Toxics Use Reduction Institute RI Workshop: Tools for TCE Substitution Hands-On Training from the TURI Lab Jason Marshall – Laboratory Director Heidi Wilcox

Toxics Use Reduction Institute

RI Workshop:Tools for TCE Substitution

Hands-On Training from the TURI LabJason Marshall – Laboratory Director

Heidi Wilcox – Research Associate

March 14, 2008CCRI-Warwick Knight CampusWarwick, RIFunding from EPA Region 1

Workshop Agenda

• 8:30 - 9:00 Registration and Refreshments

• 9:00 - 9:05 Introduction & Overview • 9:05 - 9:15 Choosing an Alternative• 9:15 - 9:25 Past TCE Work• 9:25 - 9:35 Success Stories from RI• 9:35 - 10:15 Other Resources Available • 10:15 - 10:20 Break• 10:20 - 12:25 Hands-on Cleaning• 12:25 - 12:30 Next Steps

Introduction & Overview

• TURI

• EPA Region 1

• NBC

• RI DEM

• RI DOH

TURI-Lab

• www.turi.org/laboratory– Information on cleaning basics– Past projects– Capabilities of lab– Future workshops - projects– Database link

• www.cleanersolutions.org

Choosing an Alternative

• Don’t shift the risk– From worker to environment

OR

– From environment to worker• Ex. Replacing flammable solvent with a ozone

depleting chemical

• Want to select a product that is safer for one or the other– Would be best if safer for both

What are Indicators at TURI’s Lab?

• The lab uses five criteria for screening products– Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)– Global Warming Potential (GWPs)– Ozone Depletion Potential (ODPs)– Hazardous Material Information System/

National Fire Protection Association (HMIS/NFPA)

– pH

Why These Five Indicators?

• Worker Health & Safety– VOC, HMIS, pH

• Environmental Safety– VOC, GWP, ODP, pH

Guidelines

VOC content (g/l)

0-24 Good

25-49 Good

50-74 Okay

75-99 Okay

100-149 Okay

150-199 Fair

200-299 Fair

300 Poor

>350 Poor

GWP Values

GWP = 0 Good

GWP = 1 (CO2) Okay

All others = Poor

ODP Values

ODP = 0 Good

All others = Poor

GuidelinespH

0-1.0 Poor

1.1-2.4 Poor

2.5-2.9 Fair

3.0-4.0 Okay

4.1-5.9 Okay

6.0-6.4 Good

6.5-7.5 Good

7.6-8.9 Good

9.0-9.9 Okay

10-11.4 Okay

11.5-11.9 Fair

12-12.4 Poor

12.5-12.9 Poor

13-14 Poor

HMIS/NFPA Point AssessmentH-0 F-0 R-0 Good

H-0 F-0 R-1, H-0 F-1 R-0 Good

H-1 F-1 R-0, H-2 F-0 R-0 Good

H-1 F-1 R-1, H-2 F-1 R-0 Okay

H-3 F-0 R-0 Poor

H-2 F-2 R-0, H-1 F-2 R-1 Okay

H-1 F-3 R-0 Poor

H-2 F-2 R-1 Fair

H-1 F-3 R-1, H-2 F-3 R-0 Poor

H-2 F-2 R-2 Fair

H-3 F-3 R-0 Poor

H-3 F-3 R-1, H-3 F-3 R-2 Poor

Example Screening Values

• Solvent

• Alkaline Aqueous

Product Name Indicator Value Comments

Perchloroethylene VOC 1620g/l Poor

GWP 0 Good

ODP 0 Good

HMIS H 2

HMIS F 0 Okay

HMIS R 0

pH NA Good

Product Name Indicator Value Comments

Brulin Formula 815 GD

VOC 1.1 g/l Good

GWP 0 Good

ODP 0 Good

HMIS H 1

HMIS F 0 Good

HMIS R 0

pH 11.6 Okay

Find a Safer, Effective Alternative

• CleanerSolutions Database – Used to identify safer and effective products

• Safety Scores– VOC, ODP, GWP, HMIS/NFPA, pH

• Matching Performance– Contaminant, substrate, equipment, current solvent

CleanerSolutions

• How it works - http://www.cleanersolutions.org

Search

Results

Past TCE Work

• TURA Work in MA

• EPA Grant in MA

• EPA Funding in RI

TURA Work in MA

• SSL Testing (1993-2003)– Worked with 21 companies trying to replace

TCE in cleaning applications– A wide range of industries were represented

• Aircraft• Electronics• General Mfr• Metal working• Optical• Plating

Contaminants Removed

• Conducted over 100 experiments• 11 Contaminant types

– Abrasives– Buffing Compounds– Coatings– Fluxes– Grease

– Inks– Paints– Cutting Fluids– Lubricants– Oils– Waxes

Previous Testing for TCE Replacement

• Abrasive – 1 Company in semi-conductor industry

• Ceramics parts for a company that manufactures parts for the

• Buffing compound – 2 Companies

• Metal working shop• Light manufacturer

– Brass and silver parts• Coatings

– 1 Company - tool manufacturing– Steel surfaces– Immersion

Previous Testing for TCE Replacement (cont.)

• Flux– 1 company manufactured brass bellows – Flux removal

• Grease

– 2 Companies• Musical instrument manufacture

• Tool maker

– Brass, ceramics & steel parts– Immersion and/or ultrasonic energy

Previous Testing for TCE Replacement (cont.)

• Paint/Ink– 2 companies

• Ceramic capacitor/electronics manufacturer• Tool maker

– Plastic bottles and steel pieces– Immersion

• Oil – 8 companies– Steel, carbon steel, stainless steel, aluminum, brass and ceramics – Immersion, ultrasonic and mechanical agitation

• Wax– 4 companies

• Electronics• Metal working

– Aluminum, brass, ceramics, copper, glass and steel surfaces– Manual wiping, immersion and /or ultrasonic energy

Summary of Alternatives Testing to TCE

• 21 Vendors

• 44 Products

• 11 Product Types

Class # of Products

Alkaline Aqueous 23

Caustic 1

Ester 3

HCFC 1

Neutral Aqueous 2

Organic 1

Petroleum Distillate 3

Semi-Aqueous 2

Terpene 5

Terpene-Organic 1

Terpene-Semi-Aqueous 2

EPA Grant to Replace TCE & Chlorinated Solvents

• Two year grant - 2003-2005– Conducted with MA Office of Technical Assistance– Help small companies move away from TCE &

chlorinated solvents in vapor degreasing• Work focused on drop-in substitutes

– Due to capital investment of large closed looped systems

– Gathered EH&S data for• TCE and other chlorinated solvents• The chemical classes of the substitutes for comparisons

– Article in Process Cleaning Magazine on Drop In Alternatives

• Sept/Oct issue• http://www.processcleaning.com/

SSL Testing (2003-2005)

• 8 companies trying to replace TCE/ Chlorinated Solvents in cleaning applications– Six joint site visits by OTA and TURI– Two site visits by TURI

• A wide range of industries are represented by these companies– Aircraft– Electronics-Ceramic– Jewelry– Metal working job shops– Tool – Capacitors– Wire & Cable

Contaminants Removed

• Conducted over 70 experiments• 8 Contaminant types

– Buffing– Coating– Grease– Ink/Paint– Mold Release/Silicone– Oil– Resin/Rosin– Waxes

Testing for TCE/Chlorinated Solvent Replacement

• Buffing compound – Removal had been conducted for brass parts for ornament

industry• Coating

– Cleaning trials conducted for a metal job shop and a tool manufacturer

• Grease– Testing performed for the electronic/ceramics manufacturer

• Ink/Paint– Trials run for the electronic/ceramics manufacturer and the

tool mfr

Testing for TCE/Chlorinated Solvent Replacement

• Mold Release/Silicone– Worked with a wire and cable manufacturer

• Oil– Testing conducted for a jewelry manufacturer, a capacitor

company, aircraft component manufacturer and the tool manufacturer

• Resin/Rosin– Worked with a wire & cable manufacturer

• Waxes– Testing performed for the electronic/ceramics manufacturer

EPA Funding in RI 2006-8

• Workshop Fall 2006– Worked with 13 companies– On-site testing for 6

• Second Grant 2007-8– Worked with 4 so far– Plus all of you…

Success Stories from RI

• Types of Parts Cleaned

• IRA Green

• Three A’s

Alternative Tested

Parts CleanedPart

descriptionContaminant

removedProcess

US Polychem Corporation Polyspray Jet 790 XS

Brass bracketBuffing compound

Ultrasonic


Brass rifle pinBuffing compound

Ultrasonic


Thin brass buckle

Buffing compound

Ultrasonic

RI Parts Cleaned

RI Parts Cleaned


Brass dog tags

Buffing compound

Ultrasonic


Carbon Steel dog tags

Buffing compound

Ultrasonic

US Polychem Corporation Polyspray Jet 790 XS Brass belt

buckleBuffing compound

Ultrasonic

Alconox Inc Detergent 8

Hubbard Hall Inc Ultrasoak 127

Brass Army pins

Buffing compound

Low Pressure Spray; Ultrasonic




Brass Army pins

Buffing compound




RI Parts Cleaned

RI Parts Cleaned


Brass Army pins

Buffing compound





Brass U.S. Army pins

Buffing compound




RI Parts Cleaned

Micro Care Heavy Duty Degreser C

Brass Parts

Buffing compound

Vapor Degreasing

Kyzen Corporation Metalnox M6960

DuPont Vertrel XP 10

Petroferm Inc Lenium CP

Warren Chemical Company Sea Wash Blue

Steel Parts

Oil Ultrasonics


Nickel, Chrome

Buffing compound

Ultrasonics

RI Parts Cleaned

Bio Chem Systems Bio T Max

Stainless steel parts

Buffing Compound

Ultrasonics

Bio Chem SystemsSolsafe 245

Dynamold Solvents Inc DS 104

Kyzen CorporationOptisolv OP 7168

Solvent Kleene Inc D Greeze 500 LO

Ira Green - Background

• 270 employees - Products consist of metal pieces for the DoD – Military unaware of TCE use in metal finishing

operations

• Used 12,500 pounds of TCE in 2004• When EPA contacted Ira Green, the company

was very close to exceeding permit limitations• Already had enforcement action against them

by the RI DEM 2003 and 2004

Ira Green – Finding an Alternative

• EPA collected parts for TURI to test

• Set up a test tank in Ira Green’s facility– Determined that alternative solution works

as well as TCE– TURI provided free gallon of alternative

solution

Ira Green Summary

• One product line completely converted to aqueous cleaning

• Installed additional soap cleaning tanks in plating area• Have done enough hands on shop floor testing to

know they can effectively clean 95-100% of all products

• Now working through the logistics, material handling, and queue/work in process issues to make a total conversion

• Critical to process – Clean as soon as possible after polishing– Very concerned about drying, watermarks or staining

Contact Ira Green

• Gary Eich– 401-467-4770 x113 – [email protected]

Three A’s - Background

• Small, family-owned job shop – 4 employees

• Owner wanted to stop using TCE because of associated health risks

• Used approximately 55

gallons (~690 pounds)/ year at a cost of about $1000

Three A’s – Finding an Alternative

• EPA collected parts for TURI to test• Needed to find an alternative process that

would maintain an antique finish on metal parts

• An alternative was found that will allow Three A’s to retrofit current degreaser with an immersible transducer, saving money on equipment costs

• Switched to a Steam Cleaner– Eliminating TCE from their plant

Contact Three A’s

• Alfred Mekuto III– 930 Plainfield St, Johnston, RI 02919– 401-944-8600

Overall TCE Reduction

• All Companies from 1993-2008– 46 companies– Used 297,300 lbs– Reduced 195,200 lbs– 66%

• RI 2006-7– Used 24,500 lbs– Estimated reduction

12,500 lbs– 51% reduction

• RI 2007-8– Used 16,500 lbs– Estimated reduction

11,100 lbs– 67% reduction

Other Resources Available

• RI DEM

• NBC

• RI DoH

• EPA– How-to-Guide– nPB information

• DoD

Break

• Grab some coffee while we get set up for the fun stuff…

Hands-on Cleaning

• Product Selection Based On– Contaminant removal– Substrate compatibility– Equipment compatibility

• Use CleanerSolutions.org or Vendor Literature

Successful Products Previously Tested

• Buffing Compound– Magnaflux Daraclean 283– US Polychemical Polyspray

Jet 790 XS– Oakite Inproclean 3800– Buckeye XL 100– Matchless Metal Polish Co.

MC 132– Matchless Metal Polish Co.

Buffclean 14L, 125L and 175– Alconox Detergent 8– Magnaflux Daraclean Kx 43

• Oils– Magnaflux Daraclean 283– US Polychemical Polyspray Jet

790 XS– Oakite Inproclean 3800– Brulin Aquavantage 1400– International Products Surface

Cleanse 930– Warren Chemical Sea Wash

Blue

Testing Process

• Establish Baseline– Measure how effective your current process is– Compare the alternatives

• Test the Alternatives– Dilutions to use– Hot or cold– Equipment– Time– Rinsing– Drying

Four Phases of Process

• Phase 1 Testing Chemistry Only– No mechanical energy

• Phase 2 Add Mechanical Energy– Use best cleaners

Four Phases of Process

• Phase 3 Piloting – Lab Setting– Clean supplied parts

using best products

• Phase 4 Piloting On-site– Set up cleaning process

at your facility and compare directly with current process

Next Steps

• Sign up for lab testing– Arrange for soils and part pickup

• Sign up for on-site testing– Schedule a visit with TURI

Documents

Toxics Use Reduction Institute RI Workshop: Tools for TCE Substitution Hands-On Training from the TURI Lab Jason Marshall – Laboratory Director Heidi Wilcox