Under a Contract With the Department of Environmental Quality, VPI and State Univ. Will be Conducting Pollution Prevention Assesments at Four Textile Factories in VA

Pollution Prevention Virginia
Issue #4
Winter 1994

DEQ Hires VPI to Assess Textile Facilities

Under a contract with the Department of Environmental Quality, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (VPI) will be conducting pollution prevention opportunity assessments at four textile facilities in Virginia by the end of the year. The assessments are a follow-up to the study completed by VPI last winter of pollution prevention practices at the Ronile textile dyeing facility in Rocky Mount.

"By using pollution prevention techniques, we hope to help textile manufacturers economically reduce discharges into the environment," states William Sarnecky, Environmental Engineer Senior with the Office of Pollution Prevention (OPP). "Environmental managers in textiles realize that reducing waste at the source can translate into improvements in process efficiency. These assessments can help open their eyes to the diverse possibilities."

Professor Gregory Boardman of the Department of Civil Engineering will lead an assessment team consisting of VPI faculty members and engineering students. Facilities identified as participants in the assessment project include BGF Industries in Altavista: Bibb, Inc. in Brookneal: Liberty Fabrics in Gordonsville: and Parson-Reeves in Independence.

After analyzing operations at the textile facilities, the assessment team will prepare reports containing recommendations for pollution preventing changes to make in each facility. Information from these reports will be used as a basis for a video on pollution prevention in textiles to be produced by OPP in the spring of 1995.

Monsanto Issues $1 Million Challenge

Monsanto Company will award $1 million to anyone who can develop "the most cost-effective and commercially practicable technology" to recover ammonia from one of the company's largest wastewater streams. Half of the total will fund one year of development; half will be awarded after successful demonstration of the new technology.

The challenge is the first of its kind offered by a private company. It has been compared to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Golden Carrot program which awarded $30 million dollars to Whirlpool last year in a competition among appliance manufacturers to see who could develop the most energy-efficient refrigerator.

The waste stream that Monsanto seeks to eliminate is not necessarily highly toxic, but it is difficult to reduce. "Organics in the waste stream make it difficult to recover the ammonia, and the ammonia makes it difficult to recover the organics," said Earl R. Beaver, Director of Waste Elimination for Monsanto's chemical group.

Announced at the American Chemical Society's Design for the Environment conference in August, the challenge is the latest aspect of Monsanto's continuing effort to reduce all of its toxic and hazardous waste, with the ultimate goal of "zero effect" on the environment. "Our company is well on its way to reducing releases of toxic chemicals to roughly 70% less than was occurring in 1990. But this is only a milestone toward the goal of zero effect," said Michael Pierle, Monsanto vice president of environment, safety and health.

Proposals for the challenge are being accepted through the end of the year and will be evaluated by a panel of judges named by the Center for Waste Reduction Technologies, an affiliate of the American Institute of Chemical Engineers located in Princeton, New Jersey. For more information, contact Monsanto by calling 800-643-7040 or the Office of Pollution Prevention.

Virginia Company Participates in Product Test (picture caption) [(See source document)]

Eastland Screen Print in Fairfax recently played host to EPA's Air and Energy Engineering Research Lab (AEERL), which demonstrated water-based platen adhesives and new adhesive application methods. Through the Design for the Environment program, EPA and the Screen Printing Association International are working with screen printers to reduce the amount of volatile organic compounds they emit; product tests have been performed around the country. At left, Ken Baldwin of AEERL watches as Alan Jackson, Eastland's president, applies a water-based adhesive.

P2 Leaders: Tidewater Interagency Pollution Prevention Program

America's military has a long history of coordinating complex operations that involve personnel from the Army, Air Force, Navy, and Marines. In Virginia, these different branches of the armed services have been coordinating their work as part of a different kind of combat: the war on waste.

As part of the Tidewater Interagency Pollution Prevention Program (TIPPP), environmental managers at federal facilities within the Chesapeake Bay watershed have developed pollution prevention programs and, where possible, integrated the individual programs into regionally-focused initiatives. The results of this unique program, one of only a few in the country, have been substantial: risks to the Bay have been reduced while costs associated with waste management have gone down for several of the facilities involved.

Program Expanding

The originators of TIPPP -- Langley Air Force Base in Hampton, the Ft. Eustis Army Transportation Center in Newport News, Naval Base Norfolk, and the NASA Langley Research Center -- entered into a cooperative agreement with EPA in April 1990. In October 1993, the Yorktown Naval Weapons Station and the Department of Energy's Continuous Electron Beam Accelerator Facility in Newport News joined as participants. Recently, personnel from the Marine Corps Base in Quantico and the Naval Amphibious Base in Little Creek have attended project meetings, bringing the total number of TIPPP members to eight.

"While facilities in TIPPP have unique industrial processes, they generate similar types of waste from such common operations as painting, degreasing and vehicle maintenance," explained Tim Blevins, Pollution Prevention Program Manager at Air Combat Command Headquarters, the lead agency for TIPPP. "By pooling our experience, we can find solutions to common problems in a quicker and more cost-efficient manner."

Participants in TIPPP meet on a monthly basis to share information on the pollution prevention techniques that they are using. To facilitate technology transfer, project participants have sponsored a number of pollution prevention equipment demonstrations. These demonstrations have led to the adoption of non-solvent parts washers and antifreeze recyclers at most installations.

Dramatic Results

By taking part in the project, the facilities involved have been able to dramatically reduce the amount of waste they generate. For example, the amount of hazardous waste disposed of by Norfolk Naval Base dropped from 960,000 pounds in 1991 to 340,000 in 1993. NASA Langley cut its waste generation in half in just one year.

Other installations saw their waste generation increase, but these results are still seen as positive. "An increase in disposal in the first year or two of a program is not unexpected," asserted Blevins. "The increase mostly comes from personnel being more aware of proper disposal methods." Proper disposal reduces liability risks and the chances that an installation would be cited for violating environmental regulations.

As the amount of hazardous waste generated decreases, so does the cost of waste disposal. In fact, cost savings has been one of the major benefits to the installations involved in TIPPP. For example, the non-solvent parts washers used by several facilities cost about $15,000 to install but save about $24,000 per year because of canceled solvent recycling and used rag contracts.

Model Communities

EPA has also used TIPPP to its advantage. The Pollution Prevention Act of 1990 requires EPA to identify opportunities to promote pollution prevention in all of its activities. Because many military bases are like small cities with a mix of residential, commercial and industrial areas, TIPPP installations have served as sites for model community studies by EPA. By seeing what does and doesn't work at these federal facilities, EPA can better gauge what will work in the rest of the country.

Staff from the Office of Pollution Prevention (OPP) have represented the Department of Environmental Quality at TIPPP meetings since 1992. OPP Program Manager Sharon Baxter said, "Our program has used the success of TIPPP to promote pollution prevention around the state. The TIPPP project demonstrates how the cooperative spirit of pollution prevention can bring different groups together for the benefit of all."

National Recognition

The success of the Tidewater Interagency Pollution Prevention Project has resulted in national recognition for the project participants. Ft. Eustis won the Department of the Army Pollution Prevention Award for 1994 and Naval Base Norfolk won the 1994 Secretary of the Navy Environmental Quality Award. Though the war is not over, these pollution prevention leaders have made great strides in preventing pollution and all Virginians are better off because of their efforts.

Virginia Facilities Taking To Powder Coating

"Taking a powder" can mean big gains instead of "getting lost." That is, if you are talking about powder coating. Some Virginia facilities are finding that replacing standard spray painting processes with powder coating technology allows them to save money as well as avoid some sticky environmental management problems.

Nationwide, industries spray approximately 1.5 billion liters of paint every year to finish products. For each liter of paint sprayed from a conventional air spray gun, an average of 550 grams of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) are released into the environment. In fact, more VOC emissions can result from painting a car than from the engine exhaust over its entire lifetime. Powder coating can virtually eliminate VOC emissions in painting.

"Powder coating is a great example of a technology that benefits the environment and the bottom-line," asserts Patrick O'Day, Project Manager at GE Drive Systems in Salem. GE switched all of their painting operations to powder coatings in January as part of a program to reduce emissions. "We have seen 90% reductions in VOC emissions due to switching to powder and product quality has improved as well," said O'Day.

Powder coating can be used for painting most kinds of metals. Powder paint is sprayed on and then baked. The resulting finish is harder and less susceptible to abrasion than spray system finishes. Cost savings come from the high utilization rate of the paint: powder that doesn't adhere to the part can be collected easily and used again. Unlike solvent-based paint waste, the small amounts of powder that must be disposed of can go to a regular landfill because they are not hazardous.

99.8% Utilization

"We estimate a 99.8% paint utilization rate," said Shirley McNutt, a Capital Outlay Engineer for Virginia Correctional Enterprises (VCE). VCE has used inmate labor for 60 years in a wide variety of industrial activities, including a large furniture manufacturing operation at the Buckingham Correctional Center. As one of the only self-sufficient state agencies, VCE pays its way through the sale of its products and is as cost and customer conscious as a private facility.

"We replaced our wet enamel system in response to customer demands for a more durable finish. Now, everything metal goes through our powder system," continued McNutt. "In addition to the harder finish, powder coatings are easier to apply and cleaner to use. Our paint reclamation system is closed-loop so we don't have to have air monitoring anymore, either."

Economy Booster

Not only does switching to powder improve painting operations, it helps bolster Virginia's economy. A major manufacturer of powder paint is Morton International, which supplies Virginia from a production facility in Wytheville.

"Our business has grown 10% a year," stated Tom Dickerson of Richmond Powder Coating. For companies that aren't ready for the capital investment of a new painting system, "job shops" like Richmond Powder are popping up across the country.

Large or Small

Powder coating isn't just for large operations. Tabet Manufacturing Company in Norfolk is a small contractor that manufactures power distribution equipment for the Navy and has been using powder coating for more than ten years. According to Paul Sullivan, Vice President of Manufacturing for Tabet, "At the time we got into it, suppliers weren't even selling powder systems small enough for our needs. I ended up buying one of their demonstration units."

Speed in production and flexibility sold Sullivan on the technology. "A part might take 12 to 48 hours to dry after standard spraying. The powder we use has a 30-minute cure time, so you can start working with a part less than an hour after applying the paint. And if you don't like the paint coverage, you just blow the powder off before curing and start again."

Detailed information on powder coating was presented as part of the "Spray Painting: Improvements and Alternatives" teleconference the Office of Pollution Prevention broadcast this summer. Videotapes of the broadcast are available by request.

Picture caption: Jason Hock, Painting Technician at Automax of Richmond, demonstrates a powder coating system. Automax is switching to powder systems in its facilities nationwide to cut costs associated with solvent-based painting. [(See source document)]

Clearinghouse Favorites Provide Keys To Success

For an organization's pollution prevention (P2) program to succeed, it must have a few essential elements:

Recognizing the importance of this last element, the Office of Pollution Prevention (OPP) began compiling an information clearinghouse in 1989. Now with over 3000 books, reports, and fact sheets, the OPP clearinghouse has grown into a substantial resource for environmental managers in Virginia.

OPP makes its clearinghouse available to the public during normal business hours. Interested persons can also call an OPP analyst who will search the clearinghouse for information on any pollution prevention topic. A computerized index facilitates these searches; work is currently underway to allow dial-in access to this index so that it will be available to anyone with a modem.

Below is an annotated listing of the titles that are requested most often from the clearinghouse. These publications can help to get a pollution prevention program started, provide new ideas, or assist in the justification of a new piece of pollution preventing equipment. All clearinghouse publications are available for loan; many are give-aways (contact OPP for details, see page 6).

Facility Pollution Prevention Guide (US EPA, May 1992): Our most popular publication is this comprehensive how-to guide on pollution prevention that details the benefits of starting a P2 program, how to develop it and even how to measure its success. The worksheets and examples provided are useful for any facility regardless of size or product. It's a must for anybody just getting started.

A Primer for Financial Analysis of Pollution Prevention Projects (US EPA and the American Institute for Pollution Prevention, April 1993): The inability to adequately justify P2 projects economically stands as one of the principal barriers to pollution prevention. This primer tackles this problem head-on by providing practical financial analysis tools and procedures for use in the consideration of a pollution preventing alternative. Detailed examples of real-life situations are also presented.

Summary of Pollution Prevention Case Studies with Economic Data (by SIC Codes) (US EPA, January 1994): By citing the annual cost savings that companies have realized from implementing P2 processes, this compendium of more than 200 case studies gives a bottom-line justification for exploring P2 alternatives. The amounts range from the $750 Hyde Tools in Massachusetts saved by packing products in 100% post-consumer recycled paper peanuts to the $15 million Xerox saved by switching to reusable pallets.

Solvents: The Alternatives (Waste Reduction Resource Center, 1993): For anyone looking for alternatives to solvent cleaners, this document provides straightforward assistance. Tables list brands of aqueous and semi-aqueous cleaners, aqueous equipment suppliers and ultrasonic cleaners. Each listing provides a supplier name, address and phone number as well as comments on types, uses and potential problems associated with the different products.

EPA Guides to Pollution Prevention (US EPA, various dates): EPA regularly produces guides on pollution prevention for different industries. Each report lists common wastes produced in the particular industry and suggests strategies for reducing each of them. The ever-expanding list of industries covered includes commercial printing, metal finishing, photoprocessing and more.

Pollution Prevention Technology Handbook (Noyes Publications, 1993): As an encyclopedic reference to current and potential P2 techniques used in 36 industries, this publication is a favorite of OPP staff. Each chapter describes a manufacturing process and the types of waste it generates and then details pollution prevention technologies currently used or in development.

The Consumer's Handbook for Reducing Solid Waste (US EPA, August 1992): This colorful and accessible handbook presents a succinct overview of the solid waste problems of today and provides twelve specific suggestions that consumers can use to reduce the amount of waste they create. Appendices list source reduction alternatives around the home and additional information sources.

Business Guide for Reducing Solid Waste (US EPA, November 1993): Developed as part of WasteWi$e, EPA's voluntary program for reducing solid waste, this guide offers easy-to-use worksheets to help a company perform a waste assessment. The WasteWi$e program provides this guide as the first step in a comprehensive technical assistance program available to program members.

Picture caption: OPP staff members comb the clearinghouse for useful information. [(See source document)]

Pretreatment Coordinators Get The P2 Treatment

Wastewater treatment officials from all across the Commonwealth came to Richmond for a special workshop on "Pollution Prevention for Municipal Pretreatment Coordinators," offered by the Office of Pollution Prevention (OPP) on October 12 and 13. The training session taught local officials and Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) employees the basic methods for assessing pollution prevention opportunities at industrial facilities that discharge to publicly-owned treatment works (POTWs).

To provide practical experience in using these methods, the second day of the training featured a field exercise at one of three selected industrial facilities in the Richmond area. Trainees were transported to either Domestic Uniform Rental, Stanley Hardware, or Wako Chemicals USA, Inc., where they toured the facility and were asked to prepare a report on the waste reduction opportunities they found.

"Actually going out to an industrial unit and doing an assessment was the most useful part of the training," said Jan Pickrel, an Environmental Engineer Senior from DEQ's Water Division. "I believe it would be very helpful to repeat the training to reach even more pretreatment coordinators."

Nationwide, POTWs receive more than 65 million pounds of toxic materials a year.

"By requiring spill prevention plans and toxic organic management plans and including best management practice conditions in permits, POTWs are already involved in pollution prevention," remarked OPP Senior Environmental Engineer, William Sarnecky. "This training will help pretreatment personnel broaden their approach and encourage specific waste reduction techniques among their industrial customers."

The training was made possible by a Municipal Water Pollution Prevention grant from EPA. In November, OPP offered follow-up field exercises at Perdue Farms in Rockbridge, the Washington Metro Authority in Arlington, Allied Colloids in Suffolk, Custom Paper Group in Richmond, Weaver Mirror in Rocky Mount, and Virginia Mills Cotton Products in Roanoke. Pretreatment coordinators reported on the pollution prevention opportunities they found and their reports are being evaluated.

"Nearly every POTW in the state that has a pretreatment program sent someone to this training; some wanted to send several people. As popular as it was, we will probably do it again in the future," concluded Sarnecky.

Picture caption: Stanley Hardware's Manufacturing Engineering Manager Thomas Zbell indicates a source of waste generation for a training session participant. Trainees looked at sources of solid waste as well as air and water emissions. [(See source document)]

Product Spotlight: Kenaf "Tree-Free" Paper

(Due to positive responses to the Fall edition of "Pollution Prevention Virginia," each issue will feature a new product or technology designed to reduce waste. Recommendations for spotlight products can be made to David Timberline; see below.

The enormous amount of waste paper generated in this country is arguably our biggest solid waste problem. Not only does paper fill up our landfills but paper manufacturing and recycling processes usually involve toxic chemicals and produce byproducts like dioxin that may pose considerable risk to human health. In the past few years, a product has emerged that provides a truly pollution preventing alternative for our paper-intensive society.

Paper made from kenaf, a slender, woody plant that grows up to 18 feet in a single growing season, contains absolutely no tree fiber. While using it to make paper obviously saves trees, kenaf is also whiter than wood so it requires fewer chemicals and less energy to pulp and make white. A member of the hibiscus family, the kenaf plant has low water requirements. Because it is grown for its stalk and not its fruit, no pesticides are required in its cultivation. Field trials show that kenaf can yield as much as five times more paper fiber per acre per year than southern pine.

Perhaps best of all, kenaf paper has been found to perform as well or better than comparable recycled and standard papers. Confidence in kenaf is growing: new specifications will clear the way for the federal government to use kenaf paper. Produced exclusively by KP Products in New Mexico, kenaf paper is more expensive than standard paper but costs should come down with increased production (contact OPP for more information on purchasing kenaf paper).

Picture caption: Kenaf has been used in Africa for 4,000 years. The kenaf blossom last only one day. [(See source document)]

Who Else Needs to Prevent Pollution?

Pollution prevention can benefit nearly everyone, and yet we only have 5000 people on our mailing list. Please help us spread the word. Are there people or organizations that you think would benefit from receiving this newsletter? If so, please send their names, addresses and any other relevant information to OPP at the address below. Thank you.

Office of Pollution Prevention:

Sharon BaxterProgram Manager
William SarneckyEnvironmental Engineer Senior
David TimberlineNewsletter Editor/Marketing Analyst
Joshua Heltzer
Gregory Gresko
Stephen Hunter
Pollution Prevention Specialists

Through the Office of Pollution Prevention (OPP), you can receive on-site technical assistance or personalized research services. Access to a library full of helpful information and training services are also available. Contact OPP by writing:

DEQ, PO Box 10009
Richmond, VA 23240-0009
(804) 762-4384
FAX (804) 762-4346.

Publication of this newsletter is supported in part by a grant from the United States Environmental Protection Agency.


Return to top of document

Last Updated: November 21, 1995