On the plus side, none of these three chlorinated solvent8 iS directly scheduled for elimination, and can be used in existing vapor degreasing equipment wfth minimal downtime and little if any retrofit cost.

For companies who decide to move away from the chlorinateds completely, there are two chemical substitutes available which have good cleaning ability and are not yet t h e subject of serious EPA regulation: flammable solvents and combustible solvents.

Flammable solvents, such as petroleum Bolvents, iaapropyl alcohol, acetone, and methyl ethyl ketone, are generally good clenner6, and they evaporate readily. Petroleum solvents, such as mineral apirits, kerosene and Stoddard solvent, have long been popular in the precision metalworking industry. However, all of these are heavily regulated by EPA and local air districts as VOCs.

9

Combustible solventa, ruch a8 terpenes and dibasic esters, are less volatile than flammable solvents and, consequently, have lower emissionr. However, they have a tendency to leave a re8idue on the parts which must be rinsed with water.

A major plus for the8e chemfcal substitutes is their ready availability and familiarity i n the indu8tiy. And, i n many Ca868, existing vapor degreasers can be retrofitted to use these substitute chemlcals, thus eliminating the need to invest ln new equipment.

The ultimate, long-term part# cleaning alternative, I believe, is process aubstitutim. A t the current time, there are only two alternative cleaning processes which have proven themselves capable of meeting a high degree of part cleanliness on a production basis: aqueous cleaning, which has been available for some time; and, memi-aqueous cleaning, using a combination of water and either a flammable or combustible solvent. There are other technologlea coming on the market, such as supercritical carbon dioxide and C02 mow. time, both of these are very costly, and appear to have limited production applicationa.

According to recent industry etudies, approximately 32% of metalworking companfea currently using chlorinated rolvents in vapor degreasing

these companies have read the handwriting on the wall, and are gravitating to what the experts believe is the most cost-effective and efficient long-term answer to chlorinated solvent usage.

There are literally hundreds o f different aqueous and semi-aqueous cleaners and cleaning syaterrm on the market. (L base, watet and some combination of saponifiers, surfactants,

Ho”r, at thi6 point in

* operations are investigating aqueous parts washing systems. Obviously,

The cleanera all w e , as

chelating agents, corrosion inhibitors, other solvents, and acidic or alkaline agents in various combinations and concentrations.

The cleaning equipment all s e e k s to incorporate various ""I sense" mechanical controls to manage bath contamination and assure a h i g h degree of part cleanliness.

The good news i8 that these type8 of systems have proven themselves to be more than odequate cleaning systems for most applications in the precision metalworking industry. The bad news is that both processes often require replacement o f equipment. In some cases, where entirely clean and dry parts are not required, or where low volumes of parts are cleaned, it may be p08Sibh to convert an exist ing vapor degreaser into a filtered aqueous or semi-aqueous dip tank. However, production parts cleaning to your customers' high degree of cleanliness most often will toquire you to junk the vapor degrw" and invest in totally new - and often very expensive, equipment.

Although aqueous systems are getting most of the favorable press, they aren't without problem8 of their own* Foremost among the problem areas would have to be a new round of EPA regulations intended to Bet effluent guideline limits f o r wautewater discharge8 from metal parts sanufacturlng operations. Another major problem facing uaers of water- based system8 is the increasingly stringent local and State controls regarding any type of wate+ dimcharge.

On the positive side, both of these concerm can easily be handled with good housekeeping practiceu, recycle and fecovery systems, and proper wastewaster treatment.

For companies currently using chlorinated Solvent vapor degrea6ing, now is the time to etart investigating engineering and work practice emiarions controls, pasaible chemical substitution, and eventual procee8 rubstitution. Regardless o f the option being considered, there are many different chemi6tries and equipment option8 to be evaluated.

If the decision i8 made to replace a vapor degrea8err the conversion proce88 will take time, as much a8 one and one-half year8 in some cases. on that decision:

Briefly, here are the steps a company should follow when acting

1. Determine the level of part cleanliness zequired. This is a partlcularly tough step for: job 8hopa. DiZferent currtomera may have different cleanlfneam specifications. However, until you can quantify an answer to thi6 question, you won't know which type of

Conduct your own research on various chemicals and equipment. It is usually best to research chemicals and equipment together, Bince

prOCe68 will best serve your needa.

2 ,

a chemical that is acceptable in one process may not work in another. Networking with other members of your industry, either locally or through a national trade association, can be invaluable during this investigative process.

aamples and, i t Leaslble, conduct your own bench-scale testing of these products on the 0118 and other contaminants you need to remove.

3. Once you have narrowed the list O f possible chemical8, reque8t

4 . Still working with your short-list, v i s i t the equipment manufacturer's facility and conduct t e s t cleaning on sample parts.

5. After conducting tests with all of the equipment on your short list, select the equipment and cleaner8 that meet your cleanliness requirements.

6. At this point, request proposal8 from the manufacturers of all of the equipment which meets your requirementa. Equipment ahould be cbolren on the basis of price, reliability, quality, service, minimization of waste, and ver~atility of equipment.

As easy as it is to list these six stepa, the actual implementation of a program to replace chlorinated solvents may be one of the moat difficult assignments a small business owner or manager could face. While the decisions made and the utepr taken will surely be dogged by uncertainty and financial pressuresr the alternative of doing nothing may uignal the beginnlng of the end, not simply o f your ability to get part8 clean, but also of your ability to remain competitive in a radically changed manufacturing envlronment.

/DJB 12/16/92

CROWN EQUIPMENT CORPORATION NEW BREMEN, OHIO

CROWN EQUIPMENT FIRST OPENED IT'S DOORS FOR BUSINESS BACK IN THE 1940's. INITIALLY, THEY WERE INVOLVED IN THE MANUFACTURE OF BOILER CONTROLS FOR RESIDENTIAL USE. SOON THOUGH, THEY FOUND THEMSELVES CONCENTRATING MORE OF THEIR ENERGIES ON THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF LIFT TRUCKS AND LIFTING EQUIPMENT IN GENERAL.

,

AMONG CROWN'S MAJOR BUSINESSES TODAY ARE NARROW AISLE, HIGH REACH LIFT PRODUCTS. THEY CURRENTLY HAVE PLANTS IN GERMANY, AUSTRALIA, IRELAND, AND THE U.S. THEY EMPLOY APPROXIMATELY 3200 PEOPLE WORLD WIDE, 1900 OF WHOM WORK IN THE COMPANY'S HOMETOWN OF NEW BREMEN, OHIO.

For many years , we were like a lot of manufacturers where we used 1 , 1 , 1 trichloroethane and we had two large vapor degreasets where we degreased our parts and we also had a lot of very small cold cleaning operations, by that I mean small dip tanks where the employees would run a batch of parts on a machine and then they wwld dip those parts in a batch of 1, I ,I just to take the chips off, the coolants, the cutting oils off these parts and then stack them and they wwld go to the next operation.

CROWN FIRST BEGAN TO LOOK INTO AQUEOUS CLEANING IN THE MID-80'S, INITIALLY, TO CUT DOWN THE MOVEMENT OF PARTS BETWEEN THEIR TWO VAPOR DEGREASERS AND THE PRODUCTION LINE. THEY FELT THAT A NUMBER OF SMALL WASHERS, AT MULTIPLE WORK STATIONS, WOULD AID IN PRODUCT FLOW FOR "JUST IN TIME" MANUFACTURING. BUT EVEN THAT LONG AGO, THEY KNEW THE WRITING WAS ON THE WALL.

We had a feeling and some of the literature, some of the regulations at that time, some of the OSHA regs, some of the €PA regs, we felt that the use of solvents was going to be looked at very careful?c over the next few years and so we said well, instead of investing our money into equipment using sohent technology, we decided to go into the water- based cleaning.

AS IS TRUE ANYTIME A COMPANY, LARGE OR SMALL, CONSIDERS A NEW APPROACH, IT PAYS TO DO ONE'S HOMEWORK. THATS m c n y WHAT CROWN

1

DID. THEY STARTED BY QUANTIFYING THEIR SOLVENT USAGE. ALL TOLD, CROWN WAS USING FOUR DIFFERENT CLEANING SOLVENTS IN THEIR OPERATIONS, WITH 1,1 , l TRICHLOROETHANE AS THEIR PRIMARY CLEANING CHEMICAL. THEY FOUND THAT 35% OF THE 1,l ,I WAS USED IN COLD CLEANING PROCESSES.

THIS BECAME AN EXCELLENT STARTING POINT TO TRY AQUEOUS CLEANERS FOR TWO REASONS. FIRST, BECAUSE COLD CLEANING WAS THE EASIEST PROCESS TO CHANGE, AND SECONDLY, BECAUSE THE CHANGE WOULD HAVE THE BIGGEST IMPACT ON THEIR EMPLOYEES, BY REMOVING THE POTENTIAL EXPOSURE TO TR ICHLOR.

THEY TESTED 20 TO 30 AQUEOUS CLEANERS IN SIMPLE BENCH TESTS, USING SMALL PARTS OFF THE LINE, THE SAME WAY THE EMPLOYEES WOULD DO DURING NORMAL OPERATIONS, AND THEN COMPARING THE RESULTS. ALTHOUGH CROWN DID NOT HAVE "CLEANLINESS STANDARDS" IMPOSED EXTERNALLY, THEY USED THE COMMON SENSE APPROACH OF EXPERIMENTING TILL THE NEW CLEANER PERFORMED AS WELL AS OR BETTER THAN THE TRICHLOR.

WHEN THE CROWN ENGINEERS FOUND A COMBINATION THAT FULFILLED THEIR REQUIREMENTS, THEY THEN PREPARED THEMSELVES FOR WHAT IS OFTEN THE MOST DIFFICULT ASPECT OF IMRODUCING A MANUFACTURING CHANGE.

We've felt like we were going to be prepared for the worst when we, number one, when we first introduced the water-based cleaning and the cold cleaning operations, because we felt people were very used to solvent and the way that it performed; the quick drying and the very good cleaning ability. So, we were very prepared for some employee complaints on switching out that solvent. And, to our surprise, we found that there was very lMe of that because the employees really did not like using the solvent.

THE NEXT STEP, REPLACING THE WORK HANDLED BY THE TWO LARGE VAPOR DEGREASERS, HAD THE STAFF AT CROWN RETHINKING THE ENTIRE PROCESS. ONE OF THE DEGREASERS WAS USED MOSTLY TO DO SMALL SCREW MACHINE PARTS. PREVIOUSLY, ALL THESE SMALL PARTS WERE CLEANED WITH SOLVENTS. MANY, WOULD THEN BE DE-BURRED AND CLEANED AGAIN.

UPON CAREFUL D(AM1NATION CROWN WAS ABLE TO ELIMINATE SOME OF THESE PARTS FROM THE CLEANING PROCESS ALTOGETHER. THE REST, WERE PROCESSED THROUGH A VIBRATOR CONTAINING AN AQUEOUS CLEANER. THIS HAD THE ADDED ADVANTAGE OF PUrrlNG THE DEBURRING AND THE CLEANING PROCESS ALL IN ONE STEP.

2

Right, and that was very important, because once you streamline your operation as far as removing some parts from the cleaning process or reducing the number of times you are cleaning, that% going to allow you to size your equipment smaller and also to get more parts through, now that you have eliminated a lot of that load on that cleaning system.

CROWN’S SECOND DEGREASER HAD TO CLEAN A WIDE VARIEN OF MATERIALS OF VARIOUS SIZES. AFTER LOOKING AT IMMERSION, ULTRASONIC AND SPRAY

STEP IN THE PROCESS WAS FINDING THE RIGHT CLEANER. d

WASH EQUIPMENT, mEy ULTIMATELY CHOSE AGITATED IMMERSION. THE FINAL

We are using alkaline cleaner solutions. We had to work with our chemist in developing the cleaning solutions because of the aluminum, because of the copper and cast iron, we had to be able to have one solution that would handle all of our metals and all of our different parts. But, basically, we had the wash tanks that had the cleaning solution in it, we then go to a rinse tank which had the very small amount of rust protectant in it, then it goes to the main rust inhibitor tank and if you’re doing aluminum parts, for instance, you do not have to take the aluminum into the rust inhibitor tank, and from there, it goes right into the dryer where it is dried with forced air.

AND THE PAYOFF?

We used roughly 17 thousand gallons of solvent a year. And, when we report that, we put it into pounds and it is 200 and some thousand pounds, and that‘s a very large number to report to the EPA or to the general public. And, in fact, it is a large volume of 1 , 1,7 emissions into the air, so we were able to completely eliminate those emissions into the air, which were our biggest benetit.

OBVIOUSLY, THE CONCENTRATION OF CLEANER AND RUST INHIBITOR, AT WHAT TEMPERATURE, FOR HOW LONG, ETC., NEEDS TRIAL AND ERROR TO REACH THE RIGHT COMBINATION FOR YOUR NEEDS. THIS IS AN AREA WHERE YOUR CHEMICAL SUPPLIER OR EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURERS EXPERIENCE CAN BE HELPFUL IN GUIDING THE PROCESS, BUT WHAT WORKS BEST ON YOUR SHOP FLOOR IS UP TO YOU TO DISCOVER. THE EFFORT YOU INVEST EQUALS THE RESULTS YOU GET...AND THE RESULTS Do PAY.

In talking with our operator of the central cleaning line, he has told me on many different occasions that in some of our parts where we have stubborn greases of a lot of chips that may have been lodged, the central cleaning line, the aqueous solutions are doing a better job than the 7,1,7.

3

AND ON A DOLLAR FOR DOLLAR BASIS?

We also found because of the cost of the solvent, there was a great economic benefit in not purchasing 17 thousand gallons of l , l , l , that's approximately $6.00 a gallon. The cleaning solutions are basically 5.10% cleaner and the rest is wafer, so you are going to be buying much less chemical, if you will, and you are going to be adding a lot of water which is obviously very cheap.

FOR A COMPANY LIKE CROWN EQUIPMENT THOUGH, THERE ARE EVEN BETTER REASONS TO HAVE MADE THE CHANGE OVER. CROWN IS A PRIVATELY OWNED BUSINESS WHOSE MANAGERS AND OWNERS CALL NEW BREMEN HOME. THE CONCEPT OF BEING A "GOOD CORPORATE CITIZEN" IS MORE THAN JUST A CATCH PHRASE FOR THEM. THE STANDARDS OF ENVIRONMENTAL SAFElY THEY HOLD THEIR PLANT TO, AFFECTS, FOR GOOD OR EVIL, THEIR NEIGHBORS, THEIR FRIENDS, AND THEIR FAMILIES.

T C Productions and the Cleveland Advanced Manufaduring Program, 1883.

4

EATON CORPORATION SPENCER, IOWA

THERE IS NO GETTING AROUND THE WISDOM OF REDUCING AND EVENTUALLY ELIMINATING REGULATED SOLVENTS IN YOUR SHOP. THERE IS ALSO NO GETTING AROUND THE FACT THAT IT TAKES REAL EFFORT TO MAKE THE CHANGE-OVER WORK. THAT'S A LESSON THAT THE PEOPLE AT EATON CORPORATION'S HYDRAULIC DIVISION PLANT IN SPENCER, IOWA LEARNED FIRST HAND.

THE SPENCER PLANT MANUFACTURERS, ASSEMBLES AND TESTS HYDROSTATIC TRANSMISSIONS FOR BOTH HEAVY AND LIGHT DUTY OFF ROAD APPLICATIONS. THCl CAN PROVIDE TRANSMISSIONS FOR EVERYrHING FROM HARVESTING COMBINES TO A BACKYARD LAWN AND GARDEN TRACTOR.

s

WITH THE NUMBER OF PARTS HANDLED ON A DAILY BASIS, THEY HAD KEPT FOUR LARGE VAPOR DEGREASERS BUSY FOR YEARS. THAT THOUGH WAS ABOUT TO CHANGE.

EATON, AT THE CORPORATE LEVEL, HAD DECIDED AS EARLY AS 1983 TO PHASE OUT CHLORINATED SOLVENTS. BY '85 IT WAS MADE A PRIORITY FOR THEIR SPENCER PLANT, EVEN THOUGH SPENCER'S HANDLING OF THESE CHEMICALS COULD BE CONSIDERED EXEMPLARY.

(KElTLECAhUP) With the use of vapor degreasers, that is a hazardous waste by definition, and required many documents to be filed to prove that you were disposing of or handling your 1,1,1 trichloroethane properly, both before it was used and after it was used. The vapor degreasels were unique in that they were pretty much totally enclosed with large quantities of 1,1,1, but as it was enclosed, it also had to be regenerated and cleaned through the still process and/or the diatomaceous filtering processesses. Through those processes then we would generate the still boftoms, which is a hazardous waste, and the diatomaceous emh, which is hazardous waste. The 1 , 1,l would be sent out for reclaim where they would clean it at a vendor's supply house, and consequently be sent back in to us for reuse.

BY 1985, SPENCER HAD BEEN USING 25,OOO GALLONS OF 1,1,1 TRICHLOROETHANE A YEAR, ONE AREA IN WHICH THIS USE WAS TAKEN FOR GRANTED WAS IN THE CLEANING STAGE AFTER PARTS HAD GONE THROUGH FLAT LAPPING. BECAUSE PRECISION FITS ARE NEEDED THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE ASSEMBLY OF A TRANSMISSION TO INSURE PROPER FUNCTION, A WIDE VARIETY OF PIECES, IN STEEL, BRASS AND CAST IRON WENT THROUGH THE LAPPING PROCESS.

1

(CARLSON) a lot of our parts have blind-holes; a lot of them have grooves; internal cavities and so forth, and even though we are only lapping on their surface, there is enough of the lapping compound and oil mixture on the table that it gets up into these blind cavities, blind-holes, and it is ve/y difficult to remove.

PREVIOUSLY, THEY COULD COUNT ON THE 1,1,1 TRICHLOR TO FLUSH THE LAPPING ABRASIVE AWAY AS IT REMOVED THE OIL BASED VEHICLE FROM THE PART. FOR AN AQUEOUS CLEANER TO BE EFFECTIVE, IT WOULD HAVE TO DUPLICATE THESE RESULTS. TO FIND THE RIGHT CLEANER, THE DECISION WAS MADE TO BRING ALL OF EATON'S RESOURCES TO BEAR.

(BURKE) And, that was how I got inmlved in the beginning. It was Jerty Carlson's idea to use corporate semices to assist in making the decision process. Primarily, the soaps and the temperatures. And, once we had a soap, then we would go back into Jerry's hand for the equipment for it. Well, we started out with, well I had probably five different detergents that we used on typical soil. However, as the patts Jerv was sending new parts from Spencer to the lab in Cleveland, we were learning quickly what none of the traditional soaps I'd seen had any affect on overall part cleanliness and if started to get scary, in terms of our ability to clean parts.

BEFORE ALL WAS SAID AND DONE, JOHN IN CLEVELAND AND JERRY IN SPENCER TESTED OVER 50 DETERGENTS NONE OF WHICH PROVED SATISFACTORY

(CARLSON) And, we got into some fairly exotic detergents and nothing was working, and that's when we came to the stark realization that we are going to have to change our lap process, not only our cleaning process itself, and that's a vely critical process to the success of this plant because it's so critical to the function of the hydrostatic transmission and it's a very delicate process;

WHAT CARLSON AND BURKE HAD BEEN MISSING WAS THE INHERENT DIFFICULTY IN DISSOLVING THE OIL BASED LAPPING VEHICLE WITH ANY AQUEOUS BASED CLEANING SYSTEM. THE KEY WAS TO FIND A MORE WATER SOLUBLE LAPPING VEHICLE.

AND, LOOKING BACK, THEY REALIZED ONE OTHER FLAW IN THEIR METHODOLOGY. BECAUSE CLEVELAND WAS BEllER EQUIPPED AS A LAB SITE, DIRTY PARTS WERE BEING WRAPPED IN PLASTIC AND SHIPPED THERE FOR TESTING.

2

(BURKE) Per example, if fakes 75 minutes to get a part from the dirty process to the washing process, then let the part sit for 15 minutes. But don't rely on things being shipped for five days and sitting over weekends in labs and then coming back and trying to clean them, it's just not going to work the same way. (...EDF...)and you will mislead yourself if you try to design around those components.

BY Lf=TTING THE DIRT SET, THEY WERE ACCIDENTALLY CREATING A MUCH MORE ' DIFFICULT CLEANING PROBLEM THAN WOULD EVER OCCUR ON THE SHOP FLOOR. THEY FOUND THAT ONE OF THE SECRET TO FINDING AN AQUEOUS CLEANING SYSTEM THAT WORKS FOR YOU IS TO BRING IT INTO THE REAL WORLD. TAKE THE PROCESS OUT OF THE LAB, AND INTO THE SHOP. AFTER ALL, THAT'S WHERE YOU'LL BE USING IT.

ONCE THEY HAD THEIR CLEANING CHEMISTRY IN ORDER, THE TEAM'S NEXT CRUCIAL CHOICE WAS THE CLEANING EQUIPMENT. AFTER EVALUATING THE VARIOUS OPTIONS, THEY WENT WITH SPRAY CLEANING AND FOUND A MANUFACTURER THAT WOULD DESIGN TO THEIR SPECIFICATIONS.

(CARLSON) So when we designed the washer, we designed if so that we would basicaliy double the time cycle so we had fwo wash stages of fwo minutes each at 140 0, we felt that the increased temperature would gef us m e r cleaning, and it was also designed at 40 psi so that we would get a stronger spray impingement than we did with the 25. We increased the number of nozzles roughly 50 percent over what the lab washer had, we doubled the time in each stage, and we increased the pressure from 25 to 40 psi to give us a safety margin that we felt very comfortable with having.

THEY HAD REACHED THE MOMENT OF TRUTH.

(CARLSON) ... the washer was operational and we did some preliminary testing for a couple days, felt that the cleaning process was working and we made a decision one afternoon that we were going to cut the cod and we 9uife /ifera/& went over and cut the conveyor down to the vapor degreaser that we had and said, "Tomorrow at seven o'clock we are going to be water washing", and the acceptance of the operators was overwhelming, and I feel that that was a large part of making if a success.

AQUEOUS CLEANING HAS BECOME A WAY OF AT THE SPENCER PLANT. NO LONGER JUST AN EXPERIMENT, IT'S NOW AN OPERATIONAL PROCESS. EVEN SO, IT'S A PROCESS THAT IS BEING CONTINUOUSLY IMPROVED.

3

(SUSIE) The operating experience has been one where we have been continually egloring or experimenting with the process itself. It hasn't remained quite the same as when we first installed it as we react to different process changes, we have been working very closely with the chemical supplier as we determine what parameters we should have for the soap concentrations and the tust preventive concentrations.

THE ABILITY TO CONSTANTLY EVALUATE, TO RETHINK, AND TO SEE THE PROCESS AS ONE OF CONTINUOUS IMPROVEME NT... IT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LONG TERM SUCCESS AND FAILURE.

AS WE ENTER 1993 THE EATON TEAM CAN LOOK BACK ON A NUMBER OF YEARS

SAY, WITH THIS AMOUNT OF HINDSIGHT, PROVES INTERESTING. EXPERIENCE WITH NON-HAZARDOUS, AQUEOUS CLEANERS. WHAT THEY HAVE TO

(BURKE) As a corporation, we've reduced our chlorinated solvents usage probably by 99 percent over a based line of 1987 usage. We have only a small number of plants that are still using chlorinated solvents; every plant has a program in place that I effectively believe by 1994-1995 time frame, we should be completely off chlorinated solvents.

(CARLSON) We wanted it to work, they wanted it to work, and it wasn't without some initial start-up problems but with everybody pulling together we overcame those problems very, very easily and we're on the way to success.

(SUSIE) The operatots have always viewed this move very positively. Everyone had concerns over solvent use, and as you know there are threshold limit values on solvent that are 9uite low and with water wash the limits are completely off the scale, so there's a general fmling of safety w ~ h the operators and they feel very much at ease with the water wash.

(KRTLECAMP) Oh yeah. Wiihout a doubt, it's woflh it. The people that we have that work around the water washers today I think are so much better off from an'environmental aspect. It's just a safer cleaner operation to be around.

Q T C Productions and the Cleveland Advanced Manufacturing Program, 1993.

4

Case Study: Winner of the 1988 Tennessee Governor’s Award for Excellence in Hazardous Waste Management Frank H a r t ” , CHMM, Environmental Coordinator and Rad Clanton, Production Engineer TRW Ross Gear Division

Faciii ty Description The Ross Gear Greeneville plant began operations in June of 1972. The

28 1,920 square foot facility is used for the manufacturing of hydraulic motors, hydrostatic steering units, and manual steering gears. The company currently has an employment level of 349 people. Project

Narrative

nents manufactured by the Greeneville facility, cleanliness of the parts is paramount. Some of the machining operations employed in the manufacture of our product lines place a severe demand upon the cleaning process to remove contaminants.

ping is a process for improving the surface finish of parts using an abrasive media. In the Greeneville plant, this media is a slurry composed of five micron silicon carbide grit and a petroleum based vehicle. This media is very hard to remove from the parts.

Because of the critical cleaning requirements, solvent vapor degrcasing was employed using trichloroethylene. This process resulted in good clean parts and, unfortunately, hazardous wastes. Two wastesmams were generated: 1) still bottoms from the in-house distillation of the solvent; and 2) a waste filtration powder containing residual trichloroethylene. Stack and fugitive emissions also released the solvent into the air, even with the best of handling procedures and engineering design.

Precipitated by both the health and environmental concerns associated with trichlorotthylene usage, a project was initiated in early 1986 to find a feasible altemative to solvent degrcasing. After extensive research and evaluation, a process using an aqueous alkaline solution in conjunction with ultrasonic cleaning capabilities was developed. Equipment was designed and built to incorporate this process, and in December of 1987, the use of trichloroethylene was discontinued in the Greeneville

Environmental Impact

vapor degrcasing operation caused a significant reduction in the amount of hagardous wastes generated by our facility. For instance, in 1987, we generated 14,090 pounds of waste trichloroethylene sti l l bottoms which were transported off-site for reclama- tion or disposal. Also, 3,740 pounds of the filtration powder were sent to a disposal facility for subsequent thermal destruction. In addition to these wastcstreams, an estimated 50,300 pounds of the solvent escaped into the air through fugitive and stack emissions.

On the other hand, the aqueous cleaning process produces no hazardous wastes or air emissions, and after an ultrafiltration process for oil removal, can be released directly to the plant effluent.

The elimination of a Trichloroethylene vapor degrcasing operation.

Due to the extreme sensitivity to contamination of the fluid power compo-

One such operation, lapping, presents an extremely difficult problem. Lap-

plant.

As illustrated by the attached chart, the elimination of the trichloroethylene

In summary, the benefits derived from this project are as follows: 1.

2.

3.

Inaoduction: TRW with mention of 1988 TCMCSSCC Governor’s Award

The elimination of potential health hazards associated with the usage of trichloroethylene. A 50% reduction in the overall quantity of hazardous wastes generated by the Gneneville plant. A significant reduction in disposal costs.

TRW Cleaning Methods Interview

for Hazardous Waste Management and Environmental Award from Tennessee Association of Businesses, and that TRW will be case study in new US EPA document.

What were the major concerns about handling, storing, and using 1.1’1 Trichlorethylene or TCE on-site at this manufacturing facility?

What types of soils and contamination arc we talking about? Was there more than one type of contamination? TRW identified the different soils to be removed: lapping soil, coolants and grit; and chips and grinding grit. Patch tests wen performed on all product lines to determine how contaminated the parts wefe after cleaning in the TCE degrcasing unit.

Next, TRW headquarters mandates the “replacement of solvent metal parts cleaning in a year!” At this point with your previous research, you began looking at the parts configurations and cleaners and cleaning systcms to remove the specific identified contaminants and soils generated by the metal fabrication processes. What and where did you ‘‘field test” your various options? “We med anyone who could carry a bucket of chemicals in...”

Finally, looking at the product and the part design, TRW concluded they couldn’t spray, they couldn’t submerge, and ultrasonics became the only product for them for the heavy soil from the lapping process. How does ultrasonics work?

the systems cleaning effectiveness by adding I understand you have “zed . . external fduring?

cleaning? What arc some of the impartant parameters to consider in metal parts

1. Ti; 2. Temp~ratun - M Would YOU s t a ~ (140 de- F)? If this didn’t work - most everyone would say, “take it higher!” Share your ex@- en- on determining the final best cleaning temperature for your operation. Rad, you mentioned you had raised the temperature one-night during testing to 190 d e w F and werc having no success with cleaning. You collected a beaker of the cleaning fluid and placed a thennometer in it for observation. When it was at 120 degrees F, you noticed that the soil fell to the bottom of the beaker and the oil rose to the surface. What was your

3. chemicals - Chemical concentrations calling for 7 - 8% solutions for final best cleaning tcmpcrawc - 120 degrees F?

4

cleaning didn’t clean well. Did you raise concentrations? How high (12%)? What percent solution finally worked the best? (3%); and 4. Agitation or impingement - During your “field testing period,” what types of things did you run across? What are current patch tests showing as far as cleanliness of parts compared to

Rad, you mentioned four types of process soil and ultrasonics as the choice for the prcvious patch tests for the TCE degreasing process?

dealing with the lapping process soil - could you take us out in the plant and show us the Jensen cleaner and modifications you have made to the system? While we’re out here, could you show and tell us how you dealt with the other types of contaminants? Almco spray cleaner for coolants and grit. Bowden washer for chips and grinding grit Relate experience of determining what to clean with - through observation of machine cleanliness - decided to use coolant as cleaning fluid and is st i l l using it.

Whm is TRW today? Frank, what types of benefits and cost savings have been realized by this process change? Reduced worker exposure, reduced fugitive emissions, and reduced waste management costs.

Rad, the tale you and Frank have told started with all parts cleaning being performed in a TCE degreaser run by three operators. W m thm process flow problems with this arrangement? What problems have the new cleaning systems solved - have labor costs been reduced?

thing was working and running fine. When this happens, an ethic sets in which some summarkc as, “If it’s not broke, don’t fix it!” Rad, you stated that when something is working, you also forget to keep up With the evolution of process changes. Frank, initially TRW was looking for a cleaning process for lapping-type soil - did this lead to new discoveries that resulted in another process modification within this facility?

replaced by an aluminum oxide which uses water as a canier with glycerin used for “slickness.” In fact, TRW finally got rid of the lapping process except for one part in one product and replaced it with a fine grurding process.

When we w m talking the other day, you both said it was good when every-

Yes, we discovered that silicon carbide which uses oil as a carrier could be

-end-

SECTION 4

GENERAL CLEANING INFORMATION

Excerpts from

8 GUIDETO CLEAN TECHNOLOGY

ALTERNATIVES TO CHLORINATED SOLVENTS FOR

CLEANING AND DEGREASING

a July 1992 Draft

United States Environmental Protection Agency

.

NOTICE

This Guide to Clean Technology: Alte"?s to CUwimted sdoents for Cleaning and Degreastng summarues information collected from U.S. Environmental Protection Agency programs, peer-reviewed journals, industry experts, vendor data, and other sources. The original Quality Assurance/ Quality Control (QNOC) procedures for the reports and projects summarized in this guide range from detailed, reviewed ckrdty Assurana Project PIans to standard industrial pcactiCe. When possi#e, the technology summaries indude an evaluation of the QAECX: controls applied for the original data collection if they were used. However, pu#ication of the guide does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, nor does mention of trade namm or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.

This document is intended as advisory guidance in identdying alternatives to chlorinated solvents for pollution prevention in deaning and degreasing processes. Final selection of a technology will be shop- and process-specific and, therefore, will be done by the individual users of cleaning and degreasing processes and products. Cofrpliance with environmental and occupational safety and heatth laws is the responsibility of each individual business and is not the focus of this document

.

FOREWORD

Today's rapidly developing and changing technobgies and industrial products and practices frequently carry with them the increased generation of materials that, if improperly dealt yyjfh, can threaten both public health and the environment. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is charged by Congress with protecting the Nation's land, air, and water resources. Under a mandate of national environmental law, the agency strives to formulate and implement actions leading to a compatible balance between human activities and the ability of natural systems to support and nurture life. These laws direct the U.S. €PA to perform research to define our environmental problems, measure the impacts, and search for solutions.

Reducing or eliminating the generation of hbardous solvents at the source or recycling these solvents on site will benefit industry by reduang disposal costs and lowering the liabilities associated with hazardous waste disposal.

Publications in the U.S. €PA series, Gufdes to f3oIJllfjnn Reuenfion, provide an overview of several industries and describe options to minimize waste in these industries. Their focus is on the full range of operations in existing facilities. Many of the pollution prevention techniques described are relatively easy to implement in current operations without major process changes.

This Guide to Clean Technology: Altematiues to Chlorinuted SdLtentS for Cleaning and Degreasing summarizes relatively new commercially available and emerging technologies that prevent and/or reduce the production of hazardous materials during deaning and degreasing processes. Some of the technologies described in this document have been commercialized and are reducing or eliminating the use of chlorinated cleaning and degreasing solvents. Some are 'next generation" dean technologies that often, but not always, represent relatively major process changes, high levels of training, and high capital investments compared to the technologies described in the Guides for POZZution Remnfton. The waste minimization techniques characterized in the Guidesfor Pollution Reuention should be considered and implemented first. Although some of the dean technologies described herein could be inserted into current operations, they should be considered primarily for major plant expansions or new grass roots facilities.

a

CONTENTS .

Section 1 1 ~

Section 2

Overview

9

Available Technologies

Aqueous Cleaners 16

Semi-Aqueous Cleaners 20

AI i p hat ic Hydrocarbons 25

Hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) 20

Miscellaneous Organic Solvents 30

.

SECTION 1 .

OVERVIEW What Is Clean Technology?

Why Clean and Degrease?

A clean technology is a source reduction or recycling method applied to eliminate or significantly reduce hazardous waste generation. source reduction indudes product changes and source control. Source control can be further characterized as input material changes, technology changes, or improved operating practices.

Pollution prevention should emphasize source reduction technologies, but, if source reduction technologi8S are not available, recycling is a good approach to reducing waste generation. Recy- cling should be used where possible to minimize waste treatment requirements after source reduction options have been evaluated and/or implemented.

The clean technology must reduce the quantity and/or toxicity of the waste produced. It is also essential that final product quality be reliably controlled to meet acceptability standards. In addition, the cost of applying the new technology relative to the cost of similar technologies should be considered.

The industries that use chlorinated solvents for cleaning include:

4 Metal finishing 4 Aircraft 4 Automotive 4 Machine parts 4 Electronics 4 Advanced materials 4 Machine and automotive repair shops.

Cleaning is performed to remove any surface-adsorbed contamination that wUI interfere with process performance or is undesirable from the standpoiit of product performance or appearance. Because there is 110 universal definition of %lean," process develop- ers must adopt their own crtteria for judging cleanliness using methods that meet their indMdual needs. Underestimating the level of cleanliness required for a particular application may lead to a loss of product performance or quality, while overestimating may cause time, energy, and materials to be wasted. As a working definition, 'clean" is usually the level of cleanliness required for any of the following to occur:

1

Overview

. . + A mechanical or electrical process functions according to its

design specifications.

criteria.

+ A coating material adheres properly to a substrate. + A product’s finish meets certain performance and appearance

The type of soil to be removed from a part varies considerably with the nature of the item and the conditions under which it is manufactured, stored, handled, and treated. In metal finishing, for example, cleaning is performed to remove oils and greases used for lubrication, machine tool cutting, quenching, and rust prevention. Metals polishing and buffing compounds present difficult cleaning problems because they contain waxes and abrasives and can form metal soaps during use. In the electronics industry, cleaning consists pri- m y of removing sower flux residues and particulates of excess solder and circuit board material. Additional soils that may be encountered in numerous other industries indude adhesives, fingerprints, inks, cured paints, mineral oil, mold releases, asphalt, tar, sealants, silicones, petrolatum, waxes, and toners.

Traditionally, chlorinated hydrocarbon solvents have been used to remove oils, fats, waxes, and other organics from surfaces. Chlorinated solvents have been widely used until recently because they are very effective deaners and are safe from the standpoint that they present no fire hazard. The solvents most commonly used are 1,1,2-trichloro-l,2.2-trifluoroethane (CFC-113); 1,l.l- tdchloroethane (TCA; also called methyl chloroform, or MCF); trichloroethylene (TCE); perchloroethylene (PERC); and methylene chloride (METH). Some properties and characteristics of these solvents are described in Table 1.

There are lwo traditional cleaning/degreasing methods:

0 Vapor degreasing 0 colddearling.

V8pOr wteaslng, a solvent is heated to its boiling point so that vcrpar b created which can then contact soiled parts suspended above the liquid surface. The vapor condenses on the cooler parts, dbdvhg the soil and flushing the liiid.soU mixture back into the hot liquid. Vapor rising past the parts is condensed by a cooling bcr<et used to slow the eventual loss of solvent to the atmosphere. -US0 the contaminants usually have higher boiling points than the SOhrent, the vapor itself remains relatively pure. The cleaning proCeSS is complete when the parts warm up and vapor no longer condenses on them. The parts are then removed and air-dried.

2

I

31

Low

1000

e

t I

124 130 91 132

Low Medium Medium Medium

350 50 25 500'"'

Table 1. Properties and Characterlstlcs of Chlorinated Solvents

Phvslcal Pmertles and Characterlstlcs

Ozone-Depletlng PotenIial (ODP)w

Photochemical ReadMty (RCFU-Usted)

Molecular WeigM (grams per mole)

Boiling Pdnt ("C)

Density (gem') Surface Tension (dyndcm)

Kauri Butanol Value

Toxicitv Irelathre1 ~~ -~

OSHA PEL 8-hr TWA (Ppm)

CFC-113 1 TCA I TCE 1 PERC I CCI,CCI, I CH,CI, !I

0.8 I 0.1 I I II

187.4 I 133.5 I 131.4 I 165.9 I 94 9 II 47.6 72-88 I 86-88 I 120-122 I - G4-4OII 1.56 I 1.34 I 1.46 I 1.62 I 1.33 II 17.3 I 25.4 I 29.3 I 31.3 NIA 7

, but it is not exempt under the Clean Air Act. to h e r the PEL of METH to 25 ppm or lower (Department of Labor, 1991).

w

.'.

Overview

Process time for vapor degreasing is usually about 10 minutes. CFC-113. TCA, TCE. and PERC are commonly used in vapor degreasing.

Cold cleaning is generally performed in a tank containing TCA or CFC-113 at room temperature. The primary disadvantage of cold cleaning compared with vapor degreasing is that its cleaning performance degrades with use because the solvent becomes "loaded" wi!h dissolved contaminants.

A solvent may be defined as any substance that can dissolve another substance. Hence, pure water is a solvent for many polar and ionic compounds. However, to avoid confusion, the term solvent will be confined herein to non-aqueous substances, and the term cleaner will be used for substances that use water in any aspect of a cleaning pro'cess such as washing and/or rinsing.

Cleaning methodologies can be grouped broadly as being chemical, electrochemical, or mechanical in nature.

The chemistry of a cleaner determines whether it acts by displacing, dissolving, or in some way chemidly altering the contaminant on a substrate and hence causing its removal. Cleaners and solvents are designed to implement one or more of these mechanisms, depending on the nature of the soil to be removed. Details about these chemical mechanisms are given in Sections 2 and 3 along with general descriptions of various cleaner components.

Electrochemical methods are often employed prior to electroplating and consist of applying a current (direct, reverse, or periodic) through a workpiece. Water decomposition causes small bubbles of hydrogen (direct) or oxygen (reverse) to form at the metal surface and helps to lift away soil partides. The metal itself is usually immersed in an alkaline solution to increase electrical conductivity and to maximize cleaning performance.

Mechanical methods control fluid impingement on a surface and vary considerably with the type of process equipment being used. Some form of mechanical energy is almost always used to augment the chemical or electrochemical cleaning process. Simple agitation, air sparging, turbulent flow, spraying, and ultrasonic action are typical methods used to enhance cleaner performance. (See U.S. EPA publication Guide fa Clean Technology: Cleaning and Degfeasing Process Changes.) The bulk physical properties of a cleaner or Solvent also affect the cleaning process by determining how a liquid interacts with a surface. For example, surface tension affects a fluid's ability to penetrate small spaces such as cracks and

4

0 v e r d I e v i

'ollution Problem

*

Nhat's In rhls Guide?

. holes as well as getting between the soil and substrate to help displace the soil.

In the 1970s' it was realized that some chlorinated solvents undergo chemical reactions in the-upper atmosphere that lead to the destruction of stratospheric ozone, which filters out much of the sun's ultraviolet radiation. For this reason, the world community has since sought to eliminate production and use of these solvents. According to the Montreal Protocol, signed in 1987 by 45 nations including the United States, agreements were made to restrict the production and use of otonedepleting chemicals. The Montreal Protocol and its London Amendments (1990) led to further changes in the U.S. Clean Air Act. For example, the amended Clean Air Act established a time frame to elipinate all fully halogenated chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and certain chlorinated hydrocarbons and hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs).

Of primary concern to U.S. industries that use solvents is the phaseout of CFC-113 and TCA, which will take place in the years 2000 and 2002, respectively. Another concern is the expected ban on HCFCs between 2020 and 2040 or earlier, as stipulated by the London Amendments to the Montreal Protocol.

This application guide describes clean altematives to chlorinated solvents that can be used to reduce waste in cleaning and degreasing operations. The two main objectives of this application guide are:

4 To identify commercial and developing solvent systems and other technologies that eliminate the use of ozone-depleting chlorinated solvents and reduce the use of smog-producinb high-VOC (volatile organic chemical) solvents.

4 To provide resources for obtaining more detailed engineering information about these technologies.

The following questions are addressed:

What alternative solvents or deaners are available or under development that would reduce or eliminate pollution? Under what circumstances might one or more of these alternative solvents or cleaners be applicable to a given operation? What pollution prevention, operating, and cost benefits could be realized by adapting the new technology?

Overview

. Other Questions Affecting Investment Declslons

Who Should Use This Guide?

Other questions affecting the decision to choose an altemative technology include:

+ Might new pollution problems be introduced that did not exist

+ Will tighter, more complex process controls be needed? + Will product quality and operating rates be affected? + Will new operating or maintenance skills be needed? + What are the overall Capital and operating cost implications?

under the old technology?

If one or more altemative solvents and deaners seem attractive as replacements for chlorinated and high-VOC solvents, the next step for the user is to obtain detailed engineering data in order to perform an in-depth evahration of the technology. Section 4 provides vendor information that may be helpful in obtaining technical data. Furthermore, the user may benefa greatly by inquiring among others in related industries who have already implemented one of the technologies mentioned in this guide.

This application guide has been prepared for plant process and system design engineers. The guide is intended to provide technology transfer assistance to personnel responsible for process improvement and process design. Process descriptions within this guide allow engineers to evaluate options so that clean technologies can be considered for existing plants and factored into the design of new cleaning and degreasing operations.

The guide's purpose is to present sufficient information to enable potential users to select one or more candidate technologies for further analysis and in-plant testing. The guide does not recommend one technology over any other. It presents concise summaries of applications and operating information to support preliminary selection of dean technolagy options for testing in specific processes. Sufficient detail is provided to dtow identification of possible technologies for immediate application to eliminate or reduce waste production.

The keywords listed in the box on the next page will help you quickly Scan the available and emerging technologies covered.

6

. li Keywords

Clean Technology

Pollution Prevention

Source Reduction

Source Control

Recycling

e

9 mary of L tfits

Solvent Substitute

Alternative Solvent

CFC Replacement

Cleaning/Degreasing

Metal Cleaning

Defluxing

Aqueous Cleaners

Semi-Aqueous Cleaners

Aliphatic Hydrocarbons

Hydrochlorofluorocawns (HCFCs)

Miscellaneous Organic Solvents

Supercritical Fluids

Carbon Dioxide Pellets

Catalytic Wet Oxidation Cleaning

. Hot-Wall Vacuum Deoiling

. Absorbent Media Cleaning

The clean technologies described in this guide are divided into two groups based on their maturity-commercially available technologies and emerging technologies in advanced pilot plant testing.

Table 2 summarizes the pollution prevention, operational, and economic benefits of dean altematives to chlorinated solvents. You may wish to scan this summary table to select those altematives that best fit your operations and needs. Detailed discussions of these benefits and operational aspects for each technology are provided in the next two sections of this document.

7

Table 2. Summary of Beneflts of the Clean Altematlve Solvent Technologies

PolbUon Prrvmtion:

U I I I I I

Economlcr: I

costs

1 1 ’ 1 ’ 1 I Relatively low capkd costs 1 ‘ 1 Regulatory: I

NO waslewaler produced when used urdikrl~d tmt~ wilhocll rinsing. .I

When no\ sewed.

SECTION 2 .

. Howtousethe Summary Tables

Descriptive Aspects

Operational Aspects

-

AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGIES

Seven available alternatives to chlorinated solvents for cleaning and degreasing are evaluated in this section:

Aqueous cleaners Semi-aqueous cleaners Aliphatic hydrocarbons Hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) Miscellaneous organic solvents Supercritical fluids Carbon dioxide pellets

Tables 3 and 4 summarize descriptive and operational aspects of these technologies. They contain evaluations or annotations describing each available clean technology and give a compact indication of the range of technologies covered to allow preliminary identification of those technologies that may be applicable to specific situations. Readers may refer to the summary tables throughout this discussion to compare and contrast technologies.

Table 3 describes each available clean technology. It lists the Pollution Prevention Beneflts, Reported Applications, Opera- tional and Product Benefits, and Hazards and Umitations of each technology.

Table 4 shows the key operating characteristics for the available materials and technologies. The rankings are estimated from descriptions and data in the technical literature and are based on comparisons to the materials that these alternatives would replace.

Process Complexity is qualitatively ranked as %I@,' "medium,' or "iow" based on such factors as the number of process steps invoked and the number of material transfers needed. Process Complexity is an indication of how easily the new technology can be integrated into existing plant operations. A large number of process steps or input chemicals, or multiple operations with complex sequencing, are examples of characteristics that would lead to a high complexity rating.

9


The Required Skill Level of equipment operators alSO IS ranked as "hlgh," "medium," or "low." Required Skill Level is an indication of the level of sophistication and training required by staff to operate the new technology. A technology that requires the operator to adjust critical parameters would be rated as having a high skill requirement. In some cases, the operator may be insulated from the process by complex control equipment. In such cases, the operator skill level is low but the maintenance skill level is high.

Table 4 also lists the Waste Products and Emissions from the available clean technologies. It indicates tradeoffs in potential pollutants, the waste reduction potential of each, and compatibility with existing waste recycling or treatment operations at the plant.

The Cleaner Cost per Gallon column provides a preliminary measure of economics to be compared with the cost for solvents currently used. Due to the diversity of cost data and the wide variation in plant needs and conditions, it is not possible to give specific cost comparisons. Cost analysis must be plant-specific to adequately address factors such as the type and age of existing equipment, space availability, production volume, product type, customer specifications, and cost of capital. Where possible, sources.of cost data are referenced in the discussions of each clean technology.

The Energy Use column provides a qualitative assessment of the energy requirements associated with each altemative.

The Optional Post-Cleaning Operations column summarizes additional rinsing, drying, or other operations that may be needed following cleaning or degreasing. These are noted to indicate special considerations in the application of the clean technology.

The last column in Table 4 lists References to publications that will provide further information for each alternative. These references are given in full in Section 4.

The text further describes the pollution prevention benefits, reported applications, operational and product benefits, hazards and limitations, tradeoffs, unknowns, and the current state of development for each technology. Technologies in earlier stages of development are summarized to the extent possible in Section 3, Emerging Technologles.

10

I

Table 3. Aval lable Clean Technologles f o r A l lernal lves lo Chlof lnated SOlVenlS fo r Cleanlng and Degreaslng: Descr lpt lve Aspects

Technology

Aqueous Cleaners

Semi. Aqueous Cleaners

Pollullon Prevenllon Beneflts

No ozone depletion potential Novocs Many cleaners reported IO be biodegradable

Reported Appllcatlons

Excellent lor removing inorganic and polar organic soils Used to remove lighl oils and residues left by oWr cleaning processes

Operallonal and Producl Beneftts

Removes parliculates and films bener than solvenls Cleaner pedormance changes wilh concentralion and lemperature, so process can be tailored lo individual Weds Works well wilh ultrasonics

8

Hazards and Llmltatlons

Nonflammable and nonexplosive, relatwely low health risks compared to solvents, consult Mate rial Safely Data Sheet (MSDS) lor individual cleaner Soil andlor spenl cleaner may be diliicull lo remove tom blind holes and crevices May require more floor space, especially i t mulCStage cleaning is performed in line Often used a1 hgh lemperalures (1 20 to 200°F) Metal may corrode i f part no1 dned quickly, rust inhibitor may be used wilh cleaner and rinsewater

polymers Stress corrosion cracking can occur in some

VOC levels readily reduced when used in emulsbn form Terpeneswohwellal b w lemperahres, so less heal energy required Same tvpes of cleaners allow used lerpene lo be separaled hom lhe aqueous part for separate recycling or disposal Relatively low vohnnes of organic waste produced

* High solvency gives lerpene cleaners good ability for removing heavy grease, waxes, and tar Most semi-aqueous cleaners can be used favorably wilh metals and most polymers NMP used as a formulating agent in coatings, slrippers, and cleaners

Rusl inhibitors can be included in semi-aqueous formu@lions Nonalkaline pH; prevents etching 01 metals Low surface tension allows semi- aqueous cleaners lo penetrate small spaces Glycol elhers are very polar solvents that can remove polar and nonpolar soils NMP used when a waler-miscible sohrenl Is desired Esters have good solvent properlies for many soils and are soluble in most organic compounds

~

Mists of concenbaled cleaners (especially ter penes) are highly flammable, hazard 17

overcome by process design or by uslnq as waler emulsions Limonene-based terpenes emit a stronq cltrlls odor lhal may be objectionable Some semi-aqueous cleaners can c , i w swelling and cracking of polymers and elastomers Some esters evaporate too slowly to be used Vrilhout including a rinse and/or dry process

Technology !T IP( .

Aliphatic Hydrocarbons

Hydrochloro- fluorocarbons (HCFCS)


fable 3. Avallable Technologles lor Alternallve Solvenls for Cleanlng and Degreaslng: Oescrlptlve Aspects (Contlnued)

Pollullon Preventlan Beneflts

Produce no waslewatw Recyclable by distillalion Highgradeshawlow odor and aromatic hyd"mcor\tent

reduced evapom8w loss

(low low) * HghQradeshave

lower emissions of oronedepleting substances lhan CFCs Producesno wastewater

Do not contain halogens, so hey do not contribute lo ozone depletiin Most are considered bodegradable Generate no wastewaler when used undiluted

Reported ApplkaUons

Used In applicalions where water contact with parts Is undesirable

6 Used on hard-to-clean organic soils, hduding heavy oil and grease, tar, and waxes Law grades used in automobile repair and relaled seMce shops

~~ ~

Used as dropin replacements for CFC-113 and TCA vapor degreastng Compatible with most mu : 1 .1 ceramics, and wilh many wiyiiiers

Most are used in small batch operalions for spot cleaning

Operatlonal and Product Benefits

* No water used, so there is less potenthl for corrosion of metal parts

* Compatible with plastics, most metals, and most elastomers

* Low la@ surface tensbn permits cleaning In m a l l spaces

~

* Shod-term sdutkrr to choosing an

No flash point

alternative sotvent whkh permits use of existing equipment

Alcohols are polar solvents and are good lor removing a wide range of inorganic and organlc soils; soluble in water and may be used to accelerate dFling Kelones ham good solvent propertles for many polymers and adhesives; !hey are soluble in water and may be useful for certain rapid drying operations Vegetable oils are used to remove printing inks and are compatible with most elastomers lighter alcohols and ketones have hi* evaporahn rates and therefore dry qwY


* Flammable or combustible, some have very low mash points, so process equipment must be designed to mitigate explosion dangers

* Slower drying times than chlorinaled solvenls The cost of vapor recovery, i f implemented. is relatively hi@

I

Have some Ozone Depletion Potential and

less eHecHve than CFC-113 for removing

Incompatible with acrylic, styrene, and ABS

Global Warming Potential

buffii compounds

plastic

Most of the alcohols and ketones evaporate readily and therefore contribute to smog Alcohols and ketones have low llash points and present a fue hazard Inhalation of these cleaners can present a health hazard Some have vapor pressures that are too lrgh IO

be used in standard process equipment

AQUEOUS CLEANERS

Pol I u t i on Prevent lo n Benefits The primary pollution prevention benefit of aqueous cleaners is that

they are not ordinarily hazardous unless they become contaminated with hazardous materials during a deaning process. Proper treatment of wastewater to remove contaminants will allow most spent cleaning solutions and rinsewater to be discharged to sewers, providing the effluents meet local discharge requirements.

How Do They Work? Aqueous cleaners are made up of several important dasses of

chemical components. Each component performs a distinct function and affects the way soil is removed from a substrate.

Builders provide alkalinity and buffering capacity. They maintain the chemical environment in which other components of the cleaner operate.

Surfactants, or surface action agents, provide detergency by lowering surface and interfacial tensions of the water so that the cleaner can penetrate small spaces better, get below the soil, and help lift it from a substrate. Surfactants may be cationic, anionic, or nonionic in nature. The anionic and nonionic types are most often used in immersion deaning; nonionic surfactants have lower foam- produang characteristics and are preferred in applications where agitation is used.

Emulsiflers.cause water-immiscible soils, such as oil or grease, to become dispersed in the water. Chemicals added to help maintain the dispersion of soil partides in the deaning medium are known as deflocculants. Emulsifiers are most useful when a small amount of soil is present so that the cleaner does not become 'loaded" too quicldy. Emulsifiers are undesirable in situations where a large amount of oil b to be removed. In deaning situations where oil content is high, a better methodology is to rely on the oil's natural immiscibility with water and allow sepration to occur so that the lighter fractions can be skimmed off the top and the heavier fractions can be removed by fibation. The volume of waste generated is greatly reduced using this kind of phase separation technique, and the lifetime of the cleaner is thereby extended. Because many emulsions remain stable only at elevated temperatures and under alkaline conditions, separation of the oily fraction from the aqueous cleaner can often be induced in emulsion cleaners by lowering the temperature and, sometimes, by acidifying the bath. Individual

,

16

Why Choose This Technology?

manufacturers can provide information on their specific 011 separation techniques.

Saponifiers are alkalis that react chemically with oils containing fatty acids to form soaps. Vegetable oils and animal fats are examples of substances that can be saponified. Sequestering agents prevent the mineral content of hard waters (mostly calcium and magnesium ions) from forming insoluble products with the cleaner. The use of sequestering agents permits the cleaner to attack only the soil and ensures that less cleaner is used. Other additives may be included to enhance overall cleaning performance, for example, anti-foaming agents and corrosion inhibitors.

Operatlonal Features ',

Aqueous cleaning can be performed in almost any application that was once considered the domain of vapor degreasing or cold solvent cleaning. However, some ferrous metals may exhibit flash rusting in aqueous environments; therefore, such parts should be tested prior to full-scale use. Because many kinds of aqueous cleaners are available, some investigation is required to find cleaners that are most effective against the soils typically encountered and to find cleaners that give the best performance with the process equipment that will be used. Whereas solvents depend largely on their ability to dissolve soil, aqueous cleaners utilize both physical and chemical interactions to remove soil from a substrate. For this reason, good engineering practices and process controls tend to be more important in aqueous cleaning than in traditional solvent cleaning.

Availability

Aqueous cleaners are widely available. A partial list of vendors is given in Section 4.

costs

Aqueous cleaners are available in the form of concentrated liquids and as powders. The concentrated liquids cost between $6 and $10 per gallon, when purchased in drum-size quantities. They are diluted 1:3 to 1 : l O with water for most applications.

The cleaner's longevity must also be considered when evaluating cost. Filtering to remove particulates and skimming to remove oil will extend a cleaner's lifetime. Other benefits of these actions

. 7

. .vailable Technologies

Reported Applications

Operational and Product Benefits

Hazards and Limitations

Tradeoff s

18

includ6 uniform cleaning performance and reduced disposal costs, because the oily wastes collected can be disposed of separately.

Waste disposal costs can be kept low by discharging the bulk of the used cleaner to a sewer. However, it may be necessary to treat the deaner prior to disposal. Dissolved metals can be precipitated or absorbed onto a substrate using a number of developed technologies. Suspended solids can be removed by small-pore filters (10 p or less). Emulsified oil can be separated from the aqueous deaner by means of coalescing equipment or advanced membrane ultrafiltration techniques. Consult with cieaner and equipment manufacturers to determine the best approach.

Aqueous deaners have been used for a long time by metal finishers. Primary detergents'are used to process buffed metals at temperatures ranging from 120°F to boiling. Alkaline detergent '

cleaners are used to remove light oils and residues (including other types of cleaners) left by manufacturing processes, shop dirt, and light scale. Alkaline cleaners are used at elevated temperatures, ranging from 120 to 200°F (Metal Finishing Guidebook and Directory, 1991 ).

Aqueous cleaners are superior to solvents in removing inorganic contaminants, particulates, and films. They also exhibit considerable flexibility in application because their performance is strongly affected by formulation, dilution, and temperature. The formulation that gives the best results can be found through some investigation, and the user can select the dilution factor and temperature that give the best results.

Health and Safety. Health risks associated with aqueous deaners are relatively low. Because aqueous cleaners are nonflammable, there is no risk of fire. Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDSs) for individual products should be consulted before use.

Compatibility with Materials. Metal corrosion may occur if parts cannot be dried quickly enough. A rust inhibitor may be used along with the cleaner to help prevent rust. Stress corrosion cracking can occur in some polymers as a result of contact with alkaline solutions. Consult with cleaner manufacturers to obtain recommended formulations and procedures.

The primary tradeoff when switching from solvent cleaning to aqueous cleaning is that parts usually need to be rinsed and will remain

Aqueous Clsaners

Summary of Unknowns

State of Development

wet for sbme time unless action is taken to speed up the drying process. The three main methods for drying parts are evaporation, drs- placement, and mechanical removal (Polhamus, 1991 ).

Evaporation under ambient conditions is slow, depends on temperature and humidity, and creates an opportunity for dust to settle onto the part. Using a heat lamp will speed the process but is dependent on orientation and still leaves the parts in contact with the air. Placing the parts in a vacuum oven is another way to dry them in small batches. Evaporation is improved using a technique known as hot air recirculation, in which heated air is recirculated within a large chamber; makeup air is continuously introduced to re- plenish moist air which is slowly exhausted. Another method, called evaporative drying, passes dry air or inert gas (to lessen the tendency for oxidation) through a chamber to provide laminar flow past the wet parts.

Displacement methods include capillary or slow-pull drying. With this method, a hot part is slowly extracted from equally hot deionized water. The surface tension of the water in effect peels the water off the part; whatever water is left readily vaporizes. Another displacement technique, common to metalworking, uses oil to displace water from the part. The oil also acts as a rust inhibitor by forming a protective barrier between the part surface and the air.

Mechanical removal techniques are also commonly used. Air knives blow water off the part with high-pressure air. Centrifugal drying spins the water off.

The ability of aqueous cleaners to remove most soils has been demonstrated in numerous tests. The greatest concern in aqueous cleaning is whether the product and/or process can tolerate water. Compatibility of the product/process with water must be carefully investigated. A second important unknown is whether rinsewater can be discharged to a local sewer. If municipal or other restrictions are in effect, the cost of performing all required pretreatments must be considered and included in estimates of an operating budget.

Aqueous cleaning has been performed for many years in the metal finishing industry. New products are continually being developed for an expanding market. The overall state of development for aqueous cleaning technology is high.

19

. -

SEMI-AQUEOUS CLEANERS

Pollution Prevent ion Benefits

How Do They Work?

The primary pollution prevention benefits of semi-aqueous cleaners are reported to be biodegradability, low toxicity, and the fact that they do not cause ozone depletion. In addition, these deaners may be continuously recycled and reused.

Semi-aqueous cleaners comprise a large group of cleaning SOIU- tions that typically are composed of surfactants, rust inhibitors, and other additives. The term semi-aqueous refers to the use of water in some part of the deming process, such as washing, rinsing, or both. Semi-aqueous deaners are designed to be used in process equipment, much like aqueous deaners. Semi-aqueous deaners in common use indude water-immisdble types (terpenes, esters, petroleum hydrocarbons, and glycol ethers) and water-miscible types (alcohols, ketones, and amines). Alcohols and ketones will be discussed later under Miscellaneous Organic Solvents, because they are normally used for small-scale cleaning operations. One water-miscible solvent, N-methyl-2-pyrrolidone (NMP), is used for parts cleaning and degreasing operations and so is included in this discussion.

Terpenes are natural hydrocarbons that are commonly used in semi-aqueous deaners. Actually, there are many kinds of terpenes. Among them, &limonene and a- and gpinene are listed most frequently in commercial semi-aqueous deaners. Terpene alcohols and para-menthadienes are also used. Terpenes are derived from plant sources such as citrus and pine oils. Although terpenes are not miscible in water, they do form emulsions with water, which are stabilued by surfactants and other additives. In cleaning applications, terpenes may be used undiluted or diluted with water. Dilution may reduce deaning performance but, on the other hand, cuts usage and expense, lowers vapor pressure thereby decreasing vapor emissions, and may produce acceptable results with soils that are not too difficult to r e m e . Terpenes have relatively low flash points (about 11 5 to 1207) and so should not be heated above about 907, exmpt when used in an inert atmosphere or when diluted to a safe concentration with water as recommended by the product manufacturer.

Esters have good solvent properties for many soils and are soluble in most organic compounds, but they have only limited solubility in water. The most common types of esters used for cleaning include

7n

Semi-Aqueous Cleaners


aliphaticmono-esters (primarily alkyl acetates) and dibasic esters (DBE). Esters may be used cold, or heated to improve cleaning performance. Many types of esters have flash points in excess of 200'F.

Glycol ethers also have good solvent properties for common soils. They form emulsions with water that can be separated for recycling. Two common kinds are known as the %-series' and >series" glycol ethers. The p-series glycol ethers are reported to be safe for personal contact and are not regulated under the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) Title 111. They generally have high flash points (~200.F) and can be safely heated for improved solvency.

/Vmethyl-2-pyrrolidone, or NMP, has been used in the chemical and petrochemical industries a6 a solvent for extraction and as a formulating agent for coatings, strippers, and deaners. NMP has high solvency for a number of soils. It normally is used undiluted, but it can be mixed with water. NMP is completely miscible with water and organic compounds such as esters, ethers, alcohols, ketones, aromatic and chlorinated hydrocarbons, and vegetable oils. NMP can be used cold or heated because of its high flash point (about 199'F).

After washing, the cleaned parts may be rinsed to remove residue, or the residue may be allowed to remain on the parts. If rinsing is the desired option, it is common practice to rinse in a secondary tank to capture dragout cleaner. The emulsion-type cleaners can be coalesced into their aqueous and non-aqueous components by gravity separation or by advanced membrane separation techniques. These techniques permit used cleaner to be recycled back into the wash tank or discharged for treatment and disposal. Redaimed rinsewater can also be reused or discharged.

Operational Features

Proper use of these deaners is required to reap their full pollution prevention benefits. Good engineering design is essential so that air emissions can be kept low. For example:

Cleaning bath should be operated at the minimum temperature where acceptable cleaning performance is obtained. Low vapor pressure cleaning agents should be used. Oragout should be minimized by the use of air knives. Air exhaust rate should be maintained at a minimum level.

21




A case in point is d-limonene, which is highly photochemically reactive (Damall et al., 1976). It has a moderately low vapor pressure and is suppressed by diluting the cleaner in water and using it at low temperature.

Semi-aqueous cleaners have excellent solvency for a number of difficult soils, such as heavy grease, tar, and waxes. They generally have lower surface tensions than water, which allows them to penetrate small spaces such as crevices and blind holes. NMP has been used for stripping cured paint and hence is a good substitute for methylene chloride.

Avai labil Ity

Semi-aqueous cleanersare widely available. A list of vendors is provided in Section 4.

costs

Terpenes, esters, and glycol ethers are typically priced from $10 to $18 per gallon, when purchased in drum-size quantities. The cost of NMP is higher, about $25 to $30 per gallon, when purchased by the drum.

Semi-aqueous hydrocarbon deaners have been used in the metal deaning industry, where they are known by the more descriptive term, emulsion deanem. Semi-aqueous deaners are now gaining wider appeal in all types of industries where parts are cleaned, such as metal fabrication, electronics, and precision parts manufacturers. The performance of some of these deaners has been validated in govemment tests, for example, the Phase 2 Standards for Electron- ic Components issued by The Institute for Interconnecting and Packaging Electronic Circuits (IPC, 1990).

Semi-aqueous cleaners may have certain advantages over aqueous cleaners; for example, semi-aqueous deaners

4 May be more aggressive in removing heavy organic soils. 4 May have lower corrosion potential with water-sensitive metals. 4 Penetrate small spaces more easily because they have lower

surtace tensions.

22

Semi- Aqueou s Clears rs


Tradeoff s

Summary of Unknowns

. Health and Safety. Mists of concentrated semi-aqueous cleaners can be ignited at room temperature. This warning is especially serious for terpenes, which have the lowest flash points. For example, flash points as low as 115°F restrict safe operating temperatures to no more than 88°F in some cases (many manufacturers recommend a minimum of 27°F between the flash point and the operating temperature). Washing equipment should be designed to avoid creating mists, such as by spraying or agitating below the fluid surface or by using ultrasonic action. Also, equipment used with low flash point deaners should have overtemperature protection.

The health effects associated with using semi-aqueous cleaners have been investigated by some of their manufacturers. Results to date suggest that the risk3 are low. However, full €PA-sponsored testing for chronic toxicity in these cleaners is yet to be performed (Wolf et al., 1991). On the other hand, mineral spirits have been widely used for many years and have never been tested in this way. Limited testing of d-limonene has yielded positive carcinogenicity results in male rats (National Toxicology Program, 1990). Another concern with terpenes is that their strong odors may become objectionable to workers, thus requiring additional ventilation in areas where they are used.

Compatibility with Materials. Semi-aqueous cleaners are non- corrosive to most metals and are generally safe to use with most plastics. Terpenes are generally not recommended for cleaning polystyrene, PVC, polycarbonate, lowdensity polyethylene, and polymethylpentene; nor are they compatible with the elastomers natural rubber, silicone, and neoprene. NMP dissolves or degrades ABS, KynarfM, LexanTM, and PVC and it causes swelling in Buna-N, Neoprene, and VitonTM. Glycol ethers seem to degrade polystyrene and cause swelling in me elastomers Buna-N and silicon rubber.

As with aqueous cleaners, water rinsing is necessary if cleaned parts are to be free of residue. If water rinsing is performed; the parts must be dried. The methods of drying ated for aqueous cleaners apply here as well. Another tradeoff is that more waste streams must be managed than with either solvent cleaning or aqueous cleaning.

The major uncertainty about semi-aqueous cleaners is whether they will meet biodegradability and toxicity requirements for economic recycling and disposal.

23

9va ilab le Tech no log ie s

State of Develop men t Semi-aqueous cleaners offer improvements over older emulsion

cleaners used in metal cleaning. As with aqueous cleaners, new products will continue to be produced, and the overall state of development can be considered to be high.

24

ALIPHATIC HYDROCARBONS

Pollution Prevention Benefits The primary pollution prevention benefits of aliphatic hydrocarbon

cleaners are that they produce no wastewater, are recyclable by distillation, and have low toxicity; paraffinic grades have very low odor and aromatic content and low evaporative loss rates. How- ever, planned recovery of VOCs is an important part of pollution prevention if these solvents are to be used.

How Do They Work?


Aliphatic hydrocarbons are available in two grades, the basic petroleum fractions and the specialty grade of synthetic paraffinic hydro@rbonS. Products of the petroleum fraction grade indude mineral spirits, kerosene, white spirits, naphtha, and Stoddard Solvent. These are technologically less advanced, as they contain components that have abroad range of boiling points and may include trace amounts of benzene and other aromatics. Petroleum fractions were available many years before chlorinated solvents attained their popularity. More recently, improved separation and synthesis techniques have led to the production of the specialty grade of paraffinic hydrocarbons. Compared to petroleum fractions, the paraffinic hydrocarbons have lower flammability, lower aromatic content, narrower boiling ranges, and higher solvency, and they are more expensive.

Hydrocarbon solvents work by dissolving organic soils. They operate at near room temperature in the liquid phase. Flash points as low as 105°F restrict safe operating temperatures to no more than 78°F in some cases (there should be a minimum of 27°F between the flash point and the operating temperature). When the cleaning lifetime of a hydrocarbon cleaner expires, the entire bath must be replaced.

This technology could be chosen when water contact with the parts is undesirable. Cleaning with petroleum distillates lends itself to simple, inexpensive, one-step cleaning in situations where a high level of cleanliness is not essential.

25

lvailable Technologies

Operational Features

Aliphatic hydrocarbons have high solvencies for many "hard-to- clean" organic soils, including heavy oil and grease, tar, and waxes. In addition, they have low liquid surface tensions (-22-28 dynes/cm), which allows them to penetrate and clean small spaces.

Availability

Many petroleum-refining and distillation companies produce aliphatic hydrocarbons for cleaning applications.

costs

Mineral spirits cost around $3 per gallon, and paraffinic hydrocarbons for metal cleaning cost from $7 to $lO.per gallon, when purchased in drum-size quantities. Paraff ink hydrocarbons for electronic cleaning may cost up to $32 per gallon.

eported Applications



Petroleum fractions have had a long history of use, particularly in automobile repair and related service areas. Specialty-grade paraffinic hydrocarbons have become widely available only recently, but are reported to be used for a broad range of metal cleaning and electronics defluxing purposes.

No water is used with hydrocarbon cleaners, so there is no potential for water corrosion. This may be a concern for use with parts in which water may become trapped in cavities, and for some precision cleaning operations.

Health and Safety. Aliphatic hydrocarbons are flammable or combustible, and some have very low flash points, as low as 105OF. Process equipment must be designed to mitigate explosion dangers. The toxicity level of hydrocarbon solvents is considered low: 8-hour PELS for Stoddard Solvent and VM 8 P naphtha are 100 ppm and 400 ppm, respectively. Values for synthetic aliphatic hydrocarbons have not been determined yet, but they are expected to be relatively high.

Compatibility with Materials. Hydrocarbon cleaners are compatible with most metals and plastics, and with most elastomers.

26

Aliphatic Hydrocarbcns

. Tradeoffs

Summary of Unknowns

State of De vel o pmen t

Hydrocarbon cleaners have slower drying times than chlorinated solvents. Parts may be dried by forced air or by some other method. Restrictions on VOC emissions may apply in some areas. If so, the cost of vapor recovery must also be considered when evaluating the cost of using these solvents.

Hydrocarbons are VOCs, and hence, they are photochemical smog producers. Restrictions against their use may be realized in the future. Businesses choosing this alternative must consider the expenses of possible requirements for recovering VOCs from exhaust equipment.

Petroleum hydrocarbons'have been used for a long time. Paraffinic hydrocarbons are new products and are undergoing rapid development for specialized deaning applications.

27

HYDROCHLOROFLUOROCARBONS (HCFCs)

Pollutlon Prevention Benefits

How Do They W O W


The reason for the development of hydrochlorofluorocart)ons, or HCFCs, is to lower emissions of ozone-depleting substances that are used in cleaning, foam-blowing agents, and refrigerants. Although HCFCs accomplish the goal of reducing emissions, they too have some Ozone Depletion Potential, about 0.12 to 0.15 relative to CFC-11, which is 1.0. Therefore, HCFCs deplete ozone at a rate about 6 or 7 times less than that of CFC-113, but about equal to that of TCA (see Table 1).

HCFCs are designed to tk drop-in replacements for CFC-113 and TCA. Like these solvents, HCFCs have high solvency characteristics for a large number of organic soils, but they are found to be less effective for removing buffing codpounds

The chemical properties of HCFG14lb make it a good substitute for CFC-113, such as similar boiling point, surface tension, viscosity, and heat of vaporization (Basu and Logsdon, 1991). HCFC-141b is used alone or as an azeotropic blend with methanol and nitromethane.

It is important to realize that HCFCs are being developed for interim use only. The London Amendments to the Montreal Protocol call for a ban of HCFCs between 2020 and 2040. The main reason for choosing this technology is to enable an existing CFC-113 or TCA vapor degreasing system to continue in use until a better altemative is found.

Operatlonal Features

HCFG141b is designed to be used in existing solvent cleaning operations.

.

Availability

HCFC-14lb is currently being produced by Allied Signal under the trade name Genesolv. Genesolv 2000 is pure HCFC-14lb (1.1 dichloro-1 -fluoroethane) and Genesolv 2004 is an azeotropic blend.

Hydrochlorofluorocarbons ( HCFCs,

Reported Appllcations

Operatlonal and Product Benefits


Tradeoff s

Summary of Unknowns


costs - The current cost is approximately $3.00/lb1 or about $30.00/gallon.

HCFCs have had no commercial solvent use prior to 1990.

HCFCs provide a short-term solution to choosing an alternative solvent and allow use of existing equipment.

Health and Safety. 'Because they have lower boiling points than CFC-113, HCFC solvent vapors may be lost too quickly in older degreasers, and these vapor's may be a health risk Some emission control feature may have to- added, such as extending freeboard space and adding secondary condensers.

HCFCs have no flash point and are nonflammable. Like TCA, however, HCFC-14lb will bum if the oxygen content is sufficiently high.

Compatibility with Materials. HCFC cleaners are compatible with most metals and ceramics and with many polymers. They are incompatible with acrylic, styrene, and ABS plastic. Further testing by producers is under way.

Overall, HCFCs have similar performance characteristics to CFC-113 and TCA. However, like the CFCs, the HCFCs will be phased out of use.

The principal unknown at this time is whether regulations will permit use of HCFCs until at least the year 2020, as expected.

HCFCs have probably been developed to their MI extent. Except for HCFG141b, all other HCFC solvents have tumed out to be. toxic.

29

.-

MISCELLANEOUS ORGANIC SOLVENTS

Pollution Prevention Benefits The miscellaneous organic solvents do not contain halogens;

therefore, they do not contribute to ozone depletion. However, most of the alcohols and ketones evaporate readily, thereby contributing to smog formation.


How Do They W O W This group covers a wide range of solvents that may be beneficial

as a replacement technology, particularly on a small scale. Types that are commonly used include:

+ Alcohols - ethanol, isopropanol (IPA) 4 Ketones - acetone, methyl ethyl ketone (MEK) 4 Vegetable oils and fatty acids.

b

Alcohols, like glycol ethers, are very polar solvents and are good for a wide range of inorganic and organic soils. They are soluble in water and may be useful in certain drying operations.

Ketones have good solvent properties for many polymers and adhesives. They are soluble in water and may be useful for certain rapid drying operations.

Vegetable oils are finding us8 in removing printing inks. They also seem to be compatible with elastomers (Environmental Program office, city of Irvitle, 1991).

Operational Featums

These cleaners will probably find their greatest use in small batch operations, rather than as substitute sotvents in ~arge-s~ale pro- cessea

Availability

These cleaners are commercially available.

30


costs

Approximate costs when solvents are purchased in bulk quantities are as follows:

c

+ isopropyl alcohol $ 0.50ilb or $3.30/gal. + rrpropyl alcohol $0.70ilb or $4.70/gal. 4 acetone $O.SO/lb or $3.30/gal. + MEK $0.60/lb. or $4.00/gal. .




Tradeoff s

Summary of Unknowns


Most of these cleaners have been used for a long time as general- purpose solvents and in coatings formulations.

The lighter alcohols and ketones have high evaporation rates and, therefore, fast drying times.

Health and Safety. Alcohols and ketones have low flash points and present a tire hazard. Inhalation of these cleaners can present a health hazard.

Compatibillty with Materials. Alcohols and glycol ethers are safe to use with most metals, but some of the glycol ethers can cause swelling and cracking of polymers and elastomers. Ketones also are incompatible with many structural polymers. Esters, on the other hand, seem compatible with most polymers.

The primary tradeoffs in choosing these cleaners is that some have vapor pressures that are too high to be used in standard process equipment, whereas others evaporate too slowly to be used without induding a rinse and/or dry process.

The primary unknown is whether the more volatile soivents will be able to meet VOC emission restrictions in highly regulated areas of the country.

These cleaners are well developed. Most of them have existed for some time. Many of them have reached their full potential for development.

31

SOLVENT Loss c0"OL- THINGS YOU CAN DO NOW

Background:

Chlorinated solvent users are facing greater regulation and cost in the use of these products in cleaning applications. Public concern over ozone depletion and "greenhouse" gases, shrinking alternatives to and cost of residuals disposal and accelerating raw material costs have all users looking for alternatives.

Defense suppliers must meet military specification cleaning requirements which often limit use of less costly alternatives. Many larger industries adopt military specifications as their own standards for simplicity. Until changed and alternative cleaning processes have been approved, many suppliers must still use chlorinated and halongenated solvents.

Solvents either under regulatory control now or have been identified for future controls include:

Solvent Property

Methylene Chloride Toxic, suspected carcinogen Perchloroethylene Toxic, suspected carcinogen Trichloroethylene (TCE( VOC - photochemical reactor l,l,l, Trichloroethane (TCA) Stratospheric ozone depleter Trichlorotrifluoroethane Stratospheric ozone depleter

(CFC 113)

In use, losses occur mainly from fugitive releases in the work place, disposal of still bottoms and cleaning residue from tanks. Losses can be reduced by taking several simple and relatively inexpensive steps. Pending approval of less costly and environmentally sound cleaning alternatives, an audit of your operating practices and processes could identify areas to reduce consumption, reduce generation of waste, and save money. This report identifies where losses occur, outlines reduction techniques and presents one company's results achieved through conservation actions on open top and in-line cleaners.

Alcatel, a Raleigh, North Carolina electronics manufacturing company, has achieved measurable results by implementing many of these recommendations. A -summary of the company's actions is included in this report.

POLLUTION PREVENT.ION PROGRAM NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH, AND NATURAL RESOURCES

OPEN TOP CLEANERS

With open top vapor cleaners (OTVC), losses occur both when in or out of operation. , During idling or downtime, losses occur at the solvent vapor and air interface. Evaporation from cold solvents and convection currents from warm freeboards move (diffuse) solvent vapor into ambient air around the cleaner. Losses can also occur at any solvent feed line connector, pump seals or any other physical linkage in the system.

Losses from OTVC while in operation are greatest during workload entry into and exit from the cleaning tank vapor zone. Air and solvent are displaced by the basket or part as it is lowered into the the tank. The vapor zone also contracts and expands as the hot vapor condenses on and heats parts being cleaned. This pumping effect and movement of the vapor zone increases mixing in t he air above the vapor zone and subsequent exhaust out of the cleaner. These losses can be reduced by simple operational changes and minor equipment modification.

Air flow around open areas increases solvent loss. Exhaust collection systems over open top cleaners capture air laden solvents to reduce work place concentrations but often contribute to greater solvent losses by creating positive air flows away from the vapor zone. Processing air captured in the exhaust system through carbon absorbers and cycling back into the solvent zone helps but does not eliminate losses. Some control options are listed in Table I.

IN-LINE CLEANERS

In-line cleaners will have solvent losses similar to open top cleaners but paths to the environment differ. Solvent drag out from in-line cleaners is a major source of solvent loss. Since the solvent surface is not as open to the air during idling times, diffusion into the air around the machine will not be as great.

Some losses are similar in both open top and in-line cleaners. The rate at which a part is moved through the vapor zone has a large influence on the amount of vapor or solvent pushed or pulled from the cleaner - whether open top or in-line. In general, the slower the movement, the less solvent is lost. Solvent filling and draining with both types of cleaners provide additional opportunities for conservation. Filling from buckets will cause greater loss than from a closed circuit system.

Solvent loss source remedial actions, process modifications and possible equipment changes are listed in Table 11.

TABLE I - SOLVENT LOSS CONTROL OPEN TOP CLEANERS

SOURCE OF LOSS ALTERNATIVE CONTROLS OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

Evaporat ion, convec t ion , d i f f u s i o n , o u t t o p .

Drag ou t /vapor zone d is tu rbance

Increase f reeboard t o w i d t h Place u n i t where a i r r a t i o t o a t l e a s t 1.0. c u r r e n t s across t o p

are minimized. (Away f rom windows, fans, vents, e t c . ) . D e f l e c t , a i r c u r r e n t s away fromi open tops .

I n s t a l l f reeboard r e f r i g e r a - t i o a c o i l s (operates a t -20 F . ) .

Reduce pr imary condenser temperature.

I n s t a l l automated cover.

Capture escaping s o l v e n t w i th exhaust system. (CAUTION: VACUUM HEAD CAN ACCELERATE EVAPORATIVE LOSSES)

P l a n f o r increased con! densate water d i s p o s a l .

Top should be kept c losed d u r i n g i d l e o r downtimes. Keep condenser c o i l s on d u r i n g downtime.

Add carbon absorber and r e c y c l e captured s o l v e n t s (may n o t be as e f f e c t i v e as f r e e - board r e f r i g e r a t i o n ) .

Reduce p a r t / w o r k un i t move- O r i e n t p a r t f o r b e s t ment i n and o u t of vapor zone drainage. Keep work t o minimum speed c o n s i s t e n t l o a d i n vapor zone wi th p r o d u c t i o n needs. I f u n t i l condensat ion automated do n o t exceed stops. Keep workload 11 feet /min . w i th in f reeboard

u n t i l d ry . Remove s l o w l y . I f r i n s e wi th in same t a n k , d r a i n p a r t s over s o l v e n t sump.

Vapor Zone d i s t u r b a n c e .

Reduce basket o r work s i z e t o Lower work i n t o and u t i l i z e 50% o r less o f opening. a t s low steady r a t e .

remove from vapor zone

Mechanica l Leak, o t h e r l o s s e s

Check j o i n t s , connectors and Scale o f t e n forms s e a l s i n s o l v e n t syscem wi th around l e a k s f o r h a l o n d e t e c t o r . Stop a l l v i s u a l d e t e c t i o n . leaks . Use s p e c i f i e d gaskets Leak checks should and m a t e r i a l s . be r o u t i n e maintenance

a c t i v i t y .

I n s t a l l downtime cover. I n s u r e good f i t around edges.

TABLE I1 - LOSS CONTROL - IN-LINE CLEANERS

SOURCE OF LOSS ALTERNATIVE CONTROLS OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

Solvent losses t o ambient Freeboard t o width r a t i o a i r should be a t leas t 1.0.

I n s t a l l freeboard ref r igera- Plan f o r increased con t i o n system ( f o r vapor cleaners densate water disposal

Minimize a i r f low around un i t . Consider adding Keep entrance and e x i t openings extension t o e x i t t o closed during down t ime. extend drying time. "

I n s t a l l f laps over operr ings for use during down t ime.

only 1

Mechanical Check a l l connections, top leaks, and set up continuous maintenance program.

Transfer solvent through closed I n s t a l l carbon absorb- p ip ing loop system.

Check top edges for caulk as necessary.

Reduce entrance and openings.

t i o n u n i t i n loop t o capture and recycle solvent.

leaks. Re- Glass tops should ! checked f o r cracks. Replace i f leaking.

e x i t Opening should have l e a than 10% f r e e width during par t passage.

Operational Reduce conveyor speed t o minimum consistent with production needs.

00 not exceed 11 fpm.

Keep work load i n vapor zone u n t i l condensation stops.

Allow t o dry wi th in cleaner i f possible. Or ien t parts f o r optimum drainage.

I n s t a l l sump cooling system and act ivate during downtime.

Spray r inse a t a down--- ward angle i n t o solvent Spray nozzle should be as f a r in to freeboard ,,

as work w i l l permit.

ALCATEL

Alcatel manufactures circuit boards for their own telephone switching systems. The Raleigh operations consumed some 86,000 pounds of CFC's during 1987. Manufacturing cleaning operations incorporate both in-line and open top vapor cleaners.

In June, 1989, Alcatel manufacturing engineering personnel initiated in process changes to reduce Freon consumption. An old Detrex in-line cleaner was replaced with a $90,000 new design Detrex cleaner which has added cooling coils at the entrance to and exit from the cleaner. Internal modifications, designed to reduce solvent loss from the cleaning zone, have been added. Daily CFC usage has dropped from 13 gallons to 4 gallons per day from this one operation. This amounts to a 70% consumptive reduction. Based on a five day, 40 hour week production schedule, the unit will pay for itself in less than 16 months at today's Freon prices. If ' present 15% quarterly price increases continue or accelerate as expected, the pay back period could be less than 12 months.

Additionally, open top cleaner losses have been reduced from 8 gallons per day to 5 gallons per day. This was accomplished through improved maintenance, stopping leaks, keeping cooling coils on and covered during idling and down time and redirecting air flows away from cleaners. Additionally, Alcatel installed an automated hoist on one open top cleaner to regulate entry and exit speeds of parts thus reducing drag out. On an annual basis the combined solvent consumption from open top and in-line cleaners would be reduced 57%. Conservation actions are on-going. Additional operational practice changes are being implemented to reduce losses due to drag out from open tank cleaners.

Alcatel's total consumption of Freon, 86,000 pounds in 1987, 74,000 pounds in 1988 (business slow down), will be reduced to 46,000 pounds in 1989 mainly as a result of the purchase of new equipment. A 1990 goal of 31,000 pounds has been established with all solvent usage to be eliminated by 1993. The company is moving aggressively to meet these goals.

For additional information contact:

Office of Waste Reduction Pollution Prevention Program N.C. Department of Environment, Health & Natural Resources Post Office Box 27687 Raleigh, NC 27611-7687

-

Telephone: (919) 571-4100

COPYRIGHT: OCTOBER 1989

N.C. Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources Reprint with Permission

(300 copies reprinted May 1992 at a cost of $.05 per copy)

Aqueous Cleaners as Substitutes for Organic Solvents

by Terry Foecke

For a wide range of cleaning applications, this paper will examine possible substitutes which would allow facilities to reduce or eliminate their use of solvent cleaning. Then, some of the most important cautions and considerations for use of these substitutes will be presented, along with case studies of their application .

Many types of facilities use solvents for cleaning of parts and equipment. In a large number of cases, these materials, when they become wastes, can be reused or recycled, or used as energy sources. But these efforts at efficient use and responsible management do not address fully the problems with the llse of these of the chemicals, or whether there might be ways to accomplish the required cleaning without solvents. There is a potential of liability which could be associated with the use of these materials as a worker health and safety issue. But even more pertinent, many of these materials are under restriction of use and production by a wide number of jurisdictions.

1

WRITAR, 1313 5th St. SE, Suite 325, Minneapolis, MN 554144502 PH. (612) 379-5995

The 1987 J4ontrealpmtpcol on Submces ?hat DQ&@ the 0- , and subsequent 1990 amendments and adjustments, restricts the production and consumption of ozonedepleting chemicals. Two such chemicals, CFC-113 and l,l,l-tricholoroethane (TCA) will be completely phased out in developed countries by by the years 2000 and 2005 respectively, and ten years later in developin. countries. The U.S. was amended in 1990, and contains several provisions pertainin, to stratospheric ozone protection. Congress has also placed an excise tax on ozone-depleting chemicals manufactured or imported for use in the United States, which pr0Vides a further incentive to use alternatives and substitutes. Following is summary information describing all these initiatives.

*

CFC Phase-out

Clean Air Act Montreal Prom1

Reducefrom 1986 levels by: 199 1 - 15% 1992-20% 1993-25% 1994-35% 199550% 199660% 1997-85% 1998-85% 1999-85% 2000-100%

Fneze at 1986 production and consumption levels by July 1989 2096 reduction from 1986 levels by January 1993 50% reduction from 1986 levels by January 1995 85% reduction from 1986 levels by January 1997 100% reduction from 1986 levels by January 2000

PCA Phase-out

Clean Air Act Montreal Protocol

Freeze at 1989 levels by 199 1 Freeze at 1989 levels zontinues in in 1992 Reduce from 1989 levels by:

199415%

199650%

1993- 10%

199530%

1997-5096 1998-50% 1999-50%

2001-80% 2005- 100%

2000-8096

Source #I

Freeze at 1989 production and consumption levels by January 1993 30% reduction from 1989 levels by January 1995 70% reduction from 1989 levels by January 2000 100% reduction from 1989 levels by January 2005

2

‘ -

I


for CFC-113

5

American Electronics Association member companies AT&T, U.S. Canon, Japan Digital Equipment Corp., U.S. Hitachi Corp., Japan Honeywell, U.S. IBM, U.S. Intel Carp., U.S. Matsushita, Japan Motorola, Inq., U.S. Nissan Motor Corp., Japan Northern Telecom, Canada Seiko-Epson, Japan Sharp Corp., Japan Texas Instruments, U.S. Toshiba Corp., Japan Volvo, Sweden

Source #1

2000 1994 1994 1995 2000 1997 1993 1992 1995 1992 1993 1991 1993 1995 1994 1995 1994

In addition to these initiatives, of more immediate importance are activities which can take place because of releases reported under SARA Title 111, Section 313. In many communities around the country, those reported releases are being used to demand minimization of solvent releases. Federal, state and local legislation is being passed which brings the use and release of many types of solvents under intense examination. When that happens, many facilities am finding it cheaper and easier to control and minimize u of the solvents under scrutiny, since control technologies can be very expensive. Essentially, any solvent use which creates a waste solvent which cannot be reused or recycled is coming under presswe, and minimization is clearly the answer.

But in addition to the "negative incentives", you should know that water-based cleaning is a viable option, with much promise in many applications. Water excels at the removal of ionic contaminants, water soluble fluxes, and other contaminants. In combination with a saponifier and surface tension reducer, water can remove oils, rosin fluxes and other nonpolar substances. An important qualification is that water-based cleaning involves using a of processes for cleaning, drying, and recycling and/or treatment, with a method of moving parts through the system, whereas solvent cleaning is typically performed in a single unit. Total processing times for water-based cleaning can be as short as a few minutes, and may be done in batch, continuous or hand operations. Following is an overview comparison of the differences between solvent- and water-based cleaning:

3


SUMMARY OF AOUEOUS CLEANERS

I PISADVANTAGES

*Safety--Aqueous systems have few problems with worker safety compared to many solvents. They are not flammable or explosive. Toxicity is low for most formulations, requiring only simple pxecautions in handling the chemical. It is

t, however, to consult the material h3- ety data sheets for in€ormation on health and safety.

.Cleaning--Aqueous systems can be readily designed to clean particles and films better than solvents.

*Broad Range--Aqueous systems have multiple degrees-of-freedom in process design, foxmulation and concentration. This enables aqueous processes to provide superior cleaning for a wider variety of contaminants.

*Inorganic or Polar Soils--Aqueous cleaning is particularly good for cleaning inorganic or polar materials. For environmental and other mons , many machine shops ~IE using or m converting to water-based

Thest arc idtally suited to aqueous chemistry.

lubricants and coolants VS. oil-baed.

9il and Grtasc Removal--Organic f b s , oils, and greases can be removed very effkctively by aqueous chemistry.

*Cleaning Difiiculty--Parts with blind holes and small crevices may be difficult to clean and may require process optimization.

-Process Control--Aqueous processes require careful engineering and control.

-Rinsing--Some aqueous cleaner residues can be difficult to rinse from surfaces. Nonionic surfactants a especially difficult to rinse. Trace residues may not be appropriate for some applications and materials. Special precautions should be applied for parts requiring subsequent vacuum deposition, liquid oxygen contact, etc. Rinsing can be improved using DI water or alcohol rinse.

*Drying--For certain part geometries with crevices and blind holes drying may be difficult to accomplish. An additional drying section may be required

*Material Compatibility--Camsion of metals or delayed environmental stress cracking of certain polymers may occur.

4


*Multiple Cleaning Mechanism-Aqueous cleaning functions by several mechanisms rather than just one (solvency), including Saponificafion (chemical reaction), displacement, emulsification, dispersion, and others. Particles are effectively removed by surface activity coupled with the application of energy.

4 J l d s Applicab%ty--Ultrasonics are much marc effective in water-based solvents than in organic solvents.

Chemical Cost--Low consumption and inexpensive.

*Water--In some applications, high purity water is needed Depending on purity and volume, high purity water can be expensive.

*Energy consUmption--Energy consumption may be higher than that for solvent cleaning in applications that require heated rinse and drylng stages.

*Wastewater Disposal--In m e instances, use of aqueous cleaning may require wastewater matment prior to discharge.

In order to begin the process of deciding whether you might be able to reduce or eliminate the use of any solvents you currently have in your facility, you might try to find answers to the following:

J J J J J J J J

J

.I

.I

What is the product you wish to replace?

Is the chemical used as a pure substance or as a mixture?

Why do you want to replace the chemical?

How much of the chemical do you use?

Where do losses of the chemical occur?

What are you using the chemical for?

How are you using it? Describe the process.

What are you trying to accomplish with this

What are the materials and/or substrates

Are there any known contraindications (health and

Have any other substitution techniques been attempted? List

process?

affected by this process?

safety, quality, costs, etc.) associated with the current process?

them. What worked, what didn't work, and why?

Source: Inland Technology, Inc. and WRITAR 5

WRmAR, 1313 5th St. SE, Suite 325, Minneapolis, MN 554144502 PH. (612) 379-5995

Answering all these questions completely will give you an excellent base for changing your cleaning proctssts. Later sections in this paper will give you more specific guidance for what is obviously a daunting task. To start with the first item, understanding your current use following arc some of the possible use areas, and the types of solvents which may be used in tho mas, you should check in order to complete an accurate inventory of your solvent use.

*Preparation far surface coating -Electroplating ---Painting --Conversion coating ---Protective coatings

*Cleaning of assemblies ---Circuit boards ---Other electronics ---Motors, drives, etc.

*Drying of assemblies/parts --Circuitboards --orher elecmnics --Precision assemblies

*Process equipment cleaning ---Reactors ---Hoses, lines ---work amas ---Mixing equipment

*protective coating removal --Paint -Conformal coatings ---Oils, greases, waxes

~Intennediate processing ---Marking dyes and inks ---Inspections procedures

1 I source #4

6

WRmAR, 1313 5th St SE, Suite 325, Minneapolis, MN 554144502 PH. (612) 379-5995

F

Alcohols

Methanol Isoppanol

Ketones Acetone Methy isobutyl ketone

Ester solvents

Isobutyl isobutynue Ethyl Bcttatt

Aliphatic solvents

HcXane Mineralspirits

Ethanol Isobutanol

Methyl ethyl kctone

Heptane

Aromatic solvents

Toluene Xylene

Chlorinated solvents

Methylene chla!ride Trichlorouhyb

Fluorinated solvents

Freon 'IF FrtonTMS Frcon TES

After documenting the uses and volumes of solvents in the facility, the next step wil l be to consider the appropriateness of those uses. That is not to say that currtnt uses arc inappropriate, but rather to recognize the need to examine earlier decisions, in order to discover possibilities for change. This will begin to tell you why you want to find an alternative. It might be that the material currently used will be phascd out Or it may be that health and safety conams, or the volume of your reported emissions, arc motivating you. Whatever the exact season, it is important to understand fully what it is you expcct fram a replacement, so that you can know when you have found a suitable one. There arc several components to this question which will now be examined in order.

7


Cleaning is defined as the removal of soil or unwanted matter (including moisture) from a surface to which it clings. This can be done in several ways:

By mechanical action: wiping, brushing, spraying, machining or abrading

By solution: the soil is dissolved in the solvent

By chemical reactions: soluble or non-interfering products are formed by chelation, saponification, etc.

By detergency: lifting the soil from the surface by displacing it with surface active materials that have a greater affinity for the surface than the soil.

Often a combination of mechanisms is employed, and the substrate involved, the nature of the soil and the degree of cleanliness required are all factors in the function of a cleaner. Some of the options available for aqueous cleaning include: water, water and alcohol, acid, alkaline, emulsion and saponifier chemistry. These may be used in ultrasonic, immersion and spray equipment. Rinsing is usually done in tap water, deionized water, or water with special additives. Drying alternatives include air knives, heaters, and centrifugal spin dryers. Solution recycling, contaminant separation, and waste treatment and disposal are other common components.

Vapor degreasing operates on the principle that vapors from a boiling solvent condense on a cool part, flushing off oily soils. This cleaning action continues until the parts are the same temperature as the vapor and condensation is stopped. The soils are dissolved in the solvent while the part is removed clean and dry. The process usually takes anywhere from 3-10 minutes. Vapor degreasing is especially efficient at removing organic soils such as oil-based cutting oils, grease, petdatums and high-melt waxes. It is less efficient at removing fingerprints, water salts and road film.

Emulsion and diphase cleaners use non-chlorinated solvents as part of their packagc These c l a m function by emulsifying or otherwise trapping the soils and keeping them dispersed throughout the fluid. As these cleaners are used, the entire bath becomes contaminated.

Acid cleaners are used to remove rust and scale, and to clean aluminum and Zinc, metals susceptible to etching when exposed to strong alkaline cleaners. Acid cleaners contain mineral acids (nitric, phosphoric, sulfuric, and hydrofluoric) chromic acid, or organic acids (acetic and oxalic), plus chelating agents, detergents, and small amounts of water-miscible solvents.

Aqueous alkaline cleaners are water solutions containing water conditioners, corrosion inhibitors, varying amounts of alkalinity builders and a selection of organic surfactants chosen for foaming, wetting (surface tension) and soil removal properties. Cleaning cycle times range from 10- 30 minutes, excluding drying, which can vary drastically depending on the geometry of the parts being

Builders are the alkaline salts in the aqueous cleaners. They are usually a blend of two or m a alkali metal orthophosphates and condensed phosphates, alkali metal hydroxides, silicates, carbonates, bicarbonates, and borates. Phosphates are the best overall builders. However, the discharge of cleaning solutions containing phosphates is subject to environmental regulations. Chelating agents such as ethylenediamine tetraacetate (EDTA) can be used instead of phosphates. Silicates axe difficult to rinse and may cause trouble in subsequent plating operations if not completely removed. Carbonates and hydroxides are an inexpensive source of alkalinity and are effective builders.

Addizives are either organic or inorganic compounds which provide additional cleaning or surface modifications. Chemical compounds such as glycols, glycol ethers, chelating agents and polyvalent metal salts could be considered additives. Surfactants are organic compounds which provide detergency, emulsification, and wetting in a cleaner. Surfactants are unique because of their characteristic structure. They have two distinct structural components attached together as a single molecule. The lyophobic half has little attraction for the solvent (water) and is insoluble. The lyophilic half is polar and has a strong attraction for the solvent (water) which carries the molecule into solutio The unique chemical structure of surfactants provides high affinity for surface adsorption; these arb

proctssed.

a WRUAR, 1313 5th St. SE, Suite 325, Minneapolis, MN 55414-4502 PH. (612) 379-5995

classified as anionic, cationoc, nonionic and zwitterionic (amphoteric). A nonionic type surfactant should be used if an aqueous spray cleaner is used. This surfactant is the only type that results in minimum foaming and also provides good detergency. For immersion cleaning all types of surfactants can be used; however, in most cases the anionic or nonionic types are used. Source #2

manufactllring

PROCESS FLOW FOR AQUEOUS CLEANING

W.sh RiaPC Dryer: I r I I 1

water h w

L Room tanperaaure stage: Stage: Heated detergent solu- Wam. Spray, airorheatedair tion: spray, immersion. immersion ultrssonics, Qc.

: Spray.

)ryer: .loom tempemure

I airorheatedair

1

Periodk Removal --.). WasteTreatment

Solution Recirculation performed continuously by means of fdtering andor skimming

Source #1

.). POTW

Prior to making a choice about cleaning chemistry and equipment, you will need to understand the characteristics of the contaminant you are trying to remove, and the degree of cleanliness you are trying to achieve. If you think of contaminants as a waste which you cannot tolerate on your product, then you can address your cleaning needs by spending the minimum necessary to =move exactly the types and quantities of contaminants which are a problem.

First, specify the composition of the part and its configuration, size, weight, function, porosity, substrate and quantity. The size and shape of the workpieces seldom influence of the type of cleaning chemistry used, but may determine the method of cleaning and the handling techniques employed. Parts with excessive porosity, such as coatings, parts that have severely rough surfaces, parts that have permanent overlapping joints (e.g.,. rivet joints, skip welded and crimp joints), and parts with blind holes and tubing can retain solution which can cause corrosion. Metals such as aluminum and alloys containing magnesium, lithium and zinc require special consideration because of their sensitivity to attack by certain chemicals. For examples, cleaners for aluminum are generally between a pH of 9 and 11, while those for magnesium are best if above 11 pH. Zinc and cadmium are also subject to corrosion and pitting by alkaline solutions.

9


Next, identify the soils to be removed. The efficiency of cleaning is highest when the chemistry has an affinity for the soil. Soils can be classified into seven groups:

f &uZuze conramiltatiOn occurs in most cleaning oprations. many of these contaminants car only be identified using optical microscopy, and may not be of concern to the end use or qualit. requirements. If they are of concern, it is best to perform any characterization in-house, since sending any samples off-site risks further contamination. The aim should be to develop a matrix of characteristics for every contaminant found in your process, and then a range of possible checks against and responses to each contaminant.

Thinfilm chemical contamination can also occur, arising from such sources as outgassing fram lubricants, adhesives, coatings, and polymeric and elastomeric materials. Chemical residues can also originate in fingerprints, machining fluids, coolants and packaging. Any alternative cleaner should be tested to evaluate its effectiveness in removing any of these which may occur in your pmcess.

Pigmented compounds may require removal, and can occur in the following substances: whiting, lithophone, mica, zinc oxide, bentonite, flour, graphite, white lead, moybdenum disulfide and soap-like materials. These materials can most likely be found listed on MSDS's (internally) or may have to be sought specifically in the pmcesses of suppliers.

Unpigmented oil and grease such as drawing lubricants, rust preventative oils and quenching oils are another range of possible contaminants, especially on incoming raw material stock.

Forming lubricants andmachiningfluids can be classified into three subgroups:

0 Plain or sulfurized mineral and fatty oils (or a combination of the two), chlorinated mineral oils, and sulfurized chlorinated mineral oils

0 Conventional or heavy duty soluble oils with sulfur or other compounds added

0 Chemical cutting fluids that are water-soluble and contain soaps, amines, sodium salts of sulfonated fatty alcohols and alkyl aromatic salts of sulfonates

Polishing and buffing compounds can also be classified into three subgroups:

0 Liquids: mineral oils and oil-in-water emulsions, or animal and vegetable oils with abrasive materials

0 Semi-solids: oil-based materials containing abrasives and emulsions, or

Solids: grease containing stearic acid, hydrogenated fatty acids, tallow,

water-based materials containing abrasive and dispersing agents

hydrogenated glycerik, petroleum waxes, and combinations that produce either saponifiable or non-saponifiable materials, in addition to abrasive materials

A final category of contaminants is that of miscellaneous sruface conturninants, such as lapping compounds, residue from magnetic particle inspection, hand oils, shop dirt, airborne dust, finger grease and metal pieces.

of those soils. That way you will know whert to begin to modify the need for cleaning, which can determine the success of the implementation of any altemative cleaners.

0

In addition to knowing & the soils are, you must determine the

10

< WRITAR, 1313 5th SL SE, Suite 325. Minneapolis, MN 554144502 PH. (612) 379-5995

Check the following:

Are the soils

4 Received as raw materials?

J produced in general machining operations?

J R C X ~ U C X ~ in forming/stamping operations?

d Produced in subassembly?

4 Received with vendor parts?

d Source #1

, Any combination of the above possibilities?

Once you have determined contaminants and their sources, you need to know how much of the contaminant must be removed. Cleanliness can be thought of as residing on a sliding scale, from sterility in an inert environment, through selective removal of particular contaminants, to allowing accumulated contaminant residues to remain. What you want to achieve is the minimum level of cleanliness acceptable to meet performance requirements. You might try to answer some of the following questions:

J J J

HOW clean must the part be for the next step in the process?

Is the part being cleaned for performance or aesthetic reasons?

E cleaning is customer-specified, can a perf~rmance standaxxi replace specific cleanliness standards, or replace the requirement that a certain substance be used?

Source #2 and W A R

Several standard tests can be used to determine the cleaning ability of any alternative cleaning process. Visual inspection is done using high-intensity or long-wave ultraviolet lights, primarily on large production parts (rather than test coupons). Examination by this form of testing can reveal water-spotting, streaking or haze that could indicate insufficient rinsing.

Electron or optical microscopy is used with production parts or test coupons, and can reveal contamination residues, obtain photographic documentation, and observe crystal properties. Microchemistry characterizes microscopic residues on surfaces. This technique is especially useful for dissolving residues on a large surface, then transferring the dissolved residues to a slide for closer examination. The reaction between specific reagents and contaminants causes the formation of characteristic crystals, which are by this examination.

The tissue paper test is done by rubbing a clean piece of white tissue paper on the cleaned surface, and then checking the paper for stains. The acid copper test uses a ferrous panel immersed in a copper sulfate solution. On areas where the surface is clean, copper will be deposited chemically, forming a strong, adherent, semi-bright coating that is spot-free. The testing of residue level is another method of removing contaminants for examination and characterization elsewhere. In this test, a test panel is rinse with an appropriate solvent after cleaning. The solvent is then evaporated, and the residue examined qualitatively and quantitatively using analytical instrumentation.

The atomizer test applies a fine water mist to a cleaned dry surface. Cleanliness is determined by the value of the "advancing contact angle". Surface energy can be measured under laboratory conditions for the same reasons, using a contact angle goniometer. Kerosene viewing of water break is another way to find and examine the all-important breaks in continuous wetting left by incomplete cleaning and/or rinsing. A test panel is removed from the cleaning solution and

11

WRn'R, 1313 5th St. SE, Suite 325, Minneapolis, MN 554144502 PH. (612) 379-5995

immediately placed at the bottom of a container of kerosene which is lighted from the bottom, which illumines the water breaks. Radioactive tracers and fluorescent dyes are used to track any remaining residues. Either can be mixed with soils, passed through the cleaning process, and detected later.

Gravimetric testing measures panels before and after cleaning to determine gross amounts oA residues. Sensitivity depends on the balance used and the size of the panel relative to the amount of residue. An oil spot test can be used to test degreasing cleaners. An area is cleaned on ground glass, a drop of oil placed on the cleaned area and then evaporated. An evaporation ring indicates contamination. Particulate contamination evaluations can be obtained by examining particulates trapped in a thin sheet of polyvinyl chloride which has been pressed against the surface and then heated to 2400 F. and cooled. This procedure captures particulates for visual examination. Particulates can also be added to a surface in a controlled manner, using precision particles, nephelometry and membrane filtration, to evaluate removal effectiveness of particles of a particular size of concern.

source #1 See &o A.%hf-F24 for evaluation of general cleaning.

a New Cl- Procm

Now that you have more understanding of your current cleaning needs and processes, the next stcp is to evaluate alternative processes. The following sections of this paper will give you some sense of the components of a new cleaning process, their relative importance, and current information on the newest approaches to cleaning, especially those which use aqueous processes.

--Equipment

Immersion cleaners consist of one or more tanks, with still or agitated solutions. Some cleaning chemistries, which can require elevated temperatures to function in certain applications, can be accommodated by adding heaters to the tanks. Ultrasonics, air sprayers, and agitation, created by pumping air or solution or by using mechanical agitation created by a hoist, can all be added to a immersion tank. This can be considered the basic building block of the cleaning process.

Ultrasonics creates cavitation (bubbles) at the cleaning surface in the cleaning solution using high frequency vibrations. As the bubbles form and collapse they actually create a “scrubbing” action that cleans the surfaces of a part, including blind holes and very small cracks and crevices. The action of ultrasonics also mates high temperatures and turbulence on the microscopic scale, further aiding the cleaning process. This type of equipment can be added to other cleaning systems, or used as a step in a spray machine. The limitations on the use of ultrasonics include the tendency for thick oils and greases to absorb the ultrasonic energy, thus thwarting the cleaning action, the capital expense, some difficulty with maintenance of immersed transducers, and the use of large amounts of electricity, approximately 10-15 watts per liter of solution. This means that cleaning tanks for very large parts would be prohibitively expensive.

Spray cleaners arc of three general types: batch, conveyor and rotary. Spray pressure, volume and angle of the spray itself can all have a significant effect on cleaning. Batch spray cleaning in a single spray chamber is especially suited to large parts and those soiled with heavy greases and tars. Rotary spray cleaners use a drum with a partition that spirals along the interior surface of the drum. In this way, when the drum is rotating parts are transported along the length of the drum. These units are especially useful for cleaning small parts such as smew machine parts and small metal stampings. Rotary spray washers can clean large volumes of parts, but any part cleaned this way must be able to stand the tumbling action of the rotating drum. Conveyorized spray equipment is usually best applied to large manufacturing operations with high throughput requirements to clean parts which are flat and even with controlled surface characteristics. The amount of wash and rinse water required can be as low as 10% of that required for batch cleaning. Spray pressure can vary from 2 psi to 2O00 psi and more. In general, the higher the spray pressure, the more mechanical help is provided to remove soils. Optimization of nozzle design is critical, taking into account such factors as spray pattern, drop size and formation, pressure/velocity and volume. source #2

1 2

WRITAR, 1313 5th St. SE, Suite 325, Minneapolis, MN 55414-4502 PH. (612) 379-5995

AQUEOUS CLEANING PROCESS EQUIPMENT

*Highest cost

*Requires rinsewater for some applications *Requires new basket design

I *Long lead time

*Cannot handle heavy oi ls *Limits part size and tank volumes *Separate dryer may be ltXJUired

Ad vantages

*fighest leve o cleaning; cleans complex parts, configurations *Can be automated *Parts can be welded .Usable with parts on trays

IMMERSION W ITH MECHANICAL

AGITATION

*Usable with parts on trays

*Will flush out chips

.cleans complex parts and configurations

*Simple to operare

*Requires rinsewater for some applications

*Harder to automate

*Requires proper part orientation and/or changes while in solution *Separate dryer may be XXpired

SPRAY W ASHER

*High level of cleanliness

*Will flush out chips .Simple to operate *High volume

*Portable *Short lead time

*Requires rinsewater for some applications to prevent film residues *Not effective in cleaning complex parts *Separate dryer may be ItXpired

Rinses can also be configured as batch, spray or conveyorized systems. Tap water may be sufficient to remove the cleaning chemistry and avoid deposi t ion of contaminants, but achieving low ionic, organic or metallic contamination may require deionization or reverse osmosis to produce the feed for the rinse. Chelating neutralizers are used in ceratin critical applications to dissolve organic and inorganic metals compounds and neutralize residual acidity/alkalinity. These chelating neutralizers are often salts of EDTA or weak alkaline solutions of ammonia salts. After being rinsed in such a modified solution, parts are then rinsed in deionized or relatively pure water that contains additives to enhance the displacement of the previous solution and decease the amount of water clinging to the part and thus requiring drying. Corrosion inhibitors (such as silicate salts), anti-oxidants (borates, stabilizers, and small amounts of solvents such as ethoxylated polyalcohols may all be added as stages of a rinse. The important point to note is that rinsing with "plain" water is not the only way to follow an aqueous cleaning solution, and may very well be the wrong way.

Drying can rarely be accomplished by simply allowing cleaned parts to air dry, for economic as well as quality reasons. Surface oxide formation and corrosion caused by solution penetrating between surfaces with close tolerances are two common quality problems. There are may aids to speed drying, including flash drylng with super hot air, forced air, air knives, infrared, convection ovens, hot nitrogen, centrifugal and chemistries which the water to "sheet" from the part or leave a

13


protective coating. Drying can constitute a very high, and new, energy cost, and is often a key decision point after quality concerns.

Parts handling must assure that all surfaces of the parts being cleaned are properly positioned for exposure to the cleaning solution. This is especially critical in spray systems. Part which do not allow solutions to drain freely must be rotated to prevent cross-contamination of other process chemistries, or dragout of process solutions. The handling system must integrate with your loading and unloading systems, and parts with intricate internal passages, pockets or crevices which trap solutions, or other types of areas which are difficult to reach may not be suitable for this type of system. Following is some basic guidance for parts orientation:

e Orient the surface as close to vertical as possible

e Rack with the longer dimension of the workpiece horizontal

e Rack with the lower edge tilted from the horizontal so that the runoff is from a comer rather than an entire edge

Water use minimization should be built into every cleaning system. Cleaning agents and rinse water should reused and recycled wherever technically and economically feasible. For example, rinse solutions too contaminated for their original purpose may be reused for another, less critical process. v i s presumes a high level of familiarity with cleaning needs, covered earlier in this article.) Effluent from one rinse system can be used as influent to another rinses system, allowing the use of up to 50% less water. In addition, this reuse scheme may accelerate the chemical diffusion process (which is what rinsing actually is) by reducing the concentration of alkaline material at the interface between the chemical film and the water, and reducing the viscosity of that film, allowing for quicker and better rinsing. However, this sort of reuse should be evaluated carefully, especially if acid and alkaline rinses are involved, since unwanted particles, such as metal hydroxides, may be deposited onto cleaned parts. Some other examples of water use minimization are: "prinsing" parts in solutions which are similar to the solution immediately following, e.g.,.rinsing in the acid rinse an acid etch before e the etch; using effluent from a final rinse as mfluent elsewhere, even to other types <I operations; using noncontact cooling water or steam condensate as rinsewater.

Waste treatment of aqueous cleaning solutions may require a system that can handle a variety of chemicals and contaminants: glycol ethers, phosphates, high concentrations of silicates, surfactants which do not degrade easily, high pH, oil, grease, dissolved and suspended metals, and organics. Roper treatment may require modification of an existing pretreatment system, or contracting with an offsite facility. Following are some important considerations in management of the wastes from these systems:

4 chelating action available, and at a minimum separate chelated and nonchelated wastestreams. This will reduce the volume of any treatment residuals produced, and may in some cases make treatment possible. A disadvantage of non-chelated systems is the requirement fix continuous filtration, which means higher maintenance costs fix filter replacement and tank cleanout, and disposal of those residuals.

4 cleaning solution. Removal methods include rope, belt, disc and floating skimmers for floating matexials, mechanical filters in the 50-100 micron particle removal size range, and membrane technologies such as microfiltration and ultrafiltration.

4 Reduce sludge volumes by separating contaminated and noncontaminated watm avoid using lime for neutralization; use polyelectrolytes rather than alum or femc chloride as coagulants.

Consider using non-chelated cleaner chemistries, or those with the mildest

Remove oil and grease, continuously or occasionally, to extend the life of the

Source #2 and WFUTAR

1 4

WRmAR, 1313 5th SL SE, Suite 325, Minneapolis, MN 554144502 PH. (612) 379-5995

. . v: VOC Re- in Solvent Cleaning

The use of solvents for cleaning is widespread at the Boeing Commercial Airplane Group (BCAG). In 1988,210,000 gallons of methy ethyl ketone (MEK) were used at Boeing in the Puget Sound area, although conservation has since reduced that number somewhat. Cleaning prior to painting is critical to ensure paint adhesion, corrosion resistance and satisfactory appearance. Solvent cleaning may be repeated several times during the finishing process, as illustrated by this example:

a Cleaning of mated (dodine or anodized) metal prim to application of corrosion resistant primer.

a Cleaning of corrosion resistant primer prior to polyurethane topcoat application.

a Reactivation of aged primer prior to additional primer or topcoat application.

In order to identify alternatives to the current solvent cleaning process, BCAG evaluated 1) solvents with less than 45" Hg vapor pressure; 2) solvent emulsions; and 3) alkaline cleaners. The solvents most commonly used have been MEK and MEWtolene mixtures. A solvent blend (BMS 11-7) was also used in a sealing test.

To test the cleaning effectiveness and efficiency of alternatives, panels were coated with the following contaminant mixture: 20 parts Boelube; 20 parts Monsanto low density Aviation Hydraulic Test Fluid; 20 parts TT-S-735, Type VII (fuel) to three parts fine Arizona dust. The contaminants were then aged on the test panels for 24 hours at room temperature plus 72 hours at 1200 F. The prepared panels were cleaned with the test solvents and overcoated. In some cases the solvent was allowed to evaporate rather than being wiped dry. Solvent emulsions and alkaline cleaners were followed by a water rinse and wiped dry. Controls were prepared using MEK.

Testing after a 7-day cure consisted of paint adhesion, (both dry and after a 7-day water immersion); topcoat appearance and paint flow; and rain erosion. The following materials were found to be acceptable alternative cleaners in that they did not harm the substrates, did not have residues, and have reasonable ease of use.

.( Citra-Safe, Inland Technology 4 .( .( .(

DeSoClean 45 (solvent mixture), Desoto, ~nc. Turco 6709 (solvent mixture), Turco products, Inc. DBE, DBE-5 (dibasic esters), W o n t Butyl Carbitol (diethylene glycol monobutyl ether), Union Carbide

Cleaning prior to sealing is another critical area of solvent use which was evaluated for possible alternatives. Test solvents were required all the following surfaces:

0 Epoxy primer (BMS-10-11, Type 1) 0 Alodinedaluminum a

a Titanium Fuel tank primer (BMS 10-20)

before application of a variety of sealants. After exposure to a regime of environmental testing similar to that conducted for pre-paint cleaning, the following tests were performed:

a

a

a

Peel strength after 1) no soak; 2) 3% NaCl soak and 3) fuel soak Lap shear after 1) no soak, 2) 3% NaCl soak and 3) fuel soak Dynamic performance after 1) no soak, 2) 3% NaCl soak and 3) fuel soak

1 5

WRITAR, 1313 5th St. SE, Suite 325, Minneapolis, MN 55414-4502 PH. (612) 379-5995

The following materials were found to be acceptable for cleaning prior to the sealing of fuel tanks:

4 CitraSafe, Inland Technology 4 MOK III (proprietary mixture), Boeing Aerospace

Butyl carbitol (diethylene glycol monobutyl ether), Union Carbide 4 DBE 5 (dibasic ester), DuPont 4 Tmo 6709 (solvent mixture), Turc d Biogenic SE377C (d-limonene emulsion), Rochester Midland

source #5

The manufacturing plant is an off-shore General Electric facility in Nogales, Senora, Mexico. The finished product at this site is a signal processor and electronic control product. This plant perfoms assembly of a high quality circuit board using both surface-mounted devices (SMD) and through-hole components. Prior to mid-1988, all board cleaning was done with Freon TMS. An alternative system was sought in order to eliminate solvent cleaning from the facility.

Three fluxes were used in the studies:

0 Rosin (Alpha 61 1F or Kester 197)--Solventcleaned 0 Alpha 83o.-Water-soluble 0 Alpha 855--Water-soluble

The effectiveness of water-soluble fluxes, and cleaning of residues using aqueous cleaners, were evaluated using both cleanliness tests and functional humidity testing. A large number of discrete trials w m requirtd in order to achieve a 90% reduction in solvent used by fluxcleaning operations. Fluxes which were left on the board caused an unacceptable number of failum, and the aqueous cleanir process itself scemed to add contaminants to the boards.

The fmd resolution, pending further testing, is to perform the majority of cleaning using an inline aqueous cleaner system, followed by a brief solvent cleaning prior to conformal coating. A primary hurdle is the limited effectiveness of the cleaning equipment. Some boards art shielded completely from the spray cleaner, or cleaned inefficiently. SourCe#6

--Other Considerations: Performance and Environmental Impact

Some data do exist far pexfmance of aqueous cleaners as compared to solvents such as TCA and methylene chloride, but they art still rare. Following is a good example, ma& available by a supplier. W e the comparisons are interesting, and should give some heart to a facility searching for an altcmative, the lack of specificity as to the name of the cleaners leaves the searcher almost empty- handcd.

1 6

WRlTAR, 1313 5th St. SE, Suite 325, Minneapolis, MN 554144502 PH. (612) 379-5995

PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF TESTED AQUEOUS CLEANERS

.

17

WRITAR, 1313 5th St. SE, Suite 325. Minneapolis, MN 554144502 PH. (612) 379-5995

CLEANING TIME, IN MINUTES, AQUEOUS CLEANERS V. SOLVENTS

4 10%. 110' F. 4 20%, 120' F. Cleaner A B C D A B C D SOILS Houghton 2 2 2 2 2 2 <1 <I Draw 431 Polyisobuty- 10 12 25 5 20 20 <lo <lo ltne (honey oil) batty od 5 4 10 4 7 15 5 5 vactra #2 1 1 1 3 10 5 1 10

e1 1 <1 2 10 5 1 10 DTE-24 Blue mk 30/ 30/ 30/ 3w

Mobil Spm- ' 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1.5 d e oil Velocite #6 Bardahl 10 2 5 2 2 2 1 1.5 Glow #10 MOM 1 3 5 <1 1 2 2 2 DIE BB Slllcom 30/ 30/ 30/ 30/ glove 98% 35% 80% 40% Petrolatum 4 7 9 2 2 5 5 <1 CI Anti-scoring 30/ 30/ 30/ 30/ EP lube #3 30% 70% 20% 50% Pcrmatex 30/ 10 30/ 30/ Anti-seize 60% 95% 95% lube

30/ 30/ 30/ 30/ solder paste 30% 15% 15% 15%

50% 50% 25% 50%

20% 35% 20% 40%

LaPPmg 301 301 30/ 30/ ---- 30/ 30/

I I I I I 17% 17% 135% 15%

10096, room TCA Perc Meth

2 1.5 1.5

3 1.5 1.5

2 2 2 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1

30/ 30/ 10 90% 85% e1 e1 <1

e1 e1 e1

1 1 1

30/ 7 1 65% 10 7 1

20 10 50%

30/ 30/ 30/ 10% 20% 30%

30/ 30/ 30/ 5% 95% 12% 5 1 <1

30/30/30/30r 195% I 190% I

source #7

Other aggregate examples of these types of performance data can be gleaned from ongoing evaluations sponsored by industry p u p s and research organizations. However, regardless of the stated performance in bench-scale testing, it still remains to the facility itself to test alternatives against sDecific parts and soils.

In addition to the more general admonitions to mat wastes properly and make prudent choices, them is available more specific information on health and safety and environmental impacts of aqueous cleaners, and a common class of semi-aqueous cleaners, terpenes. The following materials were evaluatd

18


e

e

e

e

e

b

e

e

e

e 4

e

Ammonium hydroxide, potassium hydroxide; sodium hydroxide Diethylene glycol monobutyl ether Dodecanedioic acid EDTA and its tetrasodium salt Monoethanolamine; diethanolamine; triethanolamine Borax

Sodium gluconate Sodium silicate; sodium metasilicate Sodium tripolyphosphate; trisodium phosphate; tetrasodium pyrophosphate; tetrapotassium pyrophosphate Sodium xylene sulfonate

sodium CarbOMte

e

e

e

. b

e

b

e

e

d-limonene anethole alpha-pinene beta-pinene alpha-terpinene beta-terpinene terpinolene dipentene (di-limonene)

The interim assessment evaluated the available information on the toxicity of the aqueous and terpene cleaners, as well as the potential exposure levels to workers and the general population from the manufacture, formulation, and use of these cleaners. Because my of these chemicals are not yet widely used in these applications, the assessment necessarily rests on incomplete data and, therefore, should not be interpreted as a final judgment. Nonetheless, the results of these preliminary analyses indicate that the aqueous and terpene cleaners can be used in a manner safe to workers, the general population, and the environment, given appropriate technological changes and exposure control practices.

The terpenes were found to be of generally low to moderate toxicity, though they are more biologically active than the CFC‘s. Environmental releases of terpenes will be mostly to water, and should receive at a minimum gravity separation @retreatment) followed by wastewater treatment. Most of the evaluated aqueous cleaners have been widely used in industry for more than 20 years, and the only toxicity noted were some adverse effects at low to moderate doses of the amines, glycol ether and borax. Once again, most environmental releases will be to water, and should receive wastewater treatment and controlled disposal. Some of these materials show chronic toxicity to algae, and the potential of the phosphates to cause algal blooms and eutrophication is well known.

Source #7 J

19


SOURCES:

CFC-113 pnd Methyl Chlorofm in Precision Operations, ICOLP . . 1) Technical Committee, November 1990. available fiom: Industry Cooperative for Ozone Layer Protection (ICOLP)

1440 New York Av., SW, Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 202/137- 14 19

2) depleting chemicals. available fioom:

C m, a quarterly newsletter for anyone interested in alternatives to ozone-

City of Irvine Environmental Program Office P.O. Box 19575 Ixvine,CA 92713 contact: Alicia Scherer

I

3) Industry," JoAnn A. Quitmeyer, undated. available fim:

"New Technology Cleaners Replace Chlorinated Solvent Degreasers in the Metalworking

W.R. Grace & Co. - COM. /Dewey and Almy Chemical Division 55 Hayden Av. Lexington, MA 02173 617/861-6600 ~2335

4) "Vapor Degreasing," J.C. Johnson, The Dow Chemical Co. "Metal Cleaning," William P. Innes, MacDermid Inc. "Water Rinsing," J.B. Mohler

annual. all to be found in v k & D- available fim: Metals and Plastics Publications, Inc.

One University Plaza Hackensack, NJ 07601

. . .

5 ) #900958, Vanessa Gemmell and Brian Smith, Boeing Co., April 1990. availablefi.ovn: SAE Intemational

400 Commonwealth Dr. Warrendale, PA 15096-0001

"VOC Reduction: Solvent Cleaning and Paint Stripping," SAE Technical Paper Series

6) and D.F. Aitken, General Electric, IPC Technical Paper Series #IFC-TP-899.

"Eliminating Solvents in the Cleaning of Circuit Assemblies: A Case History," I.B. Goldman

available fiom: IPC 7380 North Lincoln Av. Lincolnwood,IL 60646

7) Protection Agency, Office of Toxic Substances, Washington, D.C., 1991. avaihble fiom:

"Aqueous and Terpene Cleaning--Interim Report" (extemal review draft), U.S. Environmental

Environmental Assistance Division (TS-799) USEPA / TSCA Assistance Information Services 401 M St. SW Washington, D.C. 20460

20

WRITAR, 1313 5th St. SE. Suite 325, Minneapolis, MN 554144502 PH. (612) 379-5995

RESOURCES:

"Digital Equipment Corporation Augusta Aqueous Microdmplet Module Cleaning Process," April 1990. available fim: Industry Cooperative for Ozone Layer Protection (ICOLP)

1440 New York Av., SW, Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20005 202/737- 14 19

"Effects of Degreasing Solvents on Conductive and Semiconductive Shield Compounds, and on the Electrical Performance of Molded Connectors," D.D. Perry and J.P. Bolcar, Eagle Industries, January 1991. ovailoble fim: Inland Technology, Inc.

2612 Pacific Highway East, Suite C Tacma,WA 98424 2061922-8932

W-, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH, 1989.

. . . "Controlling Toxic Air Emissions," Anthony J. Buonicore, 1990.

, pp. 29-31, September

, p. 63, May, 1990. "Emulsion and Solvent Cleaners," Stan Scislowski, &tal F i e . . . . . .

"Alternative Chemicals and Processes in Metal Cleaning," William J. Chiarella, &tal F- 9 PP. 21-23, December 1990.

"New Solder Pastes Offer CFC Alternatives," Leslie Forkner, Man- * , pp. 22-29, June 1990.

"A Semi-Aqueous Connector Cleaning Process," Paul Englert, AT&T Bell Laboratories, IPC Technical Paper Series #IPC-TP-907.

"Comparing Cleaning Alternatives to CFCs Using Various Analytical Techniques: Part 1 - HCFCs," S.S. Seeliig, A. Haller, and R. Banasiak, Allied-Signal, Inc., IPC Technical Paper Series #E-TP- 903.

"Damage-Free Ultrasonic Cleaning Using CFCs, Aqueous and Semi-Aqueous Solvents," B.P. Richards, IPCTe&&.aj&vl 'ew, pp. 26-30, March 1991.

"An Aqueous Cleaning Alternative to CFCs for Rosin Flux Removal," Charles R. Lowell and Janet R. Stenit, Hollis Automation, IPC Technical Paper Series #IPC-TP-893.

"Water-Soluble Soldering Pastes - A Possible Solution to the CFC Problem in Electronics Manufacturing?", Dr. Bemd Drouven and Dr. Werner Leske, Demetron; Dr. Karl A. Starz and Heike Kuhnhold, Degussa AG, IPC Technical Paper Series #IPC-TP-891.

"Semi-Aqueous Defluxing Using Closed-Loop Processes," Dr. Michael E. Hayes, Petroferm, Inc., Dpc Technical Paper Series #IPC-TP-898.

21

WRmAR, 1313 5th St. SE, Suite 325, Minneapolis, MN 55414-4502 PH. (612) 379-5995

"Does Ultrasonic Cleaning of PCBs Cause Component Problems: An Appraisal," B.P. Richards, P.K. Footner, Ipc T e c U Rem 'ew,pp. 15-27, June 1990. all of the preceding IPC publications available from: IPC 7380 North Lincoln Av. Linco1nwood.L 60646

"How Clean Is Clean? A Quantitative Answer," Mantosh K. Chawla, pp. 40-42, August 1990.

produced by aid available from: Electronic Controls Design, Inc. 4287-A SE International Way %

Milwaukie, OR 97222-8825

and Surface F-

ve m B- (kil&g, undated. . .

503/659-6100 . . .

"Design/Maintenance Tips for Power Washers," Dan Perkins and AI Betz, Indusgial F i e 9 PP. 20-24, May 1989.

"Solvents: The Good, The Bad and the Banned," proceedings of a national teleconference, March 1991. availablefi.0" Center for Industrial Services University of Tennessee 226 Capitol Blvd. Building, Suite 401 Nashville, TN 37219-1804

e Re-n of Solvent W a a s in m, California Department of Health Services, Sacramento, CA, 1988.

"Alternate Techniques for Managing Solvent Wastes," Benjamin L. Blaney, Journal of the &r 1, Vol. 36, No. 5, May 1986.

"Hydrofluorocarbons and Hydrochlorofluorocans--Interim Report" (external review draft), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Toxic Substances, Washington, D.C., 1991. OTS reports avaihblefrom: Environmental Assistance Division (TS-799) USEPA TSCA Assistance Information Services 401 M St. SW Washington, D.C. 20460

_-

22

wR/TAR, 1313 5th St. SE, Suite 325, Minneapolis, MN 554144502 PH. (612) 379-5995

SECTION 5

CHEMICAL AND EQUIPMENT SUPPLIERS

Waste Minimization Program - Aqueous Industrial Cleaning Chemicals

f a c t s h e e t

*I

Due to increasingly stringent federal and state regulations involving solvents, a number of industries are making the transition from solvent "cold cleaning" and vapor degreasing to aqueous chemical clean@g systems. Aqueous industrial cleaning chemicals are cleaners that are based on water as opposed to an organic solvent. Included in this definition of aqueous cleaners are the following:

Water/Alcohol Cleaners - Acidic Cleaners - Alkaline Cleaners - Emulsions - Saponifiers

General Description of the

Various Aqueous Cleaners Available

Water/Alcohol Cleaners A mixture of water and various forms of alcohol; They are used to remove inorganic contaminants.

Acidic Cleaners Used to remove rust and scale from metal surfaces; Cleans metal without etching; They have a pH < 7; Acidic cleaners may be composed of mineral acids (e.g. nitric, phosphoric, or sulfuric) or organic acids (acetic and oxalic).

Alkaline Cleaners Commonly substituted for halogenated organic solvents in metal degreasing applications; They need inhibitors to prevent etching when used on metal surfaces.

P Emulsions

Saponifiers

Are composed of water soluble solvents that are dispersed in water by surfactants (wetting agents) and emulsifiers; Emulsions are frequently used in ultrasonic cleaning.

Similar to soap in chemistry and cleaning action; They are effective in removing oils, greases, and rosin.

The manufacturer and supplier list and the purchasing guidelines on the following pages should help your company choose the aqueous cleaning chemistry that will work best for you. [']"CFC Alternatives' Environment Program Office, Irvine, CA February 1991

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Hazardous Waste Minimization Program

Purchasing Guidelines Aqueous Industrial Cleaning

for Chemicals

THE FOLLOWING LIST OF CLEANING CHEMICAL PURCHASING GUIDELINES WAS PREPARED BY THE WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RJ3OURCES TO HELP WISCONSIN BUSINESSES IDENTIFY AND EVALUATE POLLUTION PREVENTlON OPPORTUNIIES. &THOUGH Tr IS NOT POSSIBLE TO COVER EVERY ASPECT OF CLEANING CHEMICAL SELECTION, THE LIST COVERS SOME OF THE MORE IMPORTANT POINTS AND PROVIDES CONSIDERATIONS FOR EVALUATING INDUSTRIAL CHEMICALS.

What type of aqueous industrial cleaner is best for your company?

1) Choose the appropriate chemistry for the contaminant that needs to be removed. (See Table 1 and consult with the chemical company's staff.)

TABLE 1 Cleaning Effectiveness" Cleaning Chm. OlWMlkS I n O I Z a n i c s Water Only Poor Great Water/Alcohol Fair Great Acid Poor Great Alkaline Poor Great Emulsion Great Good Saponifier Great Good

Confaminants polar Non-wlar Gredt Poor Fair Fair Fair Poor Fair Poor Good Great Good Great

Great Great Great Great Good Good

* Source: "CFC Altemtives" Environmental Program Office, City of k i n e , CA February 1991

2) Assess the compatibility of the chemical cleaner with the object to be cleaned.

3) If the object to be cleaned is made of metal that is susceptible to oxidation, you should consider using a cleaning chemical or rinse solution that contains a rust inhibitor.

4) Choose the chemical that will produce the highest level of cleanliness for the part.

5) Determine the type of rinse system (e.g., spray; immersion) that will be necessary to remove the chemical residue from the object being cleaned. Chelating agents, such as EDTA and ammonia salts, are used to dissolve the residue and to reduce the acidity of the rinse solution.

6) Note whether or not the cleaning solution needs to be heated to increase its effectiveness. How much would the heating costs be expected to influence the overall operating costs of the system?

7) Be sure that the aqueous chemical cleaner is compatible with the equipment or cleaning method (e.g., spray; immersion) that you intend to use.

-2-

GUIDELINES, Cont.

P

Rate the various chemicals on the basis of toxicity, hazards of handling, and ease of adequate treatment and disposal. Try to determine which chemical is the most effective cleaner while still rating high in the three categories mentioned above.

Evaluate the expected service life of the chemical cleaner. Can the cleaning solution be filtered and recycled?

Evaluate the costs of the cleaning chemical throughout its cycle of use. - Purchase Cost - Operating Costs - RecyclingDisposal Costs

If you own or have access to aqueous cleaning equipment, ask the chemical salesperson if you may run a test cleaning of your product with the proposed cleaning chemical. If you don't currently own aqueous cleaning equipment, you should run the test, if at all possible, on the me of equipment (spray, immersion, ultrasonic, etc.) that you expect to purchase.

Ideally, the manufacturer or supplier of the chemical you are interested in should have a flexible delivery system that will conform to your chemical usage patterns.

Evaluate the quality of the technical support staff of the manufacturer or supplier of the chemical. If you need help in fine tuning the use of the chemical, will someone be available to visit your site?

Identify the health and safety precautions necessary when using this chemical in the working conditions at your facility. This information is frequently found in the Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) that you should request from the chemical manufacturer or salesperson.

Assess the wastewater treatment requirements that apply before discharging the spent cleaning solution to a sewerage treatment facility.

- The treatment required may depend as much on the contaminant that is cleaned from the part as it does on the cleaning solution itself.

- Before making a final decision, verify that the proposed treatment meets wastewater treatment requirements by contacting your sewerage district or the DNR for specific information. Be aware that treatment requirements may vary from one sewerage district to another, and what is adequate treatment in the vendor's area, may not be adequate in yours.

Determine if there are any other local, state, or federal health and safety or environmental regulations that apply to the use of the cleaning chemicals.

Some of the purchasing guidelines h e been adapted from the February I991 newsletter "CFC Alternatives" provided by the Environmental Program W c e of Irvine, C4. l3e Dh?R would like to thank them for their contribution.

-3-

Aqueous Industrial Cleaning Chemicals Manufacturer and Supplier List

August 1991

THE WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES @m), THROUGH THE WISCONSIN HAZARDOUS WASTE MINIMIZATION PROGRAM, DEVELOPED THE FOLLOWING LIST OF MA"RERS AND SUPPLIERS OF AQUEOUS hDUszlRIAL CLEANING C-CAZS. THE LIST SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED TO BE A C O M P L m LISTING OF AVAILABLE MANUFACTURERS OR SUPPLIERS OF AQUEOUS CHEMICAL CLEANERS, NOR IS THE LIST AN ENDORSEMENT OF ANY OF THE SPECIFIC MANUFA- OR SUPPLIERS. HAZARDOUS WASTE GENERATORS ARE ADVISED TO THOROUGHLY EVALUATE THE SERVICES AND COMPLIANCE STATUS OF THESE COMPANIES. THE LIST WILL BE PERIODICALLY UPDATED. IF YOU HAVE ANY ADDlTIONS OR CORRECIIONS FOR THIS

PRWW AT (608) 267-3763. LIST, PLEASE CONTACT THE HAZARDOUS WASTE MINIMIZATION TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

Manufacturers

ADF Systems 1103 16th Avenue North P.O. Box 278 Humboldt, IA 50548 Phone: (515) 332-5400

Alpha Metals 2751 Presidio Street Carson, CA 90810 Am. Jerry Schultz Phone: (213) 603-9255

Atochem North America 3 Parkway Drive Philadelphia, PA 19102 Phone: (215) 587-7000

Biochem Inc. 15OOO W. 6th Ave. Ste. 202 Golden, CO 80401 Phone: (800) 777-7870

Blue Gold Co. P.O. Box 690 Ashland, OH 44805 Phone: (419) 945-2513

Branson Ultrasonics Corp 41 Eagle Road Danbury, CT 06813 Phone: (203) 796-0400

Distributor/Sales ReD.

Engman-Tay lor W142 N9351 Fountain Blvd. Menomonee Falls, WI Phone: (800) 333-1950

Jerry Schultz Phone: (213) 603-9255

Atochem North America 24500 Center Ridge Rd. Suite 180 Cleveland, OH 44145 Phone: (216) 835-5030

Mike Lane Phone: (800) 777-7870

Steve Roberts Phone: (419) 945-2513

Schuette Industrial Sales P.O. Box 943 Waukesha, WI 53187 Am. Tom Riddle Phone: (414) 549-0050

4

Manufacturers Distributor/Sales ReD.

C & H Chemical Company

St.Pau1, MN 55107 Phone: (612) 227-4343

I 222 Starkey Street

(800) 328-4827

Chemical Ways Corp.-Ardrox 921 Sherwood Drive Lake Bluff, IL 60044 Phone: (708) 295-1660 *

Fax: (708) 295-8748

Crest Ultrasonics 23352 Madero Street Suite P Mission Viejo, CA 92691 Phone: (714) 588-9704

Delta-Omega Technologies Ltd. P.O. Box 81518 Lafayette, LA 70598 Phone: (800) 833-5091

(318) 239-5131

Electrochemical Circuit Chem. Corp. 751 Elm Street Youngstown, OH 44502 Phone: (216) 746-0517

Empire 2101 West Cabot Blvd. Langhome, PA 19047 Phone: (215) 752-8800

Environmental Technology Port of Sanford Sanford, FL 32771 Phone: (407) 321-7910

F’remont Industries 4400 N. Valley Industrial Blvd. Shakopee, MN 55379 Phone: (612) 445-4121

John Jesmok Kevin Urmann Chuck Griggs Phone: (800) 328-4827

Tim Dwyer Stevens Point, WI Phone: (715) 341-9204

or Pat McGinn Brookfield, WI Phone: (414) 783-7777

David Arata 525 Westin Street Hoffmann Estates, IL 61904 Phone: (708) 843-2139

Ken Jane Phone: (3 18) 237-509 1

Regional Office 5129 Industry St. Maple Plain, MN 55359 Phone: (800) 621-0510

Omni Finishing Systems 163 Railroad Drive Ivyland, PA 18974 Phone: (215) 953-1 166

Kraft Chemical 1945 N. Hawthorne Ave. Melrose Park, IL 60160 Phone: (708) 345-5200

Bruce Swanson Phone (612) 922-0285 John Hamric Phone: (414) 534-6756

-5-

Manufacturers Distributor/Sales ReD. .

Heatbath Corporation P.O. Box 2978 Springfield, MA 01101 Phone: (413) 543-3381

Hubbard-Hall, Inc P.O. Box 790 Waterbury, CT 06725 Phone: (401) 333-6180

J. Hall Marketing 314 Straight Ave. SW Grand Rapids, MI 49504 Phone: (616) 458-1981

Kester Solder Company Division of Litton Systems, Inc. P.O. Box 188 Anaheim, CA 92805 Phone: (714) 871-0280

Kleer-Flo, Inc. 15151 Technology Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Attn. Mike Collins Phone: (612) 934-2555

Luster-On Products, Inc. Highland Station Box 90247 Springfield, MA 00139 Phone: (413) 739-2541

MacDennid, Inc. 245 Freight Street Waterbury, CT 06702 Phone: (203) 575-5700

ManGill Chemical 23000 St Clair Ave. Cleveland, OH 44117 Phone: (800) 627-6422

Bill Kitazaki W3332 N5542 Linden Circle West Nashota, WI 53058 Phone: (414) 367-4108

Don Micek Phone: (401) 333-6180

Regional Office 515 E. Touhy Avenue Des Plains, IL 60018 Phone: (800) 253-7837

Mike Collins Phone: (612) 934-2555

Ashland Chemical 1033 N. Hawley Rd. Milwaukee, WI 53208 Phone: (414) 258-4235

MacDermid, Inc. 9805 Hamilton Rd. Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Phone: (612) 944-9141

Gary Morrifsette 1494 1 Wellington Rd. Wayzata, MN 55391 Phone: (612) 473-7457

-6-

Manufacturers Distributor/Sales ReD.

Mirachem Corporation 2107-2113 E. 5th Street Tempe, AZ 85281-3034 Phone: (602) 966-3030

Oakite Products 50 Valley Rd. Berkley Heights, NJ 07922 Phone: (800) 526-4473

.4

?

O.C.S. Manufacturing 429 Madera Street P.O. Box 370 San Gabriel, CA 91778-0370 Phone: (818) 458-2471

Sonicor Corp. 100 Wartburg Avenue Copiague, NY 11726 Phone: (5 16) 842-3344 Fax: (516) 842-3389

Texo Corporation 2801 Highland Avenue Cincinnati, OH 45212 Phone: (513) 731-3400

NonHaz Alternatives 910 Country Club Drive Wooster, OH 44691 Phone: (800) 33 1-3688

Oakite Products Inc. 13177 Huron River Drive Romulus, MI 48174 Phone: (800) 52 1-6200 Phone: (8 18) 458-2471

Gary Hartline Phone: (8 18) 458-247 1

Metal Finishing Supply 21575 Doral Rd. Brookfield, WI 53066 Phone: (414) 782-0555

Bill Chapin Phone: (414) 352-4586 John Butt Phone: (4 14) 77 1-754 1 Rick Phipps Phone: (414) 542-5958

Hazardous. Waste Minimization Program Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources

P.O. Box 7921(SW/3) Madison, WI 53707

(608) 267-9523 Or (608) 267-3763

I PUBL-SW-147 91 - -, Printed on Recycled Paper

-7-

Waste Minimization Program

Aqueous Parts Washing Equipment

f a c t s h e e t

Backmound Information

There are two basic approaches to aqueous cleaning, batch processes and continuous processes. The approach your company decides upon will be based on the production levels that you require. For a high production level a continuous process is probably the better choice, while batch processing is sufficient for moderate and lower production level.

Batch Processing The parts are loaded into the washer in batches. A cleaning operation (washing, rinsing, drying) must be completed for a batch before another operation can be started. Batch processing is labor intensive, so it will require an employee to operate.

Continuous Processing Parts are loaded continuously into the washer system and are moved through the cleaning system by a conveyor type system. Continuous systems are not labor intensive, so the washer would not need an operator at all times.

The other distinction between models of aqueous parts washers is the method of cleaning that is used. The most commonly used methods of cleaning are immersion cleaning, spray cleaning, and ultrasonic cleaning. These methods are briefly described below.

Immersion Cleaning The parts are dipped into cleaner-filled tanks. The cleaning solution may be agitated and/or heated to improve cleaning. Immersion is often a batch process.

.

Spray Cleaning

Ultrasonic Cleaning

Spray cleaners increase the cleaning ability by combining the cleaning chemistry with physical cleaning (sprayer). Spray cleaning may be batch or continuous.

Ultrasonic cleaning is a special type of immersion cleaning in which high frequency vibrations are transmitted through the solution to produce a scrubbing action. It is effective in cleaning very small parts.


Purchasing Guidelines for Aqueous Parts Washing Equipment

1) What is the configuration and size of the part to be washed?

Does the configuration or size lend itself to spray washing or immersion?

- Does the part have grooves or cavities that may require a special cleaning method?

- Will the configuration of the part promote "drag-out"? Drag-out is contamination of the rinse solution by dirty wash solution that remains on the part after it has been removed from the wash stage.

2) Does the material from which the part is made make it susceptible to damage from the washing method you are considering?

3) What is the quantity of parts to be washed?

- Smaller quantities can be handled efficiently in batch systems, while large quantities may be more efficiently handled in a continuous process system.

4) What specific functions must the cleaning equipment perform?

- Will the cleaning solution need to be heated?

- Is a dryer system necessary to remove moisture from the part immediately after washing?

- Is a multi-stage process necessary to increase the cleanliness of the parts?

- Is an oil separator/skimmer an available equipment option?

-2-

PURCHASING GUIDELINES, Cont.

.

5)

6)

What are the contaminants that need to be removed?

- Is the proposed cleaning agent compatible with the type of equipment to be used?

- If immersion cleaning is going to be used, will the contaminants be suspended in the cleaning solution or will they settle to the bottom of the tank?

- Would the contaminant be more easily removed with the aid of physical or mechanical treatment?

What are the time constraints on the process?

Is the cycle time required in seconds, minutes, or hours?

- Will a batch system be fast enough or will a beltdriven or monoraildriven continuous process be required?

- Could an ultrasonic cleaner reduce the cycle time?

Will the equipment manufacturer provide a test cleaning of your parts for your inspection?

Will the cleaned parts meet the cleanliness standards of your clients?

What are the wastewater treatment requirements for the contaminated cleaning solution and rinse water?

- Contact the Wisconsin DNR or local POTW to determine wastewater regulations and cost of compliance.

- State law requires that plans and specifications be submitted to the Wisconsin DNR before installation of wastewater treatment equipment!

What operations are to be performed immediately after cleaning?

- Will the parts be painted, plated, or galvanized?

- Will these operations be affected by the aqueous washer?

Will the parts need to be handled automatically or can they be handled manually?

What are the power requirements of the equipment? Is it energy efficient?

Are there any local, state or federal health and safety or environmental regulations that apply to the use of this equipment?

- Depending on the type of industry using this equipment, there may be categorical effluent standards that apply to discharge of process wastewater.

-3-

.

Aqueous Parts Washing Equipment Manufacturer and Supplier List

August 1991

THE WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES om), THROUGH THE WISCONSIN HAZARDOUS WASTE MINIMIZATION TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM, DEVELOPED THE FOLLOWING LIST OF MANUFACTUFERS AND SUPPLWS OF AQUEOUS PARTS WASHING EQUIPMENT. THE LIST SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED TO BE COMPLJTE IN RS LISTING OF MANUFACTURERS AND SUPPLIERS. LIST IS NOT AN ENDORSEMENT OF ANY OF THE SPECIFIC hMNUFACIWRERS OR SUPPLIERS LISTED. HAZARDOUS WASTE GENERATORS ARE ADVISED TO THOROUGHLY EVALUATE THE SERVICES AND COMPLIANCE STATUS OF ANY COMPANY THAT THEY USE TO MANAGE THEIR HAZARDOUS WASTE. ?kE LIST WILL BE PERIODICALLY UPDATED. IF YOU HAVE ANY ADDITIONS OR CORFUZClTONS FOR THIS LIST, PLEASE CONTAm THE HAZARDOUS WASTE MINIMIZATION TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM AT (608) 267-3763.

AQUEOUS WASHERS

Manufacturer

ADF Systems Ltd. P.O. Box278 Humboldt, IA 50548 Phone: (515) 332-5400 Fax: (515) 332-4475

American Metal Wash 360 Euclid Avenue Canonsburg, PA 15317 Phone: (412) 746-4203 Fax: (412) 756-5738

Better Engineering 7101 Bel Air Road Baltimore, MD 21206 Phone: (800) 229-3380

Bowden Industries 1004 Oster Drive N.W. Huntsville, AL 35816 (800) KLEENER

Distributor/Sales Rep.

Engman-Taylor W142 N9351 Fountain Blvd. Menomonee Falls, WI . Phone: (800) 333-1950

Ed Joseph Associates P.O. Box564 Oconomowoc, WI 53066 Phone: (414) 567-9229

Carney Sales Co. 12471 Rhode Island Ave. South Savage, MN 55378 Phone: (612) 895-0227

Bill Lanier Phone (800) KLENER

4

Manufacturer Distributor/Sales ReD.

Cleanomat 664 Medelssohn Ave. Golden Valley, MN 55427 Phone: (612) 591-9388

F.M.T. Inc. 1950 Industrial Dr. Findlay, OH 45840 Phone: (412) 4224768 Fax: (419) 422-0072

Graymills Corporation 3705 N. Lincoln Ave. Chicago, IL 60613 Phone: (3 12) 248-6825

Kleerflo, Inc. 15151 Technology Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Phone: (612) 934-2555

Lewis Corporation 102 Willenbrock Rd. Oxford, CO 06483 Phone: (203) 264-3100

ManGill Chemical Magnus Division 7255 Division St. Oakwood Village, OH 44146 Phone: (800) 627-6422

Stoelting, Inc. 502 Highway 67 Kiel, WI 53042 Phone: (4 14) 894-7029

Vibron Division Burgess & Associates 33660 Pin Oak Parkway Avon Lake, OH 44012 Phone: (800) 321-2283 L

Al Brenn Phone: (800) 328-4827

Applied Technology 417 W. 46th Street Minneapolis, MN 55409 Phone: (612) 825-61 11 Ed Burde

Bob Kimsel Phone: (3 12) 248-6825

Mike Collins 15151 Technology Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Phone: (800) 328-7942

Ryan Equipment Co. 749 Creel Drive Wood Dale, JL 60191 Phone: (708) 595-571 1

Gsry Morrissette 14941 Wellington Rd. Wayzata, MN 55391 Phone: (612) 473-7547

James Booker Phone: (414) 894-2293

(800) 558-5807

Ed Josephs Associates P.O. Box 564 Oconomowoc, WI 53066 Phone: (414) 567-9229

-5-

ULTRASONIC AQUEOUS WASHERS

Manufacturer Distributor/Sales ReD.

Branson Ultrasonics 41 Eagle Road Danbury, CT 06813 Phone: (203) 796-0400

Crest Ultrasonics Scotch Rd. Mercer County Airport Trenton, NJ 08628 Phone: (609) 884-4000

Schuette Ind. Sales P.O. Box943 Waukesha, WI 53187 Attn: Tom Riddle Phone: (414) 549-0050

David Arab 525 Westin Street Hoffman Estates, IL 61904 Phone: (708) 843-2139

Empire Cleaning Equipment omni Finishing systems 2101 West Cabot Blvd. Langhome, PA 19047 Phone: (215) 752-8000

163 Railroad Drive Ivyland, PA 18974 Phone: (215) 953-1 166

Fax: (215) 752-9373 Fax: (215) 953-8644

Sonicor, Inc. 100 Wartburg Avenue Copiague, NY 11726 Phone: (5 16) 842-3344 Fax: (516) 842-3389

swen sonic Corp. 960 Rolff St. Davneport, IA 52802 Phone: (319) 322-0144

Ranschoff Corporation N. 5th St. & Ford Blvd. Hamilton, OH 45011 Phone: (513) 863-5813

D.W. R e m " Inc. 6557 MonzingenMahe West Germany Phone: (0 67 51) 50 11

Metal Finishing supply 21575 Doral Rd. Brookfield, WI 53008 Phone: (414) 782-0555

Ed Josephs Associates P.O. Box564 Oconomowoc, WI 53066 Phone: (414) 567-9229

Ed Josephs Associates P.O. Box564 Oconomowoc, WI 53066 Phone: (414) 567-9229

Max Daetwyler Corp. 13420 Reese West Huntersville, NC 28078 Phone: (704) 875-1200

Hazardous Waste Minimization Program Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources

P.O. Box 7921(SW/3) ~ Madison, WI 53707 - (608) 267-9523 or

-- - - (608) 267-3763

Q I - - Printed on Reaycled Paper PUBL-SW-148 91 7

WASTE REDUCTION RESOURCE CENTER FOR THE SOUTHEAST

SOLVENTS - THE ALTERNATIVES

AUGUST 1992

P.O. BOX 27687 382sBARR€rrORNE RALEIGH, NORTH CARWNA 2761 1-7687

SOLVENTS - THE ALTERNATIVES

Prepared By: Bob Carter

Waste Reduct ion Resource Center Fcrr The S o u t h e a s t P. 0. Box 27687

3825 Barret t Dr ive Raleigh, NC 27611-7687

(800) 476-8686

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

A s p e c i a l t h a n k s is due t o a l l who provided c o n s t r u c t i v e cri t icisms of t h i s r e p o r t . Hopeful ly i t w i l l be more u s e f u l t o r eade r s because of t h e i r in te res t . V i c Young, P h i l Morse, and Gary Hunt of t he Cen te r and Stephen Evanoff, General Dynamics, Dallas, TX, a l l provided v a l u a b l e i n p u t . The person due t h e greatest thanks is Ann Hoke of t h e Center whose pa t i ence and t o l e r a n c e through many rewrites made it a l l poss ib l e .

Introduction:

"Crunch" time has come for most solvent users. If the excise tz.: won't do it, accelerated phase out of the chlorinated ozons depleters and the Clean Air Act will. All users of s o l v e n t s , whatever the application, need to look for safe and effective alternatives. What ever the motivation - cost, safety, regulatory - the time to change has arrived. The United States has unilaterally proposed moving the phase out date for chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), halons, carbon tetrachloride, and methyl chloroform from 2000-2005 to December 31, 1995. This move came due in part to new NASA measurement dat4 showing accelerated ozone depletion over North America far in excess of original predictions. it is anticipated that the same phase out schedule will be adopted by all signers of the Montreal Protocol at their next meeting in November 1992.

The Clean Air Act will further reduce economical options available as regulations are promulgated to control emissions for the photo chemical reactors, green house gas contributors, carcinogens, and other chemicals with hazardous characteristics. In communities classified as "non-attainment" areas for ozone, particulates, or carbon and nitrogen gases, limits will be extremelyiestrictive on volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions. motivation to producers to make material substitutions.

Product labeling requirements will provide strong

Purpo se :

This pamphlet attempts to summarize existing technologies, equipment and cleaners to permit users to begin a realistic look at alternatives. Options, not solutions, will be presented. Products identified as available are presented as just that. The Center does not, and will not, recommend a specific alternate cleaner, equipment or treatment methodology as the "best" approach. The tables represent a cross section of products available and identifies where additional information can be obtained. You must identify the best, or as is often the case, best combination of cleaners and equipment that meet your specific needs.

Discussion:

There is no "drop-in" replacement for chlorinated solvents in any cleaning application. Switching to aqueous or semi-aqueous cleaners and processes generally requires additional equipment, multiple cleaning and rinsing sreps, and drying depending on the cleaning level currently being attained in vapor degreasers and other solvent based cleaning processes. The customer's cleaning specifications may limit alternatives available or dictate the final configuration of the cleaning process. What follows

3

cleaning - plating, coating, heat treating, anodizing, etc. - also dictates the specifications for "clean".

There are many variables that must be considered when choosing the best cleaning process for your application. The soils to be removed, the substrate to be cleaned, safety to workers, disposal of spent cleaners (treatability), recyclability, production rate and, as stated, before, what follows cleaning. Different cleaners work better for different applications. The key is to optimize the cleaning process for your application.

Factors to Be Considered:

Soils: There are three general classifications of soils - organics (rosins, glycols, oils, greases, waxes), water soluble inorganic salts (chlorides, sulfates, etc.) and insoluble particles (dirt, dust, metal fines, etc.). Parts that have passed through multiple processes grinding, machining, forming, heat treating, etc., will have soil combinations to remove.

Substrates:

Acid and alkaline cleaners may attack metal substrates. Strong alkaline cleaners will etch aluminum, aluminum alloys, and zinc. Strong acids will etch steel. Strong oxidizing acids (nitric and chromic) will corrode copper. Suppliers typically add inhibitors to control or reduce the effect of these characteristics.

Cleaners:

Aqueous and semi-aqueous cleaners fall into several categories. Suppliers classify their products as biodegradable, safe, non- hazardous, and other subjective qualifiers. Determine the validity of these claims for yourself. If not, you can be presented with surprises you would prefer not having to solve.

The Air Force found that "biodegradability" ranged from hundreds of parts per million (ppm) to hundreds of thousand (ppm) of biological oxygen demand ( B O D ) . Chemical oxygen demand (COD) tests had parallel variability. Suppliers can provide this information to you. Don't let sudden increases in sewer use charges be your motivation to check. different one may not be the solution you are seeking.

Trading one problem for a

When choosing the cleaners and affiliated equipment to meet your needs, there are many factors that must be considered. Production rates, customer requirements, cost and floor space are common to all. Material screening must include health hazards, treatability, either in a publically owned or onsite treatment plant, and equivalent cleaning performance. Corrosion potential and impact on down stream processes, while corrective with

4

additives in cleaning tanks or post-clean rinse tanks, must be considered when choosing- the right process. municipal sewer system, keep your Publically Owned Treatment Works informed of any change anticipated in the volume, screnqth; or potential toxicity of your waste.

If discharging to a

There are many blends being marketed. One "aqueous" cleaner contains alcohol, an alkaline detergent, surfactants, saponifiers and water with or without glycol ethers. The relative concentration of each will determine what problem or combination of problems such as flammability, treatability, health effects, etc., you must deal with in your design. Closed cycle systems have been designed to over come problems such as flammability, treatability, VOCs, etc., associated with exotic cleaners. As a general rule, if you use two barrels of chlorinated solvents per month, it may be cost effective to consider closed systems using terpenes, alcohols or blends.

c

Test1 If tests are conducted at a supplier's laboratory, be certain that all variables are incorporated into the series of tests, such as:

- Cleaner concentration, temperature, immersion time - Parts movement speeds (production rate) - Solution contact with parts/agitation (type and rate) - Solution replacement rates - - Tank and pump dimensions (depth of solution,

agitation, etc.1 - Nozzle spacing, pressures, and flow rate

If you test a supplier's product, use the supplier's (prequalifiedj expertise to assist you.

Semi-Aqueous Cleaners:

Terpenes: Terpenes are chemical compounds extracted from plants such as the bark of trees or citrus fruit skins. They have been used in household cleaners, pharmaceuticals, deodorizers, and other commercial products. While having excellent solvency characteristics, there are factors, including safety, that must be considered. In general, terpenes cannot be sprayed in an open tank. The vapor has a relatively low flashpoint. This generally limits open tank liquid heating to 100" F or less. not as easily recycled as aqueous cleaners. Odor may be a work place detractant. BODS and CODs need to be checked and verified. Water chemistry, keeping the right balance between the cleaner and additives, can be a problem accentuated by evaporative losses. At least one manufacturer has developed a "closed" system that minimizes safety problems. The same manufacturer can incorporate a vacuum distillation or membrane filtration unit to reuse the terpene based cleaner. An alcohol or mineral spirits rinse system is required for some applications.

Terpenes are

5

Hydrocarbons :

Hydrocarbons, usually combined with a surfactant and r u s t inhibitor, are effective in removing soils such as cutting o i l s , coolants, greases and waxes. These compounds can be effectively recycled. Disposal options generally involve incineration. All have low flash points that must be considered and planned for in equipment selection.

For other applications such as replacing methyl ethyl ketone or methylene chloride in special cleaning applications (wiping, paint gun cleaning, etc.), many have turned to combinations of N- methyl pyrolidone (NMP) dibasic esters (DBE) and other less hazardous materials coming available. thoroughly tested and evaluated for health and environmental impact before switching.

Any alternative should be

Aqueous Cleaners:

Aqueous cleaners range from pure water to exotic combinations of water, detergents, saponifiers, surfactants, corrosion inhibitors and other special additives. When combined with heat, pressure, agitation, filtration, etc., an effective combination can be

Alkaline type cleaners are reemerging as safe effective substitute compounds for chlorinated solvents in many applications. As with other families of cleaners, there is no one drop-in replacement for all uses. generally will be able to formulate cleaners to meet your needs. These additives take into consideration the soils and subsequent production process.

found for most cleaning applications. - -

The large suppliers

Additives generally perform the following:

- Penetrate s o i l s to wet surface - Emulsify (dissolve) solids in to solution

(can be filtered out or rinsed off) - Neutralize (raise Ph of acid soils, lower

Ph of alkalines) - Saponify (change insoluble fats and fatty

acids into water soluble soaps) - Oxidize (loosen rust and stains for easy removal) - Precipitate (convert soils to heavier form for removal as sludge)

- Coagulation (to assist in removal of suspended soils by filtration)

- Flotation (cause soils to migrate to surface for skimming).

AS previously stated, the additives can create concurrent or post cledning problems. Special handling, health, safety, treatment, and disposal must be considered in a process design and cleaner

6

1

.

selection. esters, have unanswered. health and safety questions. Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) and demand full answers, particularly the BOD and COD Of solutions with additives. stated previously, many suppliers can formulate to meet your needs to reduce bad side effects such as corrosion, flammability, health effects, treatability, etc.

Some additives, such as certain glycol ethers and

As

Review

Equipment Selection:

Cleaning equipment ranges from "A to 2". custom design for your process. degreasers and other solvent cleaning processes can be modified to do the job. Large units can be converted to multiple tanks, modified to incorporate spray rinsing, ultrasonics, mechanical agitation, filtration, air knives, etc., to do the job. be the most cost effective approach to take. quote on retrofitting existing equipment and/or providing new equipment. terpenes or NMP in their existing degreasers as a substitute for CFCs in vapor degreasing.

Many suppliers will Despite disclaimers, vapor

This may Many companies will

Some companies have designed retrofit packages to use

If you have the in-house capability to modify your units, consider is. modification plans and kits. identified that specialize in existing equipment modification.

Check with the original manufacturer; they may have If not, several companies have been

Summary:

As stated in the beginning, this report attempts to provide information on the considerations and options available when changing from solvent cleaning to aqueous or semi-aqueous cleaning. attendant benefits of cost savings, risk reduction, and a better work environment. you can do it also.

Others have made the transition effectively with the

Some of the references available through the Center are listed in Table 1. these reports will be made available to you on request.

If you are in any of the States of Region IV, EPA,

Equipment and vendor information was extracted from product literature available in the Center. not a complete list of products on the market. available or are already available but not known to the Center. We do not recommend any product or supplier. the product(s1 and supplier(s1 that meet your special set of needs and criteria.

It is a representative list, Others are coming

Only you can choose

Free, nonregulatory technical assistance is available through various State and Federal programs. programs is available through the Center. service area, do not hesitate to call.

Information on these If you are in our

7

AOUEOUS/SEMI AQUEOUS CLEANERS

TYPE

Terpene & Esters

..,.. USE POTENTIAL PROBLEM

Electronics &I Flammability Parts Cleaners

Bio Act EC7

Simple Green

Oaraclean 2 2 0 , 282 , 283

Quaker 624 GD

Turco 3878 6753 6778

Metal Cleaning Simple Green

Oaraclean 2 2 0 , 282 , 283

Flamma bi 1 ity Treatability

Quaker 624 GD

Alkaline With or Without Glycol Ethers

Alkaline

Emulsion w/agitation (3878) Non-Chromated Alkaline ( 6 7 7 8 )

Metal Cleaning & Corrosivity Electronics Parts Silicates Cleaning Immediate

Rinse May Be Required

Si1 icates Immersion Corrosivity Ultrasonic

Chromates Replace Vapor Degreasing from 3878

LF-NC Non- Chromate Form

4215 -NC-LT II

Turco 3878 6753 I 6778

SUPPLIER

Petrofirm, Inc. Specialty Chemicals 5400 First Coast Hwy. Fernandina, FL 32304

Simple Green P. 0. BOX 880135 El Paso, TX 88588-0135

W. R. Grace 5 5 Hayden Ave. Lexington, MA 62173 404-691-8646 800-232-6100

Quaker Chemical Co Elm & Lee Streets Conshohocken, PA 19428 215-832-4000

Atochem - NA 3 Parkway Philadelphia, PA 215-587-7000

I 1 I

Terpene I

2

CLEANER

Coors Bio-T

SUPPLIER

Spectro-Chemical Lab Division Coors Porcelain CO. 600 Ninth Street Golden, CO 80401 303-277-4254

TYPE USE

Terpene Metal Cleaning

Ridolene 1025

POTENTIAL PROBLEM

Flammability

Parker Amchen 32100 Stephenson Hwy Madison Heights, MI 48071 800-222-2600 Ext. 286

Petroleum Solvent

Terpene Hydrocarbon

Aliphatic Hydrocarbon Petroleum Distillate

Hydrocarbon

Hydrocarbon

I Do TD 1414-F-B Flash Point Parts Cleaning & Paint Prep

Lacquer Stripper Flash Point

Paint Thinner Flash Point

Drawing Oil, voc ' s Cutting oil, Flammability Grease

Drawing Oil voc ' s F 1 amma b i 1 i t y

Arsol I 3HA-HF ~~~

Kwik Dri 66

Actrel 3338L, 3349L, 3360L, 1160L

Ashland Chemical, Inc. Industrial Chemicals P. 0. Box 2219 Columbus, OH 43216

Exxon Chemical P. 0. Box 5200 Baytown, TX 77522

614-889-3627

713-425-2115

Exxate 800 Exxon Chemical P. 0. Box 5200 Baytown, TX 77522 713-425-2115

Alkaline (NaOH) Vapor Degreaser

I I

3

CLEANER TYPE

Mineral Acids/ Glycol Ethers

Rust Corrosion Remover CT-3/CT4

USE

Remove Oxidation Rust. Requires Pretreat with CT.l

CT1/2

Surfactants With Corrosion Inhibitors

Semi Aqueous Glycol/ Hydrocarbons

Cold Cleaner w/Hydrocarbons

Water Biodegradable

XUS11269.01 Light Oils/Grease

Light Oils, Metal Films

Oils, Grease

Metals Parts Wash

XUSll2 68

XUS- 112 67

Action Bioclean

BUPPLIER

Chem-Tech International Mid America Chem Corp. 4701 Spring Road Cleveland, Ohio 44131 216-749-0100

~

Do

Daw Chemicals d Metals 2020 Dow Center Midland, MI 48674 517-636-3029

Dow Chemicals & Metals 2020 Dow Center Midland, MI 48674 517-636-3029

Dow Chemicals &I Metals 2020 Dow Center Midland, MI 48674 517-636-3029

Action Products, Inc. 2401 W. First Street Tempe, Arizona 85281 602-894-0100

Acid Hydrocarbon

I Precleaning Multi- Substitutes

I

~

POTENTIAL PROBLEM

Safety

Preclean CT1, Rinse CT2, Dry Flammability

Safety Corrosion of Some Metals

Odor - Must Be Incinerated for Disposal

Toxicity , VOC'S Treatment

?

4

8

TYPE CLEANER USE

Teile Reinigung Smittel 09

Alka 1 h e KAOH pH13

Sulphanate

SW-528 Metal Cleaner

Metal Cleaning R. B. Degrease

Terpene

Bioclean

Methylene Chloride 1,1,1 Vapor degreasing

~~

Citrex Citra Safe

Alkaline & Surfactants

Axarel 38/52

Circuit Boards RMA & RA Flux Remove & Cleaner

SUPPLIER

RAASM USA P. 0. Box 150146 Nashville, TN 37215 615-255-7434 Lubrichem, Inc. P. 0. Box 30665 Raleigh, NC 27622 919-839-1211

Environmental Technology Sanford, FL 32771 407-321-7910

Kester 515 E. Touhy Ave. Des Plaines, IL 60018- 2675

Inland Technology 2612 Pacific Hwy, E. Tacoma, WA 98424 206-922-8932 ~~

Dupont Chemicals Chestnut Run Plaza P. 0. Box 80711 Wilmington, DE 19880- 0711 Mid America Chemical Cleveland, OH 44131 216-744-0100

I I

Alka 1 ine Steam, Pressure Cleaning

Alkaline Printed Circuit Boards

Hydrocarbon 38- Electronics 52-Grease Metal Cleaner

POTENTIAL PROBLEM

Safety

Aluminum Alloys Safety

Foaming

Safety

F 1 amma b i 1 it y

Flash Point

Treatment

CLEANER U S E

Substitute for 1,1,1 Cable & Metal Cleaner

P F Degreaser

POTENTIAL PROBLEM

Combustible

Arconate TM 1000 Replace Methylene Chloride

~~

Gillite 0650

Safety Requirement

Hurricane Cleaning Compounds

Metal Cleaning

Vapor Degreasing Alternative Cleaners

Aquaease

Safety

Process Specific

EZE 267D

BUPPLIER

PT Technologies, Inc. 108 4th Ave., South Safety Harbor, FL 34695 813-726-4644 Arc0 Chemical 3801 West Chester Pike Newtown Square, PA 19073 1-800-32 1-7000

Man-Gill Chemical 2300 St. Clair Ave. Cleveland, OH 44117 1-800-627-6422

Midbrook Products 2080 Brooklyn Road BOX 867 Jackson, Mich 49204 517-787-34 8 1

Hubbard-Hall, Inc P. 0. Box 790 Waterbury, CT 06725- 0790 203-756-5521

E2E Products, Inc. P. 0. Box 5744 Greenville, SC 29606 803-879-7 100

TYPE

Low Aliphatic Hydrocarbon/ Terpene

Propylene Carbonate

Alkaline

Alkaline

Alkaline, Terpenes and/or Hydrocarbons

Metal Cleaning Safety

Steel Parts Dip Tank

I

6

USE

I

POTENTIAL PROBLEM

CLEANER

(1) Metal Cleaning (2) Heavy Oil

Buildup All Surfaces

Ink Removal, Hand Wiping, Emulsion Cleaning

Brulin 815 GD 815 GR

(1) None Listed ' In MSDS. High Concentra- tions could cause Aquatic Toxcity (2) None Listed

Flammability Treatment Disposal

Alka - 2000

Tailored To Meet Cleaning Needs

(1) DOT 111/113 (2) Omni Clean

H. D.

~~

Waste Disposal Safety

Glidsafe Family

Rentry Solvent Blends

SUPPLIER

Brulin Corporation

Calgon Vestal Labs. 7501 Page Avenue St. Louis, MO 63133 800-648-9005

~~~

Delta - Omega Technologies, Inc. P. 0. Box 81518 Lafayette, LA 70598- 1518 318-237-5091

GLIDCO Organics P. 0. Box 389 Jacksonville, FL 32201 904-768-5800 800-231-6728

~ ~~

Envirosolve, Inc. 1840 Southside Boulevard Jacksonville, FL 32216 904-724-1990

TYPE

Alkaline

Potassium Hydroxide

~

(1) Proprietory "Surf actants System"

Proprietary (2) "Water Based"

Terpene Blends

Terpenes With Add it ives

Metal Cleaning ~~

Mild Corrosivity Silicates

Ferrous Metals Cleaning only!

High pH Safety and Handling

7

CLEANER

3D Inc. 2053 Plaza Drive Benton Harbor, MI ,49022-2211 616-925-5644 800-272-5326

oxsol Solvents TN Family

SUPPLIER

(1) Parts Prep (2) Micropure

USE I TYPE

(1) Ionox FC, HC, MC, LC

~ ~~ ~ ~

Alkaline With Rust Inhibitor & Anti Foaming Agent Contains Glycol Ether

(2) Aquanox SSA & 101

~ ~

"Any Washable Surface It

3D SUPREME

Precision Clean

OXYCHEM Occidental Tower 5005 LBJ Freeway Dallas, TX 75244 800-752-5151

International Specialty Products 1361 Alps Road Wayne, NJ 07470 800-622-4423

KYZEN Corporation 413 Harding Industrial Drive Nashville, TN 37211 615-831-0888 800-845-5524

I

Halogenated Aromatic Derivative Of Toulene

Formulated To Meet Specific Cleaning Needs

I I

N-Methyl Pyrrolidone Plus Additives

(1) Parts (2) Circuit Board

Cleaning

(1) Alcohol &

(2) Alcohol

Surfactants & Sponifiers

Alkaline, Water Blend

I I

Electronics Precision Parts

LPS Laboratories, Inc. 4647 Hugh Howell Road Tucker, GA 30085-5052 800-241-8334

Alka 1 ine 1

Metals & Plastics

POTENTIAL PROBLEM

Varies With Formulation Check MSDS With Company

VOCs Drying. Step Usually Required

Flammability Treatability Aquatic Toxicity

Health (? ) Treatment & Disposal.

Safety

8

BATCH PARTS CLEANERS

~~ ~

Hydro Pulse

P

GOFF Corp. P. 0. Box 1607 Seminole, OK 74868 1-800-654-4633

NAME I COMPANY

Safety Clean

Action Bio-Clean

Safety Kleen Corp. Box 1419 Elqin, IL 60120

Action Products, Inc. 2401 W. 1st Street Tempe, A2 85281 602-894-0100

Jet Cleaner Autop North America P. 0. Box 150146 Nashville, TN 37215 615-255-7434

Atochem Turco Products, Inc. 7300 Bolsa Ave. Westminster, CA 92684-3600 714-890-3600

P-30B IlSpray Clean" Peterson Machine Tool 5425 Antioch Drive Shawnee Mission, KS 66202 1-800-255-6308

TYPE

Shop Parts Cleaners

Small Parts Washers

Automated Batch Cleaning small Parts

Agitated Aqueous Tank Cleaner.

High Pressure Spray Cabinet With Turntable

Hot Water Parts Washer

COMMENT

Solvents and/or Petroleum Distillates

Aqueous

Aqueous Process

Programmed Cleaning Cycles

Engine & Shop Parts Cleaner

No Cleaners

2

AQUEOUS EQUIPMENT, BUPPLIERS SMALL TO MEDIUM

J e t Washing 1 Polychem Alternative 2000

Immersion Washers

Microdroplet Module Cleaning Process

Aqua-Quick, Model 600, Model 6300, Model

U

COMPANY

Better Engineering, Mfg. 7101 Belair Road Baltimore, MD 21206 1-800-638-3380

U. S. Polychemical Corp. Route 45, P. 0. Box 268 Spring Valley, NY 10997

Bowden Industries 1004 Oster Drive, NW Huntsville, AL 35816 1-800-553-3637

~

Digital Equipment Corp. Maynard, MA 207-626-3939 Artisan (Vendor) 617-893-6800

~

Man-Gill Chemical 23000 St. Clair Ave Cleveland, OH 44117 1-800-627-6422

Electronic Controls Design 4287-A SE International Way Milwaukee, OR 97222-8825 800-323-4548

TYPE

Cabinet With Turntable Fixed Jet Spray

Aqueous & Semi Aqueous Batch & Continuous Cleaners Including Ultrasonic

Multiple unit Inline Automated Washer Conveyor or Monorail

Aqueous Inline Multiple Unit Precision Cleaner

Aqueous Metal Cleaning Batch & Inline

~ ~ ~ ~~

Alcohol - Water (Batch) Closed System

COMMENT

Custom Design and Standard Units

Family of Different Sized Units. will Modify Existing Units

Oil Skimmers, Filtration Multiple Rinse Components. Standard Units 61 Custom Desiqn

Surface Mount Cleaning Aqueous With Saponifiers Uses Stoelting CBW224 Circuit Board Washer

Replace Vapor Degreasing

Flash Point Precision & Electronics

NAME

ES TECH

5 Station Automated Cleaner

Jet Edge

Precision Cleaners

Advanced Vapor Degreasing

Proceco Typhoon

~~~

COMPANY

Equipment Systems Technology P. 0. Box 550 Findlay, OH 45840 419-424-4239

Advanced Deburring & Finishing Hwy. 70 East, P. 0. Box 1004 Statesville, NC 28677 800-553-7060 ~~

Jet Edge Inc. 825 Rhode Island Ave. So. Minneapolis, MN 55426 612-545-1477 800-538-3343

ATCOR 150 Great Oaks Blvd. San Jose, CA 95119-1367 408-629-6080 800-827-6080

~~ ~~

Petrofirm, Inc. 5400 First Coast Highway Fernandian Beach, FL 32034

Proceco, Inc. 1020 East 8th Street Jacksonville, FL 32206

904-261-8288

904-355-2888

TYPE Rotary Drum with/wo Ultrasonics Conveyorized Wash/Rinse/Dry Batch or Continuous

Aqueous, Inline Multi Station cleaning 6r Surface Preparation System or Cabinet Units

High Pressure Water Jet

Inline & Batch

Closed System Vapor Degreasing With Perfluocarbon Rinse

Heavy Duty Conveyor and Parts Washers

COMMENT

Aqueous

Drum or Power Spray Models

36,000 - 60,000 psi Cutting and Cleaning

Acqueous w/wo Ultrasonics

Semi Acqqurous (Terpene) New Design or Retrofit.

Mu 1 t iple Processes

2

NAME

Spray Washer

~~~

ESTECH C-15154 C-15158

Final Phase Industrial Parts Cleaners

Aqueous Parts Cleaner

AQUEOUS EQUIPMENT SUPPLIERS LARGE UNITS

COMPANY

New Pac, USA P. 0. Box 1461 Palatine, IL 60078 312-54 1-3961

Equipment Systems Technology P. 0. Box 550 Findlay, Ohio 45840 4 19-424-4239

Final Phase 23540 Pinewood Warren, MI 48091

Ransohof f N. 5th St., at Ford Blvd. Hamilton, OH 45011 513-863-5813

TYPE

Inline, Overhead Monorail

Heavy Duty Monorail (C-15154) or Conveyorized (C-15158)

Conveyorized Monorail or Drum Aqueous Cleaners

~ ~~ ~~ ~

Inline Monorail, Conveyorized Automated, or Batch. Complete Line of Equipment, Small to Large

COMMENT

Constructed of Composite Non- Corroding Mater i a 1s Cleans & Phosphates Aqueous Cleaners

Existing Equipment Modification Services Ava i 1 able Controlled Spray Impingement System. Complete Design Services Ava i la ble

I

Micro Coustic 1

EQUIPMENT SUPPLIERS ULTRASONIC CLEANERS

P

Vapor Degreaser I Cylindrical Sonic Transducer

COMPANY

Blackstone P. 0. Box 220 Jamestown, NY 14702-0220 1-800-766-6606

Branson Ultrasonics 41 Eagle Road, Box 1961 Danbury, CT 06813-1961 203-796-0400

Crest Ultrasonics Scotch Road, Box 7266 Mercer County Airport Trenton, NJ 08628 1-800-441-9675

Magna Sonic Systems, Inc. 788 Industrial Blvd. P. 0. Box G Xenia, OH 45385 513-372-4811 Tiyoda Mfg. USA, Inc. 1613 Lockness Place Torrance, CA 90501 213-539-5471

TYPE

Ultrasonic Batch

Ultrasonic Batch & Modular

Aqueous Precision Cleaning

Ultrasonic Batch & In Line Automated.

Ultrasonic Automated Precision Cleaner (Batch)

COMMENT

Solvents

Solvents & Aqueous

Electronics & Precision Cleaning, Solvents & Aqueous

Aqueous

Solvent Closed System

SECTION 6

BIBLIOGRAPHY

i

I I

I I

ID # 4987 201.a - Solvent Cleaning

Center for r- . Lmissions Control

SOLVENT CLEANING (DEGREASING)

--. An Assessment of Emission Control Options

Second Review Draft April 1992

Printed on Recyded Paper

Center for l- o . Emissions Control

1 025 Connecticut Avenue, N. W., Spite 7 1 2 Washington, D.C. 20036

(202) 785-4374 User Hotline: 1-800-835-5520

Fax: 202-223-5979

August 21, 1992

Thank you for your interest in the Center for Emissions Control (CEC). The Center was established as an independent non-profit organization in October 1990 in response to the growing need for information on emission control options for chlorinated solvents. It acts as a clearinghouse for information on safe and effective work practices, process modifications, control technologies, and other means to reduce chlorinated solvent emissions. In canying out these activities, the Center will be closely cooperating with local, state, and national regulatory authorities.

We believe our efforts can be particularly helpful in light of the recent amendments to the federal Clean Air Act and EPA Administrator William Reilly’s new voluntary program to reduce aggregate emissions of the solvents and 13 other substances by 33 percent in 1992 and 50 percent by 1995. We support EPA’s overall objective of reducing emissions using available practices and technology, and believe that our program can help chlorinated solvent users achieve significant emission reductions.

The Center has completed analyses of control options for paint removal and flexible polyurethane foam manufacture and has prepared draft analyses for dry cleaning, solvent cleaning (degreasing), and pharmaceutical manufacture. In addition, we have begun a literature search to compile available information on control technologies for adhesives, aerosols, chemical intermediates, coatings, .

electronics, food industry, and textiles.

We also plan to promote the development of new technologies and to encourage the exchange of information among users, manufacturers, and regulators. We have filed as a cooperative research and development venture, and currently are involved in demonstration projects in commercial furniture refinishing and flexible foam manufacture.

This material will be made available to all companies requiring information on emission control practices and equipment, and I hope your company will take

Prinird On Recyclcd Pawr

Manual on Vapor Degreasing 3rd Edition

Compiled by ASTM SUBCOMMITTEE D26.02 ON VAPOR DECREASING

ASTM Manual Series: MNL 2 Revision of Special Technical Publication (STP) 310A

ASTM 1916 Race Street a Philadelphia, PA 19103 flSTb

%EPA

w . 1 1 . 1 - -.-.-- Environmental Protection Aaencv

. . . . -. . - June 1991 - - Radiation

(ANR-445) " .

Eliminating CFGI 13 And Methyl Chloroform In Precision Cleaning Operations

I- - ..

I

. I

J

ID # 5335 201 - Cleaning

Printed on Recycled P a e r

United States Air And Environmental Protection Radiaiton Agency (AN R-445)

EPA 400 3 90 003 March 1990

GEPA

L

Manual Of Practices To Reduce And Eliminate CFC-113 Use In The Electronics Industry

t I

ID # 5338 119 - Electronics/Electrid

r0 EPA

United States Air and Environmental Protection Radiation Aaency (ANR-445)

EPA/400/1-91/019 June 1991

Attemathes for CFGI 13 And Methyl Chloroform in Metal Cleaning

P

Printed on Recycled Paper

MINNESOTA TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM

The following is a bibliography of written resources related to the substitution of other cleaning methods in place of vapor degreasing of metal pans. The bibliography is the result of literature searches conducted by MnTAP over the period .11/9 1 -4/92 of the:

MnTAP library University of Minnesota Library Compendex (1986-1991) Chemical Abstracts Metal Index & the PTS Newsletter Database (through Teltech Inc) Otonet .

Searches were done as preliminary work under a Pollution Prevention Initiatives to States grant from the US €PA to the Minnesota Office of Waste Management.

The resources have been reviewed and cfassified by content’ into the following categories:

Selection of metal cleaners to replace chlorinated solvents’ . Case studies on the substitution of aqueous cleaners’ Dealing with problem soils Miscellaneous methods for cleaning or avoiding cleaning’ Semi-aqueous metal parts cleaning Miscellaneous Issues {rinsing, drying, etc):’ Treatment of Wastewaters from Industrial Metal Cleaning Operations Cleaning Measurements’ Metal Cleaning - Introduction / Overview of Methods Emission Reductjon in Vapor Degreasers Solvent Waste Redudon In Industrial Cleaning Operations

I

Most of the resources cited are avaiblable through libraries and MnTAP will not provide copies. However, there are a few cited resources which MnTAP has played a role in developing, and which may not be widely available. MnTAP will provide copies of the these (denoted by ,*. following the citation number) on request.

MnTAP Annotated Bibliography (4/921

Selection of Metal Cleaners to Redace C hlorinated So Ivenu

1.

2.

3. '

4.

5.

6.

7.

a.

Alkaline Cleaners; Scislowski, Stan; Metal Finishing; April 1990 High pH cleaners; use of silicates; spray impingement as a way to avoid silicate use; use of NaOH; oiling out of surfamnts

ALTERNATIVES TO CHLORINATED SOLVENT DEGREASiNG - TESTING, EVALUATION, AND PROCESS DESIGN; Evanoff, Stephen P.; Singer, Kathy; Process Technology '88; 1988. Evaluation of 28 cleaners in agitated hot tanks for removing 17 greases and oils: 5 clwners removed all but 1 grease; additional cleaners worked wdl against specific toils or groups of soils; some test results; evaluation of other properties;

Aqueous Cleaning Systems Replace Chlorinated Hydrocarbons; Eberfe, A; Lachenmayer, U. & Kohler, H.; Metalloberflache 4 3 8 (1 989) 12 [translation] oil separation from neutral cleaners; spray wash optimization; need for oil separation

Fabrication and Post-fabrication Cleanup of Stainless Steels; Tuthill, Arthur; Chemical Engineering; Sept. 29 7 986 Avoid chlorinated cfwners on stainless stads [on aquip"/produttr where strength b impomntl to prevent chloride mess conodon cracking

'

INDUSTRIAL CLEANING; Spring, S. Melbourne, Australia: Prism Press, 1974. Book; rinsibiw and use of siIlates (pp20, 188); medunid vt chanial doming a d-4 varkblas (pp33-37); appiiudon tablo for dmning spdflc soil, daning W g d O r U , modification of soils (pp 127-137); comg.dbiaty of light mot81 " h c a a with danars ( P P l U 1471; residues, drying & wltw qwitty (pp18S-196)

Metal Cleaning; Innes, William; Metal Finishing Guidebook and Directory '90; 1990 Suggests wing rlkllno d m u s after p r d a n i n g with r detergent d a n u ImUalIno c l a w s elmn light Nil "r W J I but Crn't h n d l O hwvy krdmll?)

Metal Degreasing and Cleaning; Pollack, A.; Westphal, P., Robert Draper LTD, Teddington England 1963 Book; Concise "mry of Metals Handbook info told1 gMng pros & con8 for diffwent dwner typst.for dlffuont toil dassa% burned on dnwhg comgounds roqulre rdd clrUrh [PkMngl; u ~ d c s roqqubed.to r m soils from poru

COATING- (9TH ED) Metals Park, OH: American Society for Metals, 1982.. Book; table of recommended procedures for vuious soils rlso soma pros and CMU on dmnlng

METALS HANDBOOK-VOLUME 6: SURFACE CLEANING, FINISHING, AND

M o d s ; tom 8ddcr for $ p a rttUrtiW

MnTAP Annotated Bibliography (4/92)

9. NEW TECHNOLOGY ALKALINE CLEANERS REPLACE CHLORINATED SOLVENT DEGREASERS; Quitmeyer, Joann; Lubrication Engineering; 3/9 1 Tost results for cleaning a v8rieW of oily soils with WR Grace aqueous cleaners

1 0. Replacement of Chlorinated Hydrocarbons by Waterbased Cleaning Systems; Kresse, J.; Transactions IMF; 1989, 67, 109 Tost results of cleaning rust inhibiting, honing & cutting oils off shm metal; neutral and alkaline clwnws compared to TCE; ultrasonics noodd to c lan shot-bbstd shea;

11.

12.

13.

Substitution of Wax & Grease Cleaners with Biodegradable Solvents - Phase I Repon; Beller, J.M., Carpenter, McAtee, Pryfogle, Suciu, Wikoff, Harris, Schober; Air Force Engineering & Services Center; Tyndall Air Force Base; Florida, November 1988 Tost rosults on 171 ckmws from 59 vmdors; 8ltwnrtjvo solvnts, swni aqueous, & aqueous clwnws; tad corrosion on 15 metals [but only on mrolr for whwl 8 clsrnr is r e c o ~ d e d ] ; tested biodegr8dability; $crooning for h a m hazards; cleaning tests on 8 molybdonum dbulfido grrrdcwbon mixturo, 8 hydnulk oi lhrbon mixture, an ngino oil h w t d to 8 trr-liko conrirtoncy mixod with dUa, md 8 wax; idontlfied 6 clwners for further tests; those test form tho buis for 8 computcwttod dam bas0 8t t)H Idrho Engineering S d c w hborrtory

Tool and Manufacturing Engineers Handbook, Volume 111, Materials, Finishing -and Coating; Society of Manufacturing Engineers; 4th edition Book; Ob10 of rocormended procodurea for vuiour roils [from M.trlr Handbookl; also some pros m d cons on dwning mrthods; romcr 8- for spocirl titwtions; descriptions of cleaning quipmont md proces8os

Troubleshooting Cleaning Problem; Quinn, Michael; Die Casting Engineer; 29 (3) M/J 1985 Outlinw rhrnrtivu for ryllovjno dia cut lubriculu; 8orno spocifks on what condttions 8ro noodd to mako 8 procr# watk

14. ULTRASONIC CLEANING & VAPOR DEGREASING IN INDUSTRY; Branson Cleaning Equipment Company, Shdton, CT: 1980. Book; wpikmdon tabkr showing cianing p” “y usod to romow vrriow soils; mgmorrultmodw


se Stud Metal C teanerx ies on Stu-on of Aaueous . .

1 5. 1 , 1 ,1 -TRICHLOROETHANE REDUCTION ALTERNATIVES; Smythe, Alan H; Minnesota Technical Assistance Program (MnTAP) 1 987. Betch r p q woahor npl.c.r cold rotvont cloming m 0 machina .hop

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

AQUEOUS CLEANING AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO CFC VAPOR DEGREASING IN SHEET METAL MANUFACTURING; Stczepanski, Anna; O'Connor, Jim; Rochester, New York; AlChE Summer Meeting; Pittsburgh, August 1991 Uttmocric immomion cloening for -pod putr rftw lubricntr won mbotituted [oil to aynth0tic1. F m dot.ih, porhopr r contact for mora information.

Nearfield Ultrasonic Strip Cleaning; Noble, William; Proceedings: Fourth Annual Massachusetts Hazardous Waste Source Reduction Conferences; October 1 987 Ultr#onit doming of m p o d bindk drip

Bringing Degreasing up to Date; Thomas, Andy; Finishing; May 1988 D m r p r y wnhw and nwtrd cI- dog- andl putr. Ewop..n wndon.

CASE STUDY; Butler, Gary; University of Tennessee Center for Industrial Services, Waste Reduction Assessment and Technology transfer WRA7T II teleconference (Solvents: The Good, the Bad, and the Banned) March 13,1991. Agitated immomion tmk do" brrr valva v. Vid.0 with "o ddibiocul informdon m wukble.

CASE STUDY: ELIMINATION OF FREON DEGREASING AND DRYING SOLVENTS; Warden, Ken; University of Tennessee Center for Industrial Services; Waste Reduction Assessment and Technology transfer WRAlT II teleconference (Solvents: The Good, the Bad, and the Banned) March 13,1991. Stmpoddoctr id con- p u m f w d o d o d pomrdbtr ibUtkrruad8gd inn- innmion woeher; pwb Y, driod in 8 vik.Dry d.kming madtho udng cotn 8ab my( a lho IIwdk; romo additiod mfomuaon * i " i l . b k i n m V i d . 0

CASE STUDY: WINNER OF THE 1988 TENNESSEE GOVERNOR'S AWARD FOR EXCELLENCE IN HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMEM; Hartman, Frank; Clanton, Rad; University of T- Center for Industrial Serviccur; Waste Reduction Asam~nent and Technology transfer WRAlT II teleconference (Solvents: The Good, the Bad, a d tho Banned) March 13,1991 Codnuour eprmv wwhm md 4itrud hmruon . batch trnk d.at.... hydrwlrc rotor wmpononta. Much "in- irwdhbl. ir m V i d . 0 .

Europun vandot.


23. Decorative Plater Eliminates Vapor Degreasing; Willis, Dennis; 1 3th AESF/EPA Conference on the Environmental Control for the Surface Finishing industry, Orlando FL, Jan 27-29, 1992 Combinod, continuour immonion urd rpmy wuh lino (30p.i) with Jk.lino cloutor romovor buffing compound from highly poliohod m o d hudwuo on r high volumo manufacturing operation.

24. Degreasing and Cleaning Costs Slashed; Product Finishing; Oct 1986 Vibratory doburring machino nplacu vopor dogrumor on brau & aluminum g u control vdvr prnr. Somo diocuuion of obruivo Mi choico. Europoan vondor.

25. No Chlorinated Hydrocarbons Necessary in Cleaning Procesa; Miiller, Alois; Metallobefldche 42 (1 988) 5; translation Immonion cleaning and contrifugrtion ck.n blind holm and d I bollow with accordion fold r.~rrrrr

26. Replacement of Vapor Degreasing Operation with Debutring Process for Cleaning Metal Parts; MnTAP Case Study; May 1992

27. Selected Case Studies for Waste Prevention from Minnesota Businessses; DeWahl, Karl; Second Annual Pollution Prevention Conference, AlChE Summer meeting, Pittsburgh, PA; Augwt 20-21 , 199 1

ck.nr: aqu.our clouting of ocraw - put8. 3 u.. otudim - print* h y d d i motor manufactum; ocfaw machino rhop. mcrchino coolant a r

28. Solvent Waste Reduction Through Process Substitution; Elliott, Brad; Environmental Technology Expo ‘9 1 ; Chicago, 11, April 8-1 1, 199 1 Alk.liru hmuaion wnhw dag- p- 8 t d eo”*. 3 rvrtrru doviud: 2-0 countor- cunvnt wah for gron in procoa doming; 3-0 W d t . dndpmtmt for oil fm pwtr: & -0 wah, rim, ultrwonii wah. rhn/protoct for find dunii. A h dkcu#.. minimiing clwning takr wfirrtrug.

29. Substitution of Halog@Mted Hydrocarbons by Aqueous Cleaning; Zange, 6.; Galvanotechnik 80 (1 989) 7,228802291 ; translation

W wit); h4k.d -; 4- -pnd.m. d.n. rinn, plotrot dry

30. TRICHLOROETHYLENE AND STODOARD SOLVENT REDUCTION ALTERNATIVES IN A SMALL SHOP; Taylor, Debra J; Minnesota Technical Assistance Program (MNTAP) 1989. cocwmior, of vwar dawunr inton rgitrt.d. i” * wwhwwtth.rpnyrinn. uringm rlulicw dunrr to dag- 8td , duninUm & bra8 ocfaw “d put8 in ajob rhop.


Deaiina with Problem Soils: (articles generally have a few relevant sentences)

31.

32.

33.

34.

35.

36.

Alkaline Cleaners; Scislowski, Stan; Metal Finishing, April 1 990 High Ph clranrrr; r m o v d of brkod+n, vmirh-likr fibnr: ranoval of buffing cunpoundr

Citragold Technical Bulletin; 30, Inc; May, 1991 Cbimr cold r m o v d capability for cwbon, rolidifiod gnwr, & g.1l.d oil

CLEANING AND PREPARATION OF CERAMICS AND METALLIZED CERAMIC MATERIALS ON PLATING / Author: Baudrand, Donald W. Melrose Park, IL: Allied-Kelite Division, Wtco Chemical, ND. Ultraoonic, rlkeline cluning of cormic porn

DEC Cleaning Method Opened to Industry; Brinton, James; Circuit8 Manufacturing; July 1990 Clouting memema n d dum with UMII, high op"d rpry droplam

Evaluation of Alternative Cleaners for Solder flux and Mold Release Removal; Lopez, E.P., et.al., Sandia National Laboratories, 90-2974C Silicon mold nhuo compound nm0v.d a -0 -, wrocrbon rohnnt & koprod .icOhol

Magnesium - Part 11; Groshart, Earl; Metal FinMng, November 1985 Uw high pH (>13) Jk.lim c l a m " or ~~ acid picdrk 0 nroid aorr##n nd low of "td

37. No Chlorinated Hydrocarbons Necessary in Cleaning Process; MJller, Alois; MetallobedBcho 42 (1988) 5; trarulation h n r i o n cluning md can- dun blind hd.r md mJI kllom * fdd

38.

39.

40.

PARTS CLEANING; Rodzewich, Ed; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (Solvent Waste Reduction Alternative8 Seminar) MAR 1988. Ahline oprwm [lOOOpd nmarn dir &- h a m famov" O x i d b d , v" oiklnnfrli.mtchadinp"a1; rmrbJ0rmikl"Wnoid w h i m dning on W or @w&d rwhow.

prior0 pb@ulhg; acid doming

PROCESS OF BUFFING COMPOUND REMOVAL AND COMROL; Detrisac, M. Arthur; AES Sympo8iun on Cleaning, Pkkling, and Etching; 1983. R a " & d wuhwithr fog rim, u r s q u # k r M n g ~ ~ powibk, -of -dd. . l buffiw-

inawing wah at lI)O+.F (wim M nnbr), wat pwrr k.ving tha

Reducing California's Metal Bearing W m e Streams; Jacobs Engineering; Report for the Califomia Dept. of Heattti Services; Toxic s U W n C 0 8 Control DiViJon, Alternative Technology Section; July 1989 suggoata wing 9rmad.a #wstu-baod buffing a o m o w b 0 - - n o i u -no - of .UP* y. *.


41. Selection of Cleaning Rocem to Remove Stamping and Drawing Compounds from Metal Surfaces; Otrhalek, J.V., Society of Manufacturing Engineers; 1 977 Akdinr cknam common in th. nmOvd Of drming Compound.; rUggO8tr ckuring won oftrr drawing; omirr to rmovr drming "pound8 with 8 high Iwd of WnUhifWr 8nd 8 low Iovd of chlorinatd oil: give., clmning d8t4 fur 2 u n n m d spry clanua C OCH u n n m d soak cleanor

42. No Chlorinated Hydrocarbons Necessary in Cleaning Process; MGller, Alois; Metalloberfl8che 42 (1 988) 5; translation lmmonion e h i n g md crntrifugabion clan blind holm and andl b8llowr with accordion fold rrcrsser

43. Some notes on the Electroplating of Powder Metallurgy Pam; Hausner, Henry; Metal Finishing; March 1950 Cold wofkhg dwtik nmtd pwrr CYI d o u pom; mrtda or w u n CM b8 urod to fill poru

44. Soils: Scidowski, Stan; Metal Finishing; February 1990 Suggwm doming dmwing oib ~..9.oiJly chlorhtod or u8Ifurit.d oilr) a won a pouiblr. Gnphito "ut mquim OCNbbing, rony imPingan.nt. .kctrdytlc or acid h i n g for rwnovd.

45. Surface Treatment of Sintered Metal Comgorrents; Braddick,D.,Metallurgia,v54 (1 1) Vib"y doburrrintud prcr to ranovo d a w dbcdontiocu or- wrf- nrin (or oil?)

.


Miscellaneous Methods for Cleanina or A voidina Cleaninp;

46. Aqueous Cleaning Systems Replace Chlorinated Hydrocarbons; Ebede, A; Lachenmayer, U. C Kohler, H.; Metalloberfl8che 43, (1 989) 12; translation Uro of 01 wator pmloaning otop

47.

48.

49.

50.

51.

52.

53.

54.

55.

56.

57.

The Application of Ultrasonics to Metal Cleaning; Harding, William; Plating and Surface Finishing; March 1990 Optimization of ultmaonic vorieblu

Cascaded or Counter-Current Solvent Wash Line [Process Row Drawing]; MnTAP 1991

Fabrication and Post-fabrication Cleanup of Stainless Steels; Tuthill, Arthur; Chemical Engineering; Sept. 29 1986 Avoiding iron n d organic contmninrtion; n o i d ehl0ricl.t.d #hrmtr on p a ; b h t elouting

Fluidized Bed Dry Cleaning as a Replacement for Vapor Degreasing; Doschew, Patrisha, et. al.; 22nd International SAMPE Technical Conference; Sept. 668 1990 Fluid b d clming with collulooic matofid which a r b md -0 oih. labomtoy rtudy on hoot rtock.

Model Studies in the Cleaning of Surface-Mounted Assemblies with High Pressure fluorosolvent Sprays; brmond, David; (DuPont) NEPCON West 1986 Labomtoy rtudy of rpmv doming vwi.bk. h o d Lnportnw r01.y pmwn 1 on ck.nirrg IIC..H.

Modem Metal-Forming Lubrication; Newhouse, Ron; T d i n g & Production; 1982 Application & u.. of wrtcw ro(ubk md -otic lukic#nFI in .trmping nd drmring opmtionr

New Concept for Alkaline Cleaning - Low Temperatures and Infinite Bath Life; Jansen, Georg; Tervoort, Jan; Metal Finishing; April, 1985 Mothod of lorigth.rring .qcnou b.(h Iih &impr0vingtho oo(yi.t.ny of oloming Ii.0. .voiding p..kr & vdlyr c.w.d bv dwmr d.ording ovy bcM

News Item; Advanced Manufacturing Technology; v10 n07, July 1 b, 1989 Smdlh p w t i c h . a r e d t O ~ d w t & ~ fmm--nuhriJI

Preparation of Basis Metal for Plating; Groshart, Earl; Metal Finishing Guidebook and Directory; 1990 Mottmdo of p"hg vriou wmnon rmd. for pldng inoldno: o l e d q ; rinahg .trr nlkving; ~nmovJ;&.o(hnakn

Preparation of Basis Metals for Painting; Groshart, Earl; Metal Finishing Guidebook and Directory; 1990 Ckning nd ourfaaa p" prior tO painting

STANDARD PRACTICE FOR CLEANING METALS PRIOR TO ELECTROPLATING (ASTM 8 322-85) Philadelphia, PA: American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) 1985. 1o.ooop.i .py) u poaibk "da for funovhg oib & @"u

#wr(ilk. - dnnh (for lug. put81 OI - i.nin0 (0


58. Using Ultrasonic Techniques for Wet-Processing Cleaning; Halbert, Jim; Microcontamination; Nov 1988 Optimization of uttruonic olewing

59. Vacuum Deoiling for Environmentally Safe Parts Cleaning; Mitten, Wayne; Metal Finishing; Sept 1991 Vacuum plur twnpomturw up to 600.F rvrpomto oik & organic

60. WASTE MINIMIZATION IN METAL PARTS CLEANING; Office of Solid Waste; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency IEPA) Aug 1 989 id- on rvoiding or minimizing tha n o d to clom - grnrd

.

MnTAP Bibliography (4/92)

Sem i-A awe ous Metal Parts C Ieaninq Most available literature discusses the cleaning of circuit assemblies, thus many of the citations below were chosen because the information contained could apply also to metal cleaning.

61.

' 62.

63.

64.

65.

66.

67.

68.

69.

70.

71.

72.

Advantages and Process Options of Hydrocarbon Based Formulations in Semi- Aqueous Cleaning; Dishart, K.T., Wolff, M.C.; Dupont Company, Wilmington DE

Case Study - Four Star Tool Successfully Switches to Nonhalogenated Solvent; lllinios HWRlC Update, Winter 1990-91

Chemical Substitution for 1 ,1,1 -Trichloroethane and Methanol in Manufacturing Operations; Brown, L., Springer, J., Bower, M.; US €PA Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory, Cincinati, OH

Cleaning Materials; Soldering and Mounting Technology: Soldering Materials;p66 1 -7

Closed-Loop Water Recycling of Semi-Aqueous Systems; Fritz, H.L.; DuPont Company [Electronicsl Wilmington DE, 1 99 1

A COMPARISON OF CFC AND SEMI-AQUEOUS CLEANING IN A HIGH VOLUME, HIGH PRODUCTION ENVlRONMEM; Mower, Wayne L; Detrax Corp, (Singapore4J.S. Seminar Cum Exhibition on CFCs Van Waters & Rogers Seminar - Chemicals & the environment. 1 1990.

Environmental Advantages of the Semi-Aqueous Cleaning Process; Dishart, Kenneth; DuPont Company, Wilmington DE; 1990

Non-halogenated Sotvent Connector Cleaning and Lubrication Processes; Englert, P., Read, P.; Proceedings of the National Electronic Packaging and Production Conference; V 2 199 1

Fhysiochemical Aspects of Electronics Assembly Cleaning and Their Implications for Halogen-Free Solvent Selection; Hayes, Michael; 3rd Intef~tional SAM- Electronics Conference, J w 20-22 1989

PWA Aqueous and Smi-Aquaow Cleaning: System Approaches and Tradeoffs; Andnw, James; Proceedings of the National Uectronic Packaging and Production COnfOrenCO, v 1 8 Fsb 1991

Semi-Aqueous Cleaning; CFC Alternatives; City of Inrim, CA; July 1991

Terpene/Aqueoru Cleaning; HamMett, G., b"8 G.; CalComp Corp; Hudson, NH


Misceli- (nrlsLI1Q, drvi-

73. Aqueous Cleaning Systems Replace Chlorinated Hydrocarbons; Eberle, A; Lachenmayer, U. & Kohler, H.; Metallobedlache 43, (1 989) 12; translation

. .

Optimization of rproy clooning vuiablr: optimization & modolling of bath maintonancr i.r. oii reparation from clranora and rinoor: uw of r Dl wotor prrcloan 0-0

74.

75.

76.

77.

78.

79.

80.

3

81.

82.

83. +

Chlorinated Solvents: Will the Alternatives be Safer?; Wolf, K. and Yardani, A. and Yates, P.; Journal of the Air and Waste Management Association; August 199 1 componmon .of tho huwd. and ~gukt i0n d ChlothWd rdv.ntr md *th.ir & O t l t d t W f l a t h . , 8i i ie informotion io givon on aquwur Jtomativ08.

DEGREASING ALTERNATIVES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE; Thompson, Lisa M; University of Tennessee Center for Industrial SeM'ces; Waste Reduction Assessment and Technology transfer WRAIT I1 teleconference (Solvents: The Good, the Bad, and the Banned) March 13, 1991. Romoving wotw from pwrr by d-ornant with minord r g h or 'w.t.r c h u o r 140' I96 % minard rpirita plur 6% di propylano glycol Mothyl Eth.rl; dit& odditiwl infomution woileblo in 8 vidoo

Drying of Metal Pam (a list of methods); DeWahl, Karl; MnTAP December 199 1 Lirtr md doocriboa ' , dirpkcomont nd wapodvo mothoda of drying.

Dryer Handbook: AVP Crepaco Inc, Chicago, IC In fomt ion on d@ng th#y md .conomiCr; appht ioru d i r c d am for gmukr d i d o or particlo dying I0.g. food; chamid or minodal

Escape to Aqueous Cleaning; Smith, George; Metal Finishing; September 199 1 Montiono 'sonic whirik' m o a a m impmwwtt for dunor oircuktion ryrtwnr on oaitrtod itrunomion Mu; avoid riming (I 8ubr.qu.nt ogmtiOrU; offoct of rwiduw on hoat trWting; wamt8 tn&nwt n d oil wpu8tkn

thru choh of do" md procoa timing compatiblm with

PROCESS OF BUFFING COMPOUND REMOVAL AND CONTROL; Detrisac, M. Arthur; AES Sympm*wn on Cleaning, Pickling, and Etching; 1983. E f f m of bath m"th on bath lih ond cormdon (u. 01 -71

Regenerative Blowers: More than just Air Agitation; Conte, Vincent; Metal Finishing; March 1990 Air knit. d..ign for drying a wntll.tkn

Riruing: A Key Part of Pretreatment; Schrantz, Joe; Industrial Finishing, 6/90 Rinoinggonodv, f o r p h " , o f t u CoMmion nd oftu 4 d n g

Rustproofing; Scidowski, Stan; Metal Finishing; June 1990 TYP.. of MtPmOflna chalwda * m i i . b k & o d b c u a m l ' of tho vui.bkr rffocting thoir aptlieation to owa

Substitub'on of Halogenated Hydrocarbons by Aqueous Cleaning; Zange, 8.; Galvanotechnik 80 (1989) 7,2288-2291; translation Contrifugd drying of and p u b with hd.. nd r"


84. WASTE MINIMIZATION IN METAL PARTS CtEANING; Office of Solid Waste; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Aug 1989. bath maintmnwrcm, rinming, dMng

I


Treatment of Wastewaters from Industrial Metal C Jeanina Ope rations

85.

86.

87.

88.

89.

90.

91.

92.

93.

94.

95.

96.

97.

Atmospheric Evaporators; Choate, Cliff; Metal Finishing, March 1 990

Biological Treatability of Industrial Wastewater and Waste Machine Tool Coolants a t John Deere Debuque Works; Polak, Loren; Proceedings of the 41st Industrial Waste Conference, Purdue University, Lafayette, Indiana, May 1 986, Ann Arbor Science

Evaluation of a Treatment System for Spent Machine Coolants and Oily Wastewater; Alexander, William & Maul, Peter; Proceedings of the 36th Industrial Waste Conference, Purdue University, Lafayette, IN, May 198 1. Ann Arbor Science

A Guide to Understanding the Treatment of Oily Wastewater; AFL Industries, Riviera Beach, FL

Manual on Disposal of Refinery Wastes; Volume on Liquid Wastes; Chapter 5 - Oil-Water Separator Process Design; American Petroleum Institute; 1969

Materials Substim'on Lowers Industrial Waste Treatment Costs; Montgomery, Gail & Long, Bruce; Proceedings of the 41st Industrial Waste Conference, Purdue University, Lafayette, Indiana, M a y 1986, Ann Arbor Science doah primuilv with nwwI h wata mtw

Oil end Grease Removal from a Concentrated Source in the Metal Finishing Industry; Westra, Mark & R o s e , Bryan; American Electroplaters dr Surface Finishers, SUR/FIN 89 Technical Conference; Cleveland OH, June 1989

Oil-Water Separation Techniques: A Literature Review; Magdich, Paula; an unpublished report (July 1986) completed in proparation for a University of Minnesota Thesis: T h e Removal of Oil from Oil-Water Mixtures Using Selective Oil Filtration' June 1988;

A Review of the Theory of Emulsions; Magdch, Paula; August 1986; an unpublished report completed in preparation for a University of Minnesota Thesis: 'The Removal of Oil from Oil-Water Mixtures Using Selective Oil Filtration' June 1988;

Separation of Oily Wastewaters: The State of the Art; Fleischer, Alan; Presented to the Great Laker and Great Rivers Section, Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers; Cincinnati OH, May 17, 1984

Site-built Tramp Oil /Water Decanters; h T A P 1990

Treatable Cleaners; Detrisac, M.Arthw; Metal Finishing, September 1 99 1

Waste Water Treatment; Anderson, Menill; Tho Waste Line; Spring 199 1 ; Kentucky Partners State Waste Reductio Center

MnfAP Bibliography (4/92)

Cleanina Measurement3

98.

99.

100.

101.

102.

103.

104.

105.

106.

107.

108.

109.

Cleaning and Preparation of Metals for Electroplating, Parts IV, V, VI & VU; Linford, H.B. & Saubestre, E.B.; AES Research Project No. 12, serial #26; Reprints from Plating, v38 1951 11157-1161 t 1263-12661, v39 1952 155-631, v40 1953 [379- 386,489496,633-645 & 1269-1 271 1 Irbomtoy evaluation of 8 mothode of dotomining motel ruface clomnlinoa - concludoe otomizsr trot ir moat eenritivo

Evaluating Metal Cleaning Efficiency; Spring, Samuel; Metal Finishing, February 1 9 5 2 dircuuion of vrrimtioru on tho watw bndc tut

Evaluation of Metal-Cleaning Compounds: A Quantitative Method; Morgan, ON, Lankler, J.G; Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, Analytical Edition; September 1 5, 1942 w fluomaconco toat for m i n d oil on m a d

How Clean is Your 'Clean' Metal Surface; Cohen, Leon; Plating and Surface Finishing; November 1987 ehort dieeuaion of 0 mothodr for m w r i n g th. cl..nlinoeo of motd oudaca

How to Cut Phosphating Cosm Through Cleaning; Block, William; Plating & Surface Finishing, 67 (2) Fob 1980 Clunlinou mouurunonta prior to phorph.ting md p.intina

Laboratory Investigations on Metal Cleaning; Spring, Samuel; Metal Finishing; March 1950 vwurk.JI tat &hcton rftreaino - of damning #

Metal Degreasing and Cleaning; Pollack, A.; Westphal, P.; Robart Draper LTD, Teddington England 1963 rhea di.curdon of 16 mdwdo forth. dadno#@ of 111.trl a h c u

Methods of Evaluating Metal Cleaners; Spring, Samuel & Fwman, H. & Peale, L.; Industrial and Engineering Chemistry 18(3), M r c h 1946 Atomimlopravnri.tkn of th. wmr bm& tat

OPTIMIZATION OF ALKALINE SOAK CLEANERS FOR FERROUS METAL SURFACES; Cohen, L.E.; Hook, J.A; Plating and Surface Finishing; MAR 19815. rurfaaa tandon to#t for d w 6 h g th. of 111.trl ouh8.0 und.r prodwtkn dition.

Rinsability and Buffering Action of Alkaline Cloansrs; Metal Finishing, June 195 1 m...wing tho rind- of ebning dutiorw

Rinsing: A Key Part of Pretreatment: Schrantz, Joe; Industrial Finishing, 6/90 ahoa d- of 8" fornnruring th. doall inon of nwtrl rvhcl.


110. Solvent Test Kits; Joshi, S.B. et al; US Air Force, Tyndall Air Force Base, FL; The Key to Hazardous Waste Minimization, Proceedings, August 15-1 8, 1988; Air Force Logistics Command m-uring roil l d i n g r in m o n chlorineted and hydrocubon rolvontr

1 1 1. Testing Surfaces for Cleanliness; Jones, William; Metal Finishing October 1985 wrface toneion tert for tho c h l i n e u of mot4 rurfacr

a

b


Metal Cteanina - Introduction / 0 verwew of Metho&

1 12. Alternative Chemicals and Processes in Metal Cleaning; Chiarella, William; Metal Finishing; Dec 1990

113. Alternatives for CFC-113 and Methyl Chloroform in Metal Cleaning; ICOLP/US EPA; June 1991

114. AQUEOUS ALKALINE CLEANING; Bowden, Carlos L; University of Tennessee Center for Industrial Services; Waste Reduction Assessment and Technology transfer WRATT II teleconference (Solvents: The Good, the Bad, and the Banned) March 13, 1991.

11 5. Aqueous Cleaning; CFC Alternatives; City of Irvine, CA, Feb 1991

1 16. Aqueous Cleaning as an Alternative to CFC and Chlorinated Solvent Based Cleaning, D'Ruir, Carl, Noyes Publications, Park Ridge, NJ, 1991

1 1 7. Chemical Cleaning: Processing and Practices, Part 1 ; Loy, Terry; PC Fabrication, November 1986

11 8. Chemical Cleaning: Processing and Practices, Part 2; Loy, Terry; PC Fabrication, December 1986

1 19. Emulsion and Solvent Cleaners; Scidowski, Stan; Metal Finishing, May 1990

120. Metal Cleaning; Innos, William; Metal Finishing Guidebook and Directory '90, Hackensack, NJ I

121. Metal Degreasing and Cleaning; Pollack, A.; Westghcrl, P.; Robert Draper LTD, Teddington England 1963

122. Preparation for Plating; Bwkard, P.N.; Modem Electroplating, 3rd Ed. *

123. Standard Practice Cleaning Metals Prior to Electroplating; ASTM, B 322- 85; March 1985

124. SURFACE PREPARATlON VIA CHEMICAL APPLICATIONS; Otrhalek, Joseph V.; Sokalski, Stanley M; Dotrex Chemical Industries

125. Synthetic Detergent and Cleaner Selection; Scidowski, Stan; Metal Finishing, Mar 1990

126. The t e n Commandments of Rocidon Cleaning; Hoffman, Roger; IBM Corp., Rochester MN

127. WASTE MINIMIZATION IN METAL PARTS CLEANING / Corpumte Author: Office of Solid Waste. Wadrington DC: U.S. Enviroruneml P r o t ~ ' o n Agency Aug 1989.

,


mission Reduct ion in Vanor D e a r e w r

128.

129.

130.

131.

132.

133.

134.

135.

136.

137.

138.

139.

140. J

141..

Alternative Control Technology Document - Halogenated Solvent Cleaners; US €PA Office of Air Quality; Research Triangle Park, NC; August 1989

CFC Emission Reduction - The Health Care Industry Experience; Currie, Robert; Proceedings of the 84th Annual Meeting of the Air & Waste Management Association; June 1 6-21, 199 1 ; Vancouver, BC

Conservation and Recycling Practices for CFC-113 and Methyl Chloroform; ICOLP Technical Committee; US €PA; June 1991

Control of Volatile Organic Emim*ons from Solvent Metal Cleaning; US EPA Office of Air & Waste Management; Research Triangle Park, NC; November 1977

Cool it to Cut Degreadng Cost; Nyien, G.C.; American Machinist; November 1982

Degreasing System Pdlutim Prevention Evaluation; Darvin, C.H., Wander, J.; Proceedings of the 84th Annual Meeting of the Air 6. Waste M a M g w " t Association; June 1 6-21, 1 99 1 ; Vancouver, BC

Emissions from Open Top Vapor Degreadng Systems; Darvin, Charles; Third Conference on Advanced Pdlution Contrd for the Metal Finishing Industry; US EPA Industrial Research Laboratory; February 1 98 1

Evaluation of Sdvent Degreaser Emissions; Katan, Gerstle, Darvin; 1979

Freon Cleaning Agents: Cleaning System Design; DuPont Corp; Wilmington DE

Freon Cleaning Agents: Recommended Work Practices; DuPont Corp; Wilmington DE I

Freon Cleaning Agents: S o h n t Emion Reduction; DuPont Corp; Wilmington DE

A Membrane Proces8 for the Recovery of Vdatile Organic Compounds from Process and Vent Stream; Wij jns, Kaschemekat, Baker; Proceedings of the 84th Annual Meeting of the Air & Waste Management Association; June 16-21 8 1991; Vancowor, BC

Ttw Recychg Loop Closes for Sdwnts; Basta, Nicholas; Chemical Engineering, June 1991

Reducing Chlorinated S o h " Emissions from Three Vapof Degreasers; Hymes, Corey; MnTAP Intem Report, 1990

142. Reducing Sdvent Emions from Vapor Degreasen; MnTAP factsheet, 7/91


143. Reduction of Solvent Emissions from Vapor Degreasing; Buresh, Pat; MnTAP Intern Report; 1989

144.

145.

146.

147.

148.

149.

Replacing 1 , 1 , l -Trichloroethane: Consider other Chlorinated Solvents; Warner, Mertens; Plating and Surface Finishing; November 1 99 1

Throwing a Cold Blanket on the Vapor-Degreased Emissions Problem; Staheli, A.H.; Mechanical Engineering, August 1973

Trouble-Shooting Vapor Degreasers Save Solvent Dollars; PPG Industries, Inc; Pittsburgh, PA

Vapor Emission Control in Vapor Degreasing and Dofluxing Equipment; Ramsey, Robert; DuPont Company; Wilmington DE

Vapor Solvent Recovery Using Brayton Cycle Technology; Ennoking, Joeseph; University of Tennessee Center for Industrial Services, (Waste Reduction Assessment and Technology transfer WRAlT II teleconference (Solvents: lh Good, the Bad, and tfn Banned)) March 13,1991.

WASTE MINIMIZATION IN METAL PARTS CLEANING; Office of Sdid Waste; U.S. Environmental Rotecsion Agency (€PA) Aug 1989.

.


ial Clean ina Qoe rat iow Solvent Waste Rewt ion in I n a t r . .

150. Are You Disposing of Good Raw Materials as Waste?; Waste Advantage; Pollution Prevention Review; Spring 199 1

1 5 1. Cascaded or Counter-Current Solvent Wash Line [Process Flow Drawing]; MnTAP 1991

1 52. Case Studies from the Pollution Prevention Information Clearinghouse: Solvent Recovery; US EPA Office of Pollution Prevention; November 1989

1 53. Freon Cleaning Agents: Equipment Suppliers; DuPont Corp, Wilmington, DE

154. Freon Cleaning Agents: Solvent Reclaimation; DuPont Corp, Wilmington, DE

155. Life extention of a fluorocarbon-Alcohol Sdvent with Additive Addition; Cox, C. Peek G.; Proceedings of the Technical Program - National Electronic Packaging and Production Conference; Cahners Exposition Group; June 10-1 2, 1 986

1 56. + Minnesota's Final Report on RCRA Integrated Training and Technical Assistance (RIlTA); Gilburtson, J and DeWahl, K; Minnesota Pollution Control Agency; June 1991 rdv.nt wo) wt r d m t coruunptiocl in hdf

"in 6mIwnt mrp duction c.w rtudioe, u u of 2 m g o

157. + Selected Case Studies for Waste Prevention from Minnesota Businesses; DeWahl, Karl; 2nd Pollution Prevention Conference, AlChE Summer Meeting, Pittsburgh, PA, Aug 20-21, 1991

1 58. Site-built Tramp Oil / Water Decanters; MnTAP 1990

159.. Soak Step Reduces Sdwnt Waste from Cleaning Paint Straining Equipment; MnTAP, Minneapdu, 7/91

160. + Spray Noale Selection Reduces S o h " Waste Vdwne when Cleaning Paint Straining Equipment; MnTAP, Minnoapdh, 6/91

161. Standclrd Practice for Handling an Acid Dogreaser or Still; ASTM Standard D 4579- 86

.I 162. Sdvent Reduction Attematives: Things you can do now: Waste Reduction Resource Center for tfa Southeast, Raleigh, NC; October 1989

SECTION 7

Wisconsin’s Pollution Prevention Resources

-.

Pollution Prevent ion

Reduces Costs Improves Efficiency Boosts Competitiveness

Reduces Liability

Using the Center's Services To use the Center's services, contact your county extension office. TheCommunity Natural Resource and Economic Development Agent will identify what services the Center can povide. The agent will also act as the long-term liaison for your wa~le reducticm needs.

You may also contact SHWEC directly: Solid and Hazardous Waste Education Center University of Wisconsin-Extension 610 Langdon Street. Rm. 529 Madison, WI 53703-1 195 6081262-0385 F ~ x 608/262-6250 Collaborating W Institutions: W - C r e e n Bay, UW-Madison, and UW-Steveru Poinf

SHWEC and UW-Extension provide equal opportunities in employment and programming.

I .

No Cost Non-regulato y

Technical Assistance &

Waste Reduction Resources

Available from

The Solid and Hazardous Waste

Education Center

Solid and Hazardous Waste Education Center 610 Langdon Street, Rm. 529 Madison, WI 53703-1 195 608/26z-(na5 Fax 608/262-6250

University of Wisconsin-Madison / Extension

What is SHWEC?

The University of Wisconsin-Extension’s Solid and Hazardous Waste Education Center (SHWEC) was created to provide pollution prevention services to waste generators in Wisconsin. SHWEC’s pollution prevention specialists will:

Assess your hazardous waste streams, Provide no-cost, non-regulatory technical assistance, and Identify appropriate waste reduction options.

Why Pollution Prevention?

Controlling production costs is vital in today’s competitive market. Industrial hazardous wastes are financial and legal liabilities for Wisconsin companies. Pollution prevention can eliminate or reduce:

Costs for hazardous chemicals and waste disposal, Long-term liability, and Regulatory burden accompanying toxic material use and hazardous waste generaton.

Who Can Benefit?

SHWEC’s services benefit the following groups that generate hazardous wastes, have toxic wastewater or air emissions, or use hazardous or toxic materials:

Industries and Businesses Institutions Governmental Units

’ # , I . ‘ ’

@ This brochure is printed on recycled paper.

Pollution Prevention Services Available From UW-Extension

Pollution Prevention Specialists At SHWEC

On-Site Technical Assistance SHWEC’s pollution prevention specialists will visit

your facility and help evaluate your hazardous wastes. The evaluation will:

Help you identify the sources and amounts of hazardous waste in your plant or shop, Show you how to figure the true cost of your hazardous wastes, Identify strategies for reducing or eliminating hazardous waste, Pinpoint the economic benefits of reducing or eliminating your hazardous wastes.

The specialists will provide you with a report that justifies making the necessary in-plant changes. It will also list sources for equipment and raw materials and outside consulting services available for implementing the appropriate waste reduction options. And, our specialists will be available for follow-up assistance.

Assistance by Phone or Mail Call SHWEC’s pollution prevention specialists to dis-

cuss your technical information needs. They can provide: Descriptions of waste reduction technologies, Lists of vendors. and Case studies for many pollution prevention options.

We also have access to a national network of pollution prevention programs and resources. It is likely that other companies have accomplished waste reduction for a process similar to yours. Working through the national net-

the costs and risks associated with trying a new process. wakourspecialistscanpwideyouwithinfmation toduce

Wayne P. Pferdehirt, P.E. (6081265-2361)

Wayne is a registered engineer with fifteen years of professional experience. He has provided solid and hazardous waste technical assistance to businesses and communities across the Midwest through ten years of consulting engineering experience and previously through an outreach program at Argonne National Laboratory.

Wayne also directs courses in designing waste recycling and collection systems for the Univer- sity of Wisconsin-Madison’s Department of En- gineering Professional Development.

Phillip (Jack) Annis (41414752845)

Jack is a former hazardous waste minimization specialist for the military with extensive experience in fabricating and processing. As a Pollution Prevention Specialist for southeast Wisconsin, Jack provides businesses and local governments with advice about eliminating waste at the source. He focuses on helping businesses develop cost-effective and environmentally sound pollution prevention programs.

David S . Liebl (6081265-2360)

David is an environmental chemist with extensive experience with hazardous pollutants. He concentrates on hazardous waste minimization, with an emphasis on providing economic justifications for pollution prevention based on accurate analysis of industrial processes.

.

Kw> Solid & Hazardous Waste Education Center 61 0 Langdon Street, Rm. 529 University of Wisconsin-Extension Madison, WI 53703 Phone: 6081262-0385 Fax: 6081262-6250

The Solid and Hazardous Waste Education Center (SHWEC) is a free, non-regulatory, program that will assist you in solving your waste problems. Established by the University of Wisconsk-Extension, and funded by the Wisconsin Legislature, SHWEC provides educational assistance t o citizens, businesses, and local government concerning the best available methods for managing and reducing waste. SHWEC specialists provide technical and legal information t o help decision makers design and implement programs t o meet regulatory mandates, reduce waste volumes and protect the environment. In addition t o providing general waste management assistance, SHWEC provides assistance that is focused in two program areas.

POLLUTION PREVENTION

Educational programs t o assist industry, municipalities, and government agencies in reducing toxic releases and hazardous waste.

Technical assistance to industry for pollution prevention by providing technical information and resources and by assisting industry in conducting on-site pollution prevention audits t o reduce toxic releases and hazardous waste.

INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT

Educational programming for municipalities, businesses and consumers on recycling topics including legal and technical issues regarding the design and implementation of recycling collection and waste reduction programs, finding markets for recyclable materials, evaluating waste processing technologies and the manufacture of products from recyclable materials.

Information for municipalities and businesses on waste processing technologies such as yard waste composting, solid waste composting, waste-to-energy, and material recovery facilities and, the legal and technical aspects of lanm siting and operation.

To use the services provided by SHWEC please contact your County Extension Office.

Collaborating UW Institutions: UW-Creen Bay, I* ' SHWEC and UW-Extension provide equal opptonilics UW-Madison, UW-Stevens Point , %a . . ;n employment and prop"%

Print& on recycledpaper ..

' i

f i SHWEC Solid & Hazardous Waste Education Center

' 610 Lanndon Street, Rm. 529 University of Wiscor isin-Extension

Madison: Phone: 6081262-0385 WI 53703 Fax: 6081262-6250 III-

SOLID AND HAZARDOUS WASTE EDUCATION CENTER (SHWEC)

The UW-Extension Solid and Hazardous Waste Education Center (SHWEC) is an expansion of the educational assistance that UW-Extension has historically provided to local governments and businesses. With new demands placed on Wisconsin government and business by the legislature and congress, Chancellor Patrick Boyle of UW-Extension felt there was a need to bring together the educational resources in Extension to better coordinate and enhance waste related educational programming. The Solid and Hazardous Waste Education Center uses existing and new state specialists to help communities better address solid waste management problems.

The center faculty are from a number of campuses. Here is a brief description of the topic areas and experience for each.

Elaine Andrews, W-Madison (608) 262-0142

is an environmental education specialist. She provides educational programs and materials on hazardous waste and toxic substance issues and consults with communities regarding educational and management strategies for household and farm hazardous waste.

Phillip (Jack) A&, Milwaukee Co. Extension (414) 475-2845 A former hazardous waste minimization specialist for the military with

extensive experience in fabricating and processing, Jack is a pollution prevention specialist. A member of the pollution prevention program, he provides business and local government with advice concerning how to eliminate waste at the source. His major focus is on helping businesses in southeastern Wisconsin to develop cost effective and environmentally sound pollution prevention programs.

Also a member of the UW-Extension Environmental Resources Center, Elaine

Sherrie Gruder, UW-Madison (608) 262-0398 Formerly the recycling director for the city of Fitchburg, Sheme is the

recycling operations specialist. She helps communities with decisions regarding how to establish a successful recycling program. She will help with decisions regarding collection methods, equipment, and processing facilities. She will also provide general advice concerning contracting for recycling and processing services.

Holly Johnson, UIV-Stevens Point (715) 3462793

waste processing specialist. She provides technical assistance to communities and businesses regarding options for processing waste to reduce volume and extract usable

.A landscape architect with extensive recycling experience, Holly is the solid

Collaborating UW Institutions: UW-Green Bay, I* SHWEC and UW-Extension provide equal opportunilies UW-Madison, UW-Stevens Point %P in employment and programming.

Printed on rccycled paper

resources including yard waste and solid waste composting and waste to energy. She is also assisting the establishment 3f the pilot cooperative ma;.keting program in westem Wisconsin. She can help communities with decisions regarding processing system design, equipment choices, and siting and operating regulations.

Mary Kohrell, UW-Green Bay (414) 465-2707 Formerly marketing director for a large recycling aoperative, Mary is the

recycling marketing specialist. She assists cbmmunities and businesses define and develop markets for recyclable materials. She will help interpret market specifications and contract requirements and can assist with planning and implementation of coopefative marketing programs. She also provides assistance for programming related to consumex purchasing and market development.

David Liebl, W-Mkdison, (60s) 262-0385 An environmental chemist formerly with the Minnesota Technical Assistance

Program, David is a pollution prevention specialist providing assistance to business and local government. The goal of the pollution prevention program is to eliminate waste at its source, so it need not be managed later. Methods for reducing waste include in-facility auditing, process changes, and improved purchasing. David provides advice conccrning these topics as well as other hazardous waste related concerns.

Phil O'Leary, UW-Madison (608) 2620493 As a member of the Department of Engineering Professional Development Phil

sponsors programs for technical professionats ip the areas of landfilling, waste to energy, recycling, and composting. He is well known as a speaker both h Wisconsin and nationally concerning a variety of waste related topics.

Wayne Pferdehiirt, UW-Madison (608) 262-0385

prevention specialist. He also provides assistance to business and local government regarding methods of reducing waste at the source. Additionally, Wayne has had extensive experience in designing material recovery facilities (MRFs) for recycling. He can provide technical assistance both for pollution prevention and regarding design and construction of recycling processing facilities.

An engineer with extensive consulting experience, Wayne is a pollution

Patrick Walsh, UW-Madison (608) 262-8179

legal and technical information regarding all areas of waste management, including landfilling, waste to energy, recycling, and composting. He also provides assistance regarding new rules for underground and above ground storage of fuels, environmental liability, and management of hazardous materials.

An engineer and lawyer, Pat is the solid waste specialist. He provides general

'

Solid & Hazardous Waste Education Center Cooperative Extension

~ -~

1304 S. 70th St.

Phone: 4141475-2045 Fax: 414/475-3777

University of Wisconsin-Extension

West Allis, WI 53214 m

EPA Hotline Numbers

RCRA/Superfund Hotline 800-424-9346

Small Business Ombudsman 800-368-5888

Stratospheric Ozone 800-296-1996

EPCR4 800-535-0202

National Appropriate Technology Assistance Service 800-428-2525

National Response Center 800-424-8802

National Pesticide Telecommunications Network 800-858-7378

Office of Pollution Prevention 202-252-0178

National Environmental Technology Applications 800-486-3822

Pollution Prevention Information Clearinghouse 703-821-4800

TOSCA 202-554-1404

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Information Resources

Office of Pollution Prevention, Ken Wiesner, Director 608-267-9700

Hazardous Waste Minimization Program, Lynn Persson, Coordinator 608-267-3763

Pollution Prevention Information Clearinghouse, Specialist 608-267-9523

Telephone numbers and points of contact for Department Bureaus and District Offices in the Division of Environmental Quality are listed in "Managing Your Hazardous Wastps: A Guidefor Wisconsin Small Quantify Generators " a free publication available from the Pollution Prevention Information Clearinghouse.

University of Wisconsin, United States Department of Agriculture and Wisconsin Counties Cooperating.

Collaborating UW Institutions: U W-Green Bay, 4* SHWEC and UW-Extension provide equal opportunities U W-Madison, U W-Stevens Point +$ in employment and programming.

Printed on recycled paper

POLLUTION PREVENTION RESOURCES FOR WISCONSIN BUSINESSES

UW-EXTENSION SOLID AND HAZARDOUS WASTE EDUCATION CENTER Provides technical assistance and education.

528 Lowell Hall, 610 Langdon Street, Madison, WI 53703 Wayne P. Pferdehirt, Pollution Prevention Specialist,(608) 265-236 1 David S. Liebl, Pollution Prevention Specialist, (608) 265-2360

Milwaukee Co. Extension Office, 1304 S. 70th St., West AUL, WI 53214 P. (Jack) Annis, Pollution Prevention Specialist, (414) 475-2845

WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Incorporates pollution prevention into regulatory and enforcement program. Maintains technical clearinghouse.

Box 7921, Madison, WI 53707 Ken Weisner, Coordinator, Pollution Prevention Program, (608) 267-9700 Lynn Persson, Coordinator, Hazardous Waste Minimiza tion Technical

Assistance Program, (608) 267-3763

WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT Administers pollution prevention audit grant program

123 W Washington Ave., Madison, WI 53707 Louise Rech, (608) 266-2766

U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

Hotline for Solid & Hazardous Waste (RCRA) & Superfund (800) 424-9346 or (703) 920-9810

Hotline for Chemical Emergency Preparedness Program, including Community Right to Know Provisions (800) 535-0202 or (703) 920-9877

National Pesticide Telecommunications Network (provides information about pesticides, including spill handling, disposal cleanup, and health effects) . (800) 858-7378

INDUSTRIAL MATERIAL EXCHANGE SERVICE

Publishes bi-monthly bulletin that provides opportunity to businesses to trade, sell, or give away materials they consider a waste but which anotherfinn can productively use. Listings are published free and mailed to over 10,OOO subscribers nationwide.

For subscriptions, contact LYM Persson at Wisconsin DNR. To list a material, contact P.O. Box 19276, Springfield, IL 62794-9276; (217) 7824450

i. For mor, . rformation

Call

0 Safety Consultation-Waukesha (41 4) 521 -5063

Regional Off ices

0 Shawano (715) 524-5840

0 Lacrosse (608) 785-9339

0 Chippewa Falls (71 5) 726-2543

For Industrial Hygiene Consultation Contact:

Wisconsin Division of Health Section of Occupational Health

PO Box 309 Madison, WI 5371 1

(608) 266-9383

TDDNOICE RELAY 1-800-947-3529

The Department of Industry, Labor and Human Relations does not discriminate on the basis of disability in the provision of services or in employment. If you need this printed material interpreted or in a different form or if you need assistance in using this service please contact us.

H 8 3 m

The State of Wisconsin

ON-SITE AFETY

CONSUL ION

Education

Techn ica I Assistance

~ N O Penalties

.No Citations

SBD-6383-P (R.10/92) Department of Industry, Labor

and Human Relations

THE DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRY, LABOR AND HUMAN RELATIONS

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

The Department has a long history of successful cooperation with employers in the areas of regulation and education for safety and health hazards in the workplace. These efforts continue today, even though employers are now regulated by Federal OSHA.

The Wisconsin On-Site Safety Consultation Pro- gram has a primary mission to provide education and assistance to private employers to help them comply with OSHA standards and regulations. Part of that effort is directed beyond mere rules, to helping identify and eliminate any potential safety hazard.

1 have no hesitation in recommending On-Site Consultation to employers. Education and assistance are always more acceptable than citations and penalties.

Let us continue our tradition of cooperation in promoting safety in the workplace.

Sincerely, 7

Carol Skornicka

The Consultation Program provides several benefits for you as an employer. On-site consultants WILL:

.

0 Help you to recognize hazards in your workplace.

0 Suggest approaches or options for solving a safety or health problem.

0 Identify sources of help available to you if you need further assistance.

0 Provide you with a written report that summarizes these findings.

0 Assist you in developing or maintaining an effective safety and health program.

0 Offer training and education for you and your employees at your workplace, and in some cases away from the site.

0 Under specified circumstances, recommend you for recognition by OSHA and a one-year exclusion from general schedule enforcement inspections.

Consultants WILL NOT:

0 Issue citations or propose penalties for violations of Federal or State OSHA standards.

0 Routinely report possible violations to OSHA enforcement staff.

0 Guarantee that any workplace will “pass” a Federal OSHA inspection.

.. 9)

lu 0 c

.. w

z s .. C 0

9) a 0 m C 0 0

2 Y -

5 c E c

c

.. v) In al

,. a, U 0 0 a G

In v) w C v) 3

0 9) a h I-

.-

n .c

C

c . . al C 0 c

v) w 9) x 0 - ? w 0

0,

c

L

n E 3 C 9) c

.- 2 X

a 2 a a

Waste Minimization Program - Hazardous Waste. Minimization

Program Description f a c t s h e e t

3

The best way to avoid the cost and liability of hazardous waste disposal is to avoid producing the waste in the first place. Many industries are discovering the truth in 3Ms slogan: Pollution Prevention Pays. Wisconsin industries and other hazardous waste generators can learn more about pollution prevention through the Department of Natural Resources' Hazardous Waste Minimization Technical Assistance Program. The program provides general information on waste minimization for all generators and specifically targets three categories: 1) electroplaters and metal finishers, 2) auto repair and body shops, and 3) local governments, universities and trade schools. The Hazardous Waste Minimization Technical Assistance Program includes:

L'

Waste Minimization Workshops/'Ikaining

Each year we put on waste minimization training workshops that are open to the public at a minimal fee. Past workshops include: a half day workshop "Saving Money Through Pollution Prevention" and three workshops on the vehicle maintenance industry and pollution prevention. We also co-sponsored two teleconferences put on by the University of Tennessee, "Solvents: the Good, the Bad and the Banned," and "In Living Color: Painting Challenges for the 90's." Plans are being made putting on an electroplating workshop this winter. Announcements for the waste minimization workshops are sent to everyone who files the annual report or who has written to us for waste minimization information.

We would like to cooperate with trade associations and businesses to develop additional workshops that focus on industry-specific needs. If your organization is interested in co-sponsoring a waste " i z a t i o n workshop or training program, please contact Lynn Persson, DNR Hazardous Waste Minimization Coordinator at (608) 267- 3763.

Pollution Prevention Information Clearinghouse

The Clearinghouse distributes over 100 publications on waste reduction and recycling. Publications include checklists to identify waste " i z a t i o n opportunities at your facility and detailed guides for conducting waste reduction assessments. We carry many publications which we do not list on the order form, so please call the Clearinghouse specialist and ask about our reference collection.

~~


In addition to sending you information from our in-house collection, we can obtain publications for you through the US EPA's pollution prevention database known as PPIC or EIES. The US EPA's information system provides case studies, waste minimization references, a pollution prevention activity calendar, and up-dates on legislation and other state programs. Please call 608) 267-9523 to order our publications list or to learn more about waste minimization opportunities for youi business.

Waste Exchange

Waste exchanges have proven to be a successful way for companies to trade, sell or even give away materials that they consider a waste but which another firm needs. The DNR cooperates with the Illinois Industrial Material Exchange Service (IMES) and mails the IMES bulletin to Wisconsin businesses. Every two months IMES publishes a listing of materials wanted and materials available. Listings information submitted to IMES is published without charge and mailed to over 10,000 subscribers nationwide. At no time is the exchange involved in negotiations or actual exchange of materials. If you would like to participate in IMES, call (608) 267-9523.

Pollution Prevention Video Library

We have established a video library at the University of Wisconsin-Extension's Bureau of Audio Visual Services (BAVI). The videos cover pollution prevention, hazardous waste minimization, and a variety of RCRA waste management issues. The tapes are only available on a rental basis. To rent a video, call BAVI at 1-800-362-6888.

* Additional Services * Program Speakers. Have you considered inviting a pollution prevention specialist to speak at your next organization or staff meeting? If you would like to explore the possibility, please contact us. We will try to put you in contact with a pollution prevention expert in your particular area of interest.

Pollution Prevention Services and Products. We are developing information files on vendors with specific waste reduction or recycling services and products. If you have a special expertise or would like more information about firms that do, please contact the Clearinghouse specialist at (608) 267-9523.


P.O. Box 7921(SW/3) - - Madison, WI 53707 (608) 267-9523 or

- (608) 267-3763

Q - m

PUBL-SW-152 9' - -, Printed on Recycled Paper

Managing Your Hazardous Wastes: A Guide for Wisconsin Small Quantity Generators ThirdEdition 1992

Wisconsin's Guide for Small Quantity Generators has recently been updated. The Guide helps companies and others that generate hazardous waste answer the following questions.

5

0 Whatishazanlouswaste?

How do I set up a waste management system for my facility?

What do I have to do to comply with hazardous waste eguhtions?

How can I mduce the amount of hazardous waste that I genewe?

0 Who can I call to get mom infonnation?

Single copies of the document are available at no charge to Wisconsin businesses and local government that manage hazardous waste and others involved in hazardous waste management issues and education in Wisconsin. If you would like to order a copy of this 110-page document, use this self-mailer by filling out the form below, fold the page in half with DNR address on outside, staple or tape, use a first class stamp and mail.

city Statc ZIP

'd phone

If you would like to be on a mailing list to receive our newsletter, W&*Lcss*News, please check the fdowing category of business that is most appropriate:

- H.nrdous waste generator or other industry S310 f i i )

I

I I I I I I I I I

I

!

I I I I I I I I I I I

I I I i I I I I I I I I

- Other (educator, consultant, government, etc) ,9320 (0th) I

H S340 PQGJ

DNR Publications 2421 Darwin Road

Madison, WI 53704

Waste Minimization Program - Pollution Prevention -

Video Library -

f a c t s h e e t

3

The DNR’s Hazardous Waste Minimization Program has set up a video rental library at the UW-Extension’s Bureau of Audio Visual Services. The videos cover pollution prevention, waste minimization and a variety of RCRA hazardous waste management issues. The tapes are great for training employees and for getting upper management support for waste minimization programs.

Waste Minimization

In Partnership With Earth (US EPA) - John Denver and CEOs of several large companies explain measures taken to prevent pollution.

Pollution Prevention in Business (US EPA) - an interactive video teleconference on hazardous waste management and waste minimization.

Beyond Business as Usual: Meeting the Challenge of Hazardous Waste (US EPA) - success stories from industry, Federal agencies, State and local government programs. The video stresses that successful pollution prevention requires both industrial initiatives and governmental direction.

Automotive Refrigerant Recycling - (Iowa Waste Reduction Center) a short introduction to how to recycle automotive refrigerant.

Less is More: Pollution Prevention is Good Business (US EPA) - highlights large and small companies success stories proving that pollution prevention is the best alternative to costly end-of-the-pipe waste management strategies.

An Introduction to PPIC (US EPA) - a short. introduction on how to use the EPA’s PPIC system.

Solvents Reduction Teleconference (Univ. of Tenn) - video teleconference on solvents reduction. (6 hrs)

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources 0 Hazardous Waste Minimization Program

In Living Color: Painting Challenges for the '90s (vniv. of Tenn) - video teleconference on pollution prevention for painting processes. (6 hrs).

Hazardous Waste Management

Practical Aspects of Hazardous Waste Sampling (US EPA) - a discussion of hazardous waste sample handling equipment and techniques.

Land Disposal Restrictions Seminar (US EPA) - an introduction to the Land Disposal Restrictions program.

Personal Protection and Safety (US EPA) - an explanation of personal protection and safety in working with hazardous waste on-site.

Monitoring Well Installation (US EPA) - an introduction to the basics of monitoring well installation.

Construction of RCRA Ground Water Monitoring Wells (US EPA) - a step by step explanation of well installation and operation.

RCRA Orientation Program (US EPA) - an introduction to the hazardous waste regulations. Good for training new employees.

* * *

The running times for the videos are approximately 15 - 60 minutes with exceptions as noted. The tapes are not available for purchase.

To rent a video, just call BAVI at 1-800-362-6888.


P.O. Box 7921(SW/3) - - Madison, WI 53707 (608) 267-9523 or

.pc

(608) 267-3763

Q - =a Printed on Recycled Paper PUBL-SW-156

We’re glad to provide your company/organization with the publications that you check off on the list below. All publications are free to Wisconsin businesses, local government and others interested in promoting pollution prevention and good management of hazardous waste. Our funding is limited, so please, restrict your total request to 300 pages or 15 publications. Waste minimization publications ftom other states are included, too. Please note that each state has slightly different hazardous waste regulations, so refer to WisconSin’s regulations, handbooks and fact sheets for information specific to Wisconsin’s hazardous waste programs.

Return this original form to the attention of the Clearinghouse Specialist at the above address. Keep in mind, your name will be added to our general mailing list to receive notices about future workshops and other activities. If you have comments on any of the publications or suggestions for additional publications to include in the Pollution Prevention Clearinghouse, please give the Hazardous Waste Minimization Program staff a call at the numbers listed above.

L’

Setting Up a Company Program

* Recently added publication

Wisconsin’s Waste! Minimization and Pollution Prevention Programs

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0 V

Hazardous Waste Minimization Program Description @NR 2 pp) PUBL-SW-152 92

Pollution Prevention Program Summary (DNR, DOD, SHWEC 1 p) 93

Technical Assistance & Waste Reduction Resources UWExt-Madison Solid and Hazardous Waste Education Center (SHWEC brochure) 92

Hazardous Pollution Prevention Audit Grant Program

Annual Govemor’s Award for Excellence in Hazardous Waste Reduction (brochure) 92

Act 325, Legislation establishing Wisconsin’s Pollution Prevention Program (5 pp) 90

** Wate.Less.News, most recent newsletter from the DNR’s Hazardous Waste Minimization Program (4-8 pp)

Pollution Prevention and Waste Minimization Workshop and Training Opportunities (2 pp) 93

@OD 2 PPI 91

Pollution Prevention: Information Clearinghouses

. o

0

0

0

** Wisconsin Pollution Prevention Information Clearinghouse Publications Order Form (6 pp)

Wisconsin Pollution Prevention Video Library (2 pp)

PUBL-SW-199 8/93

PUBL-SW-156 92

Great Lakes Technical 2 pp) 1992

PIES Quick Reference

Resource Library (UWEX SHWEC

Guide (EPA 4 pp) 92

** Recently revised publication

0 PIES: Pollution Prevention Information Exchange System

0 PPIC: Pollution Prevention Information Clearinghouse

Wisconsin Program Management Reports

(EPA brochure) 92

(EPA brochure) 92

0

0

0

0

0

0

Research Report II: Personal Interviews with Hazardous Waste Generators: Summary and Analysis (25 pp) PUBL- MB-004 92

Research Report 111: Information: Sources, Desired Types

Research Report IV: Hazardous Waste Generator Contacts with the DNR (19 pp) PUBL-MB-006 8/92

Research Report V: Bamers and Incentives to Hazardous Waste Reduction (56 pp) PUBL-MB-007 8/92

Report to the Legislature on Pollution Prevention Activities in Wisconsin (20 pp) 91

Wisconsin Hazardous Waste Minimization Chapter, Hazardous Waste Capacity Assurance Plan (9 pp) PUBL-

and Formats (19 pp) PUBL-MB-005 8/92

SW-107 89

0 ** Draft Guidance to Haz Waste Generators on the Elements of a Waste Minimization Program (EPA 6 pp) Federal Register Vol. 58 No. 102 May 28 93

0 * Pollution Prevention: A Guide to Program Implementation (UWEX SHWEC 43 pp) 93

Pollution Prevention In formation Clearinghouse: Publications Order Form 2

0

o

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Facility Pollution Prevention Guide (EPA 143 pp)

* Understanding Pollution Prevention Assessments (VWEX

** The 33/50 Program: Forging an Alliance For Pollution Prevention (EPA brochure) 741-K-92-00192

Achievements in Source Reduction and Recycling-10 U.S.

Corporate Environmental Policies Package (EPA PPIC 40

Operating Procedures, Waste Reduction Opportunity Checklist (WI DNR 3 pp) 89

Pollution Prevention = Pure Profit (WI DNR 8 pp)

Pollution Prevention: Make it Work for You-Model Policy

Pollution Prevention: Make it Work for You-Checklist (WI

Profiting from Waste Reduction in Your Small Business, (AK Health Project 46 pp) 88

Strategic Waste Minimization Initiative (SWAMI) Software and Guide Order Form @PA 1 p) 93

Waste M m t i o n : Environmental Quality with Economic Benefits, (EPA 34 pp) 90

Waste Reduction Assessment and Technology Transfer: Training Manual 2nd ed. (Univ of TN 486 pp) 90

600/R-92/088 92

SHWEC 2 pp) 4/93

Industries (EPA 60 pp) 600/2-91/05191

PPI 91

PUBL-TS-009 93

(WI DNR 2 pp) PUBL-TS-004 90

DNR 2 pp) PUBL-TS-005 90

Equipment Manufacturers & Consultants Many of these fact sheets include an qdanation of the equipment, purchasing guidelines and a list of manufacturers.

0

0

0

.o

0

0

0

Activated Carbon Adsorbers for On-Site Recovery (WI

Agitated Thin Film Evaporators for On-Site Recovery (WI DNR 4 pp) PUBL-SW-146 91

Aqueous Industrial Cleaning Chemicals (WI DNR 7 pp) PUBL-sw-147 91

Aqueous Parts Washing Equipment (WI DNR 6 pp) PUBL-SW-148 91

DNR 5 pp) PUBL-SW-145 91

** High Volume Low Pressure Equipment (WI DNR 4 pp) PUBL-sw-149 93

Membrane Filtration: Microfiltration, Ultrafiltration and Rev. Osmosis. (MnTap 5 pp) 91

* On-Site Anti-Freeze Recycling and Reconditioning (WI DNR 2 pp) 6/93

0 Onsite Solvent Recovery Stills (WI DNR 7 pp) PUBL-

0 * Used Oil Filter Crushing Machines (Wl DNR 1 p) 4/93

0 Environmental consultants with Hazardous waste

Waste Exchanges & Recycling Markets

SW-150 91

Minimidon Services (WI DNR 2 pp) 90

0 Waste Exchges (WI DNR 2 pp) PUBL-SW-138 93

0 ** Waste exchange newsletter: Industrial Material Exchange Service, most recent copy (Illinois EPA 28 pp)

0 Markets for Wisconsin’s Recycled Materials Software and Hard Copy Order Form (WI DNR 2 pp) 92

** Markets for Wisconsin’s Recycled Materials - Excerpts 0 Barrels and Drums (4 pp) 7/93

0 Oil Filters (2 pp) 6/93 0 Precious Metals (7 pp) 7/93 0 Solvents (1 p) 7/93

0 oil (4 pp) 7/93

Solid Waste Recycling

0

0

0

0

0

Financial and Technical Assistance Available to Recycling Programs and Businesses. @OD, DNR, WHEDA 6 pp) 91

Recycling and Waste Reduction Information and Education Publ. Order Form (WI DNR 2 pp) PUBL-IE-138 93

Recycling and Waste Reduction Tech Assistance Publ. Order Form (WI DNR 2 pp) PUBL-SW-334 4/93

Solid Waste Reduction and Recycling Demonstration Grants (WI DNR 2 pp) 5/92

Video and Handbook on Recycling in the Workplace, how to order (WI DNR 6 pp) PUBL-IE-115-91 6/91

Household Hazardous Waste

Reduction & hevention

D Don’t Poison the Ones You Love (City of Madison, CBE

0 Safe at Home: rediscovering cleaning solutions from a

Management

& DNR 4 pp)

bygone era (DNR, UWEX & CBE 4 pp) 91

0

0

0

Clean Sweep Grant Program Requirements (WI DNR

Haz. Waste in Your Home: Here’s what you should do!

4 pp) PUBL-SW-036 85

(WI DNR 2 pp) PUBL-WW-003 89

Household Hazardous Waste Collection: Bibliography in Brief (UWEX 3 pp) 89


Hazardom Waste Management Requirements

0 Mauaging Your Haz. Waste: A Guide for WI Small Qupntity Gmerators (110 pp) PUBL-SW-07193

0 ** what is Hazardous Waste? (4 pp) PUBL-SW-106 93

0 EPA Identification Number (4 pp) PUBL-SW-101 89

L I Hazprdous Waste Manifest (4 pp) PUBL-SW-102 89

0 Hazardous Waste Inspection Logs (2 pp) PUBL-SW-098

0 Hazardous Waste Training Records (2 pp) PUBL-SW-099

0 Land Disposal Restrictions (6 pp) PUBL-SW-105 89

89

89

0 Wisconsin Licensed Commercial TSD’s List (1 p) 12/92

0 Transpoe Survey Results, hazardous waste transporters

Other Environmental Regulations

0 Air Management Regulations Publications Order Form (2

0 Environmental Response Section Publications Order Form: LUST, Spills, Env Repair, Superfund (9 pp) 12/92

0 Managing Industry Stormwater Discharges: Preparing a Pollution Prevention Plan (4 pp) PUBL-WW-016 92

0 Wastewater Treatment Plant Discharges - General Prohibitions NR 211.10, WI Adm. Code (6 pp) 92

For regulations relating to lubeling products made with ozone depleting substances, see Parts Cieuning under the next categov.

for small quantity generators (1 1 pp) 87

PP) 1/92

0 TrpnspOrting Hazardous Waste (2 pp) PUBL-SW-137 91

0 Toxicity characteristic Leaching Procedure TCLP (EPA 7 PPI 90

0 ** Recycling Hazardous Waste: DNR Requirements in Brief (2 pp) PUBL-SW-191 93

0 ** Recycling Hazardous Waste: Guide to NR 625 Recycling Provisions (12 pp) PUBL-SW-189 93

0 Wisconsin’s Hazardous Waste Laws 8t Regulations: How

Special Hazardous Waste Guidance

0 ** Consumer Battery Recyclers (WI DNR 4 pp)

0 Fluoresceat Lamps and Incandescent Bulbs (2 pp)

Used Oil Management ReqUirements

0 Used Oil Management (12 pp) 93

0 Recycle Used Oil (4 pp) PUBL-E-105 2/91

to YOU C a P Y (1 PI 92

PUBL-sw-203 93

PUBL-sw-195 93

Uscd Oil Burning (4 pp) PUBL-SW-104 89 ” 0 ** Used Oil Filters: Businesses (2 pp) PUBL-SW-135 4/93

0 Used Oil Filters: Households (1 pp) PUBL-SW-134 8/91

0 control Potential Risks from Recycled Used Oil, Management Standards Issued-No Hazardous Waste Listing (EPA 3 pp) 530/F-92/018 92

Hazardous Waste Management Information & Services

0 ** Hamdous Waste Specialists @NR 2 pp)

0 WisconSin Licensed Transporters for Hazardous Waste List

PUBL-SW-202 6/93

(6 pp) 12/92

Coating & Painting

0 Coating and Painting, Waste Reduction Opportunity

0 In Living Color: Painting Challenges for the ’90s (Univ of

0 Metal Parts Coating Plant (EPA Waste Minimization

Electroplating

0 Plating and Metal Finishing, Waste Reduction Opportunity Checklist (WI DNR 5 pp) 89

Cl Cyanide Waste Minimization from Electroplating Operations (EPA Waste Min Audit Report 5 pp)

Checklist (WI DNR 3 pp) 89

TN 80 pp) 91

Assessment Brief 4 pp) 600/M-91/015 91

600/S2-87/056 88

0 * Electroplating and Metal Finishing Hazardous Waste Minimization Demonstration Project (WI DNR 75 pp) PUBL-SW-193 92

C l Fluoborates and Metal Ions Removal and Recovery from Electroplating Wastewater @PA 5 pp) 600/S2-85/054 85

0 Solvent Wastes Minimintion and Electroplating Waste (EPA Waste Min Audit Report 5 pp) 600/S2-88/010 88

Formulating

0 Formulating, Waste Reduction Opportunity Checklist (WI DNR 3 pp) 89

Machining & Cooling

0 Machining Waste Reduction Opportunity Checklist (WI DNR 2 pp) 89


0 The Cool Facts on Recycling Metalworking Coolants (MA

Parts Cleaning

0 Cleaning, Opportunity Checklist (WI DNR 4 pp) 89

CFC Alternatives newsletter: City of Irvine, CA.

SIC 2700: Printing and Publishing Industry

0 The Commercial Printing Industry (EPA Pollution Prevention Guide 45 pp) 625/7-90/008 90

0 Commercial Sheet-Fed Printing Industry, Reduction of VOC Emissions Via Product Substitution and Recycling of Solid Waste, Terry Printing, Inc., Janesville, WI (EPA 3

OTA 4 pp)

Aaueous Cleaning Semi-Aqueous pp) 600/2-9 1 /05 1 9 1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

- (2igi) 0 Cleaning-(7/91)

Labeling for Products Made with Ozone Depleting Substances (UWEX SHWEC 2 pp) 93

Metal Parts Cleaning-Waste Minimization (EPA 50 pp)

Reduction of Total Toxic Organic Discharges and VOC Emissions from Using Plastic Media Blasting (EPA Project

Replacing 1 , 1, l-Trichloroethane with Citrus-Based Solvents, GE Medical Systems (WI DNR Pollution Prevention Case Study 4 pp) PUBL-SW-168 92

Replacing 1 , 1 , l-Trichloroethane with Citrus-Based Solvents, Northern Precision Casting (WI DNR Pollution Prevention Case Study 4 pp) PUBL-SW-16192

Replacing CFCs with Aqueous Cleaners, GE Medical Systems (WI DNR Pollution Prevention Case Study 4 pp)

Replacing Chlorinated Solvents with Aqueous Cleaners for Parts Cleaning, Briggs and Stratton (WI DNR Pollution Prevention Case Study 4 pp) PUBL-SW-162 92

Using Plastic Media Blasting to Strip Paint from Parts, Gehl Company (WI DNR Pollution Prevention Case Study

530/SW-89/049 89

S u " a r Y 8 PPI 87

PUBL-SW-169 92

4 pp) PUBL-SW-165 92

Solvent Reduction

0 Alternatives to Solvents: Degreasing for the 90's (UWEX

0 The Good, the Bad and the Banned: Solvent Reduction.

0 Guidelines for Waste Reduction and Recycling: Solvents.

s m c 212 pp) 93

(Univ of TN 80 pp) 91

(OR 44 pp) 199f

SIC 2000: Food Products Industry

0 Salt Whey RecOverylReuse by Evaporation, Frigo Cheese Corporation (WI DNR Pollution Prevention Case Study 4 pp) PUBL-SW-167 92

SIC 2400/2500: Wood Products and Furniture Industry

0 Audication of Low Solvent Coatings to Wood Furniture, S&maq Evaluation of Associated koblems (EPA 4 pp) 600/S2-87/007 87

_ _ 0 Manufacturer of Printed Labels (EPA Waste Minimization

0 Printing. (NJ EPA 12 pp) 91

0 The Printing Industry, Waste Reduction Guidebook (OR 35

SIC 2800: Chemical Manufacturhg Industry

0 Mercury-Beaxing Waste Minimization, Mercury Cell Chloralkali Plant (EPA Waste Min Audit 4 pp) 88

0 The Paint Manufacturing Industry (EPA Pollution Prevention Guide 67 pp) 625/7-90/005 90

0 Paint Manufacturing Plant (EPA Waste Minimization Assessment 4 pp) 600/M-91/023 91

0 The Pesticide Formulating Industry (EPA Pollution Prevention Guide 83 pp) 625/7-90/004 90

0 The Pharmaceutical Industry (EPA Pollution Prevention Guide 74 pp) 6297-91/017 91

SIC 3000: plastics Industry

0 Printed Plastic Bags Manufacturer (EPA Waste

SIC 3300: Primarv Metals Industrv


PPI 91

,

Minimization Assessment 4 pp) 600/M-91/017 91

0 Generators of Corrosive and Heavy Metal Wastes (EPA Wast Minimization Audit Summary 6 pp) 600/S2-87/055 87

0 Thermal Metal Working Industry (CA Waste Audit Study

SIC 3400: Fabricated Metal Products

60 PPI 91

0 Aluminum Cans Manufacturer (EPA Waste Minimization

0 Brazed Aluminum Oil Coolers Manufacturer. (EPA Waste


Min Assessment Brief 4 pp) 600/M-91/018 91

0 Fabricated Metal and Metal Finishing, excerpt (NJ EPA 10

0 The Fabricated Metal Products Industry (EPA Pollution

0 Metal Casting and Heat Treating Industry (EPA Pollution

0 Metal Finishing, Electroplating, Printed Circuit Board

PPI 91

Prevention Guide 58 pp) 625/7-90/006 90

Prevention Guide 70 pp) 625/R-92/009 9/92

Manufacturing, excerpt (OR 35 pp) 91


0 The Metal Finishing Industry (EPA Pollution Prevention

0 Recycling a Rinsewater Stream Using Ultrafiltration and

SIC 7500: Vehicle Maintenance Industry

0 The Auto Repair Industry (EPA Pollution Prevention Guide 69 pp) 625/R-92/011 10/92

Ion Exchange, Snapon Tools (WI DNR Pollution Prevention Case Study 4 pp) PUBL-SW-166 92

Guide 47 pp) 62517-911013 91

0 The Automotive Refinishinn Industry (EPA Pollution 0 References: Pollution Prevention and the Metal Finishing

SIC 3600: Electronics & other Electric Equipment Industry

Industry (NC DNR 38 pp)

0 Printed Circuit Board Industry (EPA Waste Minimization

0 Printed Circuit Board Manufacturer (EPA Waste Minimization Assessment Brief 5 pp) 6OORd-9 11022 9 1

0 Printed Circuit Board Manufacturing Industry (EPA Guide to Pollution Prevention 117 pp) 625/7-90/007 90

0 Printed Circuit Board-Multilayered, Manufacturer (EPA Waste Min Assessment Brief 7 pp) 600/M-91/02191

U Printed Circuit Board-Prototype, Manufacturer (EPA Waste Min Assessment Brief 4 pp) 6OO/M-91/045 91

0 Reverse Osmosis to Purify a By-product Stream for Reuse, Rayovac Corporation (WI DNR Pollution Prevention Case

Case Studies S v 8 pp) 600/S2-88/008 88 7

Study 4 pp) PUBL-SW-160 92

0 Solvent Waste from Parts Cleaning and from Electronic Capacitor Manufacturing (EPA Wast Min Audit Summary Case Studies 6 pp) 600/S2-87/057 87

SIC 3700: Transportation Equipment & Repair Industry

0 Marine Maintenance and Repair Industry (EPA Pollution Preventin Guide 64 pp) 625/7-91/014 91

0 The Mechanical Equipment Repair Industry (EPA Pollution

SIC 3800/3900: Instruments & Mist, Mfg. Industries

Prevention Guide 46 pp) 625/R-92/008 9/92

Cl Optical Fabrication Laboratory (EPA Waste Min Assessment Summary 4 pp) 6OO/S2-9 1/03 1 9 1

SIC 7200: Dry Cleaning Industry

0 The Dry Cleaning Industry, Hazardous Waste Regulations LJ of (OR 6 pp) 91

0 Equipment Improvement Cuts Drycleaning VOC Emissions by 80 96, Spic and Span (WI DNR Pollution Prevention Case Study 4 pp) PUBL-SW-163 92

SIC 7300: Photoprocessing Industry

0 Photofinishing Facility (EPA Waste M i n i a t i o n Assessment 4 pp) 600/S2-91/039 91

0 The Photoprocessing Industry (EPA Pollution Prevention Guide 61 pp) 62617-911012 91

Prevention Guide 60 pp) 6%/7-91/616 91

0 The Green Machine (WI DNR Booklet on how car owners can "ize their cars' impact on the environment 16 pp) 91

0 Radiator Repair Industry, Waste Reduction Options (NC DNR 9 pp) 86

0 Pollution Prevention for the Vehicle Maintenance Industry: Self-Assessment Guide (WI DNR 60 pp) 92

D References: Pollution Prevention and the Vehicle Maintenance Industry (2 pp)

AIso, see WI DNR & EPA Used Oil Management Requirements, p . 3

SIC 8OOO: Health Services Industry

0 Hospital Pollution Prevention Case Study (EPA Project Summary 6 pp) 600/S2-91/024 91

0 Selected Hospital Waste Streams. (EPA Pollution Prevention Guide 45 pp) 625/7-90/009 90

0 References: Health ServicesEduc. Facilities (6 pp)

SIC 8200: Educational Institutions

0 Institutions, Colleges and Universities (Hamdous Waste Minimization 8 pp) 92

Opportunity Assessemnt 22 pp) 91 0 Madison Area Technical College (WI Waste Minimization

0 Research and Educational Institutions (EPA Pollution Prevention Guide 73 pp) 625/7-90/010 90

0 University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee (WI Waste Minimization Opportunity Assessemnt 24 pp) 91

0 Vocational Institutions, Colleges and Universities (Haz Waste Min Guide 17 pp) 92

0 Waukesha County Technical College (WI Waste Minimization Opportunity Assessemnt 24 pp) 91

See SIC 8ooo for additional references.

SIC 9100: Local Government

Communities Controlling Toxics, Publications Order Form (Local Government Commission 1 pp)

0 Opportunities for Local Government to Promote Pollution Prevention (EPA 6 pp) 90


Waste Reduction Tips for Local Government (AK 10 pp)

References: Pollution Prevention and Local Government

Please we this space to request additional information or to give us your comments:

(2 PPI 93

Name

Organization

Address

City state Zip

Bone Type of Industry

Unsure

Unsure

Have you ordered publications from the clearinghouse before?

Do you currently d v e Waste*Less*News?

- Y e - no - - Y e - no -

How did you hear about the clearinghouse?

EPA ID No. (optional to help avoid duplicate mailings)

Notes:

PUBL-SW-199 8/93

7

SECTION 8

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The Cleveland Advanced Manufachuiag Program would like to thank the following individuals, who participated in the planning for this teleconference:

Brent, Randy; Vice President, Technical Aff& ManGill Chemical Companj 23000 St. Clair Ave, Cleveland, Ohio 44117. Phone: 800-627422, FAX: 216-486-1214.

Boyd, Larry; Manager, Environmental Services Cleveland Advanced Manufacturing Program; 4600 Prospect Ave; Cleveland, Ohio 44103. Phone: (216) 432-5300; FAX: (216) 361-2900.

Foecke, Teny President; Waste Reduction Institute for Training and Applications Research (WRI’TAR); 1313 5th SL SE, Suite 325, Minneapolis, MN 554144502. Phone: 612-379-5995; FAX: 632-379-5996.

Green, Danielle; En~nmental Protection Specialist, G m t Lakes National Progtam Office; US EPA; G-gJ, 77 West Jackson Blvd; Chicago, Illinois 60604-3590. Phone: (312) 886-7594; FAX: (312) 353-2018.

Hemy, Thomas R; Erie County office of Pollution Prewntion; 95 F m k h Street, Room lOn; Buffalo, NY 14202. Phone: (716) 858-7674; FAX: (7l6) 858-6257.

Horan, Marcia D; Auto Project coordinator; offire of Waste Reduction suvices; P.O. Box 3OOO4, Lansing MI 48909. Phone: (517) 373-9122; FAX: (517) 335-4m.

Joyce, Joanne; Pollution Prevention/Technid Assistance; Indiana Department of Environmental Management; 105SouthMeridian St. Indianapolis, IN4620640fi. Phone: (317) 232-8172; FAX. (317) 232-5539.

Lawrence, Phillip; principal Facility - Enhnmental Control Engineer; Ford Motor Company, The American Road, World Headquarters, Room 640 m m , MI 48121-1899. Phone: 313-322- 3753; FAX: 313-337-9938.

Liebl, David S; Pollution Prrvention Specialist, University of WisconSin-Extension; 610 Langdon Street; Madison, WI 53703; Phone: (608) 265-2360; FAX. (608) 262-6250.

Merrill, Nan; Manager of Waste Reduction SeMces, office of Waste Reduction Servicq P.O. Box 3OOO4, Lansing MI 48909. Phone: (517) 335-1178; FAX: (517) 335-4724.

Metcalf, Cam; Training Manager, Center for Industrial Sexvia Univenity of Tennessee; 226 Capitol Blvd. Bldg., Suite aoS; Nashville, Tennessee 37219-2456. Phone: (615) 242-2456; FAX: (615) 7416644.

HWRIC; Illinois Department of Eneqyand Natural Resoums; One East Hazehvd Dr., Miller, 1 - l

Champaign, Illinois 61a. Phone: (217)-333-8940; FAX: (217) 333-8944.

Ostheim, Steven T; Director, Government Programs; Center for Hazardous Materials Research; University of Pittsbugh Applied Research Center, 320 W W Pitt Way, Pittsbuqh, PA 15838 Phone: (412) 826-5320; FAX: (412) 826-5552.

Perciak, John k; Executive Officer, sales and Marketing; Unified Technologies Center, Cuyahoga Community College; 2415 Woodland Ave., Cleveland, OH 44115. Phone: (216) 987-3030; FAX: (216) 987-3038.

Peremn, Donna N; Assistant Director, MnTm Suite #207,1313 5th Street S e Minneapolis, MN 55414. Phone: (612) 6274555; FAX: (612) 627-4769.

Peterson, Gayl~ Program Dircctor, The Great Lakes Protection Fund; 35 East Wacker Drive, Suite 1880; Chicago, IL 60601. Phone: (312) 201.0660; FAX: (312) 201-0683.

Sasson, Antbon~ EnvirOnmcntal Supenkior; Pollution Prevention W o n , Ohio EPA; P.O. Box 1049 Columbus, OH 432664149. Phone: (614) 644-2970; F a (614) 644-2329.

Smelcer, George; Director, Hazardous Waste Extension Pmg”; Center for Industrial Services, Univenity of Tennessee; 226 Capitol Blvd. Bldg., Suite 606; Nashville, Tennessee 37219-2456. Phone: (625) 242-2456; FAX: (6l5) 741-6644.

Tarmohamcd, YaSmin; Pollution Prevention Bmch,Environment Canada; 25 St. Clair Ave. Ea& 6th Floor; Tomnto, Ontario M4T-lM2. Phone: 416-973-3347; FAX: (416) 973-7438.

waslo&& Dennis; systems & Programrmng * Dept., US EPA, 14th Floor, 77 W. Jackson Blvd, Chicago, IL60604. Phone: 312-353-590~FAX: 312-353-4342.

W e d , Toxic Use Reduction Specialist; Citizens for a Better Environment; 222 South Hamilton St., Madison, WI 53703. Phone: 608-251-2804.

Wever, Gract; Vice F’msident, Environmental Affairs, Comcil of G m t Lakes Industries and Director and Liaison to the Comd of G m t Lakes Industries for Eastman Kodak Company; Eastman Kodak Company, 1999 Lake Ave, #3-83RL, Rochester, NY 14650-2215. Phone: (716) 722-3348; FAX: (7l6) 722-6525.

The Cleveland Advanced Manufacturing Program would like to thank the following organizations for permission to reprint written documents found in this manual:

ManGill Chemical Company

Minnesota Technical Assistance Prog”

North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources; Pollution Prevention program

Ohio Environmental Protection Agency

United States Environmental Protection Agency

University of Tennessee, Center for Industrial SeMces

Waste Reduction Institute for Training and Application Research

Waste Reduction Resource Center for the Southeast

3

./:

, .f d

alternatives to solvents

Documents