SUBSTITUTE LUBRICANTS (NON-LEAD, NON-OZONE-DEPLETING SUBSTANCES)
 |
|
||||||||||||
| Overview: | Substitute lubricants
that lack or contain reduced amounts of lead, ozone-depleting compounds,
or other hazardous or toxic substances are preferable over conventional
formulations. These lubricants reduce the consumption and disposal of
these other harmful formulations.
Formulations that use reduced amounts of
hazardous and toxic compounds should be employed over their dangerous
alternatives. Product content may be checked using the material safety
data sheet (MSDS). In Section II of the MSDS, chemical components and
their percentage (or range of percentage) of the product is presented. By
comparing MSDSs for multiple products with the same MIL SPEC and NSN, a
more environmentally friendly product may be selected. As a starting
point, the list of hazardous and toxic compounds that should be avoided
include the ozone-depleting compounds (ODCs) and the "EPA 17" list.
Both of these lists are presented below. EPA 17 List
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Compliance Benefit: | Use of substitute
lubricants can decrease the amount of hazardous waste generated at a
facility. The decrease in hazardous waste helps facilities meet the
requirements of waste reduction under RCRA, 40 CFR 262, Appendix, and may also help facilities reduce their generator status and lessen the amount of regulations (i.e., recordkeeping, reporting, inspections, transportation, accumulation time, emergency prevention and preparedness, emergency response) they are required to comply with under RCRA, 40 CFR 262. In addition, use of an ODS-free lubricant will help facilities meet the requirements under 40 CFR 82, Subpart D and Executive Order 12843 requiring federal agencies to maximize the use of safe alternatives to Class I and Class II ozone depleting substances, to the maximum extent practicable. The compliance benefits listed here are only meant to be used as a general guideline and are not meant to be strictly interpreted. Actual compliance benefits will vary depending on the factors involved, e.g. the amount of workload involved. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Materials Compatibility: |
No materials compatibility issues were identified. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Safety and Health: |
The concerns vary with the type of lubricants being used. Proper personal protective equipment should be used, if needed. Consult your local Industrial Health specialist, your local health and safety personnel, and the appropriate MSDS prior to implementing any of these technologies. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Benefits: |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Disadvantages: |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Economic Analysis: | Economics depends
upon the substitute lubricant chosen. An economic analysis should compare
the cost of the environmentally friendly product to the previously used
product. The analysis should account for different product consumption
rates (i.e., used to take 1 ounce of spray, now it requires 2 ounces), and
for different labor amounts required to use the product. The following economic analysis was based on vendor information provided for the listed products. The following cost elements are used in comparing BREAK-FREE CLP pump spray and WD-40® aerosol cans for lubrication.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Approving Authority: | Approval is
controlled locally and should be implemented only after engineering
approval has been granted. Major claimant approval is not
required. |
| NSN/MSDS: |
|
| Points of Contact: | Army: Mr. Khaled Zreik US Army TACOM Fuels and Lubricants Technology Team Warren, MI 48397-5000 Phone: (810) 574-4227 DSN: 574-4227 FAX: (810) 574-4244 Email: zreikk@tacom.army.mil |
| Vendors: | This is not meant to be a
complete list, as there may be other suppliers of this type of equipment.
Break-Free, Inc. E/M Engineered Coatings |
| Sources: | None listed.
|
[Back]