Alternatives To Solvents - P2 InfoHouse

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 PM
Co-Sponsored by:
Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources

- 610
- I
Madison,
Langdon Street, Rm. 529
WI 53703
Phone: 608/262-0385 Fax: 6081262-6250
WELCOME !
university
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

Company:
Location:
Products:
UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN 9
Program Evaluation
EXTENSION
ALTERNATIVES TO SOL VENTS: DEGREASING IN THE 90’s
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

a
*
3
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.
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 hly 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.
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 legited 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
their plants.
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
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

The 1984 Amendments to the Resource
Consemation and Re oven Ac t, and them ardous and Solid Waste h e ndments (HS WA)
9f 1984, specifically mandated Wrstmasan
objective forthenation’s environmental
managementprogram. Onemeans ofimplementing
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 Protection
Agency (USEPA) developed an industrial
waste minimization program which has sought to
assesswastepracticesandidentifywasteminimidon
opportunities. In early 1989, source raiw
tion wasassigned the highcstpnontywithin EPA
followed by secondary emphrrir 011 recycling.
Thus, through the mtion 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 environmcnt?l
regulatory program ever to be off& in the
United States is the new Air
mts of 1peQ. The Clean Air Act Amendments
arc supplemental goals that call for the reduction
of emissions and establish a time frame within
OVERVIEW
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 Suwes tha t Dede te the Ozone
m. TheMontreal Protocol and the Clean Air
Act impose limits on the production and consumptionofthefollowingournedcpletingchetnicalsaccordingtospecifiedscWles:
chlomfluo-
~haklrw,~tetrachlori&andmedryl
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-inspired
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~pce is defined as one emitting 10 tons
per year of any listed air toxic or 25 tons per year

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
assessing compliance with sources. Prior to
EPA’s issuance of a particular MACT standard,
sources can undertake voluntary reduction mea-
sures 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 emis-
sions 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 dvent
degrcasing operations. Another propored rule
involveshazardous organiccompapnd~ssioar
from synthetic organicrmnuhtmhgplants, in-
cluding 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 cat-
egories 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 sub-
stance on the list.
Additionally, the EPA has established a
voluntary pollution prevention initiativealso &led
the 33/50 Pr-. This program was initiated
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 endsfpipe
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 Chloride,
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
dsSi~~dwasttinv~tory~’. On~~thtpolluti~sourcd~ssionsartutegorizad,anovdl
air quality rrnd pollution prcvatiodwaste management
program should be created and include:
1 fitid aswmmt of emissions/
pollution sources;
2.h ideo of what to expect out of the
~raoryprocess; and
3.systuudc way ofmeeting the
regulations.
_ _ -
- ~ __---

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 examiningtheirindustrialprocessestoidentifyand~~
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
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 pollu-
tion. Pollution prevention is the use of materials,
processes, or practices that reduce or eliminate the
creation of pollutants or wastes. Pollution pre-
vention should be considered the first step in a
hierarchy of options for reducing the generation
of pollution. The next step in the hierarchy is
pounds by 1995, a 50% o v d reduction. The
Toxic Release Inventory (nu) will be wed to
~~~lerecyclingof~ywastesthatcarmotbe
reduced or eliminated at the source. Wastes that
trackthcscsuiuctionsusing 1988datauabaseline. cannot be recycled should be treated in accor-
As required by the Pollution ptcvcntion Act of dancewitharvirornnentalstandards. Finally,any
1990,T€Uindustrialr~rting~ts~ wastes that remain affcr treatment should be disexpanded
beginning in calendar year 1991 to
include information on pollution prevention.
pod of srrfely.
EPA is promoting pollution prevention
WhileEPAissetkingtorcduccaggrcgate because it ir often the most cost-effective option
~ti~nalenvironmentalr~l~a~~~ofthese 17chd- to reduce pollution, and the enviroiunental and
cals 50% by 1995, individual wmpanies are health risks associated with pollution. Pollution
encouraged to develop their own reduction goals prevention is often cost effective because it may
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 pcriodireduce
raw material losses, reduce reliance on
expensive “md-of~ipe” treatment technologies
and disposal practices, wnwe 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
Trichloroethylene
Mercury & Mercury Compounds
Xylcnes
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 hazard-
ous 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 intdod 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 -tosphere.
There, photodecomposition of these
materials occurreleasing elemmtalchlorineand
bromine into the atmosphere which catalytically
converts ozone to clcmental oxygen. This mction
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 internationalappmachwasnecessarytoeffectivelysafeguard
the planet's ozone layer. Because releases
of CFCs mix in the atmosphere to affect stratospheric
ozo~le globally, efforts to reduce emissionsframspecificprodwts
by only afew nations
would have potentially been offset by increases in
emissions from othernations, leaving therisks to

the ozone layer
unchanged.
7 Recognizing the
global nature of this issue,
the EPA participated in negohations,
organized by the United Nations
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 altcma-
tive 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.
Page2 of3
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 deplet-
ing 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
in~mtoin~colrnnerceunlessitbears
a clearly legible and conspicuous label stating:
“WARNING: CONTAINS (INSERTNAME
OFSUBSTANCE),ASUCEWHICH
HARMSPUBLICHEAL”HANDENMR0N-
MENTBY DESTROYING OZONEINTHE
UPPER ATMOSPHERE.”
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:

“WARNING:
MANUFACTURED
WITH [INSERT NAME
OF SUBSTANCE], A SUB-
STANCE WHICH HARMS
PUBLIC HEALTH AND EM-
RONMENT BY DESTROYING
OZONE IN THE UPPER ATMO-
SPHEREl”
Although an explicit definition of “manu-
factured with” is not provided, the EPA proposes
that this shall mean a product which was manufac-
tured 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
Page 3 of 3
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 sub-
stances in the manufacturing process of many prod-
ucts 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 indus-
try 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 prcvd shoafd
be recycled in an mvironmcntaIly safe mannrr
whenever feasiblc;
*pollution that cannot be prevented or re-
cycled should be treated in an mvinmmcntally
safe manner whenever feasible; and
*disposal or other release into the environ-
ment shouldbeemployedonly asalastrtsorr and
should be conducted in an environmentally safe
manner.
Pollution prevention means “source reduc-
tions”, asdefinedunderthePollution Prevention
Act, and other practices that reduce or eliminate
the creation of pollutants through increased effi-
ciency 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 ated 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 oppor-
tunities forindustryto
reduce or prevent pollu-
tion at the source through
cost-effective changes in pro-
duction, operation and raw mate-
rials use. Such changes offer indus-
try 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 percentagechangs,
~ ~ur~~-nducti~n~~~~,dtechniquts
used to identify so~rcduction Oppartunities.
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 pollu-
tion.

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.
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 ake 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
- may contain chlorinated paraffhs or sulfurized oils
Soils with waxy film, oxidized rosin, paste or other soft film
quire elevated temperature
- higher concentrations (higher cost $)
0
Soils with abrasives, hard carbonized film, buffing compounds, smut, rust, and heat
scale
- job matched specialized chemicals
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
Forming~ricants;~ Plain/sulfurized mind/fatty
fluids
oils; solubk oils; water-solubk
cutdng fluids
PolWng/buf6ng compounds
cutting/griuding fluids
Oxidation; scale
Miueral oils and emulsions
oil/water w/abmsives or
d@"q grrasc w/&& or
wax
Plain and sdfurkd mind and
fatty oils
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;
1,lJ uichloraethane; perchloroethylene
Fluorinated solvents F"
Acetone; methyl isobutyl ketone; methyl ethyl
ketone
Ethyl acetate; isobutyl bobutyrate; isopmpyl
acetate; glycol ether acetate
Hexanes; mineral spirie heptane

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 \
new parts
gloves a/
brushes
Process Flow Diagram
-solvent
Inputs
mew parts
machining oils
dust
mold parts
oil
grease
paint chips
metal fnes
dirt
.gloves and paint brushes
. (used for cleaning parts)

I solvent
new parts
gloves &/
brushes
\
Process Flow Diagram
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

3
solvent
old parts
Process Flow Diagram
.clean parts
outputs
.contaminated solvent
.solvent vapors lost to evaporation
.contaminated gloves
.paint brushes soaked with solvent
.sludge
...................................
outputs
lean parts
air emissions
*dirty solvent
gloves &
dirty gloves &
brushes
brushes
sludge

ushes
Process Flow Diagram
Output Dispostion
dean 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
sludge
w shipped as haz.
waste
I

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.
B. Types of soils.
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

C. How to combine components.
1. Inorganic components.
a. caustic (hard surface cleaning)
b. phosphate (water softening and rinsing)
c. borates (corrosion protection)
d. chelators (water softening)
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.
B. Disadvantages
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.
1. Not recommended for removal of soaps and synthetics.
2.
3.
Usually require higher maintenance.
Usually requires inhibitors.
4.
5.
6.
Can contain SARA reportable chemicals.
Can produce washer scale and sludge.
May solubilize heavy metals.
7. Can embrittle some parts.

5. Alkaline cleaning.
A. Advantages
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
B. Disadvantages
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.
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.
8. Temperature
1.
2.
C. Chemical
Different parts and soils require different cleaning times.
Time cycles may be dictated by cleaning equipment.
Cleaning often improves at elevated temperatures.
Certain soils can only be removed at high temperatures.
1. Acid, alkaline, solvent.
2.
3.
D. Concentration
1.
2.
Certain soils require certain cleaning chemicals.
Choice of chemical will impact on cleaning results.
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. Good for large parts without a lot of blind holes or recesses.
2. Relies on chemical action only.
3. Usually requires longer time to clean.
4. Low volume production.
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.
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.
4. Usually slows down production.
5. Provides good mechanical cleaning.

E. Spray
1. Higher volume, larger rackable parts.
2.
3.
Usually tied to continuous production conveyor systems.
Not good for shielded areas.
4. Very economical.
5. Requires fair amount of floor space.
6. Spray impingement provides good mechanical cleaning.
8. Key factors in selecting the cleaning process.
A. Size
1. Weight and overall dimension of part.
2. Material handling method.
B. Shape
1. Configuration of part.
2. Nesting parts, blind holes, flat surfaces, irregular surfaces.
C. Surface
D. Soil
1. Typeofmetal.
1. Type of soil.
2. Difficulty in removing soil.
E. Subsequent process
1. what follows cleaning process, i.e., parts dried, parts painted, length
of storage.
2. Drying.
9. Aqueous waste considerations.

"CHLORINATED SOLVENT VAPOR DEGREASING: THE CMCK 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 choice 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 of 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 Act. In
particular, Section 313 of that Act requirea chlorinated solvent users
to file annual report8 detailing the amount of 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 Act 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 Air Act, EPA is hard at work developing a new
Natfonal Emission Standard for Hazardou8 Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for
vapor degreasing emisaione. Although we won't know until November of
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.
Speciflc to the use of methylene chloride, OSHA is currently
considering a nine-fold reduction in the employee PermiUBible exposure
limit, from the current PEL of 500 parte per million down to 25 ppm.
In addition to the regulatory burdens, users of chlorinated solvents

Page 2
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 tam8 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 just 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 of 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 it fu 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.
The challenge of identifying a syatem that meets these parameters, and II.
then being able to afford it, 18, 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 for elimination,

Page 3
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''
- 8olutions. A8 I mentioned earlier, both of these solvents are
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.
The easiest answer for 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 - for 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, for 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.
Brk 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
3 the free-board ratio la correct, and keep the cover closed. Closely
monitor the contamination level of your solvent. Don't fall into the
trap of cleaning out your degreaeer on a fixed schedule. Clean out the
degreaser and replace contaminated solvent with freuh 8olvent only when
it's required. Testing can extend the life of 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.

Page 4
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 to reduce 6olvent
emissions to the ambient environment. These controls can often result
in aubstantial reductions in solvent emissions, although there will be
8ome expense involved.
For 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
to control emiurions during down-time and working time. Simply
covering an open top vapor degreaser during down t ime 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 of 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 of 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 Offer8 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 Act. Trichloroethylene is listed a8
a VOC, and the OSHA PEL for methylene chloride may be dropped from the
current SO0 ppm to 25 ppm. All will be 8UbjeCt to the solvent
dogrearing NESHAP being developed by EPA under the Clean Air Act, and,
depending on the amount of emissions, will be considered either major

9
Page 5
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 the 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.
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 in the indu8tiy. And, in 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. At 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. Ho”r, at thi6 point in
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
* operations are investigating aqueous parts washing systems. Obviously,
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 of different aqueous and semi-aqueous
cleaners and cleaning syaterrm on the market. The cleanera all we, as
(L base, watet and some combination of saponifiers, surfactants,

Page 6
chelating agents, corrosion inhibitors, other solvents, and acidic or
alkaline agents in various combinations and concentrations.
The cleaning equipment all seeks to incorporate various ""I sense"
mechanical controls to manage bath contamination and assure a high
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 of 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 existing 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 for 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 of 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. Briefly, here are the steps a company should follow when acting
on that decision:
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
prOCe68 will best serve your needa.
2,
Conduct your own research on various chemicals and equipment. It
is usually best to research chemicals and equipment together, Bince

Page 7
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.
3. Once you have narrowed the list Of possible chemical8, reque8t
aamples and, it Leaslble, conduct your own bench-scale testing of
these products on the 0118 and other contaminants you need to
remove.
4. Still working with your short-list, visit the equipment
manufacturer's facility and conduct test 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 of 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 mcny 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

d
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
WASH EQUIPMENT, mEy ULTIMATELY CHOSE AGITATED IMMERSION. THE FINAL
STEP IN THE PROCESS WAS FINDING THE RIGHT CLEANER.
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

s
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.
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 mer 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
EXPERIENCE WITH NON-HAZARDOUS, AQUEOUS CLEANERS. WHAT THEY HAVE TO
SAY, WITH THIS AMOUNT OF HINDSIGHT, PROVES INTERESTING.
(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 Hart”, 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
The elimination of a Trichloroethylene vapor degrcasing operation.
Narrative
Due to the extreme sensitivity to contamination of the fluid power compo-
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.
One such operation, lapping, presents an extremely difficult problem. Lap-
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
plant.
Environmental Impact
As illustrated by the attached chart, the elimination of the trichloroethylene
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 still 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.

In summary, the benefits derived from this project are as follows:
1. The elimination of potential health hazards associated with the
usage of trichloroethylene.
2. A 50% reduction in the overall quantity of hazardous wastes
generated by the Gneneville plant.
3. A significant reduction in disposal costs.
TRW Cleaning Methods Interview
Inaoduction: TRW with mention of 1988 TCMCSSCC Governor’s Award
for Hazardous Waste Management and Environmental Award from Tennessee
Association of Businesses, and that TRW wil 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?
..
I understand you have “zed the systems cleaning effectiveness by adding
external fduring?
What arc some of the impartant parameters to consider in metal parts
cleaning?
1. Ti;
2. Temp~ratun - M Would YOU sta~ (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
final best cleaning tcmpcrawc - 120 degrees F?
3. chemicals - Chemical concentrations calling for 7 - 8% solutions for

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
the prcvious patch tests for the TCE degreasing process?
Rad, you mentioned four types of process soil and ultrasonics as the choice for
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
still 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. Wm thm process flow
problems with this arrangement? What problems have the new cleaning systems
solved - have labor costs been reduced?
When we wm talking the other day, you both said it was good when every-
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?
Yes, we discovered that silicon carbide which uses oil as a carrier could be
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.
-end-

SECTION 4
GENERAL CLEANING INFORMATION

8 GUIDETO
Excerpts from
CLEAN TECHNOLOGY
a July 1992
Draft
ALTERNATIVES TO
CHLORINATED SOLVENTS FOR
CLEANING AND DEGREASING
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
.

a
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 environ-
ment. 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.

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
What Is Clean
Technology?
Why Clean
and Degrease?
.
OVERVIEW
A clean technology is a source reduction or recycling method
applied to eliminate or significantly reduce hazardous waste genera-
tion. source reduction indudes product changes and source con-
trol. Source control can be further characterized as input material
changes, technology changes, or improved operating practices.
Pollution prevention should emphasize source reduction technolo-
gies, 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 contamina-
tion 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 fol-
lowing to occur:
1

Overview
2
.
. + A mechanical or electrical process functions according to its
design specifications.
+ A coating material adheres properly to a substrate.
+ A product’s finish meets certain performance and appearance
criteria.
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 bufing compounds present difficult cleaning problems
because they contain waxes and abrasives and can form metal
soaps during use. In the electronics industry, cleaning consists prim
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

w
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)
I
Table 1. Properties and Characterlstlcs of Chlorinated Solvents
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
t I
31
Low
1000
, but it is not exempt under the Clean Air Act.
to her the PEL of METH to 25 ppm or lower (Department of Labor, 1991).
124 130 91 132
Low Medium Medium Medium
350 50 25 500'"'
e

.'.
4
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 per-
formance 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 sol-
vent 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 dis-
placing, 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 electro-
plating 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

*
'ollution
Problem
Nhat's In
rhls Guide?
.
holes as well as getting between the soil and substrate to help
displace the soil.
0 v e rd I e vi
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 alterna-
tive 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?
6
.
Other questions affecting the decision to choose an altemative
technology include:
+ Might new pollution problems be introduced that did not exist
under the old technology?
+ 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?
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 recom-
mend one technology over any other. It presents concise summa-
ries of applications and operating information to support preliminary
selection of dean technolagy options for testing in specific pro-
cesses. 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.

e
.
li Keywords
Clean Technology
Pollution Prevention
Source Reduction
Source Control
Recycling
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

PolbUon Prrvmtion:
Table 2. Summary of Beneflts of the Clean Altematlve Solvent Technologies
U I I I I I
Economlcr: I
costs
Relatively low capkd
costs 1 1 ’ 1 ’ 1 I
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 indi-
cation 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 pro-
cess steps or input chemicals, or multiple operations with complex
sequencing, are examples of characteristics that would lead to a
high complexity rating.
9

Available Technologies
10
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 develop-
ment for each technology. Technologies in earlier stages of devel-
opment are summarized to the extent possible in Section 3,
Emerging Technologles.

Technology
Aqueous
Cleaners
Semi.
Aqueous
Cleaners
I
Table 3. Avallable Clean Technologles for Allernallves lo Chloflnated SOlVenlS for Cleanlng and Degreaslng: Descrlptlve Aspects
Pollullon Prevenllon
Beneflts
No ozone depletion
potential
Novocs
Many cleaners reported
IO be biodegradable
VOC levels readily
reduced when used in
emulsbn form
Terpeneswohwellal
bw 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 pro-
duced
Reported
Appllcatlons
Excellent lor removing inorganic and
polar organic soils
Used to remove lighl oils and residues
left by oWr cleaning processes
* 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
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
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
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 it
mulCStage cleaning is performed in line
Often used a1 hgh lemperalures (1 20 to 200°F)
Metal may corrode if part no1 dned quickly, rust
inhibitor may be used wilh cleaner and
rinsewater
Stress corrosion cracking can occur in some
polymers
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,iw
swelling and cracking of polymers and
elastomers
Some esters evaporate too slowly to be used
Vrilhout including a rinse and/or dry process
~

Technology
!TIP(.
Aliphatic
Hydrocarbons
Hydrochloro-
fluorocarbons
(HCFCS)
Miscellaneous
Organic
Solvents
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
(low low)
* HghQradeshave
reduced evapom8w
loss
lower emissions of
oronedepleting sub-
stances 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 mall spaces
~
* Shod-term sdutkrr to choosing an
alternative sotvent whkh permits use
of existing equipment
No flash point
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
Hazards and Llmltatlons
* Flammable or combustible, some have very low
mash points, so process equipment must be de-
signed to mitigate explosion dangers
* Slower drying times than chlorinaled solvenls
The cost of vapor recovery, if implemented. is
relatively hi@
Have some Ozone Depletion Potential and
Global Warming Potential
less eHecHve than CFC-113 for removing
buffii compounds
Incompatible with acrylic, styrene, and ABS
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
I

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 treat-
ment 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.
16
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 frac-
tions 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
,

Why Choose This
Technology?
manufacturers can provide information on their specific 011 separa-
tion 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 sol-
vent 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 encoun-
tered 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:lO 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 solu-
tions. Consult with cleaner manufacturers to obtain recommended
formulations and procedures.
The primary tradeoff when switching from solvent cleaning to aque-
ous cleaning is that parts usually need to be rinsed and will remain

Summary of
Unknowns
State of
Development
Aqueous Clsaners
wet for sbme time unless action is taken to speed up the drying pro-
cess. 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 deion-
ized 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?
7n
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 reme. 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

Why Choose This
Technology?
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 formu-
lating 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

Available Technologies
Reported
Applications
Operational and
Product Benefits
22
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.

Hazards and
Limitations
Tradeoff s
Summary of
Unknowns
Semi- Aqueou s Clears rs
.
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?
Why Choose This
Technology?
Aliphatic hydrocarbons are available in two grades, the basic petro-
leum 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 oper-
ate 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
eported
Applications
Operational and
Product Benefits
Hazards and
Limitations
26
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 hydro-
carbons 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.
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 com-
bustible, and some have very low flash points, as low as 105OF.
Process equipment must be designed to mitigate explosion dan-
gers. 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 compati-
ble with most metals and plastics, and with most elastomers.

Tradeoffs
Summary of
Unknowns
State of
De vel o pmen t
.
Aliphatic Hydrocarbcns
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 OW
Why Choose This
Technology?
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 character-
istics for a large number of organic soils, but they are found to be
less effective for removing bufing 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.
.

Reported
Appllcations
Operatlonal and
Product Benefits
Hazards and
Llmltatlons
Tradeoff s
Summary of
Unknowns
State of
Development
costs -
Hydrochlorofluorocarbons ( HCFCs,
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, how-
ever, 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 OW
Why Choose This
Technology?
30
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:
b
+ Alcohols - ethanol, isopropanol (IPA)
4 Ketones - acetone, methyl ethyl ketone (MEK)
4 Vegetable oils and fatty acids.
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 adhe-
sives. 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 processea
Availability
These cleaners are commercially available.

c
Reported
Applications
Operational and
Product Benefits
Hazards and
Limitations
Tradeoff s
Summary of
Unknowns
State of
Development
costs
Miscellaneous Organic Solvents
Approximate costs when solvents are purchased in bulk quantities
are as follows:
+ 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. .
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

Background:
SOLVENT Loss c0"OL-
THINGS YOU CAN DO NOW
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 the 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
Evaporation, convection ,
diffusion, out top.
Drag out/vapor zone
disturbance
Vapor Zone
disturbance
Mechanical Leak,
other losses
Increase freeboard to width Place unit where air
ratio to at least 1.0. currents across top
are minimized. (Away
from windows, fans,
vents, etc.). Deflect,
air currents away fromi
open tops.
Install freeboard refrigera-
tioa coils (operates at
-20 F.).
Reduce primary condenser
temperature.
Install automated cover.
Capture escaping solvent
with exhaust system. (CAUTION:
VACUUM HEAD CAN ACCELERATE
EVAPORATIVE LOSSES)
Plan for increased con!
densate water disposal.
Top should be kept
closed during idle
or downtimes. Keep
condenser coils on
during downtime.
Add carbon absorber
and recycle captured
solvents (may not be
as effective as free-
board refrigeration).
Reduce part/work unit move- Orient part for best
ment in and out of vapor zone drainage. Keep work
to minimum speed consistent load in vapor zone
with production needs. If until condensation
automated do not exceed stops. Keep workload
11 feet/min. within freeboard
until dry. Remove
slowly. If rinse
within same tank,
drain parts over
solvent sump.
Reduce basket or work size to
utilize 50% or less of Lower work into and
remove from vapor zone
opening. at slow steady rate.
Check joints, connectors and Scale often forms
seals in solvent syscem with around leaks for
halon detector. Stop all visual detection.
leaks. Use specified gaskets Leak checks should
and materials. be routine maintenance
activity.
Install downtime cover. Insure good fit around
edges.

TABLE I1 - LOSS CONTROL - IN-LINE CLEANERS
SOURCE OF LOSS ALTERNATIVE CONTROLS OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
Solvent losses to ambient Freeboard t o width ratio
air should be at least 1.0.
Install freeboard refrigera- Plan for increased con
tion system (for vapor cleaners densate water disposal
only 1
Minimize air flow around unit. Consider adding
Keep entrance and exit openings extension t o exit to
closed during down time. extend drying time. "
Install flaps over operr
ings for use during
down time.
Mechanical Check all connections, top leaks,
and set up continuous maintenance
program.
Transfer solvent through closed Install carbon absorbpiping
loop system.
tion unit in loop to
capture and recycle
solvent.
Check top edges for
caulk as necessary.
Reduce entrance and
openings.
Operational Reduce conveyor speed to mini-
mum consistent with production
needs.
Keep work load in vapor zone
until condensation stops.
Install sump cooling system
and activate during downtime.
leaks. Re- Glass tops should !
checked for cracks.
Replace if leaking.
exit Opening should have lea
than 10% free width
during part passage.
00 not exceed 11 fpm.
Allow to dry within
cleaner if possible.
Orient parts for
optimum drainage.
Spray rinse at a down--ward
angle into solvent
Spray nozzle should be
as far into freeboard ,,
as work will 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%
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:
1993- 10%
199415%
199530%
199650%
1997-5096
1998-50%
1999-50%
2000-8096
2001-80%
2005- 100%
Source #I
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
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
WRITAR, 1313 5th St. SE, Suite 325, Minneapolis, MN 554144502 PH. (612) 379-5995
I
‘ -

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
for CFC-113
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
WRITAR, 1313 5th St. SE, Suite 325, Minneapolis, MN 554144502 PH. (612) 379-5995

*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
lubricants and coolants VS. oil-baed.
Thest arc idtally suited to aqueous
chemistry.
9il and Grtasc Removal--Organic fbs,
oils, and greases can be removed very
effkctively by aqueous chemistry.
SUMMARY OF AOUEOUS CLEANERS
I PISADVANTAGES
*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
WRITAR, 1313 5th St. SE, Suite 325, Minneapolis, MN 554144502 PH. (612) 379-5995

*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
process?
What are the materials and/or substrates
affected by this process?
Are there any known contraindications (health and
safety, quality, costs, etc.) associated with the current process?
Have any other substitution techniques been attempted? List
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
*Drying of assemblies/parts
--Circuitboards
--orher elecmnics
--Precision assemblies
*protective coating removal
--Paint
-Conformal coatings
---Oils, greases, waxes
1 I
source #4
*Cleaning of assemblies
---Circuit boards
---Other electronics
---Motors, drives, etc.
*Process equipment cleaning
---Reactors
---Hoses, lines
---work amas
---Mixing equipment
~Intennediate processing
---Marking dyes and inks
---Inspections procedures
6
WRmAR, 1313 5th St SE, Suite 325, Minneapolis, MN 554144502 PH. (612) 379-5995

F
Alcohols
Isoppanol
Methanol
Ketones
Acetone
Methy isobutyl ketone
Ester solvents
Ethyl Bcttatt
Isobutyl isobutynue
Aliphatic solvents
HcXane
Mineralspirits
Aromatic solvents
Ethanol
Isobutanol
Methyl ethyl kctone
Heptane
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 will 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
WRITAR, 1313 5th St. SE, Suite 325, Minneapolis, MN 554144502 PH. (612) 379-5995

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 clam 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
proctssed.
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
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
water hw I r I I 1
L
W.sh
stage:
Heated detergent solution:
spray, immersion.
ultrssonics, Qc.
RiaPC
Stage:
Wam. : Spray, Spray.
immersion
Dryer: )ryer:
Room .loom tanperaaure tempemure
I airorheatedair
Periodk Removal --.). WasteTreatment
Source #1
Solution Recirculation performed continuously by means of
fdtering andor skimming
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
WRITAR, 1313 5th St. SE, Suite 325, Minneapolis, MN 554144502 PH. (612) 379-5995

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
water-based materials containing abrasive and dispersing agents
0
Solids: grease containing stearic acid, hydrogenated fatty acids, tallow,
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.
In addition to knowing & the soils are, you must determine the 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.
< WRITAR, 1313 5th SL SE, Suite 325. Minneapolis, MN 554144502 PH. (612) 379-5995
10

Check the following:
Are the soils
4 Received as raw materials?
J produced in general machining operations?
J RCX~UCX~ in forming/stamping operations?
d Produced in subassembly?
4 Received with vendor parts?
d , Any combination of the above possibilities?
Source #1
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
Source #2 and W A R
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?
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.
See &o A.%hf-F24 for evaluation of general cleaning.
source #1
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
12
WRITAR, 1313 5th St. SE, Suite 325, Minneapolis, MN 55414-4502 PH. (612) 379-5995

Ad vantages
*fighest leve o cleaning;
cleans complex parts,
configurations
*Can be automated
*Parts can be welded
.Usable with parts on trays
*Highest cost
*Requires rinsewater for
some applications
*Requires new basket design
I *Long lead time
*Cannot handle heavy oils
*Limits part size and tank
volumes
*Separate dryer may be
ltXJUired
AQUEOUS CLEANING PROCESS EQUIPMENT
IMMERSION W ITH
MECHANICAL
AGITATION
*Usable with parts on trays
*Will flush out chips
*Simple to operare
.cleans complex parts and
configurations
*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 deposition 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
WRITAR, 1313 5th St. SE, Suite 325, Minneapolis, MN 554144502 PH. (612) 379-5995

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. vis 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

. .
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), Wont
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
Fuel tank primer (BMS 10-20)
a Titanium
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
15
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
4
III (proprietary mixture), Boeing Aerospace
Butyl carbitol (diethylene glycol monobutyl ether), Union Carbide
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
wm 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 in-
line 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 emptyhandcd.
16
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
Cleaner
4 10%. 110' F.
A B C D
4 20%, 120' F.
A B C D
SOILS
Houghton 2
Draw 431
Polyisobuty- 10
ltne
(honey oil)
batty od 5
vactra #2 1
2
12
4
1
2
25
10
1
2
5
4
3
2
20
7
10
2
20
15
5

J
4
e
e
e
e
e
b
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
.b
e
b
e
e
Ammonium hydroxide, potassium hydroxide; sodium hydroxide
Diethylene glycol monobutyl ether
Dodecanedioic acid
EDTA and its tetrasodium salt
Monoethanolamine; diethanolamine; triethanolamine
Borax
sodium CarbOMte
Sodium gluconate
Sodium silicate; sodium metasilicate
Sodium tripolyphosphate; trisodium phosphate; tetrasodium pyrophosphate;
tetrapotassium pyrophosphate
Sodium xylene sulfonate
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
19
WRITAR, 1313 5th St. SE, Suite 325, Minneapolis, MN 554144502 PH. (612) 379-5995

SOURCES:
1)
CFC-113 pnd Methyl Chlorofm in Precision Operations, ICOLP
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) C m, a quarterly newsletter for anyone interested in alternatives to ozonedepleting
chemicals.
available fioom: City of Irvine Environmental Program Office
P.O. Box 19575
Ixvine,CA 92713
contact: Alicia Scherer
3) "New Technology Cleaners Replace Chlorinated Solvent Degreasers in the Metalworking
Industry," JoAnn A. Quitmeyer, undated.
available fim: 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 .. .
all to be found in v k & D- annual.
available fim: Metals and Plastics Publications, Inc.
One University Plaza
Hackensack, NJ 07601
5) "VOC Reduction: Solvent Cleaning and Paint Stripping," SAE Technical Paper Series
#900958, Vanessa Gemmell and Brian Smith, Boeing Co., April 1990.
availablefi.ovn: SAE Intemational
400 Commonwealth Dr.
Warrendale, PA 15096-0001
6) "Eliminating Solvents in the Cleaning of Circuit Assemblies: A Case History," I.B. Goldman
and D.F. Aitken, General Electric, IPC Technical Paper Series #IFC-TP-899.
available fiom: IPC
7380 North Lincoln Av.
Lincolnwood,IL 60646
7) "Aqueous and Terpene Cleaning--Interim Report" (extemal review draft), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Toxic Substances, Washington, D.C., 1991.
avaihble fiom: 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
..
I

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
1989.
W-, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH,
"Controlling Toxic Air Emissions," Anthony J. Buonicore,
1990.
.. .
.. .
, pp. 29-31, September
"Emulsion and Solvent Cleaners," Stan Scislowski, &tal F i e , p. 63, May, 1990.
.. .
"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.
. .
ve m B- (kil&g, undated.
produced by aid available from:
Electronic Controls Design, Inc.
4287-A SE International Way %
Milwaukie, OR 97222-8825
503/659-6100
and Surface F-
.. .
"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 Waas 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

P
*I
- Waste Minimization Program
Aqueous
factsheet
Industrial
Cleaning Chemicals
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.
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 for
Aqueous Industrial Cleaning 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)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
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 InOIZanics
Water Only Poor Great
Water/Alcohol Fair Great
Acid Poor Great
Alkaline Poor Great
Emulsion Great Good
Saponifier Great Good
* Source: "CFC Altemtives"
Environmental Program Office, City of kine, CA February 1991
Confaminants
polar Non-wlar
Gredt Poor
Fair Fair
Fair Poor
Fair Poor
Good Great
Good Great
Assess the compatibility of the chemical cleaner with the object to be cleaned.
Great
Great
Great
Great
Good
Good
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.
Choose the chemical that will produce the highest level of cleanliness for the part.
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.
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?
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-

P
GUIDELINES, Cont.
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 Wce of Irvine, C4. l3e Dh?R would like to
thank them for their contribution.
-3-

August 1991
Aqueous Industrial Cleaning Chemicals
Manufacturer and Supplier List
THE WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT
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 COMPLm 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
LIST, PLEASE CONTACT THE HAZARDOUS WASTE MINIMIZATION TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
PRWW AT (608) 267-3763.
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
OF NATURAL RESOURCES @m),
4
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

*
Manufacturers Distributor/Sales ReD.
C & H Chemical Company
I 222 Starkey Street
St.Pau1, MN 55107
Phone: (612) 227-4343
(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
-5-
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

Manufacturers
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
-6-
Distributor/Sales ReD. .
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

?
.4
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
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
I
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
-, Printed on Recycled Paper
-7-
PUBL-SW-147 91

.
Waste Minimization Program
factsheet
Backmound Information
Aqueous Parts
Washing Equipment
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.
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Hazardous Waste Minimization Program

1)
2)
3)
4)
Purchasing Guidelines for
Aqueous Parts Washing Equipment
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.
Does the material from which the part is made make it susceptible to damage from the
washing method you are considering?
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.
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-
.

August 1991
Aqueous Parts Washing Equipment
Manufacturer and Supplier List
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
4
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

L
Manufacturer
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
-5-
Distributor/Sales ReD.
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

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
Empire Cleaning Equipment
2101 West Cabot Blvd.
Langhome, PA 19047
Phone: (215) 752-8000
Fax: (215) 752-9373
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 em" Inc.
6557 MonzingenMahe
West Germany
Phone: (0 67 51) 50 11
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
omni Finishing systems
163 Railroad Drive
Ivyland, PA 18974
Phone: (215) 953-1 166
Fax: (215) 953-8644
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
Q - -
(608) 267-9523 or
(608) 267-3763
- I
Hazardous Waste Minimization Program
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
P.O. Box 7921(SW/3)
~ Madison, WI 53707
- 7
Printed on Reaycled Paper PUBL-SW-148 91

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 Reduction Resource Center
Fcrr The Southeast
P. 0. Box 27687
3825 Barrett Drive
Raleigh, NC 27611-7687
(800) 476-8686

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
A special thanks is due to all who provided constructive
criticisms of this report. Hopefully it will be more useful to
readers because of their interest. Vic Young, Phil Morse, and
Gary Hunt of the Center and Stephen Evanoff, General Dynamics,
Dallas, TX, all provided valuable input. The person due the
greatest thanks is Ann Hoke of the Center whose patience and
tolerance through many rewrites made it all possible.

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 solvents,
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. Product labeling requirements will provide strong
motivation to producers to make material substitutions.
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 (BOD). 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. Trading one problem for a
different one may not be the solution you are seeking.
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

c
additives in cleaning tanks or post-clean rinse tanks, must be
considered when choosing- the right process. If discharging to a
municipal sewer system, keep your Publically Owned Treatment
Works informed of any change anticipated in the volume, screnqth;
or potential toxicity of your waste.
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.
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.
Terpenes are
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.
5

Hydrocarbons :
Hydrocarbons, usually combined with a surfactant and rust
inhibitor, are effective in removing soils such as cutting oils,
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.
Any alternative should be
thoroughly tested and evaluated for health and environmental
impact before switching.
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
found for most cleaning applications. -
-
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. The large suppliers
generally will be able to formulate cleaners to meet your needs.
These additives take into consideration the soils and subsequent
production process. Additives generally perform the following:
- Penetrate soils 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. Some additives, such as certain glycol ethers and
esters, have unanswered. health and safety questions. Review
Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) and demand full answers,
particularly the BOD and COD Of solutions with additives. As
stated previously, many suppliers can formulate to meet your
needs to reduce bad side effects such as corrosion, flammability,
health effects, treatability, etc.
Equipment Selection:
Cleaning equipment ranges from "A to 2". Many suppliers will
custom design for your process. Despite disclaimers, vapor
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. This may
be the most cost effective approach to take. Many companies will
quote on retrofitting existing equipment and/or providing new
equipment. Some companies have designed retrofit packages to use
terpenes or NMP in their existing degreasers as a substitute for
CFCs in vapor degreasing.
If you have the in-house capability to modify your units,
consider is. Check with the original manufacturer; they may have
modification plans and kits. If not, several companies have been
identified that specialize in existing equipment modification.
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.
Others have made the transition effectively with the
attendant benefits of cost savings, risk reduction, and a better
work environment. you can do it also.
Some of the references available through the Center are listed in
Table 1. If you are in any of the States of Region IV, EPA,
these reports will be made available to you on request.
Equipment and vendor information was extracted from product
literature available in the Center. It is a representative list,
not a complete list of products on the market. Others are coming
available or are already available but not known to the Center.
We do not recommend any product or supplier. Only you can choose
the product(s1 and supplier(s1 that meet your special set of
needs and criteria.
Free, nonregulatory technical assistance is available through
various State and Federal programs. Information on these
programs is available through the Center. If you are in our
service area, do not hesitate to call.
7

I 6778
I
USE .,. AOUEOUS/SEMI AQUEOUS
CLEANERS
SUPPLIER
TYPE
Bio Act EC7
Petrofirm, Inc.
Specialty Chemicals
5400 First Coast Hwy.
Fernandina, FL 32304
Terpene & Esters
Simple Green
Oaraclean 220,
282, 283
Quaker 624 GD
Turco 3878
6753
6778
4215 -NC-LT
Simple Green
P. 0. BOX 880135
El Paso, TX 88588-0135
W. R. Grace
55 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
Terpene
Alkaline With or
Without Glycol
Ethers
Alkaline
Emulsion
w/agitation (3878)
Non-Chromated
Alkaline (6778)
2
I
POTENTIAL
PROBLEM
Electronics &I Flammability
Parts Cleaners
I 1
I
Metal Cleaning
Flamma bi 1 ity
Treatability
Metal Cleaning & Corrosivity
Electronics Parts Silicates
Cleaning Immediate
Rinse May Be
Required
Immersion Corrosivity
Ultrasonic
Si1 icates
Replace Vapor Chromates
Degreasing from 3878
LF-NC Non-
Chromate
Form

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
POTENTIAL
PROBLEM
Flammability
Ridolene 1025 Parker Amchen
32100 Stephenson Hwy
Madison Heights, MI
48071
800-222-2600 Ext. 286
Alkaline (NaOH) Vapor Degreaser
TD 1414-F-B I Do
Petroleum Solvent Parts Cleaning &
Paint Prep
Flash Point
3HA-HF
~~~ I Arsol
Terpene
Hydrocarbon
Lacquer Stripper Flash Point
Kwik Dri 66
Ashland Chemical, Inc.
Industrial Chemicals
P. 0. Box 2219
Columbus, OH 43216
614-889-3627
Aliphatic
Hydrocarbon
Petroleum
Distillate
Paint Thinner Flash Point
Actrel 3338L,
3349L, 3360L,
1160L
Exxon Chemical
P. 0. Box 5200
Baytown, TX 77522
713-425-2115
Exxate 800 Exxon Chemical
P. 0. Box 5200
Baytown, TX 77522
713-425-2115
Hydrocarbon
Hydrocarbon
3
Drawing Oil, voc ' s
Cutting oil, Flammability
Grease
Drawing Oil voc ' s
F 1 amma b i 1 i ty
I I

CLEANER BUPPLIER
TYPE
Rust Corrosion
Remover
CT-3/CT4
CT1/2
XUS11269.01
XUSll2 68
XUS- 112 67
Action Bioclean
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
Mineral Acids/
Glycol Ethers
I
Acid
Hydrocarbon
Surfactants With
Corrosion
Inhibitors
Semi Aqueous
Glycol/
Hydrocarbons
Cold Cleaner
w/Hydrocarbons
Water
Biodegradable
4
I
USE
Remove Oxidation
Rust. Requires
Pretreat with CT.l
Precleaning Multi-
Substitutes
Light Oils/Grease
Light Oils, Metal
Films
Oils, Grease
Metals Parts Wash
~
POTENTIAL
PROBLEM
Safety
Preclean
CT1, Rinse
CT2, Dry
Flammability
Safety
Corrosion of
Some Metals
Odor - Must
Be
Incinerated
for Disposal
Toxicity ,
VOC'S
Treatment
?

CLEANER SUPPLIER
TYPE
USE
Teile Reinigung
Smittel 09
SW-528 Lubrichem, Inc.
Alka 1 h e
Metal Cleaner
P. 0. Box 30665
KAOH pH13
Raleigh, NC 27622
919-839-1211
R. B. Degrease
Bioclean
~~
Citrex
Citra Safe
Axarel 38/52
RMA & RA Flux
Remove & Cleaner
RAASM USA
P. 0. Box 150146
Nashville, TN 37215
615-255-7434
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
Sulphanate
Terpene
Alkaline &
Surfactants
8
Metal Cleaning
Alkaline Printed Circuit
Boards
Methylene Chloride
1,1,1 Vapor
degreasing
Hydrocarbon 38- Electronics
52-Grease Metal
Cleaner
Circuit Boards
POTENTIAL
PROBLEM
Safety
Aluminum
Alloys
Safety
Foaming
Safety
F 1 amma b i 1 it y
Flash Point
Treatment

CLEANER BUPPLIER
TYPE
USE
P F Degreaser
Substitute for
1,1,1 Cable &
Metal Cleaner
Arconate TM 1000 Arc0 Chemical
Propylene
Replace Methylene
3801 West Chester Pike Carbonate
Chloride
Newtown Square, PA
19073
1-800-32 1-7000
~~
Gillite 0650
Hurricane
Cleaning
Compounds
Aquaease
EZE 267D
PT Technologies, Inc.
108 4th Ave., South
Safety Harbor, FL
34695
813-726-4644
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
Low Aliphatic
Hydrocarbon/
Terpene
Alkaline
Alkaline
Alkaline, Terpenes
and/or
Hydrocarbons
6
Metal Cleaning
Vapor Degreasing
Alternative
Cleaners
POTENTIAL
PROBLEM
Combustible
Safety
Requirement
Metal Cleaning Safety
Steel Parts
Dip Tank
I
Safety
Process
Specific

CLEANER
Brulin
815 GD
815 GR
Alka - 2000
(1) DOT 111/113
(2) Omni Clean
H. D.
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
Alkaline
I
TYPE
Potassium
Hydroxide
(1) Proprietory
"Surf actants
System"
(2) "Water Based"
Proprietary
Terpene Blends
Terpenes With
Add it ives
7
~
USE
Metal Cleaning
Ferrous Metals
Cleaning only!
(1) Metal Cleaning
(2) Heavy Oil
Buildup
All Surfaces
Ink Removal, Hand
Wiping, Emulsion
Cleaning
Tailored To Meet
Cleaning Needs
~~
POTENTIAL
PROBLEM
Mild
Corrosivity
Silicates
High pH
Safety and
Handling
(1) None
Listed ' In
MSDS. High
Concentra-
tions could
cause
Aquatic
Toxcity
(2) None
Listed
Flammability
Treatment
Disposal
~~
Waste
Disposal
Safety

CLEANER
oxsol Solvents TN
Family
(1) Parts Prep
(2) Micropure
(1) Ionox FC, HC,
MC, LC
(2) Aquanox SSA &
101
3D SUPREME
Precision Clean
SUPPLIER
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
3D Inc.
2053 Plaza Drive
Benton Harbor, MI
,49022-2211
616-925-5644
800-272-5326
LPS Laboratories, Inc.
4647 Hugh Howell Road
Tucker, GA 30085-5052
800-241-8334
TYPE
Halogenated
Aromatic
Derivative Of
Toulene
N-Methyl
Pyrrolidone Plus
Additives
(1) Alcohol &
Surfactants &
Sponifiers
(2) Alcohol
Alkaline,
Water Blend
~ ~~ ~ ~
Alkaline With Rust
Inhibitor & Anti
Foaming Agent
Contains Glycol
Ether
Alka 1 ine
1
8
I
I
I
I
I
USE
Formulated To Meet
Specific Cleaning
Needs
(1) Parts
(2) Circuit Board
Cleaning
Electronics
Precision Parts
~ ~
"Any Washable
Surface It
Metals & Plastics
POTENTIAL
PROBLEM
Varies With
Formulation
Check MSDS
With Company
VOCs Drying.
Step Usually
Required
Flammability
Treatability
Aquatic
Toxicity
Health (?)
Treatment &
Disposal.
Safety

Safety Clean
Action Bio-Clean
~~ ~
Hydro Pulse
NAME I COMPANY
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
GOFF Corp.
P. 0. Box 1607
Seminole, OK 74868
1-800-654-4633
BATCH PARTS CLEANERS
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
2
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
P
COMMENT
Solvents and/or
Petroleum
Distillates
Aqueous
Aqueous Process
Programmed
Cleaning Cycles
Engine & Shop
Parts Cleaner
No Cleaners

1
Jet Washing
U
Polychem Alternative
2000
Immersion Washers
Microdroplet Module
Cleaning Process
Aqua-Quick, Model
600, Model 6300, Model
AQUEOUS EQUIPMENT, BUPPLIERS
SMALL TO MEDIUM
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

ES TECH
NAME
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
904-261-8288
Proceco, Inc.
1020 East 8th Street
Jacksonville, FL 32206
904-355-2888
2
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
Aqueous
COMMENT
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

~~~
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

1
Micro Coustic
EQUIPMENT SUPPLIERS
ULTRASONIC CLEANERS
I
COMPANY
TYPE
Vapor Degreaser Blackstone
Ultrasonic Batch
P. 0. Box 220
Jamestown, NY 14702-0220
1-800-766-6606
Cylindrical Sonic
Transducer
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
I
Ultrasonic Batch &
Modular
Aqueous Precision
Cleaning
Ultrasonic Batch & In
Line Automated.
Ultrasonic Automated
Precision Cleaner
(Batch)
P
Solvents
COMMENT
Solvents &
Aqueous
Electronics &
Precision
Cleaning,
Solvents &
Aqueous
Aqueous
Solvent Closed
System

SECTION 6
BIBLIOGRAPHY

i
I
I
I
Center
for
r- .
Lmissions
Control
ID # 4987
201.a - Solvent Cleaning
SOLVENT CLEANING
(DEGREASING)
--. An Assessment of
Emission Control Options
Second Review Draft
April 1992
Printed on Recyded Paper

Center
for
l- o .
Emissions
Control
August 21, 1992
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
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
flSTb
ASTM 1916 Race Street a Philadelphia, PA 19103

%EPA
.
I
J
w.11.1- -.-.--
Environmental Protection
Aaencv
" .
. . . . -. . -
Radiation
(ANR-445)
--
June 1991
Eliminating CFGI 13 And
Methyl Chloroform In Precision
Cleaning Operations
I- -..
ID # 5335
201 - Cleaning
I
Printed on Recycled Paer

L
GEPA
United States Air And
Environmental Protection Radiaiton
Agency (AN R-445)
EPA 400 3 90 003
March 1990
Manual Of Practices
To Reduce And Eliminate
CFC-113 Use In The
Electronics Industry
t I
ID # 5338
119 - Electronics/Electrid

P
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
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
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.
I

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 WgdOrU,
modification of soils (pp 127-137); comg.dbiaty of light mot81 "hcaa with danars (PPlU
1471; residues, drying & wltw qwitty (pp18S-196)
Metal Cleaning; Innes, William; Metal Finishing Guidebook and Directory '90;
1990
Suggests wing rlkllno dmus after prdaning with r detergent danu ImUalIno claws
elmn light Nil "r WJI but Crn't hndlO 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 croqqubed.to s r m soils from poru
METALS HANDBOOK-VOLUME 6: SURFACE CLEANING, FINISHING, AND
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
Mods; 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 clan 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
reco~ded]; tested biodegr8dability; $crooning for ham hazards; cleaning tests on 8
molybdonum dbulfido grrrdcwbon mixturo, 8 hydnulk oilhrbon mixture, an ngino oil
hwtd 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 Sdcw 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

. .
MnTAP Annotated Bibliography (4/92)
se Stud ies on Stu-on of Aaueous Metal C teanerx
1 5. 1 , 1 ,1 -TRICHLOROETHANE REDUCTION ALTERNATIVES; Smythe, Alan H;
Minnesota Technical Assistance Program (MnTAP) 1 987.
Betch r pq 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 pod bindk drip
Bringing Degreasing up to Date; Thomas, Andy; Finishing; May 1988
D m rpry 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.
Stmpoddoctrid con- pumfwdodod pomrdbtribUtkrruad8gd inn- innmion
woeher; pwb Y, driod in 8 vik.Dry d.kming madtho udng cotn 8ab my( a lho IIwdk; romo
additiod mfomuaon * i"il.bkinmVid.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 mVid.0.
Europun vandot.

MnTAP Annotated Bibliography (4/92)
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 mod 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 gu 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
3 u.. otudim - print* hyddi motor manufactum; ocfaw machino rhop. mcrchino coolant a r
ck.nr: aqu.our clouting of ocraw -
put8.
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- 8td eo”*. 3 rvrtrru doviud: 2-0 countorcunvnt
wah for gron in procoa doming; 3-0 Wdt. 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.

MnTAP Annotated Bibliography (4/92)
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; rmovd of brkod+n, vmirh-likr fibnr: ranoval of buffing cunpoundr
Citragold Technical Bulletin; 30, Inc; May, 1991
Cbimr cold rmovd 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 nd 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 clam" 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
hnrion 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 &- ham prior0 pb@ulhg; acid doming
famov" Oxidbd, v" oiklnnfrli.mtchadinp"a1;
whim dning on W or @w&d rwhow.
rmrbJ0rmikl"Wnoid
PROCESS OF BUFFING COMPOUND REMOVAL AND COMROL; Detrisac, M.
Arthur; AES Sympo8iun on Cleaning, Pkkling, and Etching; 1983.
Ra"&d
inawing wah at lI)O+.F (wim M nnbr), wat pwrr k.ving tha
wuhwithr fog rim, u r s q u # k r M n g powibk, ~ ~ -of-dd..l
-
buffiw-
Reducing California's Metal Bearing Wme Streams; Jacobs Engineering;
-
Report for
the Califomia Dept. of Heattti Services; Toxic sUWnC08 Control DiViJon,
Alternative Technology Section; July 1989
suggoata wing 9rmad.a #wstu-baod buffing aomowb0- noiu -no of
.UP* y. *.

.
MnTAP Annotated Bibliography (4/92)
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 unnmd spry clanua C OCH unnmd soak cleanor
42. No Chlorinated Hydrocarbons Necessary in Cleaning Process; MGller, Alois;
Metalloberfl8che 42 (1 988) 5; translation
lmmonion ehing 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 dou pom; mrtda or wun 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 hing for rwnovd.
45. Surface Treatment of Sintered Metal Comgorrents; Braddick,D.,Metallurgia,v54 (1 1)
Vib"y doburrrintud prcr to ranovo d aw dbcdontiocu or- wrf- nrin (or oil?)

MnTAP Annotated Bibliography (4/92)
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; noid ehl0ricl.t.d #hrmtr on p a ; bht 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. hod Lnportnw r01.y pmwn 1 on ck.nirrg IIC..H.
Modem Metal-Forming Lubrication; Newhouse, Ron; Tding & 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: oledq; 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
- #wr(ilk. dnnh
-
(for lug. put81 OI
STANDARD PRACTICE FOR CLEANING METALS PRIOR TO ELECTROPLATING
(ASTM 8 322-85) Philadelphia, PA: American Society for Testing and Materials
(ASTM) 1985.
i.nin0 (0
1o.ooop.i .py) u poaibk "da for funovhg oib & @"u

.
MnTAP Annotated Bibliography (4/92)
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 nod 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, Jw 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

3
. .
Misceli- (nrlsLI1Q, drvi-
MnTAP Annotated Bibliography (4/92)
73. Aqueous Cleaning Systems Replace Chlorinated Hydrocarbons; Eberle, A;
Lachenmayer, U. & Kohler, H.; Metallobedlache 43, (1 989) 12; translation
74.
75.
76.
77.
78.
79.
80.
81.
82.
83. +
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
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 ~gukti0n d ChlothWd rdv.ntr md *th.ir &OtltdtWflath., 8iiie
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 rgh or 'w.t.r chuor 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
Infomtion on d@ng th#y md .conomiCr; apphtioru dircd am for gmukr dido 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 thru choh of do" md procoa timing compatiblm with
8ubr.qu.nt ogmtiOrU; offoct of rwiduw on hoat trWting; wamt8 tn&nwt nd oil wpu8tkn
PROCESS OF BUFFING COMPOUND REMOVAL AND CONTROL; Detrisac, M.
Arthur; AES Sympm*wn on Cleaning, Pickling, and Etching; 1983.
Effm 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, forph", oftu CoMmion nd oftu 4 d n g
Rustproofing; Scidowski, Stan; Metal Finishing; June 1990
TYP. of MtPmOflna chalwda * mii.bk&odbcuaml ' 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 pub with hd.. nd r"

MnTAP Annotated Bibliography (4/92)
84. WASTE MINIMIZATION IN METAL PARTS CtEANING; Office of Solid Waste; U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Aug 1989.
bath maintmnwrcm, rinming, dMng

I
MnTAP Bibliography (4/92)
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 at
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, May 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 & Rose, 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: The 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; hTAP 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

Cleanina Measurement3
98.
99.
100.
101.
102.
103.
104.
105.
106.
107.
108.
109.
MnfAP Bibliography (4/92)
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 ind oil on mad
How Clean is Your 'Clean' Metal Surface; Cohen, Leon; Plating and Surface
Finishing; November 1987
ehort dieeuaion of 0 mothodr for mwring 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.;
Teddington England 1963
Robart Draper LTD,
rhea di.curdon of 16 mdwdo for- th. dadno#@ of 111.trl ahcu
Methods of Evaluating Metal Cleaners; Spring, Samuel & Fwman, H. & Peale, L.;
Industrial and Engineering Chemistry 18(3), Mrch 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 dw6hg 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. doallinon of nwtrl rvhcl.

MnTAP Bibliography (4/92)
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 ldingr 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 chlineu of mot4 rurfacr
a
b

MnTAP Bibliography (4/92)
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 ten 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 Prot~'on Agency Aug 1989.

,
J
mission Reduct ion in Vanor Dearew r
128.
129.
130.
131.
132.
133.
134.
135.
136.
137.
138.
139.
140.
141..
MnTAP Bibliography (4/92)
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 MaMgw"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: Sohnt Emion Reduction; DuPont Corp; Wilmington DE
A Membrane Proces8 for the Recovery of Vdatile Organic Compounds from Process
and Vent Stream; Wijjns, 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 Soh" Emissions from Three Vapof Degreasers; Hymes,
Corey; MnTAP Intem Report, 1990
142. Reducing Sdvent Emions from Vapor Degreasen; MnTAP factsheet, 7/91

MnTAP Bibliography (4/92)
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.
.

. .
MnTAP Bibliography (4/92)
Solvent Waste Rewtion in Inatr ial Clean ina Qoe rat iow
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
"in 6mIwnt mrp duction c.w rtudioe, uu of 2 mgo 1991
rdv.nt wo) wt rdmt coruunptiocl in hdf
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 Soh" 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-Creen 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 cre-
ated 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 com-
petitive 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
@ This brochure is printed on recycled paper.
’ # , I . ‘ ’
Pollution Prevention Services
Available From UW-Extension
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 appro-
priate 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 netwakourspecialistscanpwideyouwithinfmation
toduce
the costs and risks associated with trying a new process.
Pollution Prevention
Specialists At SHWEC
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 expe-
rience and previously through an outreach pro-
gram 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 minimiza-
tion 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 environ-
mentally 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 minimiza-
tion, 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
Madison, WI 53703
Phone: 6081262-0385 Fax: 6081262-6250
University of Wisconsin-Extension
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 to citizens, businesses, and local government concerning
the best available methods for managing and reducing waste. SHWEC specialists provide
technical and legal information to help decision makers design and implement programs
to meet regulatory mandates, reduce waste volumes and protect the environment. In
addition to providing general waste management assistance, SHWEC provides assistance
that is focused in two program areas.
POLLUTION PREVENTION
Educational programs to 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 to 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
fi
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
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
Also a member of the UW-Extension Environmental Resources Center, Elaine
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.
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
.A landscape architect with extensive recycling experience, Holly is the solid
waste processing specialist. She provides technical assistance to communities and
businesses regarding options for processing waste to reduce volume and extract usable
III-
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

esources 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
An engineer with extensive consulting experience, Wayne is a pollution
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.
Patrick Walsh, UW-Madison (608) 262-8179
An engineer and lawyer, Pat is the solid waste specialist. He provides general
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.

Solid & Hazardous
Waste Education Center Cooperative Extension
~ -~
1304 S. 70th St.
University of Wisconsin-Extension
West Allis, WI 53214 m
Phone: 4141475-2045 Fax: 414/475-3777
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

H
8
3
m
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.
SBD-6383-P (R.10/92)
The State of Wisconsin
ON-SITE
AFETY
CONSUL ION
Education
Techn ica I
Assistance
~ N Penalties O
.No Citations
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 regu-
lation 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 assis-
tance 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 summa-
rizes these findings.
0 Assist you in developing or maintaining an ef-
fective 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 viola-
tions 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)
c
lu
0
..
w
s
z
..
C
0
2
9)
a
Y
0 - m
C
0
..
v)
In
al
,.
a,
U
0
0
a
G
5
c
E
c
In
v)
w
.- C
v)
3
n
.c
0
9)
a
h
I-
C
c
..
al
C
0
c
v)
w
9)
x
- 0
?
w
c
0
L
0,
n
E
3
C
9)
c
.- 2 X
a
2
a
a

3
L'
-
Waste Minimization Program
Hazardous Waste. Minimization
Program Description
factsheet
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:
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 "ization 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 "ization 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.
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Hazardous Waste Minimization Program
~~

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.
Q
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
m -
-, Printed on Recycled Paper
PUBL-SW-152 9'

5
'd phone
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.
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
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 fii)
i
I
- Other (educator, consultant, government, etc) ,9320 (0th) I
H S340 PQGJ
I
I
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I

DNR Publications
2421 Darwin Road
Madison, WI 53704

3
- Waste Minimization Program
Pollution Prevention
Video Library -
factsheet
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.
Q
Hazardous Waste Minimization Program
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
P.O. Box 7921(SW/3)
- Madison, WI 53707
.pc
(608) 267-9523 or -
=a
(608) 267-3763
Printed on Recycled Paper PUBL-SW-156

L’
V
. o
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.
* Recently added publication
Wisconsin’s Waste! Minimization and
Pollution Prevention Programs
0 Hazardous Waste Minimization Program Description
@NR 2 pp) PUBL-SW-152 92
0 Pollution Prevention Program Summary (DNR, DOD,
SHWEC 1 p) 93
0 Technical Assistance & Waste Reduction Resources
UWExt-Madison Solid and Hazardous Waste Education
Center (SHWEC brochure) 92
0 Hazardous Pollution Prevention Audit Grant Program
@OD 2 PPI 91
0 Annual Govemor’s Award for Excellence in Hazardous
Waste Reduction (brochure) 92
0 Act 325, Legislation establishing Wisconsin’s Pollution
Prevention Program (5 pp) 90
0 ** Wate.Less.News, most recent newsletter from the
DNR’s Hazardous Waste Minimization Program (4-8 pp)
0 Pollution Prevention and Waste Minimization Workshop
and Training Opportunities (2 pp) 93
Pollution Prevention: Information Clearinghouses
** Wisconsin Pollution Prevention Information
Clearinghouse Publications Order Form (6 pp)
PUBL-SW-199 8/93
0 Wisconsin Pollution Prevention Video Library (2 pp)
PUBL-SW-156 92
0 Great Lakes Technical Resource Library (UWEX SHWEC
2 pp) 1992
0 PIES Quick Reference
Guide (EPA 4 pp) 92
** Recently revised publication
0 PIES: Pollution Prevention Information Exchange System
(EPA brochure) 92
0 PPIC: Pollution Prevention Information Clearinghouse
(EPA brochure) 92
Wisconsin Program Management Reports
0 Research Report II: Personal Interviews with Hazardous
Waste Generators: Summary and Analysis (25 pp) PUBL-
MB-004 92
0 Research Report 111: Information: Sources, Desired Types
and Formats (19 pp) PUBL-MB-005 8/92
0 Research Report IV: Hazardous Waste Generator Contacts
with the DNR (19 pp) PUBL-MB-006 8/92
0 Research Report V: Bamers and Incentives to Hazardous
Waste Reduction (56 pp) PUBL-MB-007 8/92
0 Report to the Legislature on Pollution Prevention Activities
in Wisconsin (20 pp) 91
0 Wisconsin Hazardous Waste Minimization Chapter,
Hazardous Waste Capacity Assurance Plan (9 pp) PUBL-
SW-107 89
Setting Up a Company Program
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 Facility Pollution Prevention Guide (EPA 143 pp)
600/R-92/088 92
o * Understanding Pollution Prevention Assessments (VWEX
SHWEC 2 pp) 4/93
0 ** The 33/50 Program: Forging an Alliance For Pollution
Prevention (EPA brochure) 741-K-92-00192
0 Achievements in Source Reduction and Recycling-10 U.S.
Industries (EPA 60 pp) 600/2-91/05191
0 Corporate Environmental Policies Package (EPA PPIC 40
PPI 91
0 Operating Procedures, Waste Reduction Opportunity
Checklist (WI DNR 3 pp) 89
0 Pollution Prevention = Pure Profit (WI DNR 8 pp)
PUBL-TS-009 93
0 Pollution Prevention: Make it Work for You-Model Policy
(WI DNR 2 pp) PUBL-TS-004 90
0 Pollution Prevention: Make it Work for You-Checklist (WI
DNR 2 pp) PUBL-TS-005 90
0 Profiting from Waste Reduction in Your Small Business,
(AK Health Project 46 pp) 88
0 Strategic Waste Minimization Initiative (SWAMI) Software
and Guide Order Form @PA 1 p) 93
0 Waste Mmtion: Environmental Quality with
Economic Benefits, (EPA 34 pp) 90
0 Waste Reduction Assessment and Technology Transfer:
Training Manual 2nd ed. (Univ of TN 486 pp) 90
Equipment Manufacturers & Consultants
Many of these fact sheets include an qdanation of the
equipment, purchasing guidelines and a list of manufacturers.
0 Activated Carbon Adsorbers for On-Site Recovery (WI
DNR 5 pp) PUBL-SW-145 91
0 Agitated Thin Film Evaporators for On-Site Recovery (WI
DNR 4 pp) PUBL-SW-146 91
0 Aqueous Industrial Cleaning Chemicals (WI DNR 7 pp)
PUBL-sw-147 91
.o Aqueous Parts Washing Equipment (WI DNR 6 pp)
PUBL-SW-148 91
0 ** High Volume Low Pressure Equipment (WI DNR 4 pp)
PUBL-sw-149 93
0 Membrane Filtration: Microfiltration, Ultrafiltration and
Rev. Osmosis. (MnTap 5 pp) 91
0 * On-Site Anti-Freeze Recycling and Reconditioning (WI
DNR 2 pp) 6/93
0 Onsite Solvent Recovery Stills (WI DNR 7 pp) PUBL-
SW-150 91
0 * Used Oil Filter Crushing Machines (Wl DNR 1 p) 4/93
0 Environmental consultants with Hazardous waste
Minimidon Services (WI DNR 2 pp) 90
Waste Exchanges & Recycling Markets
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 (4 pp) 7/93
0 Oil Filters (2 pp) 6/93
0 Precious Metals (7 pp) 7/93
0 Solvents (1 p) 7/93
Solid Waste Recycling
0 Financial and Technical Assistance Available to Recycling
Programs and Businesses. @OD, DNR, WHEDA 6 pp)
91
0 Recycling and Waste Reduction Information and Education
Publ. Order Form (WI DNR 2 pp) PUBL-IE-138 93
0 Recycling and Waste Reduction Tech Assistance Publ.
Order Form (WI DNR 2 pp) PUBL-SW-334 4/93
0 Solid Waste Reduction and Recycling Demonstration
Grants (WI DNR 2 pp) 5/92
0 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
& DNR 4 pp)
0 Safe at Home: rediscovering cleaning solutions from a
bygone era (DNR, UWEX & CBE 4 pp) 91
Management
0 Clean Sweep Grant Program Requirements (WI DNR
4 pp) PUBL-SW-036 85
0 Haz. Waste in Your Home: Here’s what you should do!
(WI DNR 2 pp) PUBL-WW-003 89
0 Household Hazardous Waste Collection: Bibliography in
Brief (UWEX 3 pp) 89

Pollution Prevention In formation Clearinghouse: Publications Order Form 3
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
89
0 Hazardous Waste Training Records (2 pp) PUBL-SW-099
89
0 Land Disposal Restrictions (6 pp) PUBL-SW-105 89
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
to YOU CaPY (1 PI 92
Special Hazardous Waste Guidance
0 ** Consumer Battery Recyclers (WI DNR 4 pp)
PUBL-sw-203 93
0 Fluoresceat Lamps and Incandescent Bulbs (2 pp)
PUBL-sw-195 93
Used Oil Management ReqUirements
0 Used Oil Management (12 pp) 93
0 Recycle Used Oil (4 pp) PUBL-E-105 2/91
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)
PUBL-SW-202 6/93
0 WisconSin Licensed Transporters for Hazardous Waste List
(6 pp) 12/92
0 Wisconsin Licensed Commercial TSD’s List (1 p) 12/92
0 Transpoe Survey Results, hazardous waste transporters
for small quantity generators (1 1 pp) 87
Other Environmental Regulations
0 Air Management Regulations Publications Order Form (2
PP) 1/92
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.
Coating & Painting
0 Coating and Painting, Waste Reduction Opportunity
Checklist (WI DNR 3 pp) 89
0 In Living Color: Painting Challenges for the ’90s (Univ of
TN 80 pp) 91
0 Metal Parts Coating Plant (EPA Waste Minimization
Assessment Brief 4 pp) 600/M-91/015 91
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)
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

Pollution Prevention In formation Clearinghouse: Publications Order Form 4
0 The Cool Facts on Recycling Metalworking Coolants (MA
OTA 4 pp)
Parts Cleaning
0
0 Replacing CFCs with Aqueous Cleaners, GE Medical
Systems (WI DNR Pollution Prevention Case Study 4 pp)
PUBL-SW-169 92
0
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 Chlorinated Solvents with Aqueous Cleaners for
Parts Cleaning, Briggs and Stratton (WI DNR Pollution
Prevention Case Study 4 pp) PUBL-SW-162 92
0 Using Plastic Media Blasting to Strip Paint from Parts,
Gehl Company (WI DNR Pollution Prevention Case Study
4 pp) PUBL-SW-165 92
Solvent Reduction
0 Alternatives to Solvents: Degreasing for the 90's (UWEX
smc 212 pp) 93
0 The Good, the Bad and the Banned: Solvent Reduction.
(Univ of TN 80 pp) 91
0 Guidelines for Waste Reduction and Recycling: Solvents.
(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
SIC 2700: Printing and Publishing Industry
0 The Commercial Printing Industry (EPA Pollution
Prevention Guide 45 pp) 625/7-90/008 90
0 Cleaning, Opportunity Checklist (WI DNR 4 pp) 89
CFC Alternatives newsletter: City of Irvine, CA.
Aaueous Cleaning - Semi-Aqueous
(2igi) 0 Cleaning-(7/91)
0 Labeling for Products Made with Ozone Depleting
Substances (UWEX SHWEC 2 pp) 93
0 Metal Parts Cleaning-Waste Minimization (EPA 50 pp)
530/SW-89/049 89
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
pp) __ 600/2-9 1 /05 1 9 1
0 Manufacturer of Printed Labels (EPA Waste Minimization
Assessment Brief 4 pp) 600/M-91/047 91
0 Printing. (NJ EPA 12 pp) 91
0 The Printing Industry, Waste Reduction Guidebook (OR 35
0 Reduction of Total Toxic Organic Discharges and VOC
Emissions from Using Plastic Media Blasting (EPA Project
PPI 91
SIC 2800: Chemical Manufacturhg Industry
Su"arY 8 PPI 87
0
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
Minimization Assessment 4 pp) 600/M-91/017 91
SIC 3300: Primarv Metals Industrv
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
60 PPI 91
SIC 3400: Fabricated Metal Products
0 Aluminum Cans Manufacturer (EPA Waste Minimization
Assessment Brief 4 pp) 600/M-91/025 91
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
PPI 91
0 The Fabricated Metal Products Industry (EPA Pollution
Prevention Guide 58 pp) 625/7-90/006 90
0 Metal Casting and Heat Treating Industry (EPA Pollution
Prevention Guide 70 pp) 625/R-92/009 9/92
0 Metal Finishing, Electroplating, Printed Circuit Board
Manufacturing, excerpt (OR 35 pp) 91
,

7
LJ
Pollution Prevention In formation Clearinghouse: Publications Order Form 5
0 The Metal Finishing Industry (EPA Pollution Prevention
Guide 69 pp) 625/R-92/011 10/92
0 Recycling a Rinsewater Stream Using Ultrafiltration and
Ion Exchange, Snapon Tools (WI DNR Pollution
Prevention Case Study 4 pp) PUBL-SW-166 92
0 References: Pollution Prevention and the Metal Finishing
Industry (NC DNR 38 pp)
SIC 3600: Electronics & other Electric Equipment Industry
0 Printed Circuit Board Industry (EPA Waste Minimization
Case Studies S v 8 pp) 600/S2-88/008 88
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
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
Prevention Guide 46 pp) 625/R-92/008 9/92
SIC 3800/3900: Instruments & Mist, Mfg. Industries
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
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 Miniation
Assessment 4 pp) 600/S2-91/039 91
0 The Photoprocessing Industry (EPA Pollution Prevention
Guide 61 pp) 62617-911012 91
SIC 7500: Vehicle Maintenance Industry
0 The Auto Repair Industry (EPA Pollution Prevention
Guide 47 pp) 62517-911013 91
0 The Automotive Refinishinn Industry (EPA Pollution
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
0 Madison Area Technical College (WI Waste Minimization
Opportunity Assessemnt 22 pp) 91
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

Pollution Prevention In formation Clearinghouse: Publications Order Form 6
Name
Waste Reduction Tips for Local Government (AK 10 pp)
References: Pollution Prevention and Local Government
(2 PPI 93
Organization
Address
City state Zip
Bone Type of Industry
Have you ordered publications from the clearinghouse before?
Do you currently d v e Waste*Less*News?
How did you hear about the clearinghouse?
EPA ID No. (optional to help avoid duplicate mailings)
Notes:
PUBL-SW-199 8/93
Please we this space to request additional information or to
give us your comments:
-Ye - no -
-Ye - no -
Unsure
Unsure

7
SECTION 8
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

1-l
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, Gmt 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 Fmkh 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.
Miller,
HWRIC; Illinois Department of Eneqyand Natural Resoums; One East Hazehvd Dr.,
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 Won, 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.
Wed, 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 Gmt Lakes Industries and Director
and Liaison to the Comd of Gmt 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