Document ID: EPA-HQ-RCRA-2003-0004-0004
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2003-08-20T04:00Z

Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

1
Economics
Background
Document
Estimate
of
National
Economic
Impact
for
Conditional
Exclusion
of
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
from
RCRA
Hazardous
Waste
Regulation
US
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Office
of
Solid
Waste
Economics,
Methods
&
Risk
Analysis
Division
1200
Pennsylvania
Avenue,
NW
(
Mailstop
5307W)
Washington,
DC
20460
USA
(
703)
308­
8615
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
osw
17
July
2003
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

2
Preface
This
document
was
prepared
by
Mark
Eads,
Economist,
of
the
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
OSW)
Economics,
Methods,
and
Risk
Analysis
Division
(
EMRAD),
based
in
part,
on
a
20
August
2000
initial
economic
study
prepared
by
Northbridge
Environmental
Management
Consultants
(
319
Littleton
Road,
Suite
208,
Westford,
MA
01886,
(
978)
392­
9665),
as
subcontractors
to
Science
Applications
International
Corporation,
under
USEPA
Contract
68­
W98­
025,
Work
Assignment
2­
5.
Jim
O'Leary,
Program
Analyst
in
OSW's
Hazardous
Waste
Identification
Division,
was
work
assignment
manager
for
the
initial
economic
study.
Stephanie
Carroll,
a
chemical
engineering
undergraduate
student
from
the
University
of
Arizona,
and
2001
summer
intern
with
EMRAD,
provided
research
assistance
for
the
industrial
wipes
price
elasticity
meta­
analysis,
which
is
applied
in
this
document
for
simulation
of
potential
impacts
of
the
proposed
RCRA
exclusions,
on
the
US
national
market
for
industrial
wipes.
The
USEPA's
Office
of
Water
previously
evaluated
some
aspects
of
the
use
and
handling
of
industrial
wipes
in
the
US
economy,
with
a
focus
on
evaluating
pollutants
contained
in
wastewater
discharges
from
industrial
laundries.
The
Office
of
Water
conducted
its
evaluation
under
different
regulatory
authority
than
the
proposed
RCRA
regulatory
exclusions
evaluated
in
this
Economics
Background
Document.
Information
about
the
Office
of
Water's
prior
regulatory
investigation
of
industrial
laundries
is
provided
at
the
USEPA
website
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
ost/
guide/
laundry,
and
at
Industrial
Safety
and
Hygiene
News
("
Industrial
Shop
Towels:
Pollutant
or
Solid
Waste?",
Aug
1998,
p.
27,
http://
www.
ishn.
com/
ishn/
cda/
articleinformation/
features/
bnp__
features__
item/
0,2162,2602,00.
html).
Some
information
about
industrial
laundries
in
this
document
is
borrowed
from
the
USEPA's
March
2000
economic
report
in
support
of
the
Office
of
Water's
regulatory
evaluation
(
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
waterscience/
guide/
laundry/
final/
economics.
pdf).
The
Office
of
Management
&
Budget
(
OMB)
reviewed
a
draft
of
this
background
document
during
their
90­
day
review
period
completed
on
23
July
2003,
according
to
the
procedures
set­
forth
in
White
House
Executive
Order
12866
"
Regulatory
Planning
&
Review"
(
30
Sept
1993;
http://
www.
whitehouse.
gov/
omb/
inforeg/
eo12866.
pdf).
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

3
Table
of
Contents
I.
Introduction
to
Economic
Analysis
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
4
I.
A.
Overview
of
Proposed
RCRA
Exclusions
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
4
I.
B.
Scope
of
Economic
Analysis
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
5
I.
C.
Economic
Impact
Elements
of
the
Proposed
RCRA
Exclusions
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
7
I.
D.
Overview
of
US
Industrial
Wipes
Market
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
13
I.
E.
Summary
Count
of
Potentially
Affected
Establishments
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
14
II.
Findings
of
Economic
Analysis
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
15
II.
A.
Annualized
Direct
Impacts
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
15
II.
B.
First­
Year
Direct
Impacts
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
20
II.
C.
Other
Benefits
of
Proposed
Exclusions
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
23
II.
D.
Benefit­
Cost
Comparison
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
25
II.
E.
Potential
Direct
Impacts
of
Other
Regulatory
Options
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
26
II.
F.
Sensitivity
Analysis
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
31
II.
G.
Induced
Market
Impacts
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
35
II.
H.
Small
Business
Impacts
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
38
II.
I.
Other
Factors
Potentially
Affecting
Economic
Impacts
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
40
II.
J.
Analytic
Baseline
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
53
III.
Description
of
US
Industrial
Wipes
Market
&
Potentially
Affected
Establishments
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
55
III.
A.
Overview
of
Industrial
Wipes
in
the
US
Economy
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
55
III.
B.
Types
of
Establishments
Potentially
Affected
by
the
Proposed
RCRA
Exclusions
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
60
III.
C.
Types
of
Industries
Which
Use
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
62
IV.
Attachments
(
Tables
&
Spreadsheets)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
76
IV.
A.
Supplemental
Data
Set
A:
Count
of
Establishments
&
Count
of
Industrial
Wipes
Data
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
77
Set
B:
Industrial
Laundry
Data
(
establishments
which
supply
"
reusable"
industrial
wipes)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
103
Set
C:
Industrial
Cleaning/
Degreasing
Solvent
Data
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
120
Set
D:
Price­
Elasticity
of
Demand
for
Industrial
Wipes:
Meta­
Analysis
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
128
IV.
B.
Impact
Estimation
Spreadsheet
Model
Print­
Outs
Set
E:
Direct
Impact
Elements
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
137
Set
F:
Induced
Market
Impacts
(
partial
equilibrium
market
model)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
177
Set
G:
Small
Business
Impacts
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
185
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

1
The
United
States
"
Code
of
Federal
Regulations"
(
CFR)
is
published
by
the
Office
of
the
Federal
Register,
National
Archives
and
Records
Administration
(
NARA).
The
CFR
is
an
annual
codification
of
the
general
and
permanent
rules
published
daily
in
the
Federal
Register
(
FR)
by
the
Executive
departments
and
agencies
of
the
Federal
Government.
The
CFR
is
divided
into
50
titles
which
represent
broad
topic
areas
subject
to
Federal
regulation.
Title
40
of
the
CFR
is
"
Protection
of
Environment",
and
contains
USEPA's
regulations.
The
CFR
is
kept
up­
to­
date
by
the
individual
daily
issues
of
the
Federal
Register,
and
each
volume
of
the
CFR
is
updated
annually.
Full
text
of
the
CFR
and
the
FR
are
available
at
NARA's
website:
http://
www.
nara.
gov/
fedreg
or
at
the
US
Government
Printing
Office's
website:
http://
www.
access.
gpo.
gov/
nara
.

2
The
USEPA's
"
RCRA
Orientation
Manual"
(
report
nr.
EPA­
530­
R­
98­
004,
May
1998,
290
pages),
contains
descriptive
information
about
the
USEPA's
hazardous
waste
program
and
regulations,
as
authorized
by
Congress
in
Subtitle
C
of
the
1976
Resource
Conservation
and
Recovery
Act
(
RCRA).
Hardcopies
of
the
Manual
are
available
to
the
public
by
calling
the
National
Service
Center
for
Environmental
Publications
(
8980­
490­
9198);
an
electronic
copy
is
available
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
epaoswer/
general/
orientat/
index.
htm
.
Further
information
about
RCRA,
and
about
the
the
USEPA's
Office
of
Solid
Waste,
is
also
available
from
the
RCRA
Public
Information
Center
Hotline
(
800­
424­
9346
or
via
the
Internet
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
epaoswer/
hotline
),
and
on
USEPA's
Office
of
Solid
Waste
website
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
osw
.

3
The
current
delegation
of
regulatory
status
from
Federal
RCRA
to
state
governments
for
solvent­
contaminated
wipes,
is
based
on
the
policy
determinations
described
in
a
23
Jan
1991
letter
from
the
EPA's
Office
of
Solid
Waste
former
Director
(
Sylvia
K.
Lowrance),
to
Lance
R.
Miller,
Director,
New
Jersey
DEP
Hazardous
Waste
Management
Division,
as
well
as
in
a
14
Feb
1994
memorandum
from
EPA's
OSW
Director
(
Michael
Shapiro),
to
EPA's
regional
waste
management
directors.
Prior
to
1991,
EPA
received
three
petitions
for
excluding
both
disposable
and
reusable
wipes
from
RCRA
hazardous
waste
regulation
(
1985
Kimberly­
Clark
Corp;
1987
Scott
Paper
Co.;
1987
Alliance
of
Textile
Care
Associations).
On
20
May
1992
(
57
FR
21450,
21473­
74),
EPA
proposed
a
rule
which
would
exclude
solvent­

4
I.
Introduction
to
Economic
Analysis
I.
A.
Overview
of
Proposed
RCRA
Exclusions
EPA's
Office
of
Solid
Waste
is
proposing
a
new
Federal
exclusion
from
RCRA
regulations,
which
will
potentially
affect
industrial
facilities
that
generate
and
handle
solvent­
contaminated
wipes,
rags,
and
shop
towels.
These
classes
of
products
are
collectively
named
"
industrial
wipes"
in
this
study.
The
proposed
exclusions
will
constitute
a
new
subpart
in
Part
261
of
Title
40
of
the
Code
of
Federal
Regulations
(
CFR).
1
Under
EPA's
current
RCRA
hazardous
waste
regulations2,
industrial
wipes
contaminated
with
any
of
the
following
three
classes
of
RCRA
hazardous
wastes,
also
become
RCRA
hazardous
wastes:

!
RCRA­
listed
solvents:
One
or
more
of
37
different
chemical
solvents
listed
under
RCRA
hazardous
wastecodes
F001­
F005
(
40
CFR
261.31),
!
RCRA­
listed
chemicals:
Comparable
P­
and
U­
listed
commercial
chemical
products
that
are
spilled
and
cleaned
up
with
industrial
wipes,
and
!
RCRA­
characteristic
solvents:
Solvents
exhibiting
a
hazardous
characteristic
(
i.
e.
D001
ignitability,
D002
corrosivity,
D003
reactivity,
or
D004
to
D043
toxicity
leaching
as
defined
at
40
CFR
261
Subpart
C),

Solvent­
or
other
RCRA­
waste
contaminated
wipes
would
otherwise
be
managed
according
to
the
RCRA
Subtitle
C
"
cradle­
to­
grave"
hazardous
waste
management
requirements
(
40
CFR
260
to
270).
However,
current
EPA
Federal
policy
(
as
of
1991)
is
to
defer
the
determination
of
the
RCRA
regulatory
status
of
industrial
wipes
to
EPA
regional
offices
and
to
State
governments.
3
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

contaminated
industrial
wipes
from
RCRA
regulation
based
on
visible
contamination
and
ignitability,
toxicity
or
reactivity
exclusion
criteria.
EPA
withdrew
the
proposed
rule
on
30
Oct
1992
(
57
FR
49280).

4
For
example,
(
1)
the
State
of
Ohio
issued
Guidance
No.
DHWM­
007
in
1994
"
Solvent­
Contaminated
Rags
And
Wipers",
which
classified
solvent­
contaminated
disposable
industrial
wipes
as
hazardous
wastes,
and
solvent­
contaminated
reusable
industrial
wipes
as
conditionally­
excluded
from
the
definition
of
solid
waste
(
http://
www.
epa.
state.
oh.
us/
dhwm/
guidsolr.
htm);
(
2)
the
State
of
Oregon
Dept
of
Environmental
Quality
issued
a
"
Hazardous
Waste/
Toxic
Reduction
Policy
Clarification"
on
03
May
1996
to
the
Uniform
&
Textile
Service
Assoc,
stating
"...
this
exemption
applies
only
to
rags
or
wipers
which
are
laundered
for
reuse
and
meet
the
above
conditions
[
no
free
liquids,
closed
transport
containers
with
labels,
and
3
other
conditions].
If
those
rags
or
wipers
are
disposed,
treated
prior
to
disposal,
or
do
not
meet
any
of
the
above
conditions,
they
weill
be
considered
a
solid
waste
and
be
subject
to
waste
determination
and
applicable
hazardous
waste
regulations."
(
http://
www.
deq.
state.
or.
us/
wmc/
hw/
policy/
1996­
LM­
001.
html).

5
The
proposed
new
regulation
would
essentially
codify
current
state
government
policies
regarding4:

!
Disposable
industrial
wipes:
Conditionally
exclude
from
40
CFR
261.3
RCRA
definition
of
hazardous
waste;
state
governments
now
regulate
disposable
wipes
contaminated
with
RCRA­
listed
and
RCRAcharacteristic
(
e.
g.
ignitable)
hazardous
waste
spent
solvents
as
hazardous
waste,

!
Reusable
industrial
wipes:
Conditionally
exclude
from
40
CFR
261.4
RCRA
definition
of
solid
waste;
state
governments
now
conditionally­
exclude
solvent­
contaminated
reusable
wipes
from
hazardous
waste
regulation,
if
the
wipes
contain
no
free
liquids
and
will
be
sent
to
a
commercial
laundry
for
cleaning
and
reuse
provided
that
generators
manage
wipes
in
accordance
with
certain
exclusion
conditions
.
The
proposed
exclusions
do
not
apply
to
industrial
wipes
contaminated
with
solvents
that
when
spent
are
not
hazardous
wastes
under
RCRA
regulations.
The
Federal
Register
announcement
of
the
proposed
RCRA
exclusions
provides
a
detailed
description
of
the
proposed
conditions.
To
reduce
reader
burden,
this
"
Economics
Background
Document"
does
not
duplicate
that
description
but
provides
a
simplified
summary
of
the
conditions.

I.
B.
Scope
of
Economic
Analysis
Element
Description
of
Scope
Element
Affected
Facilities:
Estimation
of
the
number
of
respective
wipes
used
and
the
number
of
solvent­
contaminated
industrial
wipes
"
generators"
(
i.
e.,
facilities
which
use
wipes
in
conjunction
with
solvents,
thereby
generating
solvent­
contaminated
wipes),
and
any
other
types
of
entities
subject
or
potentially
affected
by
the
proposed
exclusions;
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

Element
Description
of
Scope
Element
6
Potential
Economic
Impacts:
Translate
the
conditions
for
the
proposed
exclusions
into
particular
types
of
affected
facility
implementation
activities,
equipment
or
other
incremental
changes
in
business
practices,
which
a
typical
facility
is
expected
to
require
to
become
eligible
for
and
maintain
a
regulatory
exclusion,
relative
to
the
current
"
baseline"
(
i.
e.
relative
to
the
current
regulatory
status
of
affected
generators
and
other
wipes
handlers,
and
to
their
respective
current
solvent
wipes
use
and
spent
wipes
management
practices):

!
Direct:
Estimation
of
potential
"
direct"
regulatory
compliance
impacts
(
i.
e.,
economic
costs
and
cost
savings)
for
the:
!
Proposed
exclusions
(
main
proposal);
and
!
Alternative
regulatory
options
described
in
the
Federal
Register
announcement.

!
Induced:
This
study
also
includes
estimation
of
potential
"
induced"
market
effects
on
the
relative
price
of
reusable
and
disposable
industrial
wipes,
and
on
their
respective
marketshare
in
the
US
national
economy,
for
the
main
proposal
(
not
the
options).
Direct
impacts
may
translate
into
a
change
in
the
relative
unit
cost
(
i.
e.
life
cycle
unit
cost)
of
the
two
types
of
industrial
wipes
(
disposables
and
resusables),
which
may
induce
a
marginal
shift
in
respective
national
annual
usage
marketshare,
depending
upon
the
"
price­
elasticity
of
substitution"
between
disposable
and
reusable
wipes
(
i.
e.,
sensitivity
of
wipes
users
to
changes
in
the
relative
life
cycle
unit
cost
of
the
two
types
of
industrial
wipes).

Small
Business
Impacts:
A
relatively
large
proportion
of
the
facilities
in
each
of
the
potentially
affected
industries
are
small
businesses.
This
study
evaluates
the
net
effect
of
both
direct
and
induced
impacts
on
each
industry,
and
on
small
businesses
in
particular,
for
the
main
proposal
(
not
the
options).

Sensitivity
Analysis:
For
purpose
of
comparison
to
the
"
most­
likely"
key
parameter
settings
applied
as
impact
estimation
factors,
this
document
presents
the
impact
estimation
results
according
to
alternative
combinations
of
numerical
values
(
i.
e.
uncertainty
ranges)
assigned
to
15
key
parameters,
to
reflect
information
uncertainty.
The
sensitivity
analysis
includes
three
alternative
cases
(
i.
e.
combination
sets
of
numerical
assumptions
for
key
parameters),
designed
to
produce
an
overall
range
in
economic
impact
estimate
from
low
to
high,
respectively:
!
"
Lower­
bound":
Lowest
estimate
of
number
of
entities
impacted,
as
well
as
minimum
unit
values
&
quantities.
!
"
Most­
likely":
"
Best
judgement"
settings
for
key
variables
(
which
do
not
necessarily
represent
the
mid­
point
between
the
lower­
and
upper­
bound).
!
"
Upper­
bound":
Highest
estimate
of
number
of
entities
impacted,
as
well
as
maximum
unit
values
&
quantities.
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

Element
Description
of
Scope
Element
5
Generators
of
solvent
contaminated
wipes
will
retain
the
option
of
managing
their
disposables
in
full
compliance
with
RCRA
Subtitle
C
hazardous
waste
management
requirements
(
i.
e.
40
CFR
260
to
270),
in
lieu
of
the
proposed
exclusions.

7
Other
proposed
regulatory
options
In
addition
to
the
proposed
conditions
for
the
exclusion,
this
document
provides
an
estimate
of
the
potential
economic
impacts
associated
with
regulatory
options
described
in
the
Federal
Register
announcement
of
the
proposed
rule.
There
are
two
main
alternative
regulatory
options
(
approaches),
as
well
as
at
least
one
alternative
option
for
each
of
the
major
conditions
for
the
proposed
exclusion.

I.
C.
Economic
Impact
Elements
of
the
Proposed
Regulatory
Exclusion
EPA's
proposal
would
amend
the
hazardous
waste
management
regulations
under
RCRA
and
formally
codify
a
conditional
exclusion
from
RCRA
regulations
for
solvent­
contaminated
industrial
wipes.
The
exclusion
would
be
granted
if
users
and
handlers
of
solventcontaminated
industrial
wipes
maintain
certain
"
conditions"
as
summarized
in
the
following
table.
In
comparison
to
hypothetical
full
compliance
with
the
existing
RCRA
Subtitle
C
hazardous
waste
regulations
(
40
CFR
260
to
299),
EPA's
proposed
exclusions
potentially
offer
annual
net
cost
savings
to
solvent­
contaminated
wipes
generators
and
spent
wipes
handlers.
For
example,
sources
of
cost
savings
compared
to
full
RCRA
Subtitle
C
compliance
are:

!
Spent
wipes
reporting:
Avoidance
of
the
costs
for
RCRA
hazardous
waste
activity
notification,
waste
management
permitting,
and
waste
transport
manifesting
paperwork
requirements
for
generating
and
managing
spent
solvent
industrial
wipes,
and
!
Spent
wipes
management:
Lower
costs
associated
with
non­
hazardous
waste
management
alternatives,
compared
to
managing
solvent­
contaminated
spent
industrial
wipes
at
RCRA
Subtitle
C
permitted
hazardous
waste
management
facilities.

However,
there
are
potential
implementation
costs
for
complying
with
the
conditions
of
the
proposed
regulatory
exclusion,
which
are
expected
in
part
or
in
whole
for
some
facilities,
to
offset
the
magnitude
of
savings
compared
to
hypothetical
full
RCRA
compliance
costs.
Because
such
implementation
costs
are
relatively
modest
in
magnitude,
compared
to
the
potential
full­
compliance
cost
savings,
we
assumed
in
this
study
that
all
eligible
spent
industrial
wipes
generators
would
take
advantage
of
the
proposed
exclusions,
and
only
considered
a
sensitivity
analysis
range
in
the
percentage
of
states
(
i.
e.
50%,
75%,
or
100%)
which
may
adopt
the
exclusions
after
USEPA
promulgates
them
as
a
final
rule.
5
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

8
Summary
of
Proposed
Conditions
for
RCRA
Exclusions
of
Solvent­
Contaminated
Industrial
Wipes
Item
Exclusion
Condition
Conditions
for
RCRA
Exclusions
Disposable
Wipes
(
exclusion
from
RCRA
definition
of
hazardous
waste)
Reusable
Wipes
(
exclusion
from
RCRA
definition
of
solid
waste)

1
Applicable
(
potentially
eligible)
solvents
!
Exclusion
would
not
apply
to:
 
11
specific
RCRA
F­
listed
chemical
solvents
(
any
%
blends
involving
these
solvents)
 
wipes
contaminated
with
other
RCRA
characteristically
hazardous
wastes
(
e.
g.
metals
or
RCRA­
listed
chemicals)
!
Exclusion
potentially
applies
to:
 
19
specific
RCRA
F­
listed
chemical
solvents
(
and
corresponding
P­
and
U­
listed
commercial
chemical
products)
 
ignitable­
only
(
D001)
characteristically
hazardous
solvents
!
All
RCRA­
listed
hazardous
solvents
2
Containers
for
onsite
accumulation
of
solvent
wipes
!
Accumulate
in
non­
leaking
covered
containers
!
Accumulate
in
non­
leaking
covered
containers
!
Must
recycle
75%
of
spent
wipes
in
calendar
year
3
Containers
for
spent
solvent
wipes
transportation
!
Transport
in
non­
leaking
&
non­
evaporative
loss
containers
"
designed,
constructed
and
managed
to
minimize
loss
to
the
environment":
 
covered
drums
(
sealed
drums
not
required)
if
meet
above
if
meet
above
performance
standard
 
cinched
plastic
or
cinched
cloth
bags
if
meet
above
performance
standard
 
comply
with
USDOT
packaging
49
CFR
173.212
4
Labels
for
transport
containers
!
Label
all
transport
containers
with
"
Excluded
Solvent­
Contaminated
Wipes"
!
RCRA
labels
not
required
on
containers
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

Item
Exclusion
Condition
Conditions
for
RCRA
Exclusions
Disposable
Wipes
(
exclusion
from
RCRA
definition
of
hazardous
waste)
Reusable
Wipes
(
exclusion
from
RCRA
definition
of
solid
waste)

9
5
Pre­
transport
preparation
of
spent
solvent
wipes
to
meet
"
no
free
liquids"
!
Either:
!
If
transport
for
(
a)
disposal
in
municipal
or
other
combustion
unit**,
or
(
b)
intermediate
processing
to
meet
"
dry"
standard
(
i.
e.
<
5
grams
(
i.
e.
less
than
0.175
ounces)
solvent
per
wipe),
spent
wipes
and
transport
containers
must
meet
"
no
free
liquids"
condition
(
i.
e.
contain
no
dripping
wipes
and
no
solvents
at
bottom
of
container)
!
If
transport
for
disposal
at
non­
haz
waste
landfill**,
spent
solvent
wipes
must
meet
"
dry"
condition
(
i.
e.
less
than
five
grams
solvent
per
wipe)
by
either:
 
spent
wipes
solvent
centrifuge/
extraction
 
business
records
on
solvent
&
wipes
monthly
use
to
show
under
"
dry"
threshold
 
spent
wipes
solvent
sampling
to
show
under
threshold
!
Removed
spent
solvents
must
be
managed
as
hazardous
wastes*
!
Containers
meet
"
no
free
liquids"
(
i.
e.
contain
no
dripping
wipes
and
no
solvents
at
bottom
of
container)
!
Removed
spent
solvents
must
be
managed
as
hazardous
wastes
if
RCRA­
listed
or
characteristic
hazardous*
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

Item
Exclusion
Condition
Conditions
for
RCRA
Exclusions
Disposable
Wipes
(
exclusion
from
RCRA
definition
of
hazardous
waste)
Reusable
Wipes
(
exclusion
from
RCRA
definition
of
solid
waste)

10
6
Intra­
company
transfers
of
spent
solvent
wipes
to
remove
"
free
liquids"
!
May
transport
wipes
containing
"
free
liquids":
 
if
store/
accumulate
in
covered
containers
 
if
transport
in
non­
leaking
&
non­
evaporative
loss
containers
 
if
containers
are
RCRA­
labeled
 
if
within
the
same
company
 
if
receiving
facility
uses
solvent
recovery
process
 
if
recovered
solvents
sold
on
market
for
reuse
or
managed
as
hazardous
waste*
!
May
transport
wipes
containing
"
free
liquids":
 
if
store/
accumulate
in
covered
containers
 
if
transport
in
non­
leaking
&
nonevaporative
loss
containers
 
RCRA
labels
not
required
 
if
within
the
same
company
 
if
receiving
facility
uses
solvent
recovery
process
 
if
recovered
solvents
sold
on
market
for
reuse
or
managed
as
hazardous
waste*

7
Transfer
spent
solvent
wipes
to
offsite
handler
to
remove
"
free
liquids"
Same
as
item
6
Same
as
item
6
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

Item
Exclusion
Condition
Conditions
for
RCRA
Exclusions
Disposable
Wipes
(
exclusion
from
RCRA
definition
of
hazardous
waste)
Reusable
Wipes
(
exclusion
from
RCRA
definition
of
solid
waste)

11
8
Subsequent
off­
site
management
of
spent
solvent
wipes
after
transport
!
Wipes
containers:
Store
spent
solvent
wipes
received
in
non­
leaking
&
non­
evaporative
covered
containers
!
Wipes
disposal:
 
If
spent
wipes
are
"
dry"
and
contaminated
with
any
of
19
specific
F­
listed
solvents,
may
be
disposed
in
municipal
or
other
non­
haz
waste
landfill**.
 
If
spent
wipes
meet
"
no
free
liquids"
standard,
may
be
disposed
at
municipal
waste
combustor**,
or
transported
for
processing
to
meet
"
dry"
standard.
 
If
receive
spent
wipes
containers
with
"
free
liquids"
either:
 
return
containers
(
with
wipes
and
liquids)
to
generator
ASAP
(
but
not
need
a
haz
waste
manifest)
 
recover/
manage
"
free
liquids"
as
hazardous
waste*
!
Wipes
containers:
Store
spent
solvent
wipes
received
in
non­
leaking
&
non­
evaporative
covered
containers
!
Wipes
processing
(
laundering):
 
May
launder
spent
wipes
meeting
"
no
free
liquids"
standard.
 
If
receive
spent
wipes
containers
with
"
free
liquids"
either:
 
return
containers
(
with
wipes
and
liquids)
to
generator
ASAP
(
but
not
need
a
haz
waste
manifest)
 
recover
&
manage
"
free
liquids"
as
hazardous
waste*

9
Compliance
recordkeeping
!
Comply
with
existing
RCRA
documentation
requirements
(
40
CFR
261.2(
f))
for
demonstration
of
exclusion
eligibility
from
RCRA
regulation
(
which
requires
providing
appropriate
documentation
such
as
business
contracts
that
the
material
is
not
a
waste).***

10
Other
possible
impacts
!
Read,
disseminate
&
assess
compliance
requirements
of
exclusions
!
Possible
reduction
in
annual
state
fees/
taxes
paid
for
generating
&
managing
spent
solvent
wipes
(
note:
state
fee
impacts
are
a
type
of
"
transfer
effect",
not
a
"
real
resource
economic"
effect).
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

Item
Exclusion
Condition
Conditions
for
RCRA
Exclusions
Disposable
Wipes
(
exclusion
from
RCRA
definition
of
hazardous
waste)
Reusable
Wipes
(
exclusion
from
RCRA
definition
of
solid
waste)

12
Explanatory
Notes:
(
a)
The
USEPA's
Office
of
Solid
Waste
RCRA
hazardous
waste
program
defines
"
free
liquids"
as
"
liquids
which
readily
separate
from
the
solid
portion
of
a
waste
under
ambient
temperature
and
pressure"
(
40
CFR
260.10).
(
b)
*
Spent
solvent
"
free
liquids"
must
be
managed
as
RCRA
hazardous
waste
if
the
spent
solvent
is
a
40
CFR
261.31
RCRA­
listed
hazardous
waste,
or
if
it
is
a
40
CFR
261
Subpart
C
RCRA­
characteristic
hazardous
waste.
As
of
1997,
there
were
over
46
RCRA
hazardous
waste
management
facilities
(
LQGs)
which
received
spent
solvent
hazardous
waste
from
offsite
sources
for
solvent
recovery
onsite,
according
to
the
following
solvent
recovery
technologies
(
source:
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste,
1997
Hazardous
Waste
"
Biennial
Report"
database
query
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
enviro/
html/
brs/
brs_
query.
html):
Type
of
solvent
recovery
technology
Facilities
Nr.
states
!
Solvent
fractionation/
distillation
(
M021)
46
22
!
Thin
film
solvent
evaporation
(
M022)
26
10
!
Solvent
extraction
(
M023)
11
10
!
Other
solvent
recovery
(
M024/
M029)
16
12
(
c)
**
Non­
hazardous
waste
facilities
in
the
US:
as
of
year
1999
there
are
an
estimated
(
source:
"
Size
of
the
United
States
Solid
Waste
Industry",
R.
W.
Beck
&
Chartwell
Information
Publishers,
Environmental
Research
&
Education
Foundation,
March
2001,
Table
7,
p.
19):
!
3,500
active
material
recovery/
recycling
facilities
!
3,200
active
municipal
solid
waste
landfills
!
3,100
active
solid
waste
transfer
stations
!
140
active
solid
waste
combustion/
incineration
facilities
(
d)
***
USEPA
RCRA
compliance
protocols
(
guidance)
are
available
at:
!
For
non­
hazardous
solid
waste
generator
facilities:
"
Protocol
for
Conducting
Environmental
Compliance
Audits
of
Facilities
Regulated
Under
Subtitle
D
of
RCRA",
USEPA
Office
of
Enforcement
Compliance
&
Assurance
(
OECA),
EPA­
300­
B­
00­
001,
March
2000,
153
pages,
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
compliance/
resources/
policies/
incentives/
auditing/
rcradfi.
pdf
!
For
hazardous
solid
waste
generator
facilities:
"
Protocol
for
Conducting
Environmental
Compliance
Audits
for
Hazardous
Waste
Generators
Under
RCRA",
USEPA
Office
of
Enforcement
Compliance
&
Assurance
(
OECA),
EPA­
305­
B­
01­
003,
June
2001,
178
pages,
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
compliance/
resources/
policies/
incentives/
auditing/
hazardous.
pdf
(
regulatory
requirement
HW.
10.2
on
page
26
provides
a
checklist
for
documenting
that
a
particular
material
is
not
a
solid
waste
or
is
exempt
from
hazardous
waste
regulation).
!
For
hazardous
solid
waste
treatment,
storage,
disposal,
recycling
facilities:
"
Protocol
for
Conducting
Environmental
Compliance
Audits
of
Treatment,
Storage
and
Disposal
Facilities
Under
the
Resource
Conservation
&
Recovery
Act",
USEPA
Office
of
Enforcement
Compliance
&
Assurance
(
OECA),
EPA­
305­
B­
98­
006,
Dec
1998,
246
pages,
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
compliance/
resources/
policies/
incentives/
auditing/
rcra.
pdf
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

13
I.
D.
Overview
of
Industrial
Wipes
Market
US
Industrial
Wipes
Market
(
Year
2001)

Market
&
Affected
Sub­
Markets
Wipes
Quantities
Wipes
Facilities
(
Users
&
Handlers)

US
industrial
wipes
market
(
with
&
w/
out
solvents
applied)
9.6
billion
annual
wipes
uses
!
88%
reusables
(
8.5
billion
used)
!
12%
disposables
(
1.1
billion
sold)
471,000
users
(
i.
e.
spent
wipes
generators)
!
13
economic
sub­
sectors
(
see
next
table)
!
83%
small
company
facilities
!
15%
printers
+
85%
non­
printers
1,200
industrial
laundries
supply
reusables
!
$
408
million/
year
revenues
from
resusables
!
47%
small
company
facilities
Solvent
industrial
wipes
sub­
market
(
CESQGs+
SQGs+
LQGs)
3.8
billion
wipes
per
year
(
40%
of
US
industrial
wipes
market)
215,000
users
+
handler
facilities
Portion
of
industrial
wipes
sub­
market
potentially
affected
(
only
SQGs+
LQGs)
2.8
billion
wipes
per
year
(
33%
of
US
industrial
wipes
market
!
2.55
billion
reusables
used
!
259
million
disposables
sold
68,000
to
164,000
users
+
handler
facilities
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

14
I.
E.
Summary
Count
of
Potentially
Affected
Establishments
Economic
Sub­
Sectors
Which
Use
or
Otherwise
Handle
Industrial
Wipes
Item
Sub­
Sector
2001
Estimate
of
All
Establishments*
(
by
NAICS
code)
2001
Estimate
of
Establishments
(
SQGs
+
LQGs)
Using
RCRA
Solvent
Wipes
&
Potentially
Eligible
for
the
Exclusions**

Lower­
bound
Most­
Likely
Upper­
bound
A.
Count
of
Establishments
(
Facilities)
Which
Use
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
(
i.
e.
spent
wipes
generators***):

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Printing
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
Plastics
&
Rubber
Fabricated
Metal
Products
Industrial
Machinery
&
Equipment
Electronics
&
Computers
Transportation
Equipment
Furniture
&
Fixtures
Automobile
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
Business
Services
(
copy
shops)
Automobile
Repair
&
Maintenance
Military
Bases
41,600
13,700
17,900
63,800
31,100
6,600
13,900
21,100
51,900
23,600
6,400
179,300
560
18,700
1,100
1,400
4,900
2,400
550
1,100
1,600
4,000
10,600
2,900
13,500
50
31,200
1,900
2,400
8,600
4,100
1,000
2,000
2,800
7,000
17,700
4,800
23,500
90
42,000
2,900
3,700
13,000
6,300
1,500
3,000
4,300
10,700
23,600
6,400
35,900
130
Column
sub­
totals
=
471,000
63,000
107,000
153,000
B.
Count
of
Establishments
Which
Otherwise
Handle
Spent
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes:

14
Industrial
Laundries
(
reusable
wipe
suppliers)
1,175
590
(
if
50%
states)
880
(
if
75%
states)
1,175
(
if
100%
states)

15
Solid
Waste
Management
facilities
10,600
5,300
(
ibid)
8,000
(
ibid)
10,600
(
ibid)

Column
totals
=
482,000
68,900
115,800
164,800
Explanatory
Notes:
(
a)
*
Items
1­
13
based
on
1997
Census
count,
updated
by
OSW
using
the
15­
year
average
annual
percentage
change
in
the
Industrial
Production
Index
(
IPI)
for
1986
to
2000;
items
14
&
15
from
the
1997
Census
without
update.
(
b)
**
"
Lower­
bound",
"
Most­
likely"
and
"
Upper­
bound"
in
this
document
represent
uncertainty
about
(
a)
numerical
values
for
key
estimation
parameters
applied
in
this
study,
and
(
b)
the
percentage
of
states
which
will
likely
adopt
the
exclusions
(
i.
e.
50%,
75%,
and
100%
states,
respectively).
(
c)
***
Counts
of
spent
wipes
generators
in
this
table
only
includes
facilities
which
are
potentially
classifiable
as
RCRA
"
large
quantity
generators"
(
LQGs)
or
as
"
small
quantity
generators"
(
SQGs),
excluding
facilities
potentially
classifiable
as
"
conditionally­
exempt
small
quantity
generators"
(
CESQGs),
based
on
the
average
calendar
month
quantity
of
spent
solvent
generation
associated
with
industrial
wipes
applications.
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

15
II.
Findings
of
Economic
Analysis
II.
A.
Annualized
Direct
Impacts
of
Main
Regulatory
Proposal
The
following
table
summarizes
the
"
direct
impact"
elements
of
the
proposed
exclusions
(
i.
e.
the
main
proposal,
not
the
options),
as
quantified
and
monetized
in
this
report.
Direct
impacts
are
defined
as
the
economic
costs
of
implementation
activities
and
requirements
that
eligible
or
otherwise
affected
entities
(
i.
e.
entities
eligible
and
subject
to
the
proposed
exclusion
conditions)
are
expected
to
incur
in
compliance
with
the
proposed
exclusions.
Direct
impacts
may
occur
in
the
initial
year
following
finalization
of
the
proposed
exclusions,
as
well
as
in
subsequent
years
on
an
annual
recurring
basis.
As
indicated
in
the
table,
some
elements
are
expected
to
impact
some
users/
handlers
differentially,
according
to
type
of
industrial
wipe
(
i.
e.
reusable
or
disposable
wipe),
because
of
differences
in
the
current
spent
wipes
management
practices
 
as
a
result
of
current
state
regulations
 
between
generators
of
spent
reusable
wipes,
compared
to
generators
of
spent
disposable
wipes.

Summary
of
Annualized
Direct
Impact
Elements:
Estimated
Potential
Incremental
Costs
and
Cost
Savings
to
Solvent­
Contaminated
Industrial
Wipes
Generators
&
Handlers
for
Compliance
With
the
Proposed
Exclusions
!
Estimates
Below
Based
on
"
Most
Likely"
Uncertainty
Parameter
Settings
!
Dollar
Impacts
in
Parentheses
Below
(
i.
e.
Negative
Costs)
Denote
Cost
Savings
or
Other
Economic
Benefits
Item
Direct
Impact
Element
Potential
Average
Annualized*
Impact
($/
year)
on
Spent
Wipes
Generators
&
Other
Handlers**

Disposable
Wipes
Reusable
Wipes
Net
Impact
(
row
totals)

1.
Wipes
solvent
eligibility
1A.
Determine
eligibility
(
i.
e.
read/
disseminate
scope,
applicability
&
conditions
of
exclusions)
Solvent
wipes
generators
>
$
58,000
$
774,000
$
832,000
Other
handlers
(
e.
g.
solid
waste
mgmt,
laundries)>
$
13,000
$
4,000
$
17,000
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

Item
Direct
Impact
Element
Potential
Average
Annualized*
Impact
($/
year)
on
Spent
Wipes
Generators
&
Other
Handlers**

Disposable
Wipes
Reusable
Wipes
Net
Impact
(
row
totals)

16
1B.
Contact/
assess
RCRA
regulatory
status
of
reusable
wipes
customers
(
i.
e.
determine
solvent
types
applied
to
wipes)
Cost
to
laundries
>

Not
applicable
$
262,000
$
262,000
Cost
to
laundry
customers
>
$
218,000
$
218,000
2.
Onsite
wipes
containers
Covered
containers
for
on­
site
accumulation
of
spent
solvent
wipes
by
generators
(
assumes
purchase
of
steel
foot­
lever
closeable
solvent
wipes
canisters)
$
1,130,000
$
1,617,000
$
2,747,000
3.
Wipes
transport
containers
3A.
Closed
containers
for
spent
wipes
transport
If
tied
plastic
bags
>
If
closable
metal
drums
>
$
19,000
to
$
2,836,000
$
499,000
to
$
1,094,000
$
518,000
to
$
3,930,000
3B.
Avoided
RCRA
manifest
paperwork
for
spent
wipes
($
3,455,000)
$
0
(
baseline)
($
3,455,000)

4.
Transport
container
labels
Labels
for
wipes
transport
containers
&
labor
affix
cost
If
tied
plastic
bags
>
If
closable
metal
drums
>
$
61,000
to
$
80,000
Not
required
$
61,000
to
$
80,000
5.
Pretransport
preparation
of
wipes
5A.
Labor
cost
for
decanting
accumulation
containers
$
22,000
$
6,201,000
$
6,223,000
5B.
Haz
waste
mgt
cost
for
decanted
solvents
Manifest
&
transport
>
$
0
(
include
on
manifest
&
truck
with
other
wastes)

If
fuel
blender
>
If
solvent
recycler#
>
$
8,000
to
($
6,000)
$
2,873,000
to
($
2,326,000)
$
2,881,000
to
($
2,332,000)

5C.
Wipes
sampling
to
meet
"
dry"
standard
(
sampling
not
required;
may
use
business
records
or
extraction***
).
$
69,000
Not
applicable
$
69,000
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

Item
Direct
Impact
Element
Potential
Average
Annualized*
Impact
($/
year)
on
Spent
Wipes
Generators
&
Other
Handlers**

Disposable
Wipes
Reusable
Wipes
Net
Impact
(
row
totals)

17
6.
Intracompany
transfers
Intra­
company
transfers
of
spent
wipes
containing
"
free
liquids",
for
recovery
&
management
of
solvent
as
haz
waste
$
4,000
to
$
146,000
Not
expected
if
laundries
control
wipes
handling
&
distribution
$
4,000
to
$
146,000
7.
Transfers
to
offsite
handler
Transfer
to
an
intermediate
handling
facility
(
another
company)
to
remove
&
manage
"
free
liquids"
as
haz
waste
$
4,000
to
$
146,000
$
4,000
to
$
146,000
8.
Offsite
management
of
wipes
Subsequent
off­
site
management
of
spent
solvent
wipes
(
and
"
free
liquids")
after
transport
8A.
Avoided
Subtitle
C
disposal
of
spent
wipes
($
32,971,000)
Not
applicable
($
32,971,000)

8B.
Labor
for
decanting
percolated
"
free
liquids"
$
10,000
$
121,000
$
131,000
8C.
Manage
percolated
"
free
liquids"
as
haz
waste
Manifest
&
truck
>
$
0
(
remain
onsite)
$
1,514,000
$
1,514,000
If
fuel
blender
>
If
solvent
recycler#
>
$
10,000
to
($
8,000)
$
187,000
to
($
151,000)
$
197,000
to
($
159,000)

9.
Compliance
recordkeeping
9A.
Demonstrate
RCRA
exclusion
to
inspectors
(
per
40
CFR
261.2(
f))
Cost
to
wipes
generators>
$
3,000
$
33,000
$
37,000
Cost
to
other
handlers
>
$
152,000
<$
1,000
$
152,000
Cost
to
state
agencies>
$
52,000
$
380,000
$
432,000
9B.
Avoided
RCRA
paperwork
costs
to
SQGs
that
may
become
CESQGs
($
784,000)
$
0
(
baseline)
($
784,000)
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

Item
Direct
Impact
Element
Potential
Average
Annualized*
Impact
($/
year)
on
Spent
Wipes
Generators
&
Other
Handlers**

Disposable
Wipes
Reusable
Wipes
Net
Impact
(
row
totals)

18
Sub­
total
annualized
implementation
impacts
(
items
1
to
9;
range
reflects
low­
cost
and
high­
cost
options,
respectively)
=
($
32.5)
to
($
35.6)
million/
year
$
9.1
to
$
15.3
million/
year
($
17.2)
to
($
26.5)
million/
year
Potential
fraction
of
reusable
wipes
impacts
incurred
by
industrial
laundries
(
range
reflects
low­
cost
options
of
1A+
1B+
3A+
4+
5B+
8B+
8C+
9A,
to
if
also
include
item
5A
+
high­
cost
options,
respectively)
($
0.1)
to
$
12.3
million/
year
10.
Impact
on
state
government
annual
revenues
from
waste
fees****
($
29.7
to
($
41.0)
million/
year
($
2.4)
to
($
5.7)
million/
year
($
32.1)
to
($
46.7)
million/
year
11.
Other
potential
impacts
on
industrial
laundries
11A.
Cachet
benefit
to
industrial
laundries
from
avoided
waste
"
stigma"
for
reusable
wipes
Not
applicable
($
3.4)
to
($
6.9)
million/
year
11B.
Avoided
RCRA
Subtitle
C
paperwork
costs
to
industrial
laundries
(
under
alternative
baseline)
($
1.5)
to
($
3.0)
million/
year
11C.
Avoided
costs
for
managing
industrial
laundry
sludges
as
RCRA
"
derived­
from"
haz
wastes
(
under
alternative
baseline)
($
46
to
($
92)
million/
year
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

Item
Direct
Impact
Element
Potential
Average
Annualized*
Impact
($/
year)
on
Spent
Wipes
Generators
&
Other
Handlers**

Disposable
Wipes
Reusable
Wipes
Net
Impact
(
row
totals)

19
Explanatory
Notes:
(
a)
*
Annualized
impacts
include
both:
!
Initial
lump­
sum
impacts
in
first
implementation
year
after
final
rule
promulgation
(
e.
g.
equipment
purchase
costs),
plus
!
Net­
effect
of
recurring
annual
expenses
or
savings
(
e.
g.
equipment
operation
or
maintenance
costs).
(
b)
**
Other
handlers
=
Solid
waste
management
establishments
+
industrial
laundries
which
supply
reusable
industrial
wipes.
(
c)
***
Depending
upon
economy­
of­
scale
and
market
value
of
recovered
solvent,
the
cost
for
solvent
extraction
(
e.
g.
using
centrifugation)
of
solventcontaminated
wipes
may
be
a
relatively
more
expensive
option
for
many
industrial
wipes
generators,
compared
to
decanting
"
free
liquids".
However,
some
industrial
facilities
already
use
on­
site
centrifuge
technology
to
extract
spent
solvents
from
industrial
wipes.
For
example,
the
Printing
Industry
of
Minnesota,
Inc.
purchased
a
$
15,000
centrifuge
to
spin
its
reusable
industrial
wipes
before
sending
them
to
the
industrial
laundry,
extracting
2.5
to
3.5
gallons
of
spent
solvent
for
every
centrifuge
load
of
about
220
reusable
wipes.
The
company
reuses
the
captured
solvent,
thereby
saving
$
34,000/
year
from
avoided
purchase
of
one
drum/
week
of
virgin
solvent
(
source:
USEPA
Design
for
the
Environment:
Lithography
Project
Case
Study
No.
1,
Oct
1995,
4
pages,
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
opptintr/
dfe/
pubs/
lithography/
case_
studies/
case1/
lithocs1.
pdf).
(
d)
****
State
fee
impacts
represent
a
form
of
"
transfer
payment"
(
i.
e.
not
a
form
of
real
resource
economic
cost)
which
are
not
traditionally
included
(
combined)
with
estimates
of
"
real
resource"
costs/
savings,
in
a
national
economic
analysis
framework.
(
e)
#
Solvent
recycling
impact
estimated
by
subtracting
$
2.54/
gallon
unit
cost
for
solvent
recycling
(
average
for
onsite
&
offsite),
from
the
$
3.28/
gallon
US
median
solvent
price
to
reflect
$
0.74/
gallon
resale
(
reuse)
net
value
of
recycled
solvent;
$
1.73/
gallon
recycling
cost
represents
midpoint
between:
!
onsite
recycling
cost
of
$
1.00/
gallon
(
http://
rapidimaging.
com/
TSR/
TSR%
20R­
07%
20Platemaking%
20Productivity%
20for%
20Web.
pdf).
!
offsite
vendor
recycling
service
price
of
$
2.45/
gallon
(
http://
www.
iwrc.
org/
pubs/
IPPIMetal.
pdf),
and
$
4.16/
gallon
(
http://
www.
epaonline.
com/
enews.
html,
14
April
2003).
(
f)
##
Re­
containerization
costs
(
either
for
new
containers
if
initial
transport
containers
owned
by
generator,
and/
or
for
labor
if
using
consolidation
recontainerization
into
existing
20
cubic
yard
truck
roll­
offs),
and
associated
re­
containerization
labeling
costs,
estimated
for
both
intra­
company
transfer
(
item
6)
and
transfer
to
offsite
handler
(
item
7),
by
multiplying
wipes
transport
container
costs
(
item
3A)
and
wipes
transport
container
label
costs
(
item
4),
by
5%,
which
represents
assumption
that
5%
of
disposables
(
not
reusables)
may
be
transported
for
intra­
company
processing,
and
another
5%
of
disposables
(
not
reusables)
may
be
transported
to
an
offsite
handler
(
another
company).
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

20
II.
B.
Potential
First­
Year
Implementation
Impact
The
direct
impacts
in
the
table
above
are
"
average
annualized"
impacts,
consisting
of
the
sum
of
(
a)
single­
year
(
upfront
lump­
sum)
impacts
which
have
been
annualized
into
a
uniform
future
stream
according
to
the
"
equivalent
uniform
annual
cost"
(
i.
e.
equal­
paymentseries
"
capital
recovery
factor")
method,
plus
(
b)
annually­
recurring
impacts.
The
table
below
presents
the
potential
first­
year
(
lumpsum
impacts
without
annualization.

Summary
of
First­
Year
Direct
Impact
Elements:
Estimated
Potential
Incremental
Costs
and
Cost
Savings
to
Solvent­
Contaminated
Industrial
Wipes
Generators
&
Handlers
for
Compliance
With
the
Proposed
Exclusions
!
Estimates
Below
Based
on
"
Most
Likely"
Uncertainty
Parameter
Settings
!
Dollar
Impacts
in
Parentheses
Below
(
i.
e.
Negative
Costs)
Denote
Cost
Savings
or
Other
Economic
Benefits
Item
Direct
Impact
Element
Potential
First­
Year
Impact
on
Spent
Wipes
Generators
&
Other
Handlers**

Disposable
Wipes
Reusable
Wipes
Net
Impact
(
row
totals)

1.
Wipes
solvent
eligibility
1A.
Determine
eligibility
(
i.
e.
read/
disseminate
scope,
applicability
&
conditions
of
exclusions)
Spent
wipes
generators
>
$
439,000
$
5,815,000
$
6,254,000
Other
wipes
handlers
>
$
96,000
$
26,000
$
122,000
1B.
Contact/
assess
RCRA
regulatory
status
of
reusable
wipes
customers
(
i.
e.
determine
solvent
types
applied
to
wipes)
Cost
to
laundries
>

Not
applicable
$
735,000
$
735,000
Cost
to
laundry
customers
>
$
613,000
$
613,000
2.
Onsite
wipes
containers
Covered
containers
for
on­
site
accumulation
of
spent
solvent
wipes
by
generators
(
assumes
purchase
of
metal
foot­
lever
closeable
canisters)
$
5,694,000
$
8,146,000
$
13,840,000
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

Item
Direct
Impact
Element
Potential
First­
Year
Impact
on
Spent
Wipes
Generators
&
Other
Handlers**

Disposable
Wipes
Reusable
Wipes
Net
Impact
(
row
totals)

21
3.
Wipes
transport
containers
3A.
Closed
containers
for
spent
wipes
transport
If
tied
plastic
bags
>
If
closable
metal
drums
>
$
19,000
to
$
12,442,000
$
499,000
to
$
4,801,000
$
518,000
to
$
17,243,000
3B.
Avoided
RCRA
manifest
paperwork
for
spent
wipes
($
3,455,000)
$
0
(
baseline)
($
3,455,000)

4.
Transport
container
labels
Labels
for
wipes
transport
containers
&
labor
affix
cost
If
tied
plastic
bags
>
If
closeable
metal
drums
>
$
61,000
to
$
702,000
Not
required
$
61,000
to
$
702,000
5.
Pretransport
preparation
of
wipes
5A.
Labor
cost
for
decanting
accumulation
containers
$
22,000
$
6,201,000
$
6,223,000
5B.
Haz
waste
mgt
cost
for
decanted
solvents
Manifest
&
truck
waste
>
$
0
(
include
on
manifest
&
truck
with
other
wastes)

If
fuel
blender
>
If
solvent
recycler#
>
$
8,000
to
($
6,000)
$
2,873,000
to
($
2,326,000)
$
2,881,000
to
($
2,332,000)

5C.
Wipes
sampling
to
meet
"
dry"
standard
(
sampling
not
required;
may
use
business
records
or
extraction***)
$
520,000
Not
applicable
$
520,000
6.
Intracompany
transfers
Intra­
company
transfers
of
spent
wipes
containing
"
free
liquids",
for
recovery
&
management
of
solvent
as
haz
waste
$
4,000
to
$
657,000
Not
expected
if
laundries
control
wipes
handling
&
distribution
$
4,000
to
$
657,000
7.
Transfers
to
offsite
handler
Transfer
to
an
intermediate
handling
facility
(
another
company)
to
recover
&
manage
"
free
liquids"
as
haz
wastes
$
4,000
to
$
657,000
$
4,000
to
$
657,000
8.
Offsite
management
of
wipes
Subsequent
off­
site
management
of
spent
solvent
wipes
and
any
percolated
"
free
liquids"
after
transport
8A.
Avoided
Subtitle
C
disposal
of
spent
wipes
($
32,971,000)
Not
applicable
($
32,971,000)
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

Item
Direct
Impact
Element
Potential
First­
Year
Impact
on
Spent
Wipes
Generators
&
Other
Handlers**

Disposable
Wipes
Reusable
Wipes
Net
Impact
(
row
totals)

22
8B.
Labor
for
decanting
percolated
"
free
liquids"
$
10,000
$
121,000
$
131,000
8C.
Manage
percolated
"
free
liquids"
as
haz
waste
Manifest
&
truck
>
$
0
(
remain
onsite)
$
1,514,000
$
1,514,000
If
fuel
blender
>
If
solvent
recycler#
>
$
10,000
to
($
8,000)
$
187,000
to
($
151,000)
$
197,000
to
($
159,000)

9.
Compliance
recordkeeping
9A.
Demonstrate
RCRA
exclusion
to
inspectors
(
per
40
CFR
261.2(
f))
Cost
to
wipes
generators>
$
3,000
$
33,000
$
37,000
Cost
to
other
handlers>
$
152,000
<$
1,000
$
152,000
Cost
to
state
agencies>
$
52,000
$
380,000
$
432,000
9B.
Avoided
RCRA
paperwork
costs
to
SQGs
that
may
become
CESQGs
($
784,000)
$
0
(
baseline)
($
784,000)

Sub­
total
first­
year
implementation
impacts
(
items
1
to
9;
range
reflects
low­
cost
&
high­
cost
options,
respectively)
=
($
15.8)
to
($
30.2)
million
$
21.6
to
$
31.5
million
($
8.5)
to
$
15.7
million
Potential
fraction
of
reusable
wipes
impacts
incurred
by
industrial
laundries
(
range
reflects
low­
cost
options
of
1A+
1B+
3A+
4+
5B+
8B+
8C+
9A,
to
if
also
include
item
5A
+
high­
cost
options,
respectively)
$
0.4
to
$
16.5
million
Note:
for
explanatory
footnotes,
see
previous
table.
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

23
II.
C.
Other
Benefits
of
the
Proposed
Exclusions
Other
Potential
Benefits
of
the
Proposed
Rule
In
Addition
to
RCRA
Regulatory
Compliance
Burden
Reduction
Direct
Impact
Item
(
from
table
above)
Associated
Non­
Monetary
Benefit
Element
Disposable
Wipes
Reusable
Wipes
Row
Totals
A.
Environmental
&
Human
Health
Benefits:

Pre­
transport
preparation
of
spent
wipes
Solvent
"
free
liquids"
captured
by
decanting
from
accumulation
containers
32
tons/
year
(
8,300
gallons/
year)
12,270
tons/
year
(
3,146,000
gallons/
year)
12,300
tons/
year
(
3,154,000
gallons/
year)

Offsite
management
of
transported
spent
wipes
Solvent
"
free
liquids"
captured
by
decanting
from
transportation
containers
42
tons/
year
(
11,000
gallons/
year)
797
tons/
year
(
204,000
gallons/
year)
839
tons/
year
(
215,000
gallons/
year)

Column
totals
=
74
tons/
year
(
19,300
gallons/
year)
13,067
tons/
year
(
3.35
million
gallons/
year)
13,139
tons/
year***
(
3.37
million
gallons/
year)

Potential
human
health
benefit*
=
$
0.05
to
$
0.21
million/
year
$
8.0
to
$
36.2
million/
year
$
8
to
$
36.4
million/
year
B.
Fire
Safety
Benefits:

Structure­
related
fires
attributed
to
spontaneous
ignition
of
"
oily
wipes"**
$
0.04
to
$
1.1
million/
year
$
0.26
to
$
8.1
million/
year
$
0.3
to
$
9.2
million/
year
Total
other
benefits
(
A
+
B)
=
$
0.09
to
$
1.3
million/
year
$
8.3
to
$
44.3
million/
year
$
8.3
to
$
45.6
million/
year
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

24
Explanatory
Notes:
(
a)
*
In
addition
to
potential
annual
cost
savings
benefit
for
avoiding
future
purchases
of
virgin
solvents
if
captured
spent
solvent
"
free
liquids"
are
recycled,
the
potential
environmental
benefit
of
capturing
(
removing)
the
annual
solvent
quantities
displayed
in
this
table,
from
loading
either
into
the
air,
land,
or
surface
waters
(
via
evaporation/
volatilization,
spills/
leakages,
or
laundry
effluent
wastewaters,
is
not
monetized
in
this
table,
but
may
also
be
significant.
USEPA
is
targeting
the
national
reduction
in
urban
air
emissions
of
at
least
six
industrial
solvents
(
i.
e.
benzene,
carbon
tetrachloride,
chloroform,
methyl
chloride,
methylene
chloride,
tetrachloroethylene,
trichloroethylene,
and
27
other
chemicals)
that
present
the
greatest
threat
to
public
health
in
the
largest
number
of
US
urban
areas,
many
of
which
are
emitted
from
smaller
stationary
commercial
and
industrial
operations
("
National
Air
Toxics
Program:
The
Integrated
Urban
Strategy",
Federal
Register,
Vol.
64,
No.
137,
19
July
1999).
Many
chemical
solvents
are
volatile
organic
compounds
(
VOCs)
which
when
released
into
the
environment
may
become
precursors
to
formation
of
ground­
level
ozone.
For
example,
solvent
and
paint
VOCs
are
the
second
largest
contributor
(
18%)
to
ozone
pollution
in
the
four
county
region
surrounding
Los
Angeles,
with
on­
road
vehicles
(
49%),
trains/
planes
(
13%),
power
plants
&
other
fuel­
burning
industries
(
11%),
and
other
sources
(
9%);
source:
http://
www.
wastenews.
com,
09
April
2003.
For
purpose
of
monetization,
this
table
applies
a
unit
value
benefit
range
of
$
612
to
$
2,767
per
ton
(
1998$)
"
free
liquids"
solvent
captured,
which
is
the
unit
value
for
VOC
emissions
reduction
health
benefits
USEPA
applied
in
three
recent
rulemakings:
!
1997:
USEPA
Office
of
Air
&
Radiation,
"
Regulatory
Impact
Analyses
for
the
Particulate
Matter
and
Ozone
National
Ambient
Air
Quality
Standards
and
Proposed
Regional
Haze
Rule",
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
ttn/
oarpg/
naaqsfin/
ria.
html.
!
1998:
USEPA
Office
of
Water,
"
Environmental
Assessment
of
the
Final
Effluent
Limitations
Guidelines
and
Standards
for
the
Pharmaceutical
Manufacturing
Industry",
EPA­
821­
R­
B­
98­
008,
30
July
1998,
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
ost/
guide/
pharm/
econanal/
econanal.
pdf.
!
2000:
USEPA
Office
of
Water,
"
Effluent
Guidelines
for
the
Oil
and
Gas
Extraction
Point
Source
Category:
Proposed
Rule",
Federal
Register,
Vol.
65,
No.
78,
21
April
2000,
p.
21567,
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
waterscience/
guide/
sbf/
sbfnoda.
pdf.
In
comparison,
two
other
recent
(
2001
&
2002)
economic
studies
applied
a
range
of
$
340
to
$
2,000
per
ton
for
VOC
air
emission
reduction
health
benefits
(
http://
www.
tc.
gc.
ca/
programs/
environment/
urbantransportation/
transitstudies/
docs/
Cost­
Benefit.
pdf;
and
http://
www.
translink.
bc.
ca/
files/
mae_
report/
appendix_
airemission_
eval.
pdf).
(
b)
**
Source
for
"
oily
wipes"
fire
damages:
See
Section
V.
F
"
Damage
Cases
Associated
With
Solvent­
Contaminated
Industrial
Wipes"
of
the
Technical
Background
Document
identified
in
the
preamble
for
this
rulemaking.
OSW
derived
benefit
range
to
reflect
unknown
contributions
of
(
1)
solvent
"
free
liquids"
wipes
or
(
2)
"
no
free
liquids"
wipes,
to
annual
fire
damage
cases;
and
applied
the
relative
marketshare
(
88%
reusables:
to:
12%
disposables)
to
estimate
proporational
share
of
wipe
types
in
fire
damages
incidents:
!
Upper­
bound:
Spent
solvent
wipes
share
of
$
40.2
million/
year
damages
associated
with
"
oily
wipes"
(
from
source
document),
assigned
in
proportion
to
estimate
of
solvent
wipes
share
of
471,000
total
US
establishments
in
13
industrial
subsectors
using
industrial
wipes
with
&
without
RCRA
solvents
(
107,000/
471,000
establishments
=
23%).
!
Lower­
bound:
Assumes
that
only
3.5%
of
upper­
bound
damages
attributed
to
solvent
wipes,
which
represents
the
overall
average
percentage
of
wipes
containers
estimated
arriving
at
final
destinations
with
solvent
"
free
liquids".
(
c)
***
For
benchmarking,
this
estimated
quantity
of
solvent
"
free
liquids"
potentially
captured
in
closed
accumulation
and
transport
containers,
represents
13%
to
16%
of
the
estimated
82,000
to
103,000
tons/
year
of
solvents
applied
to
industrial
wipes.
Compared
to
25%
to
40%
solvent
evaporative
loses
(
i.
e.
20,500
to
41,200
tons/
year),
this
"
free
liquids"
capture
quantity
represents
potential
reduction
in
evaporative
loss
by
32%
to
64%,
if
non­
captured
"
free
liquids"
would
completely
evaporate
from
uncovered
containers.
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

25
II.
D.
Benefit­
Cost
Comparison
Comparison
of
Annualized
Benefits
of
Regulatory
Exclusions
to
Annualized
Direct
Implementation
Costs
for
Meeting
Exclusion
Conditions
Note:
numbers
in
parentheses
denote
benefits
or
cost
savings
Item
Impact
Indicator
Average
Annualized
Impacts
($
millions)

Disposable
Wipes
Reusable
Wipes
Net
Impact
(
row
totals)

1
Direct
implementation
costs
for
meeting
conditions
of
regulatory
exclusions
$
1.59
to
$
4.73
$
11.63
to
$
15.28
$
13.22
to
$
20.01
2
Regulatory
compliance
cost
savings
(
and/
or
solvent
capture
reuse
value)
resulting
from
conditional
exclusions
($
37.22)
($
2.48)
($
39.70)

3
Other
annualized
benefits
(
environmental,
human
health
&
fire
safety)
($
0.09)
to
($
1.3)
($
8.3)
to
($
44.3)
($
8.3
to
$
45.6)

4
Total
annualized
benefits
(
2
+
3)
=
($
37.3)
to
($
38.5)
($
10.8)
to
($
46.8)
($
48.0
to
$
85.3)

5
Net
effect
=
Net
benefits
(
4
­
1)
=
($
32.6)
to
($
36.9)
($
35.2)
to
$
4.5
($
28.0)
to
($
72.1)

6
Benefit­
cost
ratio
(
4
/
1)
=
7.9
to
24.2
0.7
to
4.0
2.4
to
6.5
Explanatory
Note:
The
annualized
direct
implementation
costs
(
item
1),
the
total
annualized
benefits
(
item
4),
and
the
net
annual
effect
(
item
5)
do
not
exceed
Executive
Order
12866'
s
$
100
million
"
annual
effect"
threshold,
so
the
proposed
exclusions
are
not
classifiable
as
an
economic
"
major
rule"
(
http://
www.
whitehouse.
gov/
omb/
inforeg/
eo12866.
pdf).
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

26
II.
E.
Potential
Direct
Impacts
of
Regulatory
Options
Alternative
Regulatory
Options
Described
in
the
Federal
Register
Announcement
for
the
Proposed
Exclusion
Direct
Impact
Element
Alternative
Regulatory
Option
Potential
Economic
Impacts
of
Regulatory
Options
Disposable
Wipes
Reusable
Wipes
1.
Wipes
solvent
eligibility
Provide
RCRA
hazardous
waste
exclusion
for
all
disposable
solventcontaminated
wipes
!
Removes
landfill
constraint
for
estimated
11%
of
solvent
wipes
under
main
proposal.
!
Increases
potential
annual
disposal
cost
savings
by
a
factor
of
1.12
(
i.
e.
100%
/
(
100%­
11%)).
Not
applicable
2.
Onsite
wipes
storage
containers
Rely
on
existing
OSHA
regulations
for
storing
flammable
or
combustible
liquids,
wastes,
residues,
in
covered
containers
or
tanks.
Real
resource
(
economic)
impact
same
as
main
proposal,
regardless
of
whether
RCRA
or
OSHA
regulations
cited.

3.
Wipes
transport
containers
Transport
in
impermeable
closed
(
sealed)
containers
!
Assume
"
sealed"
container
costs
are
similar
to
metal
drum
costs
estimated
for
main
proposal.
!
Sealed
containers
may
unintentionally
result
in
redistribution
of
free
liquid
management
costs
estimated
for
the
main
proposal,
from
spent
wipes
generators,
to
waste
management
facilities
(
disposal
wipes)
or
industrial
laundries
(
reusable
wipes),
if
free
liquids
form
from
solvent
condensation
or
solvent
gravity
flow
inside
containers,
after
generator
seals
containers
prior
to
transporting
off­
site.

4.
Wipes
transport
container
labels
Do
not
require
a
RCRA­
specific
label
Eliminates
cost
associated
with
this
element
of
main
proposal
Labels
not
required
under
main
proposal
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

Direct
Impact
Element
Alternative
Regulatory
Option
Potential
Economic
Impacts
of
Regulatory
Options
Disposable
Wipes
Reusable
Wipes
27
5.
Wipes
pretransport
preparation
"
No
free
liquids
when
wrung"
to
qualify
for
exclusion
$
0.3
to
$
1.1
million
annual
cost
to
wipes
generators
for
wringing
wipes
prior
to
transport
(
source:
spreadsheet
attachment)
$
2.2
to
$
8.1
million
annual
cost
to
wipes
generators
(
or
laundry
pick­
up)
for
wringing
wipes
prior
to
transport
(
source:
factored
88/
12
relative
to
disposables
estimate).

6.
Intracompany
transfer
of
wipes
One­
time
notification
of
transfer
activities
to
state
agencies
!
Cost
to
wipes
generators:
(
5,058
to
12,483
disposable
wipes
generators)
x
(
5%
engage
in
transfer*)
x
($
105/
facility)
=
$
27,000
to
$
66,000
one­
time
cost.
!
Cost
to
states
to
review
notice:
 
Initial:
(
same
number
of
facilities
above)
x
($
30/
notification)
=
$
8,000
to
$
19,000.
 
Annual
subsequent:
55%
of
initial
cost
=
$
4,400
to
$
10,500
per
year.
!
Cost
to
wipes
generators:
(
57,633
to
140,379
reusable
wipes
generators)
x
(
5%
engage
in
transfer*)
x
($
105/
facility)
=
$
0.30
to
$
0.74
million
one­
time
cost.
!
Cost
to
states
to
review
notice:
 
Initial:
(
same
number
of
facilities
above)
x
($
30/
notification)
=
$
87,000
to
$
211,000.
 
Annual
subsequent:
55%
of
initial
cost
=
$
48,000
to
$
116,000
per
year.

Maintain
business
records
about
wipes
transferred
Assume
$
0
additional
cost
because
based
on
business
records
which
are
usually
retained
for
at
least
3
years
for
tax
reporting
or
other
legal
purposes.

Comply
with
RCRA
employee
training
(
5,058
to
12,483
disposable
wipes
generators)
x
(
5%
engage
in
transfer*)
x
($
5,000/
facility/
year**)
=
$
1.3
to
$
3.1
million/
year
(
57,633
to
140,379
reusable
wipes
generators)
x
(
5%
engage
in
transfer*)
x
($
5,000/
facility/
year**)
=
$
14.4
to
$
35.1
million/
year.
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

Direct
Impact
Element
Alternative
Regulatory
Option
Potential
Economic
Impacts
of
Regulatory
Options
Disposable
Wipes
Reusable
Wipes
28
Transfer
wipes
in
sealed
containers
!
Assume
"
sealed"
container
costs
are
similar
to
metal
drum
costs
estimated
for
main
proposal.
!
Sealed
containers
may
unintentionally
result
in
redistribution
of
free
liquid
management
costs
estimated
for
the
main
proposal,
from
spent
wipes
generators,
to
waste
management
facilities
(
disposal
wipes)
or
industrial
laundries
(
reusable
wipes),
if
free
liquids
form
from
solvent
condensation
or
solvent
gravity
flow
inside
containers,
after
generator
seals
containers
prior
to
transporting
off­
site.

7.
Transfer
to
offsite
handler
(
different
company)
One­
time
notification
of
transfer
activities
to
state
agencies
!
Cost
to
wipes
generators:
(
5,058
to
12,483
disposable
wipes
generators)
x
(
5%
engage
in
transfer*)
x
($
105/
facility)
=
$
27,000
to
$
66,000
one­
time
cost.
!
Cost
to
states
to
review
notice:
 
Initial:
(
same
number
of
facilities
above)
x
($
30/
notification)
=
$
8,000
to
$
19,000.
 
Annual
subsequent:
55%
of
initial
cost
=
$
4,400
to
$
10,500
per
year.
$
0
(
assume
industrial
laundries
maintain
complete
control
over
reusable
wipes
handling)

Maintain
business
records
about
wipes
transferred
Assume
$
0
additional
cost
because
based
on
business
records
which
are
usually
retained
for
at
least
3
years
for
tax
reporting
or
other
legal
purposes.
$
0
(
assume
industrial
laundries
maintain
complete
control
over
reusable
wipes
handling)

Comply
with
RCRA
employee
training
(
5,058
to
12,483
disposable
wipes
generators)
x
(
5%
engage
in
transfer*)
x
($
5,000/
facility/
year**)
=
$
1.3
to
$
3.1
million/
year
$
0
(
assume
industrial
laundries
maintain
complete
control
over
reusable
wipes
handling)
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

Direct
Impact
Element
Alternative
Regulatory
Option
Potential
Economic
Impacts
of
Regulatory
Options
Disposable
Wipes
Reusable
Wipes
29
Transfer
wipes
in
sealed
containers
!
Assume
"
sealed"
container
costs
are
similar
to
metal
drum
costs
estimated
for
main
proposal.
!
Sealed
containers
may
unintentionally
result
in
redistribution
of
free
liquid
management
costs
estimated
for
the
main
proposal,
from
spent
wipes
generators,
to
waste
management
facilities
(
disposal
wipes)
or
industrial
laundries
(
reusable
wipes),
if
free
liquids
form
from
solvent
condensation
or
solvent
gravity
flow
inside
containers,
after
generator
seals
containers
prior
to
transporting
off­
site.
$
0
(
assume
industrial
laundries
maintain
complete
control
over
reusable
wipes
handling)

8.
Offsite
management
of
wipes
See
element
1
above
affecting
eligibility
for
landfilling
disposable
wipes
See
element
1
above
Not
applicable
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

Direct
Impact
Element
Alternative
Regulatory
Option
Potential
Economic
Impacts
of
Regulatory
Options
Disposable
Wipes
Reusable
Wipes
30
9.
Compliance
recordkeeping
Certify
that
solvent
wipes
shipments
meet
either
"
no
free
liquids"
or
"
dry"
conditions.
 
Assume
145,000
spent
wipes
containers/
year
transported
equals
18,000
truck
shipments/
year.
 
Assume
each
shipment
requires
0.25
hours
labor
time
for
certification
&
recordkeeping
by
generator:
(
18,000
shipments)
x
(
0.25
hours)
x
($
22/
hour)
=
$
99,000/
year
 
Assume
each
shipment
equally
requires
0.25
hours
labor
time
for
certification
&
recordkeeping
by
receiver:
$
99,000/
year
 
Assume
2.7
million
spent
wipes
containers/
year
transported
equals
335,000
truck
shipments/
year.
 
Assume
each
shipment
requires
0.25
hours
labor
time
for
certification
&
recordkeeping
by
generator:
(
335,000
shipments)
x
(
0.25
hours)
x
($
22/
hour)
=
$
1.84
million/
year.
 
Assume
each
shipment
equally
requires
0.25
hours
labor
time
for
certification
&
recordkeeping
by
receiver:
$
1.84
million/
year.

Streamlined
RCRA
manifest
for
returning
wipes
with
free
liquids
to
generators
 
Assume
streamlined
manifest
is
15%
social
cost
of
traditional
manifest:
($
300/
manifest***)
x
$
15%
=
$
45/
manifest.
 
(
18,000
truck
shipments/
year)
x
(
3.5%
contain
free
liquids)
x
($
45/
manifest)
=
$
28,400/
year.
$
0;
assumes
that
industrial
laundries
will
(
a)
provide
"
full
service"
business
approach
to
their
customers,
and
(
b)
desire
to
avoid
disrupting
weekly
pick­
up/
delivery
routings,
and
not
return
free
liquids
to
generators,
but
manage
at
the
industrial
laundry.

Other
options
Exclude
reusable
wipes
from
RCRA
Definition
of
Hazardous
Waste,
rather
than
from
RCRA
Definition
of
Solid
Waste
Not
applicable
Because
conditions
identical
as
main
proposal,
only
"
catchet"
benefit
from
avoided
stigma
lost.
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

Direct
Impact
Element
Alternative
Regulatory
Option
Potential
Economic
Impacts
of
Regulatory
Options
Disposable
Wipes
Reusable
Wipes
31
Explanatory
Notes:
(
a)
*
5%
applied
to
both
the
intra­
company
and
offsite
handler
transfer
assumption
represents
OSW's
best
judgement,
in
absence
of
data.
(
b)
**
$
5,000
annual
cost
(
year
2000$)
per
facility
for
RCRA
employee
training
 
source:
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
"
Unit
Cost
Compendium",
30
Sept
2000,
DPRA
Incorporated,
cost
item
6,
p.
2).
(
c)
***
$
300
social
cost
of
paperwork
burden
per
RCRA
hazardous
waste
transport
manifest
(
EPA
Form
8700­
22)
consists
of
38%
cost
to
waste
generators,
39%
to
waste
transporters,
20%
to
waste
receivers
(
i.
e.
waste
treatment,
storage
disposal,
recycling
facilities),
and
3%
to
state
agencies
(
24
states
distribute
manifests,
collect
manifest
information,
and/
or
levy
manifest
fees);
source:
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste,
"
Hazardous
Waste
Manifest
Cost
Benefit
Analysis",
Logistics
Management
Institute,
Oct
2000,
Table
3­
9,
page
3­
7,
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
epaoswer/
hazwaste/
gener/
manifest/
pdf/
cba­
rprt.
pdf
II.
F.
Sensitivity
Analysis
For
purpose
of
quantifying
the
potential
economic
impacts
of
the
proposed
exclusions,
this
study
assigned
numerical
values
to
different
parameters
representing
current
(
baseline)
regulatory
conditions,
as
well
as
representing
expected
post­
regulatory
conditions
(
i.
e.
after
the
proposed
exclusions
are
is
promulgated
as
a
final
rule).
The
numerical
values
were
based
on
different
sources
of
data
and
information
such
as:

!
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
industrial
survey
findings
!
Other
Federal
government
databases
!
Published
commercial
data
sources
(
e.
g.
industrial
supply
catalogs)
!
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
best
judgement
based
on
fieldtrip
observations,
and
meetings
and
telephone
contacts
with
affected
industry
representatives.

The
following
table
presents
the
numerical
value
uncertainty
ranges
assigned
in
this
study
to
20
impact
estimation
key
parameters.
Most
of
the
parameters
reflect
uncertainty
about
baseline
conditions,
while
a
few
others
reflect
different
cost
options
for
meeting
the
conditions
of
the
regulatory
exclusions.
This
set
of
parameters
affects
both
estimation
of
direct
and
induced
impacts
in
this
study.
In
comparison
to
the
key
parameter
settings
as
defined
earlier
in
this
study
(
i.
e.
most­
likely
values),
the
sensitivity
analysis
of
this
section
reestimates
economic
impacts
(
direct
+
induced),
according
to
three
alternative
sets
of
parameter
settings:
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

32
!
"
Lower­
bound":
Lowest
estimate
of
number
of
entities
directly
impacted,
as
well
as
minimum
unit
values
&
quantities
(
note:
for
reusable
wipes
this
scenario
represents
minimal
direct
impacts
on
industrial
laundries,
by
assuming
a
100%
cost
pass­
thru
of
implementation
costs,
to
industrial
laundry
wipes
customers).

!
"
Most­
likely":
OSW's
"
best
judgement"
settings
for
key
parameters
(
which
do
not
necessarily
represent
the
mid­
point
between
the
lower­
and
upper­
bound).

!
"
Upper­
bound":
Highest
estimate
of
number
of
entities
impacted,
as
well
as
maximum
unit
values
&
quantities.

Assignment
of
Numerical
Values
to
Key
Baseline
and
Incremental
Regulatory
Impact
Parameters
For
Sensitivity
Analysis
of
Economic
Impact
Estimation
(
percentages
relative
to
baseline)

Item
Direct
Impact
Element
Impact
Estimation
Baseline
Parameter
Lower­
Bound
Most­
Likely
Upper­
Bound
1
1.
Wipes
solvent
eligibility
Percentage
of
wipes­
using
facilities
which
currently
use
RCRA
solvents
on
industrial
wipes
(
i.
e.
"
generators")
Printers
(
3
of
13
subsectors)
90%
100%
100%

2
Non­
printers
(
10
of
13
subsectors)
30%
35%
40%

3
2.
Onsite
wipes
covered*
accumulation
containers
Percentage
of
spent
RCRA
solvent
wipes
not
currently
accumulated
on­
site
in
covered
containers
Reusables
25%
50%
80%
4
Disposables
5
3.
Wipes
transport
containers
Percentage
of
spent
RCRA
solvent
wipes
not
currently
transported
off­
site
in
closed
containers
Reusables
25%
50%
80%
6
Disposables
7
Type
of
containers
purchased
for
spent
solvent
wipes
transport
Plastic
bags
Average
of
two
options
Metal
drums
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

33
8
4.
Wipes
transport
container
labels
Percentage
of
RCRA
solvent
wipes
transport
containers
currently
without
regulatory
exclusion
labels
Reusables
Not
required
in
proposal
9
Disposables
100%

10
5.
Wipes
pretransport
preparation
Percentage
of
spent
RCRA
solvent
wipes
not
"
dry"
as
currently
generated
Printers
90%
100%
100%

11
Non­
printers
40%
50%
60%

12
Method
for
managing
spent
solvent
"
free
liquids"
recovered
from
spent
wipes
accumulation
containers
and
from
spent
wipes
transportation
containers
Solvent
recycling
(
net
savings)
Average
of
two
options
Fuel
blending
(
net
cost)

13
6.
Intra­
company
transfer
of
wipes
Percentage
of
RCRA
solvent
spent
wipes
generators
making
intra­
company
transfers
for
"
free
liquids"
removal
Reusables
0%
(
assume
distribution
controlled
by
laundries)

Disposables
5%

14
7.
Transfer
to
offsite
handler
Percentage
of
RCRA
solvent
wipes
generators
making
transfers
to
offsite
handlers
for
"
free
liquids"
removal
Reusables
0%
(
assume
distribution
controlled
by
laundries)

15
Disposables
5%

16
8.
Offsite
management
of
spent
disposables
arriving
at
waste
mgt
facilities
&
spent
reusables
at
laundries
Percentage
of
RCRA
solvent
wipes
containers
that
arrive
at
final
destination
with
"
free
liquids"
Printers
1%
5%
10%

17
Non­
printers
0.5%
2.5%
5%

18
Method
for
managing
spent
solvent
"
free
liquids"
recovered
from
spent
wipes
accumulation
containers
and
from
spent
wipes
transportation
containers
Solvent
recycling
(
net
savings)
Average
of
two
options
Fuel
blending
(
net
cost)
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

34
19
Other
impact
estimation
parameters
"
Cross­
price"
elasticity
of
demand
as
percentage
of
"
own­
price"
elasticity
magnitude
(
higher
percentage
simulates
greater
induced
effect
on
relative
price
and
marketshare
between
disposables
&
reusables;
based
on
meta­
analysis
presented
in
this
document)
11%
26%
26%

20
Percentage
of
states
assumed
to
adopt
voluntarily
the
exclusions
after
final
rule
promulgation
50%
75%
100%

21
Industrial
laundry
exclusion
implementation
cost
pass­
thru
to
reusable
wipes
customers
For
laundry
direct
impact>
100%

32%
0%

For
simulating
induced
impact
on
wipes
market>
0%
100%

Explanatory
Notes:
(
a)
Sources
for
Numerical
Values
Assigned
in
This
Table:
!
Items
1
to
7:
USEPA­
OSW
assigned
numerical
values
for
the
three
sensitivity
analysis
cases
(
i.
e.
lower,
most­
likely,
and
upper)
based
on
either
(
a)
field­
trip
research
to
wipes
users
or
handlers,
(
b)
from
meetings
or
telephone
contacts
with
representatives
of
affected
industries,
or
(
c)
best
judgement
in
absence
of
data.
!
Other
items:
!
Cross­
price
elasticity:
Most­
likely
value
based
on
meta­
analysis
of
price
elasticity
data
contained
in
other
economic
studies;
identical
upper­
bound
value
assigned
because
reusable
and
disposable
wipes
are
reportedly
not
interchangeable
in
some
industrial
applications;
lower­
bound
based
on
two
standard­
deviations
below
the
most­
likely
elasticity
ratios
derived
from
the
meta­
analysis.
!
State
adoption:
Percentages
shown
have
two
possible
alternative
economic
modeling
interpretations:
!
The
percent
of
states/
territories
which
may
adopt
the
exclusions
after
promulgation
by
USEPA,
or
!
The
resultant
percent
of
entities
affected
by
the
proposed
rule,
as
a
result
of
a
different
percent
of
states
adopting
the
proposed
exclusions.
!
Laundry
cost
pass­
thru:
Most­
likely
value
from:
USEPA
Office
of
Water,
"
Economic
Assessment
for
the
Final
Action
Regarding
Pretreatment
Standards
for
the
Industrial
Laundries
Point
Source
Category",
EPA­
821­
R­
00­
004,
March
2000,
p.
A­
23
(
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
ost/
guide/
laundry/
final/
economics.
pdf).
(
b)
*
Accumulating
spent
solvent
industrial
wipes
in
covered/
closed
containers
on­
site
is
an
existing
(
baseline)
"
best
management
practice"
in
some
industries.
For
example,
the
Printers'
National
Environmental
Assistance
Center
(
PNEAC)
provides
a
pollution
prevention
checklist
for
use
by
lithographic
printers,
which
specifies
the
use
of
closed
containers
for
accumulating
solvent
industrial
wipes,
among
other
solvent
and
solvent
wipes
management
tips
(
http://
www.
pneac.
org/
sheets/
litho/
p2_
cklist_
litho.
html).
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

35
The
result
of
applying
the
above
uncertainty
ranges
for
estimation
of
direct
impacts
for
the
proposed
exclusions
(
main
proposal)
are:

Uncertainty
Range
for
Estimate
of
Potential
Average
Annualized
Direct
Impact
($/
year)
on
Spent
Wipes
Generators
&
Other
Handlers**
(
parentheses
indicate
net
cost
savings;
other
benefits
categories
not
included
in
this
table)

Uncertainty
Range
($
Millions/
year)

Disposable
Wipes
Reusable
Wipes
Net
Impact
(
row
totals)

Lower­
bound
($
18.9)
to
($
20.5)
$
2.9
to
$
4.6
($
14.3)
to
($
17.6)

Most­
likely
($
32.5)
to
($
35.6)
$
9.1
to
$
15.3
($
17.2)
to
($
26.5)

Upper­
bound
($
47.9)
to
($
53.3)
$
20.3
to
$
33.9
($
14.0)
to
($
33.0)

II.
G.
Induced
Market
Impacts
In
addition
to
direct
impacts,
this
study
also
estimates
potential
"
induced
impacts"
of
the
proposed
exclusions,
in
the
form
of
potential
effects
on
the
relative
prices
and
national
marketshare
of
reusable
and
disposable
industrial
wipes.
This
study
simulates
potential
induced
impacts
by
building
upon
the
direct
impacts
estimated
for
each
respective
wipes
category,
and
includes
simulation
of
potential
induced
impacts
on
the
industrial
laundry
sub­
sector,
which
is
also
subject
to
some
of
the
requirements
of
the
proposed
exclusions.
For
simulating
induced
impacts,
this
study
developed
a
simple
cobweb­
type
partial
equilibrium
market
model,
which
translates
the
estimated
average
annualized
national
direct
impacts
(
i.
e.
implementation
costs
and
cost
savings),
into
a
"
per­
wipe"
unitized
basis.
The
model
then
adds
the
unitized
per­
wipe
direct
impact
to
the
current
national
average
prices
($/
wipe)
for
each
respective
wipe,
for
the
purpose
of
simulating
an
implied
post­
regulatory
"
new
price"
(
under
both
zero
and
full
direct
impact
"
pass­
thru"
assumptions).
For
this
analysis,
the
wipes
"
price"
includes
both
the
direct
cost
to
wipes
users
of
purchasing
(
disposables)
or
leasing
(
reusables)
industrial
wipes,
as
well
as
the
unitized
per­
wipe
cost
for
managing
spent
wipes
(
i.
e.
the
"
effective
unit
cost"
per
wipe).
The
implied
percentage
changes
in
the
relative
prices
(
effective
unit
costs)
to
wipes
users,
provides
a
basis
for
the
model
to
simulate
potential
shifts
in
marketshare
between
disposable
and
reusable
wipes,
to
the
extent
that
wipes
users
actually
consider
and
are
sensitive
to
relative
prices
(
effective
unit
costs)
in
their
purchasing
choices
between
disposable
and
reusable
industrial
wipes.
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

36
The
degree
to
which
relative
price
(
relative
effective
unit
cost)
is
a
factor
in
the
selection
between
product
substitutes,
is
referred
to
as
the
"
price
elasticity
of
substitution"
for
a
product.
The
degree
to
which
the
demand
for
a
particular
product
is
influenced
by
the
price
of
that
same
product
is
referred
to
as
the
"
own­
price
elasticity".
The
degree
to
which
the
demand
for
a
particular
product
is
influenced
by
the
price
of
a
substitute
product
is
the
"
cross­
price
elasticity".
This
document
derived
both
an
"
own"
and
"
cross"
price
elasticity
for
simulation
of
the
potential
composite
effect
of
changes
to
both
reusable
and
disposable
wipes
effective
cost,
in
estimating
potential
induced
market
impacts.
Own­
price
elasticity
was
derived
from
actual
US
historical
data
on
national
average
price
and
quantities
sold
for
reusable
wipes,
whereas
in
absence
of
historical
data
for
the
US
disposable
wipes
market,
this
study
derived
an
estimate
of
cross­
price
elasticity
based
on
meta­
analysis
of
cross­
elasticity
data
published
in
other
economic
studies.
A
series
of
spreadsheets
which
follow
in
this
document
present
the
findings
for
both
the
direct
and
induced
impact
categories,
including
supporting
data
tables
and
computation
spreadsheets
for
some
of
the
key
parameters
applied
in
this
document.

Simulated
Induced
Impact
on
Relative
Unit
Cost
of
Industrial
Wipes
in
the
US
(
based
on
the
potentially
affected
sub­
market
of
2.8
billion
solvent
industrial
wipes/
year)

Type
of
Industrial
Wipe
>
Reusables
(
laundry
cost
pass­
thru
assumptions)
Disposables
Lowerbound
(
0%)
Most­
likely
(
32%)
Upperbound
(
100%)
Lowerbound
Most­
likely
Upperbound
Current
(
baseline)
average
unit
cost
$
0.0535
$
0.2368
Post­
final
rule
estimated
average
unit
cost
$
0.0535
$
0.0565
$
0.0627
$
0.0961
$
0.1020
$
0.1096
Estimated
percentage
change
in
unit
cost
0%
5.6%
17.2%
(
59%)
(
56%)
(
53%)
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

37
Simulated
Induced
Impact
on
Industrial
Wipes
US
National
Marketshare
(
based
on
the
potentially
affected
sub­
market
of
solvent
industrial
wipes)

Type
of
Industrial
Wipe>
Reusables
Disposables
Row
totals
Lowerbound
Mostlikely
Upperbound
Lowerbound
Mostlikely
Upperbound
Lowerbound
Mostlikely
Upperbound
Current
(
baseline)
marketshare
Annual
solvent
wipes
uses
affected
by
exclusions
1.49
billion
2.55
billion
3.68
billion
0.15
billion
0.26
billion
0.39
billion
1.64
billion
2.81
billion
4.07
billion
Relative
marketshare
91%
9%
100%

Possible
induced
market
impact
Change
in
annual
wipes
uses
(
48
million)
(
218
million)
(
574
million)
48
million
218
million
218
million
0
Percentage
change
(
3.2%)
(
8.5%)
(
15.6%)
32%
88%
148%
0%

Possible
marketshare
after
final
rule
implementation
Annual
wipes
uses
1.44
billion
2.33
billion
3.11
billion
0.20
billion
0.48
billion
0.96
billion
1.64
billion
2.81
billion
4.07
billion
Relative
marketshare
88%
83%
76%
12%
17%
24%
100%
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

38
II.
H.
Small
Business
Impacts
!
Small
businesses:
Because
of
the
fact
that
96%
of
companies
which
use
industrial
wipes
across
the
13
sub­
sectors,
as
well
as
94%
of
industrial
laundry
companies
are
small
businesses
(
i.
e.
"
companies"
or
"
firms"),
this
study
assessed
the
potential
magnitude
of
impacts
on
small
businesses.

!
Small
facilities:
Establishments
(
i.
e.
facilities)
owned
and
operated
by
small
businesses
are:
!
94%
small
facilities
in
13
generator
sub­
sectors
!
47%
small
facilities
in
industrial
laundry
industry
Baseline
Count
of
Facilities
Owned
&
Operated
by
Small
Businesses
Facility
size
Spent
Wipes
Generators
(
13
sub­
sectors)
Industrial
Laundries
Both
Sub­
Groups
Combined
Lowerbound
Most­
likely
Upperbound
Lowerbound
Mostlikely
Upperbound
Lowerbound
Mostlikely
Upperbound
All
sizes
62,400
106,100
151,800
588
881
1,175
63,000
107,000
153,000
Small
only
53,700
92,700
131,400
275
414
551
54,000
93,000
132,000
!
Based
on
the
zero­
impact
findings
summarized
in
the
table
below
for
the
"
most
likely"
case,
as
well
as
the
relatively
small
percentage
of
small
businesses
potentially
affected
above
the
3%
threshold
level,
OSW
presumes
that
the
proposed
RCRA
regulatory
exclusions
are
eligible
for
a
"
No­
SISNOSE"
(
i.
e.
no
significant
impact
on
a
substantial
number
of
small
entities)
determination
for
Regulatory
Flexibility
Act
(
RFA)
certification.
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

39
Screening
Analysis
Findings
for
Regulatory
Flexibility
Act
Small
Business
Impact
Certification
(
Direct
Compliance
Costs
+
Induced
Market
Effects)

USEPA's
March
1999
RFA
Guidance*
thresholds
Potentiall
affected
sub­
group
Estimated
count
of
small
facilities
potentially
exceeding
thresholds
%
of
small
facilities
in
associated
sub­
group
exceeding
thresholds
%
of
all
small
facilities
potentially
affected
Lowerbound
Mostlikely
Upperbound
Lowerbound
Mostlikely
Upperbound
Lowerbound
Mostlikely
Upperbound
>
1%
of
revenues
Industrial
laundries
0
0
72
0%
0%
13.1%
0%
0%
0.054%
Wipes
generators
0
0
0
0%
0%
0%

>
3%
of
revenues
Industrial
laundries
0
0
16
0%
0%
2.9%
0%
0%
0.012%
Wipes
generators
0
0
0
0%
0%
0%

Explanatory
Notes:
(
a)
The
estimated
number
of
entities
(
wipes
generators
&
wipes
handlers)
potentially
affected
by
the
proposed
exclusions
is
subject
to
three
sensitivity
analysis
factors,
combinations
of
which
produce
these
three
baseline
uncertainty
cases:
(
a)
Percentage
of
states
which
may
adopt
the
final
rule
(
b)
Percentage
of
wipes­
using
printer
entities
which
apply
RCRA
solvents
to
industrial
wipes
(
c)
Percentage
of
wipes­
using
non­
printer
entities
which
apply
RCRA
solvents
to
industrial
wipes
(
b)
*
USEPA's
29
March
1999
Regulatory
Flexibility
Act
(
RFA)
Guidance
(
100
pages)
is
available
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
sbrefa/
documents/
iguid99.
pdf
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

40
II.
I.
Other
Factors
Potentially
Affecting
Economic
Impacts
!
Wipes
Limited
Substitutability
In
addition
to
wipes
price
(
unit
cost)
differences,
there
are
at
least
three
qualitative
differences
between
disposables
and
reusables,
which
suggest
that
wipes
relative
marketshare
and
product
switching
(
substitution),
are
not
solely
a
function
of
wipes
relative
price:

Factors
Influencing
Market
Substitutability
Between
Reusable
&
Disposable
Wipes
Factor
Definition
Wipes
performance:
Wipes
(
a)
lint
residue,
(
b)
absorbency,
and
(
c)
durability,
dictate
consumer
choice
in
wipes
for
many
industrial
applications
where
these
qualities
are
critical
(
e.
g.
electronic
manufacturing
cannot
tolerate
lint).

Wipes
market
supply:
Industrial
laundries
provide
reusable
wipes
users
with
the
benefit
of
full
"
cradle­
to­
grave"
service,
thereby
avoiding
need
to
manage
wipes;
in
contrast,
users
of
disposable
wipes
must
manage
their
spent
wipes
as
waste.
Furthermore,
contracts
with
industrial
laundries
are
often
multi­
year,
which
serve
to
"
lock­
in"
customers.

Small
portion
of
industry
operating
costs:
Compared
to
total
operating
costs
(
equipment
+
energy
+
materials
+
labor),
annual
baseline
costs
to
a
business
of
using
industrial
wipes
is
very
small,
averaging
0.08%
of
operating
cost
(
sub­
sector
averages
range
from
0.01%
to
3.47%
across
the
13
sub­
sectors).
Consequently,
changes
in
the
relative
price
of
disposable
and
reusable
wipes
may
go
unnoticed
by
wipes
users
(
i.
e.
"
price­
inelastic
demand").

!
Annual
Solvent
Quantities
Purchased
for
Industrial
Wipes:

Possible
induced
decrease
in
future
annual
growth
of
US
demand
for
newly­
produced
solvents
applied
in
industrial
wipes
operations,
as
a
consequence
of
induced
increase
in
the
annual
quantity
of
solvents
recovered
from
solvent­
contaminated
wipes
to
meet
the
proposed
"
no
free
liquids"
regulatory
exclusion
condition.
Recovered
solvents
may
be
reused
on
wipes,
thereby
reducing
demand
for
newlyproduced
solvents.
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

6
The
statistical
"
z­
score"
is
defined
in
most
university­
level
statistics
textbooks
(
e.
g.
James
McClave
&
P.
George
Benson,
Statistics
for
Business
and
Economics,
(
Section
6.3:
The
Normal
Distribution),
4th
edition,
Dellen/
MacMillan
Publishers,
1988).

41
!
Solvent
Types
Purchased
for
Industrial
Wipes:
Possible
induced
change
in
the
proportional
mix
of
US
annual
demand
for
solvents
applied
in
industrial
wipes
operations,
as
a
consequence
of
induced
decrease
in
demand
for
certain
types
of
solvents
which
may
no
longer
be
landfilled,
and
an
induced
compensating
increase
in
demand
for
solvents
not
restricted
from
landfills.
This
study
estimates
the
potential
induced
shift
in
national
marketshare
between
the
two
types
of
industrial
wipes,
but
not
in
the
chemical
types
of
solvents
applied
to
wipes.
Analysis
of
1999
price
data
(
standardized
to
$/
gallon)
for
43
different
industrial
cleaning/
degreasing
solvents
used
in
the
US
economy
(
compiled
from
the
Stanford
Research
Institute
"
Chemical
Economics
Handbook",
http://
ceh.
sric.
sri.
com),
reveals
that
the
$
3.17/
gallon
average
cost
of
27
RCRA
F­
listed
solvents,
is
4%
less
expensive
than
the
$
3.30/
gallon
average
cost
of
16
non­
F­
listed
solvents.
This
difference
presents
a
slight
purchase
price
advantage
for
F­
listed
solvent
users,
but
users
of
F­
listed
solvents
would
also
incur
a
relatively
higher
life­
cycle
cost
of
using
F­
listed
solvents
because
of
RCRA
hazardous
waste
management
requirements.
Consequently,
comparison
of
average
prices
does
not
suggest
an
overall
cost
advantage
which
would
induced
current
users
to
switch
from
non­
F
to
F­
listed
solvents.
However,
at
the
minimum­
end
of
the
price
range
for
each
solvent
grouping,
the
$
0.75/
gallon
minimum
price
for
F­
listed
solvents,
is
48%
less
expensive
compared
to
the
$
1.44/
gallon
minimum
price
for
non­
F­
listed
solvents,
which
suggests
there
may
be
a
clear
cost
advantage
(
incentive)
for
some
current
users
of
non­
F­
listed
solvents
to
switch­
over
to
using
F­
listed
solvents,
as
a
result
of
the
exclusion
of
disposable
wipes
from
hazardous
waste
regulation.
At
the
maximum­
end
of
the
respective
price
ranges,
the
group
of
27
F­
listed
solvents
has
a
maximum
price
of
$
6.19/
gallon,
which
is
15%
higher
than
the
$
5.38/
gallon
maximum
price
for
the
group
of
16
non­
F­
listed
solvents.
Given
that
some
users
currently
pay
higher­
prices
for
F­
listed
solvents
suggests
that
F­
solvents
may
offer
preferred
chemical
performance
characteristics
in
some
industrial
solvent
applications.
If
this
is
the
case,
it
is
conceivable
that
some
non­
F­
listed
solvent
users
may
be
induced
to
switch
to
using
higher­
priced
F­
listed
solvents
to
enhance
industrial
performance
characteristics,
as
a
result
of
the
exclusion
possibly
lowering
the
lifecycle
cost
of
using
F­
listed
solvents.
In
absence
of
detailed
and
comprehensive
marketshare
data
on
these
two
groups
of
industrial
cleaning/
degreasing
solvents,
OSW
modeled
this
potential
comparative
price
switch­
over,
by
the
following
mathematical
device:
by
estimating
the
respective
marketshare
areas
represented
by
overlaying
a
normal
(
bell­
shaped)
distribution
curve
over
the
solvent
price
range
data,
and
then
computing
statistical
z­
scores
(
standard
normal
random
variable6)
to
represent
the
area
under
the
distribution
curve,
according
to
a
normal
distribution
statistical
probability
table
(
note
that
the
distribution
is
not
perfectly
normal­
shaped,
as
the
skewness
is
0.17
(
normal
=
0),
and
the
kurtosis
is
­
1.00
(
normal
=
0),
based
on
the
price
data
analysis
presented
in
an
earlier
spreadsheet
in
this
document).
The
range
between
the
minimum
and
maximum
(
i.
e.
lower­
tail
and
upper­
tail)
across
the
price
distribution
for
all
43
solvent
prices
combined,
is
compared
to
the
respective
tail
areas
for
a
normal
distribution
fit
to
the
F­
listed
solvent
price
range.
For
purpose
of
developing
an
estimate
in
this
study,
it
is
assumed
that
the
tail
areas
of
the
overall
price
distribution
after
promulgation
of
the
final
rule,
will
be
identical
to
the
tail
area
proportions
under
the
F­
listed
solvent
price
range
distribution
curve.
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

42
Estimation
of
Potential
Switch
in
National
Solvent
Usage
After
Promulgation
of
RCRA
Exclusions
!
Respective
min/
max
price
distribution
tail
areas
for
the
combined
sample
of
43
solvents:

Price
distribution
characteristics:
mean
=
$
3.22;
standard
deviation
=
$
1.34
Price
distribution
(
range)
Z­
score
computation
Distribution
area
Lower­
tail
area
($
1.44­$
3.22)/$
1.34
=
­
1.33
9%

Upper­
tail
area
($
5.38­$
3.22)/$
1.34
=
1.61
5%

Total
=
15%

!
Respective
min/
max
price
distribution
tail
areas
for
the
sample
of
26
F­
listed
solvents:

Price
distribution
characteristics:
mean
=
$
3.17;
standard
deviation
=
$
1.38
Price
distribution
(
range)
Z­
score
computation
Distribution
area
Lower­
tail
area
($
1.44­$
3.17)/$
1.38
=
­
1.25
11%

Upper­
tail
area
($
5.38­$
3.17)/$
1.38
=
1.60
5%

Total
=
16%

Possible
percentage
of
non­
F­
listed
solvents
switching
to
F­
listed
solvents
=
(
1­
35%)
x
16%
=
10%

From
the
above
computations,
according
to
an
assumed
normal
distribution
across
solvent
prices,
the
minimum­
end
price
tail
between
the
$
0.75/
gallon
F­
listed
minimum
price,
and
the
$
1.44/
gallon
non­
F­
solvent
minimum
price,
represents
9%
of
the
solvent
price
distribution.
The
upper­
end
tail
of
this
distribution
between
the
maximum
$
5.38/
gallon
non­
F­
listed
solvent
price
and
the
$
6.19/
gallon
Flisted
solvent
price,
represents
5%
(
totaling
14%
for
both
tails
of
the
distribution).
By
computing
statistical
probability
z­
scores
to
represent
these
distribution
tail
areas,
and
then
proportioning
the
new
respective
tail
areas
in
proportion
to
the
F­
listed
group
of
27
solvents
(
totaling
16%
for
both
tails),
provides
an
estimate
that
10%
of
non­
F­
listed
solvent
users,
may
switch
to
using
F­
listed
solvents.
In
addition
to
solvent
purchase
price
and
solvent
usage
life­
cycle
cost
considerations,
there
are
environmental
considerations
that
facilities
may
consider,
so
the
10%
switch­
over
should
be
considered
as
an
"
upper­
bound"
estimate.
For
example,
some
facilities
may
want
to
minimize
the
use
of
F­
listed
solvents
that
contain
hazardous
air
pollutants
(
HAPs)
to
meet
any
air
permitting
requirements
they
may
have.
Based
on
the
same
list
of
43
industrial
solvents,
27
are
F­
listed
(
63%),
and
16
of
the
27
F­
listed
solvents
(
59%)
are
HAPs,
so
there
a
number
of
F­
listed
candidate
solvents
(
at
least
11)
that
would
not
present
a
HAP
concern,
under
the
year
2001
USEPA
HAP
list.
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

43
!
Future
Annual
Generation
of
Solvent­
Contaminated
Industrial
Wipes
Industrial
production
 
and
hence,
industrial
demand
 
for
wipes
has
grown
an
average
of
3.05%
annually
in
the
US
economy
for
the
last
15
years
(
1986­
2000
data
trend).
This
average
annual
growth
represents
the
overall
rate
of
growth
in
industrial
production
over
the
13
economic
sub­
sectors
which
are
known
to
use
industrial
wipes,
including
both
"
printer"
(
n=
3)
and
"
non­
printer"
(
n=
10)
sub­
sectors.
This
factor
could
be
applied
in
both
the
economics
and
risk
assessment
as
a
sensitivity
analysis
of
impacts
and
risk
estimates,
respectively,
according
to
a
future
"
period­
of­
analysis"
(
i.
e.
stream
of
future
years),
by
applying
the
multiplier
[(
1+
0.0305)^
n],
where
n
=
number
of
future
years.
The
following
two
tables
display
the
projected
future
quantity
of
affected
industrial
wipes,
and
the
projected
future
annualized
economic
impact
of
the
exclusions,
respectively,
with
this
annual
industrial
growth
factor
applied
for
30­
years.

Projected
Growth
in
Future
Generation
of
Solvent­
Contaminated
Spent
Industrial
Wipes
(
Disposable
+
Reusable
Wipes
Generated
by
SQGs
&
LQGs)

Uncertainty
Range
RCRA
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
Affected
by
Exclusions
(
billions/
year)

2001
Baseline*
10­
years
(
factor
1.35)
30­
years
(
factor
2.46)

Lower­
bound
1.6
2.2
3.9
Most­
likely
2.8
3.8
6.9
Upper­
bound
4.1
5.5
10.1
*
Note:
This
key
parameter
(
i.
e.
estimated
number
of
solvent­
contaminated
industrial
wipes
generated
per
year)
is
subject
to
three
sensitivity
analysis
factors,
combinations
of
which
produce
these
three
baseline
uncertainty
cases:
!
Percentage
of
states
which
may
adopt
the
exclusions
after
promulgation
as
a
final
rulemaking
!
Percentage
of
wipes­
using
printer
entities
which
apply
RCRA
solvents
to
industrial
wipes.
!
Percentage
of
wipes­
using
non­
printer
entities
which
apply
RCRA
solvents
to
industrial
wipes.
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

44
Projection
of
Future
Annualized
Impacts
Over
30­
Years
Based
on
15­
Year
Historical
Growth
in
Industrial
Production
Index
(
1986­
2000)

IPI
Annual
Growth
Maximum
Net
Savings
(
lowest
costs
+
highest
savings)
Maximum
Net
Cost
(
highest
costs
+
lowest
savings)
3.05%
3.05%
3.05%
3.05%
3.05%
3.05%
Item
Year
Disposables
Reusables
Combined
Disposables
Reusables
Combined
1
2004
($
35,630,000)
$
9,150,000
($
26,480,000)
($
32,480,000)
$
15,280,000
($
17,200,000)
2
2005
($
36,717,738)
$
9,429,338
($
27,288,400)
($
33,471,573)
$
15,746,479
($
17,725,094)
3
2006
($
37,838,683)
$
9,717,203
($
28,121,480)
($
34,493,417)
$
16,227,198
($
18,266,218)
4
2007
($
38,993,849)
$
10,013,857
($
28,979,992)
($
35,546,456)
$
16,722,594
($
18,823,862)
5
2008
($
40,184,281)
$
10,319,567
($
29,864,714)
($
36,631,644)
$
17,233,113
($
19,398,530)
6
2009
($
41,411,056)
$
10,634,610
($
30,776,446)
($
37,749,960)
$
17,759,218
($
19,990,743)
7
2010
($
42,675,282)
$
10,959,271
($
31,716,011)
($
38,902,418)
$
18,301,384
($
20,601,034)
8
2011
($
43,978,103)
$
11,293,844
($
32,684,260)
($
40,090,059)
$
18,860,102
($
21,229,957)
9
2012
($
45,320,698)
$
11,638,630
($
33,682,068)
($
41,313,957)
$
19,435,876
($
21,878,080)
10
2013
($
46,704,281)
$
11,993,942
($
34,710,338)
($
42,575,218)
$
20,029,228
($
22,545,990)
11
2014
($
48,130,102)
$
12,360,102
($
35,770,000)
($
43,874,985)
$
20,640,695
($
23,234,290)
12
2015
($
49,599,452)
$
12,737,440
($
36,862,012)
($
45,214,432)
$
21,270,829
($
23,943,603)
13
2016
($
51,113,659)
$
13,126,298
($
37,987,362)
($
46,594,770)
$
21,920,200
($
24,674,570)
14
2017
($
52,674,093)
$
13,527,027
($
39,147,067)
($
48,017,248)
$
22,589,395
($
25,427,853)
15
2018
($
54,282,166)
$
13,939,989
($
40,342,176)
($
49,483,153)
$
23,279,020
($
26,204,133)
16
2019
($
55,939,330)
$
14,365,559
($
41,573,771)
($
50,993,810)
$
23,989,699
($
27,004,111)
17
2020
($
57,647,086)
$
14,804,121
($
42,842,965)
($
52,550,585)
$
24,722,073
($
27,828,512)
18
2021
($
59,406,977)
$
15,256,072
($
44,150,905)
($
54,154,887)
$
25,476,806
($
28,678,080)
19
2022
($
61,220,595)
$
15,721,820
($
45,498,775)
($
55,808,166)
$
26,254,580
($
29,553,585)
20
2023
($
63,089,581)
$
16,201,787
($
46,887,794)
($
57,511,917)
$
27,056,099
($
30,455,818)
21
2024
($
65,015,625)
$
16,696,407
($
48,319,218)
($
59,267,682)
$
27,882,087
($
31,385,595)
22
2025
($
67,000,468)
$
17,206,126
($
49,794,342)
($
61,077,048)
$
28,733,291
($
32,343,757)
23
2026
($
69,045,906)
$
17,731,407
($
51,314,499)
($
62,941,651)
$
29,610,481
($
33,331,170)
24
2027
($
71,153,789)
$
18,272,724
($
52,881,064)
($
64,863,179)
$
30,514,451
($
34,348,728)
25
2028
($
73,326,022)
$
18,830,567
($
54,495,455)
($
66,843,368)
$
31,446,018
($
35,397,350)
26
2029
($
75,564,571)
$
19,405,440
($
56,159,131)
($
68,884,010)
$
32,406,024
($
36,477,985)
27
2030
($
77,871,460)
$
19,997,863
($
57,873,597)
($
70,986,950)
$
33,395,338
($
37,591,611)
28
2031
($
80,248,775)
$
20,608,372
($
59,640,403)
($
73,154,090)
$
34,414,855
($
38,739,235)
29
2032
($
82,698,667)
$
21,237,519
($
61,461,148)
($
75,387,390)
$
35,465,496
($
39,921,894)
30
2033
($
85,223,351)
$
21,885,873
($
63,337,478)
($
77,688,870)
$
36,548,212
($
41,140,658)

Summary:
Column
totals
=
($
1,709,700,000)
$
439,100,000
($
1,270,600,000)
($
1,558,600,000)
$
733,200,000
($
825,300,000)
NPV
=
($
653,110,000)
$
167,720,000
($
485,390,000)
($
595,370,000)
$
280,090,000
($
315,280,000)
AAE
=
($
49,189,000)
$
12,632,000
($
36,557,000)
($
44,840,000)
$
21,095,000
($
23,745,000)

Note:
Percent
annual
growth
based
on
the
Industrial
Production
Index
(
US
Federal
Reserve
data);
average
annual
percentage
growth
in
the
IPI
over
the
15­
year
historical
period
1986­
2000
for
13
sub­
sector
spent
wipes
generators
(
http://
www.
federalreserve.
gov/
releases/
G17/
table1_
2.
htm).
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

7
$
1.00/
gallon
onsite
recycling
unit
cost
based
on
a
case
study
for
the
printing
industry:
http://
www.
rapidimaging.
com/
TSR/
TSR%
20R­
07%
20Platemaking%
20Productivity%
20for%
20Web.
pdf
8
$
2.45/
gallon
offsite
commercial
hazardous
waste
solvent
recycling
cost
based
on
a
case
study
on
parts
washing
in
the
metal
manufacturing
industry
(
http://
www.
iwrc.
org/
pubs/
IPPIMetal.
pdf);
$
4.65/
gallon
offsite
hazardous
waste
solvent
recycler
based
on
a
case
study
of
solvent
cleaning
of
industrial
painting
equipment
in
the
plastics
manufacturing
industry
(
http://
www.
eponline.
com;
13
April
2003).

45
!
Solvent
Recycling
!
Recycling
Assumptions
Applied
in
this
Study
One
source
of
uncertainty,
among
others,
in
this
economic
impact
study,
is
how
facilities
currently
manage
spent
solvent
"
free
liquids"
which
may
appear
in
on­
site
spent
wipes
accumulation
container,
and/
or
appear
in
spent
wipes
transport
containers,
and
how
facilities
may
decide
to
manage
any
incremental
increase
in
"
free
liquids"
captured
as
a
result
of
complying
with
the
conditions
of
the
exclusions.
This
study
estimated
the
economic
impact
for
two
possible
"
free
liquids"
management
options:

!
Fuel
blending:
Shipping
solvent
"
free
liquids"
to
offsite
hazardous
waste
fuel
blenders
(
at
an
average
net
cost
of
$
0.91
per
gallon,
based
on
average
unit
cost
reported
for
hazardous
waste
fuel
blending
from
the
OSW
Sept
2000
"
Unit
Cost
Compendium").
!
Recycling:
Recycling
solvent
"
free
liquids"
for
reuse
as
solvents
(
at
an
average
net
cost
savings
of
$
0.74
per
gallon,
based
on
the
$
2.54
average
unit
cost
from
the
three
data
points
below,
minus
the
$
3.28
average
price
of
virgin
solvent
avoided
cost
from
solvent
price
data
in
an
attachment
to
this
document).

The
solvent
recycling
option
in
this
study
represents
an
average
unit
cost
for
two
recycling
scenarios:

!
Onsite:
$
1.00/
gallon
unit
cost
reported
for
an
onsite
solvent
recycling
operation
in
the
printing
industry7
!
Offsite:
$
2.45
to
$
4.16/
gallon
unit
cost
for
offsite
commercial
solvent
recycling8
This
study
does
not
estimate
the
proportion
of
industrial
wipes
users
which
currently
fuel
blend,
or
which
currently
recycle
onsite
or
offsite,
or
which
may
find
solvent
recycling
economically
attractive
if
compliance
with
the
conditions
of
the
exclusions
result
in
an
incremental
increase
in
the
quantity
of
"
free
liquids"
captured
onsite
by
the
spent
wipes
generator.
Furthermore,
this
study
does
not
estimate
the
proportion
of
facilities
which
currently,
or
may
be
induced
by
compliance
with
the
exclusions,
to
operate
onsite,
or
ship
spent
solvent
wipes
offsite
to,
a
solvent
extraction
device
(
e.
g.
centrifuge
machine)
to
capture
solvents
from
spent
wipes
as
allowed
by
the
RCRA
regulatory
exclusions
(
although
a
following
section
presents
a
sample
of
equipment
cost
data
for
solvent
wipes
centrifugation).
Adoption
of
either
onsite
or
offsite
spent
wipes
centrifugation
(
and
other
solvent
extraction
techniques)
may
incrementally
increase
the
annual
quantity
of
solvent
to
be
managed
in
fuel
blending
or
recycling
processes.
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

46
!
Quantity
of
Solvents
Applied
to
Industrial
Wipes
The
amount
of
solvents
applied
annually
in
the
US
to
industrial
wipes
is
a
relatively
large
absolute
quantity.
A
supplemental
data
attachment
to
this
document
contains
annual
national
data
on
solvent
production
and
consumption.
Based
on
published
estimates
from
1991
and
1997,
respectively,
the
US
produced
at
least
27.0
million
tons
per
year
(
about
6.93
billion
gallons)
of
43
different
chemicals
used
as
solvents,
and
consumed
at
least
6.33
million
tons
(
about
1.62
billion
gallons)
of
these
solvent
chemicals
in
actual
solvent
applications,
(
i.
e.
excluding
use
of
solvent
chemicals
as
chemical
manufacturing
feedstocks).
As
displayed
in
the
table
below,
at
least
0.90
million
tons
per
year
(
about
231
million
gallons)
of
at
least
23
different
chemicals
are
reportedly
used
as
solvents
in
cleaning/
degreasing
applications,
of
which
OSW
estimates
that
82,000
to
103,000
tons
per
year
(
about
21
to
26
million
gallons
)
are
applied
to
industrial
wipes.
This
estimate
of
solvent
application
to
industrial
wipes
represents
about
11%
to
14%
of
the
consumption
of
cleaning/
degreasing
solvents,
and
represents
1.3%
to
1.6%
of
all
solvent
applications
(
excluding
solvents
used
as
chemical
feedstocks).
The
23
chemicals
reportedly
used
as
cleaning/
degreasing
solvents
represent
nine
different
chemical
classes:
(
1)
alcohols,
(
2)
aliphatic
hydrocarbons,
(
3)
aromatic
hydrocarbons,
(
4)
chlorinated
aliphatic
hydrocarbons,
(
5)
chlorinated
aromatic
hydrocarbons,
(
6)
esters,
(
7)
ketones,
(
8)
glycols,
and
(
9)
ethers.

Annual
Quantity
of
Solvents
Applied
to
Industrial
Wipes
Compared
to
the
Industrial
Solvent
Universe
Solvent
subset
Annual
Solvent
Quantity
(
equivalency
metrics)
Relative
percent
Million
tons/
year
Million
gallons/
year
Universe:
Manufacture
of
43
industrial
chemicals
which
may
be
used
as
solvents*
(
other
chemicals
may
also
be
used
but
not
as
prevalent)
27.0
6,930
Subset
1:
All
industrial
solvent
applications*
6.3
1,620
100%

Subset
2:
Only
industrial
solvent
cleaning/
degreasing
applications*
0.9
231
14%

Subset
3:
Only
solvents
applied
to
industrial
wipes
(
for
cleaning/
degreasing)
Reusable
wipes**
0.072
to
0.091
18.6
to
23.3
1.3%
to
1.6%
Disposable
wipes***
0.010
to
0.012
2.5
to
3.2
Subtotal
wipes
0.082
to
0.103
21.1
to
26.5
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

9
These
micro­
economic
factors
are
described
in
"
Fact
Sheet:
Considerations
in
Selecting
a
Commercial
(
Off­
Site)
Solvent
Recycling
Service",
Michigan
Dept
of
Environmental
Quality,
Environmental
Assistance
Division
Publication
#
9204,
Dec
1998,
http://
www.
deq.
state.
mi.
us/
documents/
deq­
ead­
recycle­
solrecyc.
pdf.
Two
other
references
about
the
micro­
economics
of
solvent
recycling
provide
facility­
level
benefit/
cost
worksheets
to
compute
economic
feasibility
(
profitability)
of
solvent
recycling:
!
"
A
Guide
for
Choosing
and
Operating
an
On­
Site
Distillation
Unit",
Washington
State
Dept
of
Ecology
Publication
#
94­
31,
31
Oct
1995,
http://
es.
epa.
gov/
techninfo/
facts/
washington/
wsde3.
html.
!
Iowa
Pollution
Prevention
Initiative,
Small
Business
Development
Center,
Iowa
Waste
Reduction
Center,"
Pollution
Prevention
Implementation
Plan
for
Metal
Manufacturers",
see
Section
3:
Painting
Equipment
Cleaning;
and
Section
4:
Parts
Washing,
http://
www.
iwrc.
org/
pubs/
IPPIMetal.
pdf
47
Explanatory
Notes:
(
a)
*
Source:
See
supplementary
attachment
with
industrial
solvent
data
at
end
of
this
document.
(
b)
**
Source:
Based
on
USEPA
Office
of
Water
survey
data
on
1994
annual
quantity
of
reusable
wipes
processed
by
US
industrial
laundries
(
Tables
4­
2
and
4­
3
in
report
EPA­
821­
R­
00­
006,
March
2000,
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
waterscience/
guide/
laundry/
final/
section1.
pdf):
!
Non­
printer
reusables:
Wipes:
(
9.360
billion
lbss/
year
total
items
laundered)
x
(
3.7%
non­
printer
reusables)
=
346.3
million
lbs/
year
wipes
Solvent:
[(
346.3
million
lbs/
year
wipes)
x
(
12.5%
solvent
weight)]/(
60%
to
75%
non­
evaporation****)
=
57.7
to
72.2
million
lbs/
year
=
28,800
to
36,100
tons/
year
=
7.4
to
9.3
million
gallons/
year
solvents
!
Printer
reusables:
Wipes:
(
9.360
billion
lbs/
year
total
items
laundered)
x
(
1.4%
printer
reusables)
=
131.0
million
lbs/
year
wipes
Solvent:
[(
131.0
million
lbs/
year
wipes)
x
(
50%
solvent
weight)]/(
60%
to
75%
non­
evaporation****)
=
87.4
to
109.2
million
lbs/
year
=
43,700
to
54,600
tons/
year
=
11.2
to
14.0
million
gallons/
year
solvents
!
Total
reusables:
Wipes:
477.3
million
lbs/
year
wipes=
0.239
million
tons/
year
wipes
Solvents:
145.1
to
181.4
million
lbs/
year
=
72,000
to
91,000
tons/
year
=
18.6
to
23.3
million
gallons/
year
solvents
(
c)
***
Source:
Disposable
wipes
solvents
estimated
as
proportionate
to
US
national
marketshare
of
12%
disposables:
to:
88%
reusables.
(
d)
****
Source:
Possible
25%
to
40%
solvent
evaporation
loses
reported
from
non­
covered
containers
with
solvents
in
the
automobile
service
industry,
by
the
Alabama
Dept
of
Environmental
Management
Pollution
Prevention
Unit,
and
by
the
Virginia
Office
of
Small
Business
Assistance
(
http://
www.
deq.
state.
va.
us/
osba/
factsheets/
autoserv.
html);
this
evaporation
loss
range
is
applied
in
this
table
as
a
generic
(
average)
for
all
solvent
wipes
applications.

!
Economic
Feasibility
of
Solvent
Recycling
There
are
many
economic
factors
 
both
macro
and
micro
 
which
determine
the
economic
feasibility
of
spent
solvent
recycling
for
any
individual
facility.
Because
many
chemicals
used
as
solvents
are
derived
from
petroleum,
their
prices
fluctuate
according
to
the
price
of
crude
oil.
Consequently,
the
potential
value
(
economic
feasibility)
of
recycling
spent
solvents,
as
opposed
to
buying
virgin
solvents
and
disposing
of
spent
solvents
by
blending
for
use
as
fuel,
also
fluctuates
with
the
price
of
oil
(
http://
www.
envirobiz.
com/
news/
011901_
11.
htm).
High
crude
oil
prices
might
increase
spent
solvent
generators'
incentives
to
recover
solvents,
rather
than
blend
them
for
use
as
fuels.
Micro­
economic
factors
include
transportation
access
to
offsite
recycling
facilities
or
via
mobile
recycling
unit,
recycled
solvent
quality,
and
minimum
purity
specifications
(
higher
quality
specifications
require
higher
processing
costs),
addition
of
acid
inhibitors
or
metal
stabilizers,
batch
size
of
recycling
operations
(
increasing
batch
size
lowers
unit
costs
for
recycling),
still
bottom
disposal,
and
resale
value
of
the
recycled
solvent.
9
The
map
below
displays
the
location
of
51
commercial
spent
solvent
hazardous
waste
recycling
facilities
identified
in
the
"
2003
Directory
of
US
Commercial
Recycling
Facilities"
(
Hazardous
Waste
Consultant,
Vol.
21,
Nr.
3,
Aspen
Publishers
Inc.).
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

48
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

49
!
Solvent
Extraction
(
Centrifugation)

The
following
tables
and
graphs
(
below
and
next
three
pages)
present
(
a)
wipes
centrifuge
capital
and
O&
M
cost
data,
(
b)
wipes
centrifuge
and
solvent
recycling
net
costs
(
reflecting
hypothetical
cost
offset
for
reuse
value
of
recycled
solvents),
and
(
c)
break­
even
curve
to
illustrate
the
solvent
reuse
values
required
to
achieve
cost
break­
even,
based
on
a
sample
of
five
wipes
centrifuge
machine
sizes
(
i.
e.
five
alternative
annual
wipes
processing
capacities).

Wipes
Centrifuge
&
Recovered
Solvent
Management
Costs
For
Processing
Solvent­
Contaminated
Industrial
Wipes
Facility
Size*

Centrifuge
Wipes
Capacity:
1999
Reference
Cost
Data:*
2001$
Cost
Update:****

Facility
size
classes
%
Centrifuge
capital
cost
(
initial
year)
Annualized***
equivalent
cap.
cost
($/
year)
Centrifuge
O&
M
cost
($/
year)
Total
annualized
cost
($/
year)
Total
annualized
cost
($/
year)
Implied
Average
Cost/
Wipe:

Reusables
($/
wipe)
Disposables
($/
wipe)
Base
capacity
(
lbs/
year)
Reusables
(
wipes/
year)**
Disposables
(
wipes/
year)**

1
20%
8,800
70,400
162,800
$
37,076
$
4,250
$
9,435
$
13,685
$
13,839
$
0.1966
$
0.0850
2
50%
130,000
1,040,000
2,405,000
$
40,034
$
4,589
$
25,721
$
30,310
$
30,652
$
0.0295
$
0.0127
3
84%
650,000
5,200,000
12,025,000
$
73,517
$
8,427
$
49,032
$
57,459
$
58,107
$
0.0112
$
0.0048
4
95%
1,794,000
14,352,000
33,189,000
$
154,130
$
17,666
$
128,477
$
146,143
$
147,793
$
0.0103
$
0.0045
5
99%
3,500,000
28,000,000
64,750,000
$
297,043
$
34,047
$
249,216
$
283,263
$
286,460
$
0.0102
$
0.0044
Explanatory
Notes:
(
a)
*
1999
cost
data
source:
Eastern
Research
Group,
Inc.,
04
April
2000
memorandum
to
USEPA­
EAD
(
George
Denning),
"
Revised
Draft
Documentation
for
Operating
and
Installing
a
Centrifuge
at
Industrial
Laundries",
3
pages
+
17
calculation
sheets.
Facility
size
categories
(
i.
e.
centrifuge
annual
processing
capacity
categories)
established
based
on
USEPA
Office
of
Water
sample
of
145
industrial
wipes
laundries.
(
b)
The
above
cost
estimates
exclude/
include
the
following
costs
associated
with
RCRA
Subtitle
C
hazardous
waste
solvent
management
requirements:
 
Exclude
costs
associated
with
RCRA
Subtitle
C
permitting,
which
is
not
required
for
solvent
extraction
processes
in
OSW's
proposed
solvent
wipes
rule.
­­
Include
costs
for
solvent
storage
tanks,
tank
secondary
containment,
&
RCRA
hazardous
waste
manifest
transport
of
solvent
to
offsite
reclaimers
(
e.
g.
recyclers).
­­
Include
RCRA
administrative
costs
to
generating
facility
($
1,800
per
facility).
(
c)
**
Nr.
annual
wipes
estimated
by
multiplying
annual
pounds,
times
average
lbs
per
solvent­
contaminated
wipe:
Reusable
wipes
Disposable
wipes
 
Average
weight
of
wet
solvent­
contaminated
industrial
wipe
(
lbs/
wipe)
=
0.1250
0.0541
100%
 
Average
weight
of
dry
industrial
wipe
(
lbs/
wipe)
=
0.0750
0.0324
60%
 
Average
weight
of
solvent
contained­
in
a
contaminated
industrial
wipe
(
lbs/
wipe)
=
0.0500
0.0216
40%
(
d)
***
Cost
annualization
factors:
Discount
rate
=
7.0%
Centrifuge
equipment
lifespan
=
12.5
years
(
e)
****
Cost
update
multiplier
(
http://
www.
che.
com):
1999
Chem.
Eng.
Plant
Cost
Index
(
reference
cost
data
source)
=
389.9
2001
Chem.
Eng.
Plant
Cost
Index
=
394.3
Cost
update
multiplier
(
2001/
1999)
=
1.011
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

50
Net
Cost
for
Wipes
Centrifuging
&
Solvent
Recycling
For
Processing
Solvent­
Contaminated
Industrial
Wipes
Reference
facility
size
categories
Facility
size
percentile
Annual
Quantity
Wipes
Solvent
Recovered
Solvent
Recovery
Costs:
Net
Cost
(
2001$):

Solvent
reuse
value
needed
for
break­
even
A
Annualized
centrifuge
cost
($/
year)
B
Solvent
recycling
cost
($/
year)
C
(
A+
B)
Centrifuge
+
recycling
cost
($/
gallon)
D
Reuse
value**
recycled
solvent
($/
year)
E
(
C+
D)
Net
cost
($/
year)
Average
Net
Cost
Per
Wipe:

Average
net
cost
per
gallon
Reusables
($/
wipe)
Disposables
($/
wipe)
(
lbs/
year)*
(
gals/
year)*

1
20%
2,746
352
$
13,839
$
893
$
41.85
($
1,153)
$
13,579
$
0.1929
$
0.0834
$
38.58
$
41.85
2
50%
40,560
5,200
$
30,652
$
13,191
$
8.43
($
17,035)
$
26,807
$
0.0258
$
0.0111
$
5.16
$
8.43
3
84%
202,800
26,000
$
58,107
$
65,953
$
4.77
($
85,176)
$
38,884
$
0.0075
$
0.0032
$
1.50
$
4.77
4
95%
559,728
71,760
$
147,793
$
182,031
$
4.60
($
235,086)
$
94,738
$
0.0066
$
0.0029
$
1.32
$
4.60
5
99%
1,092,000
140,000
$
286,460
$
355,133
$
4.58
($
458,640)
$
182,953
$
0.0065
$
0.0028
$
1.31
$
4.58
Explanatory
Notes:
(
a)
*
Quantity
solvent
recovered
independent
of
wipes
type
under
full
capacity
loading,
given
assumption
that
both
types
contain
average
40%
solvent
by
weight.
Solvent
recovered
estimated
by
multiplying
annual
wipes
processed,
by
recovery
efficiency,
and
by
average
lbs
solvent
per
contaminated
wipe:
Average
weight
of
wet
solvent­
contaminated
reusable
industrial
wipe
(
lbs/
wipe)
=
0.1250
100%
Average
weight
of
dry
reusable
industrial
wipe
(
lbs/
wipe)
=
0.0750
60%
Average
weight
of
solvent
contained­
in
a
contaminated
reusable
industrial
wipe
(
lbs/
wipe)
=
0.0500
40%
Average
weight
of
wet
solvent­
contaminated
disposable
industrial
wipe
(
lbs/
wipe)
=
0.0541
100%
Average
weight
of
dry
disposable
industrial
wipe
(
lbs/
wipe)
=
0.0324
60%
Average
weight
of
solvent
contained­
in
a
contaminated
disposable
industrial
wipe
(
lbs/
wipe)
=
0.0216
40%
(
b)
**
Other
assumptions:
Centrifuge
solvent
recovery
efficiency
(
ERG
Memorandum
to
OSW,
04
April
2000,
sheet
13
of
17)
=
78%
Average
cost
based
on
data
sample
of
onsite
and
offsite
hazardous
waste
solvent
recycling
services
($/
gal)
=
$
2.54
Average
reuse
value
of
recycled
solvent
based
on
median
price
for
sample
of
43
solvents
ranging
in
price
from
$
0.75
to
$
6.19/
gallon
($/
gal)
=
$
3.28
Assumed
average
specific
gravity
(
density)
of
solvents
applied
to
reusable
industrial
wipes
(
pounds
per
gallon
of
solvent)
=
7.8
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

51
8,800
130,000
650,000
1,794,000
3,500,000
Annual
Pounds
of
Solvent­
Contaminated
Industrial
Wipes
Processed
Per
Facility
(
Five
Centrifuge
Size/
Capacity
Classes)
$
0.0000
$
0.0100
$
0.0200
$
0.0300
$
0.0400
$
0.0500
$
0.0600
$
0.0700
$
0.0800
$
0.0900
$
0.1000
$
0.1100
$
0.1200
$
0.1300
$
0.1400
$
0.1500
$
0.1600
$
0.1700
$
0.1800
$
0.1900
$
0.2000
$
0.2100
Net
Cost
Per­
Wipe
for
Centrifuge
&
Solvent
Recycling
Reusable
wipes
Disposable
wipes
Note:
$
3.28/
gallon
reuse
value
based
on
median
price
for
a
sample
of
43
solvents
ranging
in
price
from
$
0.75
to
$
6.19/
gallon.
Average
Net
Cost
Per­
Wipe
for
Centrifuge
&
Solvent
Recovery
(
Including
Average
$
3.28/
Gallon
Cost
Offset
Credit
for
Hypothetical
Reuse
Value
of
Recycled
Solvent)
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

52
8,800
130,000
650,000
1,794,000
3,500,000
Annual
Pounds
of
Solvent­
Contaminated
Industrial
Wipes
Processed
Per
Facility
(
Five
Centrifuge
Size/
Capacity
Classes)
$
0
$
2
$
4
$
6
$
8
$
10
$
12
$
14
$
16
$
18
$
20
$
22
$
24
$
26
$
28
$
30
$
32
$
34
$
36
$
38
$
40
$
42
$
44
$
Per
Gallon
Recovered
Wipes
Solvent
Breakeven
curve
Net
cost
curve
Note:
Net
cost
curve
based
on
average
of
$
3.28/
gallon
reuse
value
assigned
to
recovered
solvent,
to
offset
average
cost
of
wipes
solvent
centrifuging
&
recycling.
Solvent
Processing
(
Centrifuge
&
Recycling)
Breakeven
Curve
&
Net
Cost
Curve
Breakeven
=
Market
Reuse
Value
($/
Gallon)
of
Recycled
Solvent
Needed
to
Cover
Centrifuge
&
Recycling
Costs
The
graph
below
illustrates
the
hypothetical
solvent
reuse
values
required
to
achieve
cost
break­
even
for
each
of
the
five
centrifuge
size
classes,
relative
to
an
average
cost
of
$
2.54/
gallon
for
onsite
and
offsite
solvent
recycling,
in
addition
to
the
costs
for
wipes
centrifuging
shown
in
the
prior
tables
and
graphs.
The
break­
even
curve
displayed
below
suggests
that
onsite
wipes
centrifugation
may
only
be
beneficial
(
cost­
effective)
for
the
largest
16%
of
solvent
wipes
generating
facilities
and
industrial
laundry
(
i.
e.
generating
or
handling
>
650,000
pounds
solvent­
contaminated
wipes
per
year),
or
for
intra­
company
consolidation
of
centrifuge
capacity
for
processing
solvent
wipes
generated
by
multiple
facilities,
or
for
facilities
which
require
premium­
priced
solvents
(
i.
e.
>$
5.00/
gallon
in
price)
which
capture
relatively
high
reuse
value
from
recycled
premium­
priced
solvents.
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

53
II.
J.
Analytic
Baseline
!
State
Policy
Baseline:

Since
1991,
the
Federal
RCRA
policy
has
been
to
defer
the
regulatory
disposition
of
solvent
industrial
wipes
to
EPA
regional
offices
and
to
state
regulatory
agencies.
This
policy
resulted
in
many
states
conditionally
excluding
reusable
wipes
from
hazardous
waste
regulations.
Consequently,
the
anticipated
impact
of
the
proposed
exclusions
will
not
be
incremental
relative
to
full
RCRA
regulatory
compliance,
but
incremental
to
current
state
exclusions.
This
is
the
analytic
baseline
applied
in
this
study.

!
Full
RCRA
Subtitle
C
Baseline:

This
alternative
baseline
is
defined
as
hypothetical
full
compliance
with
Federal
RCRA
Subtitle
C
hazardous
waste
generation
and
treatment
regulations,
without
either
a
Federal
or
state­
level
exclusion.
This
baseline
includes
hypothetical
compliance
with
the
RCRA
hazardous
waste
"
derived­
from"
rule
(
40
CFR
261.3(
c)(
2)(
i))
which
would
hypothetically
affect
industrial
laundry
sludges,
as
well
as
the
industrial
wipes.
Hypothetically,
industrial
laundry
sludges
could
be
regulated
as
RCRA
hazardous
wastes
because
of
RCRA's
"
derived­
from"
rule.
If
the
Federal
RCRA
Subtitle
C
hazardous
waste
standards
governed
current
operations
at
industrial
wipes
laundries,
the
proposed
exclusion
would
represent
a
relatively
larger
annual
regulatory
cost
savings
to
industrial
laundries,
incremental
to
this
hypothetical
alternative
RCRA
Subtitle
C
compliance
baseline.
To
estimate
this
hypothetical
cost
savings,
it
is
assumed
that
the
annual
costs
associated
with
hypothetical
full
compliance
with
the
RCRA
Subtitle
C
regulations
for
hazardous
waste
generators
(
40
CFR
262),
would
be
incurred
by
the
590
to
1,175
estimated
range
of
industrial
laundries
which
manage
reusable
industrial
wipes
contaminated
with
RCRA­
listed
solvents
(
see
attached
spreadsheets).

!
Incomplete
Compliance
Baseline:

Assume
partial
non­
compliance
with
existing
state
exclusions,
such
that
the
incremental
implementation
costs
of
the
proposed
exclusions
would
be
greater,
and
the
potential
cost
savings
less,
relative
to
the
assumed
full
compliance
baseline
with
the
current
state
exclusions.
Because
USEPA
does
not
have
comprehensive
information
about
the
rate
of
non­
compliance
of
industrial
wipes
users
and
handlers
relative
to
this
alternative
third
baseline,
it
is
not
presented
in
this
report.
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

54
!
Disposable
Wipes
Baseline
Non­
Compliance:

In
itself,
the
Federal
regulatory
relief
provided
to
disposables
wipes
users
in
form
of
cost
savings
for
avoided
RCRA
Subtitle
C
disposal,
largely
drives
the
resultant
difference
in
relative
prices,
and
the
consequent
induced
impact
on
industrial
wipes
marketshare
between
disposables
and
reusables.
The
findings
summarized
above
are
based
on
the
baseline
assumption
that
100%
of
spent
disposable
solvent
wipes
generators
currently
manage
their
waste
under
RCRA
Subtitle
C
requirements
(
baseline).
However,
baseline
non­
compliance
will
reduce
the
annual
dollar
value
of
the
regulatory
relief,
thereby
diminishing
the
difference
in
resultant
relative
prices,
and
consequent
induced
marketshare
impact.
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

55
III.
Description
of
US
Industrial
Wipes
Market
&
Potentially
Affected
Establishments
III.
A.
Overview
of
"
Industrial
Wipes"
in
the
US
Economy
"
Industrial
wipes"
come
in
a
wide
variety
of
types
and
brands
to
meet
a
broad
range
of
applications.
The
major
division
is
between
reusable
wipes,
which
are
laundered
or
dry
cleaned
and
used
again,
and
disposable
wipes
which
are
used
for
a
single
or
limited
number
of
applications,
and
then
discarded.
Disposable
wipes
include
both
non­
woven
and
woven
wipes,
which
are
used
by
numerous
industries
in
conjunction
with
solvents,
to
clean
surfaces,
parts,
accessories,
products,
machines,
and
physical
plant
&
equipment.

Definitions
of
"
Industrial
Wipes"
Applied
in
This
Study
Category
Definitions
of
Wipes
Disposable
industrial
wipes
Industrial
wipes:
Non­
woven
towel
consisting
of
wood
pulp*,
polyester
blends
or
100
percent
polypropylene.
These
materials
come
in
all
sizes
and
thicknesses.
They
generally
are
designed
for
one
time
use
and
are
used
to
wipe
small
quantities
of
solvents
off
hands,
tools,
equipment,
or
floors.

Industrial
rags:
Non­
homogeneous
material
consisting
of
cotton
or
polyester
fabric
blends.
Rags
are
made
from
old
(
waste)
clothing,
sheets,
towels,
or
from
cloth
remnants
from
textile
mills,
and
vary
in
size,
color
and
type
of
fabric.
Rags
are
typically
used
by
facilities
such
as
gas
stations
to
apply
and/
or
remove
small
quantities
of
solvents,
grease,
and
oil
from
auto
parts
over
the
course
of
a
day.
After
use,
most
rags
are
disposed
of
as
part
of
a
facility's
regular,
nonhazardous
solid
waste.

Paper
towels:
Sometimes
used
in
conjunction
with
solvents
in
the
workplace.
These
materials
are
made
from
wood
pulp*
with
binders.
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

Category
Definitions
of
Wipes
56
Reusable
industrial
wipes
Industrial
shop
towels:
Woven
textile
consisting
of
cotton
(
e.
g.
flannel,
corduroy,
terry,
chenille,
denim,
sheeting,
muslin,
scrim)
or
polyester
blends.
These
materials
are
a
finite
reusable
item
that
are
primarily
water­
wash
laundered
or
solvent
dry­
cleaned
a
number
of
times
(
usually
10
to
15),
before
they
outlive
their
usefulness
and
must
be
recycled
or
discarded.
Shop
towels
are
rented
by
industrial
launderers
to
manufacturing,
automotive,
chemical,
and
other
similar
facilities
for
use
in
heavy­
duty
cleaning
and
wiping.
Soiled
shop
towels
are
either
washed
or
dry­
cleaned
at
commercial
laundry
facilities.

Explanatory
Notes:
(
a)
*
For
the
purpose
of
encouraging
paper
and
paper
product
recycling
in
the
US,
Subtitle
F
(
Section
6002)
of
the
1976
RCRA
requires
Federal
agencies
to
buy
paper
products
(
and
other
items)
composed
of
the
highest
percentage
of
recovered
materials
practicable.
!
In
1988
USEPA
established
the
first
"
buy
recycled"
guidelines
for
paper
and
paper
products
containing
recovered
materials.
!
In
1998
USEPA
updated
these
guidelines,
which
currently
recommend
40%
to
100%
recovered
fiber
content
for
industrial
wipes,
which
should
include
at
least
40%
post­
consumer
fiber
content
(
i.
e.
paper
recovered
from
homes
and
offices);
USEPA
OSWER,
"
1998
Buy
Recycled
Series:
Paper
Products",
EPA­
530­
F­
98­
012,
July
1998,
8
pp.,
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
epaoswer/
non­
hw/
procure/
pdf/
paper.
pdf.
!
In
2000
EPA
identified
40
paper
mill
companies
in
the
US
and
Canada
which
produce
paper
products
from
recovered
paper,
some
of
which
manufacture
industrial
wipes:
USEPA
OSWER,
EPA­
530­
B­
99­
012,
Jan
2000,
pp.,
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
cpg/
products/
tissue.
htm.
(
b)
It
is
important
to
note
that
"
institutional
wipes"
 
another
category
of
wipes
which
are
used
mainly
by
janitorial
services,
hospitals,
schools,
restaurants,
hotels,
and
other
service­
related
establishments
 
may
also
be
affected
by
the
proposed
exclusions,
but
are
not
within
the
scope
of
this
economic
study
as
an
itemized
separate
category
of
wipes,
because
the
lack
of
explicit
data
on
the
extent
to
which
institutional
wipes
are
used
in
conjunction
with
RCRA­
listed
solvents
suggests
that
there
may
be
relatively
small
solvent
wipes
quantities
involved,
compared
to
the
industrial
categories
covered
in
this
study.

Industrial
wipes
are
distinguished
by
their
respective
price,
material
composition
(
fabric
type),
color,
size,
durability,
usage
suitability
characteristics,
and
disposal
methods.
The
type
of
industrial
wipe
 
paper
or
cloth
wipe,
shop
towel,
or
rag
 
suitable
for
each
application
depends
on
a
number
of
factors,
some
of
which
are
summarized
in
the
table
below.
Industrial
wipes
may
be
flat­
packed
or
folded
for
delivery
in
10,
25
or
50
pound
boxes,
or
in
100,
150
or
1,000
pound
bales,
and
dispensed
to
users
in
bulk
cartons,
pop­
up
box
dispensers,
or
roll
dispensers.
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

10
"
Solvent"
=
Usually
a
liquid
used
to
dissolve,
disperse,
extract
or
mix
one
or
more
other
substances
or
materials
(
other
liquids
or
solids).
Substances
dissolved
by
solvents
are
usually
called
"
solutes".
"
Solvation"
is
the
physical
and
chemical
process
by
which
one
or
more
substances
dissolve
into
a
solvent.
The
resultant
"
solution"
(
i.
e.
mixture
of
solvent
and
solutes)
may
be
"
concentrated"
(
i.
e.
a
large
proportional
quantity
of
solutes
are
dissolved
in
the
solvent)
or
"
dilute"
(
i.
e.
small
proportion
of
solutes
relative
to
quantity
of
solvent).
Solvents
have
many
different
applications,
are
used
in
many
different
industrial
processes,
appear
in
many
different
household
products,
and
consist
of
many
different
chemical
(
molecular)
types.
Water,
which
is
one
of
the
most
abundant
chemicals
in
nature,
serves
as
a
good
solvent
for
many
types
of
substances.
During
the
last
century,
the
largest
manufactured
chemical
class
of
solvents
used
globally
for
industrial
applications
has
been
chlorinated
aliphatic
hydrocarbon
chemicals,
although
other
classes
of
chemicals
may
serve
as
solvents:
cyclic
hydrocarbons,
aromatic
hydrocarbons,
ketones,
amines,
esters,
ethers,
glycols,
alcohols,
aldehydes,
and
carboxylic
acids.
By
1981
there
were
approximately
350
different
solvents
commonly
in
use
in
the
USA
(
source:
OSHA
website),
but
there
are
over
30,000
industrial
solvents
(
Corn,
1993,
p.
506).
Depending
upon
the
physical
and
chemical
characteristics
of
solvents
compared
to
solutes,
some
substances
may
be
completely
miscible
(
soluble),
partially
miscible,
or
totally
immiscible
(
not
soluble)
in
a
particular
solvent.
The
solution
process
nearly
always
occurs
with
either
an
absorption
or
release
of
energy
(
heat);
the
quantity
of
energy
that
is
absorbed
(
endothermic)
or
released
(
exothermic)
when
a
substance
is
dissolved
by
a
solvent
is
called
the
"
heat
of
solution".
For
human
health
and
safety
information
about
solvents
see
the
US
Occupational
Safety
&
Health
Administration
(
OSHA)
websites:
http://
www.
osha­
slc.
gov/
SLTC/
solvents/
and
http://
www.
osha.
gov/
oshinfo/
priorities/
solvents.
html
,
and
the
reference
book:
Handbook
of
Hazardous
Materials,
Morton
Corn
(
ed.),
Academic
Press
Inc.,
1993
("
Industrial
Solvents"
pp.
387­
398;
"
Organic
Solvents
Health
Effects"
pp.
505­
519).

57
Physical
Factors
Affecting
User
Selection
of
Industrial
Wipes
Products
Wipes
Lint
The
amount
of
lint
residue
 
the
loose,
small
particles
of
fuzz,
fine
ravelings
and
short
fibers
of
fabrics
and
fabric­
like
materials
 
allowed
in
a
particular
industrial
worktask
or
other
wipes
application,
plays
a
large
role
in
the
selection
of
an
appropriate
industrial
wipe,
since
some
electronic
equipment
manufacturing
or
printing
applications,
for
example,
cannot
tolerate
any
lint,
while
other
industrial
applications
can
tolerate
large
amounts
of
lint.

Wipes
Absorbency
Wipes
absorbency
capacity
 
as
measured
by
the
relative
quantity
of
solvent
or
other
substances
wipes
are
able
to
take
up
 
and
wipes
absorbency
rate
(
the
amount
of
time
it
takes
a
wipe
to
absorb
a
particular
quantity
of
solvent
or
other
substance),
also
are
two
important
factors
in
some
industrial
worktasks
and
wipes
applications,
while
not
in
others.

Wipes
Durability
Wipes
durability
is
important
in
some
wipes
worktasks
and
applications,
such
as
those
that
require
heavy
scrubbing,
while
often
not
important
in
tasks
where
lint
or
absorbency
considerations
are
more
important.
Durability
does
not
only
refer
to
the
physical
strength
of
the
wipe,
but
also
to
its
ability
to
withstand
contact
(
at
different
time
durations)
with
strong
chemical
solvents,
other
substances,
materials
and
surfaces.
Some
wipes
manufacturers
improve
durability
by
reinforcement
of
wipes
with
multiple
laminated
layers
(
multi­
ply),
and/
or
nylon
webbing.
Industrial
wipes
are
available
for
delicate
tasks,
critical
tasks,
general
purpose
tasks,
and
light­,
medium­
and
heavy­
duty
tasks.

Once
industrial
wipes
are
used
and
are
no
longer
suitable
for
their
intended
purpose,
they
become
in
whole
or
in
part,
solid
wastes
(
if
not
completely
recycled),
and
potentially
hazardous
wastes,
depending
upon
the
type
of
solvent10
used
in
conjunction
with
the
wipes.
The
use
of
industrial
wipes
in
the
US
economy
is
depicted
according
to
the
simplified
material
flow
diagram
provided
on
the
next
page,
which
illustrates
the
origin,
use,
and
ultimate
disposition
of
industrial
wipes
in
the
economy,
as
symbolized
box­
flow
relationships
between
different
economic
sub­
sectors
.
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

58
Entities
Potentially
Eligible
For
&
Subject
to
the
Proposed
Exclusions
Simplified
Illustration
of
the
Origin
and
Flow
of
"
Industrial
Wipes"
in
the
US
Economy
Soiled
reusable
wipes
at
end
of
lifespan
Users
of
Both
Disposable
&
Reusable
Industrial
Wipes
Reusable
Industrial
Reusable
Industrial
Wipes
Manufacturers
Solid
Waste
Management
(
Reclamation
&
Disposal
of
Used
&
Discarded
Wipes)
Clean
Disposable
Industrial
Wipes
Users
Soiled
Linen
Supply
&
Laundering
Services
(
Industrial
Launderers)
Disposable
Industrial
Wipes
Manufacturers
Soiled,
discarded
disposable
wipes
Industrial
Wipes
Distributors
(
Wholesalers)
Manufacturers
of
Equipment
Used
for
Packaging
(
Bailing)
and
Dispensing
Industrial
Wipes
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

59
US
Industrial
Wipes
Market:
1997
Economic
Statistics
on
the
Manufacturing
&
Supply
of
Industrial
Wipes
A.
Industrial
Wipes
Sub­
Sector
Statistics:
B.
Industrial
Wipes
Product
or
Commodity
Line
Statistics:

Item
SIC
Sub­
Sector
Code
NAICS
Sub­
Sector
Code
NAICS
Sub­
Sector
Code
Description
NAICS
Sub­
Sector
Total
Number
of
Companies
NAICS
Sub­
Sector
Total
Number
of
Establishments
NAICS
Sub­
Sector
Annual
Revenues
($
millions)
NAICS
Product
Code
or
Commodity
Line
Code
NAICS
Product
or
Commodity
Line
Description
Total
Number
Establishments
Nr.
Companies
With
>$
100k
Revenues
Revenues
($
millions)

Production
(
Manufacturing)
of
Industrial
Wipes
(
Disposables
&
Reusables):

1
239910
314999
All
other
miscellaneous
textile
product
mills
mfg
2,163
2,237
$
6,188.857
3149999451
Fabricated
industrial
shop
towels
(
reusables)
No
data
4
$
37.289
2
262110
322121
Paper
mills
(
except
newsprint)
120
262
$
40,184.049
322121N881
Industrial
paper
wipers
(
disposables)
No
data
2
***

3
267620
322291
Sanitary
paper
product
mfg
99
141
$
9,770.017
3222915661
Industrial
paper
towels
(
disposables)
No
data
10
$
243.677
4
3222915881
Industrial
paper
wipes
(
disposables)
No
data
8
***

5
5093
4219303
Other
recyclable
material
wholesale
trade
No
data
4,020
$
14,950.615
42193032941
Wiping
cloths,
waste
rags,
&
textile
waste
(
disposables)
488
No
data
$
880.970
Column
subtotals
(
items
1+...+
5)
=
Incomplete
data
6,660
$
71,093.538
Incomplete
data
Incomplete
data
$
1,325.249
Sub­
total
disposable
wipes
(
items
2+
3+
4+
5)
=
Incomplete
4,423
$
64,904.681
Incomplete
Incomplete
$
1,287.96
Subtotal
paper
disposable
wipes
(
items
2+
3+
4)
=
Incomplete
403
$
49,954.066
Incomplete
20
$
406.99
Laundering
of
Reusable
Industrial
Wipes:

6
7218
812332
Industrial
launderers
796
1,613
$
5,007.637
8123326303
Industrial
wiping
cloths
1,175
No
data
$
407.897
Column
totals
(
items
1+...+
6)
=
Incomplete
8,273
$
76,101.175
Incomplete
Incomplete
$
1,733.146
Explanatory
Notes:
(
a)
***
Total
revenues
for
322121N881
+
3222915881
=
$
163.313
million
(
source:
US
Dept
of
Commerce,
Bureau
of
the
Census,
"
NAICS
Code
322291
Manufacturing
­
Industry
Series",
Appendix
F,
Part
1
Product
Statistics,
p.
F­
2,
http://
www.
census.
gov/
prod/
ec97/
97m3222o.
pdf).
(
b)
Sources:
US
Department
of
Commerce,
Bureau
of
the
Census
"
1997
Economic
Census"
documents:

!
1997
Economic
Census:
All
Other
Misc.
Textile
Product
Mills
Manufacturing,
Table
6a,
p.
10
(
http://
www.
census.
gov/
prod/
ec97/
97m3149e.
pdf
).

!
1997
Economic
Census:
Sanitary
Paper
Product
Manufacturing,
Table
6a,
p.
11
(
http://
www.
census.
gov/
prod/
ec97/
97m3222o.
pdf).

!
1997
Economic
Census:
Other
Serivces,
Table
1a,
p.
28
(
http://
www.
census.
gov/
prod/
ec97/
97s81­
ls.
pdf).
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

60
III.
B.
Types
of
Entities
Potentially
Affected
by
the
Proposed
RCRA
Exclusions
As
itemized
in
the
following
table,
the
assessment
of
potential
economic
impact
of
the
proposed
exclusions
in
this
report,
focuses
on
three
categories
of
entities
which
are
potentially
eligible
and
subject
to
the
requirements
of
the
proposed
exclusions.
In
addition
to
three
types
of
entities,
there
are
at
least
seven
other
categories
of
entities
that
are
involved
in
the
US
market
for
the
supply,
distribution
and
ultimate
recycling/
disposal
of
industrial
wipes,
that
may
also
be
ultimately
affected
by,
but
not
directly
subject
to,
the
proposed
exclusions.

Types
of
Entities
Potentially
Affected
(
Directly
or
Indirectly)
by
the
Proposed
RCRA
Exclusions
for
Solvent­
Contaminated
Industrial
Wipes
Item
Type
of
Entities
Description
of
Entities
A.
Entities
Potentially
Eligible
for
and
Directly
Subject
to
the
Proposed
RCRA
Exclusions:

1
Industrial
wipes
users
Facilities
that
use
disposable
or
reusable
industrial
wipes
in
conjunction
with
chemical
solvents
(
referred
to
as
solvent­
contaminated
wipes
"
generators"
in
this
study).

2
Industrial
wipes
laundries*
Industrial
laundries
that
supply
and
clean
the
solvent­
contaminated
reusable
wipes
(
e.
g.
shop
towels).

3
Solid
waste
facilities
Discarded
industrial
wipes
material
recyclers,
solid
waste
energy
recoverers
(
combustors),
and
solid
waste
disposers.

B.
Other
Entities
Involved
in
the
Industrial
Wipes
Market,
But
Not
Subject
to
the
Proposed
Exclusions:

4
Industrial
wipes
manufacturers
Industrial
wipes
are
manufactured
by
companies
located
in
different
countries
around
the
globe.
For
example,
USEPA's
quick
scan
(
Feb
2001)
of
dozens
of
assorted
Internet
search
listings
using
the
browser
search
phrase
"
industrial
wipes",
revealed
that
industrial
wipes
are
manufactured
and/
or
distributed
in
many
countries
(
e.
g.
USA,
Canada,
United
Kingdom,
Pakistan,
Turkey,
India,
Germany,
Netherlands),
and
by
at
least
12
states
within
the
USA
(
CA,
CT,
FL,
GA,
IN,
KY,
MA,
NC,
NY,
PA,
TX,
WI).

5
Industrial
wipes
importers/
exporters
Globally­
manufactured
industrial
wipes
are
made
available
for
export/
import
shipment
to
other
countries
(
e.
g.
via
Internet
business
orders),
directly
by
manufacturers,
or
by
other
export
distributors.
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

Item
Type
of
Entities
Description
of
Entities
61
6
Industrial
wipes
transporters
Wipes
manufacturers:
New
(
unused)
Industrial
wipes
may
be
transported
by
wipes
manufacturer­
or
distributor­
owned
trucks,
or
by
independently­
owned
freight
truck
companies,
to
businesses
which
purchase
wipes
for
assorted
uses.

Reusable
wipes
laundries:
Industrial
laundry
services
usually
transport
clean
and
soiled
reusable
wipes
from
users
to
laundry
facilities.

7
Industrial
wipes
equipment
Consists
of
manufacturers
of
industrial
wipes
bailing
machines,
bagging
machines,
bailed/
bagged
wipes
conveyor
machines,
discarded
wipes
shredding
machines,
and
discarded
wipes
combustion
machines
(
USEPA's
Feb
2001
quick
Internet
search
yielded
a
list
of
12
such
companies).

8
Industrial
wipes
business
associations
At
least
12
business
associations
(
as
of
Feb
2001)
are
involved
with
the
industrial
wipes
industry
(
in
USA
and
abroad):
Uniform
&
Textile
Service
Assn.,
Textile
Rental
Services
Assn.
of
America,
INDA
­
The
Assn.
of
the
Non­
Woven
Fabrics
Industry,
European
Textile
Services
Assn.,
All
India
Yarn
Processors
Assn.,
Bureau
International
de
la
Recuperation,
German
Scrap,
Recycling
&
Waste
Disposal
Assn.,
Institute
of
Scrap
Recycling
Industries,
Secondary
Materials
&
Recycled
Textiles
Assn.,
Textile
Fibers
&
By­
Products
Assn.,
Textile
Recycling
Assn.,
Dutch
Textile
Recycling
Assn.

9
Industrial
wipes
material
exchanges
Two
Internet­
based
industrial
wipes
exchanges
listed
335
wipes
trading
and
wipes
recycling
companies
(
as
of
Feb
2001):
°
Textile
Fiberspace
Exchange
(
TFE)
"
Rags
and
Wipers
Exchange"
internet
website:
http://
www.
textilefiberspace.
com/
a/
tx1410.
html.
°
The
Recycler's
Exchange
for
rags
&
wipes:
http://
www.
recycle.
net/
Textile/
rag/
index.
html.

10
Industrial
wipes
publications
USEPA
identified
nine
publications
targeted
or
containing
information
about
the
industrial
wipes
industry
(
Industrial
Fabric
Products
Review,
Magazine
Recycling
Benelux,
Recycling
International
Magazine,
Recycling
Today,
Recycling
World
Publication
(
UK),
SCRAP
magazine,
Secondary
Market
Guide,
Textile
World,
Used
Equipment
Directory).
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

Item
Type
of
Entities
Description
of
Entities
11
USEPA
OECA's
"
Industry
Sector
Notebooks"
are
available
at
the
website:
http://
es.
epa.
gov/
oeca/
sector/
.
As
of
year
2000,
there
were
32
OECA
industry
sector
notebooks,
as
well
as
one
on
the
local
government
sector,
and
one
on
the
Federal
facilities
sector.
These
notebooks
are
classified
according
to
the
US
Bureau
of
Census
Standard
Industrial
Classification
(
SIC)
code
sytem
(
originated
in
the
1930'
s),
which
was
replaced
by
the
Federal
government's
1997
adoption
of
the
North
American
Industrial
Classification
System
(
NAICS)
codes.
The
NAICS
provides
1,170
total
industry
classifications,
compared
to
1,017
under
the
SIC
system,
including
358
new
industries
the
SIC
system
did
not
identify
(
http://
www.
census.
gov/
epcd/
www/
naics.
html
).

62
Explanatory
Notes:
(
a)
*
The
USEPA's
Design
for
the
Environment
(
DfE)
Program
of
the
Office
of
Pollution
Prevention
&
Toxics
(
OPPT)
is
partnering
with
industrial
laundries
and
laundry
detergent
formulators
to
assist
in
designing
and
using
products
with
improved
environmental
qualities
(
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
opptintr/
dfe/
laundry/
laundry.
html
).
(
b)
The
DfE
Program
is
also
developing
a
series
of
case
studies
to
illustrate
how
the
DfE
theme
can
be
applied
to
managing
solvents
and
industrial
wipes
in
lithographic
printing
operations,
with
the
objectives
of
substituting
less
volatile
solvents
used
for
cleaning,
and
reducing
solvent
quantities
absorbed
onto
industrial
wipes
(
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
opptintr/
dfe/
lithography/
lithography.
html).

The
remainder
of
this
document
addresses
only
the
first
three
types
of
entities
listed
in
the
table
above
(
i.
e.
items
1,
2,
3),
which
in
part
or
in
whole,
may
be
eligible
for
and
become
subject
to
the
conditions
of
the
proposed
exclusions
after
promulgation
as
a
final
rule
(
i.
e.
industrial
wipes
users,
industrial
wipes
laundries,
and
solid
waste
facilities).

III.
C.
Types
of
Industries
Which
Use
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
The
next
table
identifies
economic
sectors,
sub­
sectors
and
industries
(
mostly
manufacturing),
that
use
industrial
wipes
in
conjunction
with
solvents
for
manual
cleaning
or
degreasing
wiping
tasks.
EPA
derived
this
information
through
a
literature
search,
and
discussions
with
key
stakeholders
and
industry
contacts,
who
could
further
describe
industry
demographics
with
respect
to
the
use
of
solventcontaminated
wipes.
Another
important
source
in
identifying
relevant
industrial
sectors
was
EPA's
Office
of
Enforcement
and
Compliance
Assistance
(
OECA)
"
Industry
Sector
Notebooks"
which
identified
potential
users
of
solvent­
contaminated
wipes
by
fourdigit
Standard
Industrial
Classification
(
SIC)
code.
11
In
some
industries,
a
large
number
of
firms
use
wipes,
such
as
printing
and
auto
body
repair.
In
other
industries,
smaller
numbers
of
firms
use
wipes,
but
their
usage
can
be
considerable.
Similarly,
other
sectors
also
might
use
hazardous
solvents
in
conjunction
with
industrial
wipes.
For
instance,
we
were
unable
to
collect
sufficient
information
about
two
other
sub­
sectors
known
to
use
industrial
wipes,
to
include
in
this
economic
impact
study:

!
Instruments
and
related
products
manufacturers,
and
!
General
building
contractors
sub­
sectors
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

63
In
addition
to
industrial
wipes
"
users",
there
are
at
least
three
other
industries
which
otherwise
"
handle"
industrial
wipes:

!
Manufacturers
of
industrial
wipes
(
disposables
and
reusables),
!
Service
firms
which
supply,
collect
and
launder
industrial
wipes
for
industry
users,
and
!
Solid
waste
management
companies
which
receive
spent
(
discarded)
industrial
wipes
for
ultimate
disposal
(
or
material
reclamation/
recycling).

As
listed
in
the
following
table,
in
total
there
are
at
least
121
industries
using
or
otherwise
handling
solvent­
contaminated
industrial
wipes,
representing
15
economic
sub­
sectors
within
7
economic
sectors
(
i.
e.
manufacturing,
retail
trade,
information,
administrative
services,
other
services,
public
administration,
transportation
&
utilities).

List
of
Economic
Sub­
Sectors
Which
Use
or
Otherwise
Handle
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
Item
Sector
(
2­
digit
NAICS)
Sub­
Sector
(
3­
digit
NAICS)
Wipes
Activity
Industries
Using/
Handling
Wipes
(
six­
digit
NAICS)
Industry
count
A.
Users
of
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes:

1
Manufacturing
Printing
Wipes
user
323110,
323111,
323112,
323113,
323114,
323115,
323116,
323117,
323118,
323119,
323121,
323122
12
2
Manufacturing
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
Wipes
user
211112,
32511,
32512,
325131,
325132,
325181,
325182,
325188,
325191,
325192,
325193,
325199,
325998,
331311
14
3
Manufacturing
Plastics
&
Rubber
Products
Wipes
user
31332,
315299,
315999,
325991,
326113,
326121,
32613,
32614,
32615,
32616,
326199,
326191,
326192,
326211,
32622,
326291,
326299,
337215,
339113,
339932,
339991
21
4
Manufacturing
Fabricated
Metal
Products
Wipes
user
332812,
332813,
339911,
339912,
339914
5
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

Item
Sector
(
2­
digit
NAICS)
Sub­
Sector
(
3­
digit
NAICS)
Wipes
Activity
Industries
Using/
Handling
Wipes
(
six­
digit
NAICS)
Industry
count
64
5
Manufacturing
Industrial
Machinery
&
Equipment
Wipes
user
314999,
332323,
33241,
332991,
333111,
33312,
33322,
333295,
333298,
333319,
333414,
333511,
333512,
333513,
333514,
333515,
333518,
333911,
333923,
333999,
33651
21
6
Manufacturing
Electronics
&
Computers
Wipes
user
334411,
334412,
334413
3
7
Manufacturing
Transportation
Equipment**
Wipes
user
332912,
336111,
336112,
336211,
33633,
33634,
336399,
336312,
336411,
336412,
336414,
336415,
336419,
336612,
336992,
48839,
54171,
81149
18
8
Manufacturing
Furniture
&
Fixtures
Wipes
user
337115,
337121,
337122,
337124,
337127,
337211,
337212,
337215
8
9
Retail
Trade
Auto
Dealers
Wipes
user
44111,
44112
2
10
Information
Publishing
(
print)
Wipes
user
51111,
51112,
51113,
51114,
51119
5
11
Administrative
Services
Business
Service
Centers
(
copy
shops)
Wipes
user
561439
1
12
Other
Services
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
Wipes
user
811111,
811112
2
13
Public
Administration
Military
Bases
Wipes
user
92812
1
Subtotal
industrial
wipes
"
user"
industries
=
113
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

Item
Sector
(
2­
digit
NAICS)
Sub­
Sector
(
3­
digit
NAICS)
Wipes
Activity
Industries
Using/
Handling
Wipes
(
six­
digit
NAICS)
Industry
count
65
B.
Other
Handlers
of
Solvent­
Contaminated
Industrial
Wipes:

14
Transportation
&
Utilities
Solid
Waste
Mngmt
Nonhazardous
wastes
Discarded
wipes
disposer
(
if
RCRAexcluded
562111,
562212,
562213,
562219,
56292
5
Hazardous
wastes
Discarded
wipes
disposer
(
if
RCRA
C
regulated)
562112,
562211
2
15
Other
Services
Linen
supply
&
laundering
(
reusables)
Wipes
laundry
&
distributor
812332
(
8123326303
=
industrial
wiping
cloths)
1
Subtotal
industrial
wipes
"
other
handler"
industries
=
8
Total
NAICS
code
industry
count
=
121
Explanatory
Notes:
(
a)
Source:
USEPA
Office
of
Enforcement
&
Compliance
Assistance
(
OECA)
"
Industry
Sector
Notebooks":
http://
es.
epa.
gov/
oeca/
sector/
,
and
consultation
with
RCRA
regulatory
stakeholders
(
industry
associations,
USEPA
regional
offices,
state
government
officials,
as
identified
in
the
minutes
to
the
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
stakeholder
meeting
of
21
Jan
2000.
(
b)
*
NAICS
=
North
American
Industrial
Classification
System
(
http://
www.
census.
gov/
naics
).
(
c)
**
USEPA
in
this
study
did
not
collect
comprehensive
information
about
industrial
wipes
usage
for
transportation
equipment
manufacturing.
(
d)
In
addition
to
the
15
sub­
sectors
listed
above
in
this
table,
USEPA
suspects,
but
has
no
corroborative
data,
that
at
least
the
following
two
other
sub­
sectors,
representing
22
other
industries,
may
use
industrial
wipes,
because
of
similarities
in
some
worktasks
in
these
sub­
sectors
(
i.
e.
cleaning,
wiping),
to
the
known
user
sub­
sectors.
However,
these
two
sub­
sectors
are
excluded
from
this
economic
analysis:
16.
General
Building
Contractors
(
Construction)
=
23321,
23322,
23331,
23332
(
4
industries)
17.
Instruments
&
Related
Products
Mfg
=
325992,
333314,
333315,
334510
to
334519,
339111to
339115
(
18
industries)

In
addition
to
the
15
sub­
sectors
listed
in
the
table
above,
there
are
at
least
six
other
industries
which
are
directly
or
indirectly
interlinked
with
the
supply
and
use
of
solvent
industrial
wipes
in
the
national
economy,
as
listed
in
the
next
table.
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

66
List
of
Other
Industries
Which
Are
Directly
or
Indirectly
Interlinked
With
the
Supply
and
Use
of
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
in
the
National
Economy
Item
Sector
(
2­
digit
NAICS)
Sub­
Sector
(
3­
digit
NAICS)
Industry
(
6­
digit
NAICS)
Product
Code
(
7­
to
10­
digit
NAICS)
1997
Count
of
Companies*

A.
Solvents:

1
Manufacturing
Petroleum
&
Coal
Products
Petrochemicals
Aromatics
(
benzene,
toluene,
xylene,
etc.)
not
made
in
a
refinery
3251101
38
2
Manufacturing
Chemicals
All
other
basic
organic
chemicals
Other
synthetic
organic
chemicals
nec
325199R,
T,
U,
W
451
B.
Containers
(
storage
&
shipment
of
industrial
wipes):

3
Manufacturing
Plastics
&
Rubber
Products
Unsupported
plastics
bags
Other
polyethylene
specialty
bags,
pouches,
drum
&
box
liners,
shipping
sacks
32611115
175
4
Manufacturing
Plastics
&
Rubber
Products
All
other
plastics
products
Plastics
packaging
(
pails,
drums,
shipping
cases,
etc.)
32619941
747
5
Manufacturing
Fabricated
Metal
Products
Fabricated
metal
drums
&
pails
manufacturing
industry
Steel
shipping
barrels
&
drums
(
more
than
12
gallon
capacity,
excluding
beer
barrels)
3324393100
37
C.
Other
Sub­
Sectors:

6
Manufacturing
Printing
&
Related
Support
Activities
Other
commercial
printing
Label
&
wrapper
printing
3231192
128
Subtotal
=
>
1,576
Explanatory
Notes:
(
a)
*
Count
of
companies
based
on
1997
Economic
Census
"
number
of
companies
with
shipments
of
$
100,000
or
more",
so
the
count
shown
may
understate
the
total
number
of
companies,
by
excluding
small
companies
with
less
than
$
100,000
in
annual
shipments.
(
b)
Data
on
number
of
establishments
at
the
NAICS
Product
Code
level
are
not
available
from
the
Census
website
(
http://
www.
census.
gov/
prod/
ec97).
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

67
Across
the
above
22
sub­
sectors
(
i.
e.
13
users
+
2
other
handlers
+
2
suspected
users
+
5
other
associated
sub­
sectors),
the
total
number
of
industries
associated
with
industrial
wipes
uses
and
other
handling
is
149
industries
(
i.
e.
113
users
+
8
other
handlers
+
22
suspected
users
+
6
other
associated
sub­
sectors).
The
following
table
presents
EPA­
OSW's
best
estimates
about
how
each
of
the
13
economic
sub­
sectors
that
generate
solventcontaminated
industrial
wipes
use
those
industrial
wipes,
the
average
daily
volume
of
industrial
wipes
used
per
facility
in
each
subsector
the
relative
volume
of
wipes
used
between
disposables
and
reusables,
and
the
prevalent
types
of
solvents
used
in
conjunction
with
industrial
wipes.
Not
all
industrial
solvent
wipes
users
are
subject
to
RCRA
hazardous
waste
regulations.
RCRA
regulations
apply
to
those
solvent
wipes
users
which
generate
monthly
quantities
of
solvent­
contaminated
wipes
which
exceed
either
the
"
small­
quantity
generator"
(
SQG)
or
"
large­
quantity
generator"
(
LQG)
thresholds.
Furthermore,
the
RCRA
program
already
excludes
the
third
category
"
conditionally­
exempt
small­
quantity
generators"
(
CESQGs)
from
RCRA
Subtitle
C
hazardous
waste
regulation:

RCRA
Hazardous
Waste
Generator
Quantity
Categories
Generator
Category
Threshold
Quantity
(
in
any
calendar
month)

CESQG
<
220
pounds
(
0.11
ton)

SQG
>
220
pounds
(
0.11
ton)
but
<
2,200
pounds
(
1.1
ton)

LQG
2,200
pounds
(
1.1
ton)
or
more
Explanatory
Notes:
!
SQGs:
As
of
1999
there
are
approximately
20,000
LQGs
(
source:
USEPA
RCRA
Hazardous
Waste
"
Biennial
Report"
database),
289,000
SQGs
(
source:
ICF
Inc.
31
July
2000
memo
to
USEPA­
OSW);
!
CESQGs:
Between
455,000
to
700,000
CESQGs
(
source:
USEPA
report
EPA­
530­
R­
98­
004,
May
1998,
p.
III­
47).
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

68
USEPA
Estimate
of
Industrial
Wipes
and
Solvent
Usage
According
to
Economic
Sub­
Sectors
(
1995­
97
data)

Item
Economic
Sub­
Sector
How
Wipes
Are
Used
in
Sub­
Sector
(
Worktasks)
Average
Daily
Quantity
Wipes
Used
SingleFacility
Types
of
Wipes
Used**

Prevalent
Types
of
Wipe
Solvents
Reusables
Disposables
1
Printing*
Cleaning
200
to
6,000
60%
to
99%
1%
to
40%
Mineral
spirits,
terpenes,
hexane,
heptane,
ethanol,
methanol,
isopropanol,
2­
butoxy
ethanol,
methyl
ethyl
ketone
(
MEK),
acetone,
xylene,
toluene,
glycol
ethers,
ammonia,
amines,
fatty
acids,
surfactants,
acetates;
USEPA
June
1994,
EPA­
744­
R­
94­
003,
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
opptintr/
dfe/
pubs/
printing/
cluster/
inde
x.
htm
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
Mfg
Wiping
25
to
50
25%
75%
No
data
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
Products
Mfg
Wiping
25
to
50
50%
50%
No
data
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
Mfg
Wiping
25
to
50
50%
50%
Benzene,
methyl
ethyl
ketone,
methyl
isobutyl
ketone,
toluene,
xylene,
carbon
tetrachloride,
methylene
chloride,
1,1,1­
trichloroethane,
perchloro­
ethylene,
kerosene,
mineral
oil,
glycols;
USEPA
Sept
1995,
EPA­
310­
R­
95­
007,
http://
es.
epa.
gov/
oeca/
sector/
sectornote/
pdf/
fabmetsn.
pdf
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
Mfg
Wiping
25
to
50
50%
50%
No
data
6
Electronics
&
Computers
Mfg
Wiping
100
to
5,000
25%
75%
Isopropanol
(
isopropyl
alcohol)
,
methanol,
acetone,
lacquer
thinner
7
Transportation
Equipment
Mfg
Wiping
&
cleaning
25
to
1,500
25%
to
75%
25%
to
75%
MEK,
(
TCE),
acetone,
ethyl
acetate,
isopropanol,
denatured
alcohol
(
ethanol),
methyl
isobutyl
ketone
(
MIBK),
toluene,
mineral
spirits,
xylene,
naptha,
ethylene
glycol,
paint
thinners,
Stoddard
solvent,
monoethyl
ether
acetate,
methanol,
cyclohexanone,
n­
butyl
acetate,
perchloroethylene
(
PERC),
methyl
propyl
ketone
(
MPK),
petroleum
naptha
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

Item
Economic
Sub­
Sector
How
Wipes
Are
Used
in
Sub­
Sector
(
Worktasks)
Average
Daily
Quantity
Wipes
Used
SingleFacility
Types
of
Wipes
Used**

Prevalent
Types
of
Wipe
Solvents
Reusables
Disposables
69
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
Mfg
Wiping
7
to
25
drum
loads
.
100
.
0
Lacquer
thinner
(
solvent­
borne
nitrocellulose),
methyl
isobutyl
ketone,
methyl
ethyl
ketone,
xylene,
toluene,
1,1,1­
trichloroethane,
mineral
spirits,
alcohol;
USEPA
Sept
1995,
EPA­
310­
R­
95­
003,
http://
es.
epa.
gov/
oeca/
sector/
sectornote/
pdf/
wdfurnsn.
pdf
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
Wiping
50
to
100
.
100
.
0
Mineral
spirits,
ignitable
solvents
(
RCRA
wastecode
D001).

10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
Cleaning
200
to
6,000
60%
to
99%
1%
to
40%
Mineral
spirits,
methyl
ethyl
ketone
(
MEK),
acetone,
xylene,
toluene,
isopropyl
alcohol
11
Business
Services
(
copy
shops)
Cleaning
200
to
6,000
60%
to
99%
1%
to
40%
Mineral
spirits,
methyl
ethyl
ketone
(
MEK),
acetone,
xylene,
toluene
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance*
Wiping
50
to
100
.
100
.
0
Mineral
spirits,
ignitable
solvents
(
RCRA
wastecode
D001).

13
Military
Bases
Wiping
&
cleaning
25
to
500
50%
50%
MEK,
methylene
chloride
Explanatory
Notes:
(
a)
Sources:
Unless
otherwised
specified
in
this
table,
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
Hazardous
Waste
Information
Division)
"
best
estimates",
based
on
information
supplied
by:
!
industry
contacts
familiar
with
wipes
usage
!
industrial
site
visits
!
USEPA
industrial
inspectors
!
Uniform
&
Textile
Services
Association
(
UTSA)
"
Customer
Profile
Analysis
for
1996"
(
b)
Relative
marketshare
data
derived
from
information
provided
on
the
total
shop
towel
revenue
earned
from
customers
in
each
industry.
(
c)
*
For
the
printing
and
auto
repair
industries,
also
see:
USEPA
Office
of
Research
&
Development,
National
Risk
Management
Research
Laboratory,
"
Environmental
Assessment
of
Shop
Towel
Usage
in
the
Automotive
and
Printing
Industries",
prepared
by
W.
Pullman,
M.
Wolf,
R.
Thomas,
P.
Fitzpatrick,
P.
Craig,
Lockheed
Martin
Environmental
Systems
&
Technologies,
Las
Vegas
NV,
Nov
1996.
(
d)
Additional
information
about
industrial
solvents
is
available
from:
http://
www.
americansolventscouncil.
com
and
http://
www.
solventcentral.
com
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

70
1997
Economic
Characteristics
of
Sub­
Sectors
Containing
Establishments
Which
Use
or
Otherwise
Handle
Solvent­
Contaminated
Industrial
Wipes
Item
Economic
Sub­
Sector
Used
as
Benchmark
1997
Data
References
Count
of
Benchmark
Sub­
Sector
Companies
(
i.
e.
firms)*
Benchmark
Sub­
Sector
Establishments
(
i.
e.
plants
or
facilities)

NAICS
SIC
NAICS
Count
NAICS
Employees
NAICS
Revenues
($
1,000s)

A.
Sub­
Sectors
With
Establishments
That
Use
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes:

1
Printing
Mfg
323
275
to
279
38,797
42,916
838,240
$
97,944,985
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
Mfg
325
280
8,808
13,513
884,321
$
419,617,444
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
Products
Mfg
326
300
13,762
16,876
1,029,976
$
160,317,732
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
Mfg
332
340
35,149
62,501
1,774,874
$
243,254,492
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
Mfg
333
352
to
356
24,563
30,665
1,421,820
$
270,357,157
6
Electronics
&
Computers
Mfg
3344
367
5,986
6,270
588,938
$
139,708,587
7
Transportation
Eqpt
Mfg
336
370
11,159
12,980
1,848,558
$
571,979,634
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
Mfg
337
250
11,442
20,758
604,845
$
63,939,540
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
4411
5511
+
5521
46,220
46,237
1,138,995
$
553,652,292
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
5111
271
to
274
17,820
21,806
739,834
$
117,336,003
11
Business
Services
(
copy
shops)
561439
7334
4,105
5,780
87,221
$
6,844,260
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maint.
Services
8111
753
151,821
164,360
815,149
$
62,200,597
13
Military
Bases
92812
9721
5***
588
1,438,562
$
0
Subtotal
Users
=
369,637
445,250
13,211,333
$
2,707,152,723
B.
Sub­
Sectors
With
Establishments
That
Otherwise
Handle
Solvent­
Contaminated
Industrial
Wipes:

14
Solid
Waste
Mngmnt
Non­
haz
5
codes**
4953
8,011
9,650
183,407
$
26,883,540
Hazardous
2
codes**
703
926
26,284
$
3,973,535
15
Linen
supply
&
laundering
(
reusable
industrial
wipes)
812332
7218
796
1,613
81,908
$
5,007,637
Subtotal
Other
Handlers
=
9,510
12,189
291,599
$
35,864,712
Column
totals
=
379,147
457,439
13,502,932
$
2,743,017,435
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

71
Explanatory
Notes:
(
a)
Sources:
(
1)
US
Dept
of
Commerce,
Bureau
of
the
Census,
"
1997
Economic
Census":
NAICS
code
data:
http://
www.
census.
gov/
epcd/
www/
econ97.
html
SIC
code
data:
http://
www.
census.
gov/
epcd/
ec97sic/
97x­
cs2.
pdf
(
2)
US
Small
Business
Administration
(
SBA)
Office
of
Advocacy
"
Firm
Size
Data
Provided
by
the
US
Census
Bureau",
http://
www.
sba.
gov/
advo/
stats/
us97_
s4.
pdf.
(
3)
US
Dept
of
Defense
"
Fiscal
Year
96
Worldwide
List
of
Military
Installations:
Major,
Minor
&
Other",
http://
www.
defenselink.
mil/
pubs/
installations/.
(
4)
US
Dept
of
Defense,
Directorate
for
Information
Operations
&
Reports,
"
Military
Personnel
Statistics",
http://
web1.
whs.
osd.
mil/
mmid/
military/
miltop.
htm.
(
b)
*
Sub­
sector
company
count
data
may
be
based
on
either
the
NAICS
code
or
the
SIC
code
data,
or
a
mix
of
both,
depending
upon
availability
of
1997
economic
data
from
the
Bureau
of
Census
website
at
the
date
of
this
report.
The
scope
(
i.
e.
number
of
companies,
establishments,
employees,
revenues)
of
the
NAICS
code
may
not
exactly
match
the
scope
of
the
SIC
code
shown.
(
c)
The
Census
Bureau
defines
a
"
company"
as
a
business
organization
consisting
of
one
or
more
establishments
under
common
ownership
or
control.
(
d)
The
Census
Bureau
defines
an
"
establishment"
as
a
single
physical
location
at
which
business
is
conducted
and/
or
services
are
provided.
It
is
not
necessarily
identical
with
a
"
company"
(
firm)
or
"
enterprise",
which
may
consist
of
one
establishment
(
i.
e.
plant
or
facility)
or
more.
Economic
Census
data
represent
individual
establishments
rather
than
companies,
with
one
employee
or
more
and
establishments
in
operation
at
any
time
during
the
year.
(
e)
**
Disaggregated
"
1997
Economic
Census"
data
for
the
seven
solid
waste
mgnt
codes
are
provided
in
an
appendix
to
this
report.
(
f)
***
Military
base
"
companies"
consist
of
five
US
Dept
of
Defense
organizations:
Army,
Army
Guard,
Navy,
Air
Force,
&
Marines;
the
count
of
military
base
"
establishments"
includes
domestic
and
foreign
locations.
(
g)
Company
revenues
in
this
table
only
associated
with
company­
owned
establishments
classified
in
these
particular
sub­
sectors,
which
may
not
represent
all
company­
owned
establishments
and
all
sources
of
company
revenues
for
any
given
company.
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

72
Uniform
Benchmark
of
Small
Companies
in
Economic
Sub­
Sectors
Which
Use
or
Otherwise
Handle
Solvent­
Contaminated
Industrial
Wipes
Item
Economic
Sub­
Sector
1997
Count
of
Companies
by
Company
Employee
Classes
Company
1997
Revenues
($
1,000s)
by
Company
Employee
Classes
Name
NAICS
SIC
code
Total**
<
500
employees*
NAICS
<
500
employees*

A.
Users
of
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes:

1
Printing
Mfg
323
2750
to
2790
38,797
38,398
$
97,944,985
$
55,807,309
99.0%
57.0%

2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
Mfg
325
2800
8,808
8,227
$
419,617,444
$
60,844,529
93.4%
14.5%

3
Plastics
&
Rubber
Products
Mfg
326
3000
13,762
13,043
$
160,317,732
$
58,740,417
94.8%
36.6%

4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
Mfg
332
3400
35,149
34,250
$
243,254,492
$
119,380,207
97.4%
49.1%

5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Equipment
Mfg
333
3520
to
3560
24,563
23,654
$
270,357,157
$
107,542,229
96.3%
39.8%

6
Electronics
&
Computers
Mfg
3344
3670
5,986
5,646
$
139,708,587
$
28,360,843
94.3%
20.3%

7
Transportation
Equipment
Mfg
336
3700
11,159
10,653
$
571,979,634
$
45,500,385
95.5%
8.0%

8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
Mfg
337
2500
11,442
11,217
$
63,939,540
$
27,441,677
98.0%
42.9%

9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
4411
5511+
5521
46,220
46151
$
553,652,292
$
519,433,489
99.9%
93.8%

10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
5111
2710
to
2740
17,820
17,679
$
117,336,003
$
51,334,091
99.2%
43.7%

11
Business
Service
Centers
(
copy
shops)
561439
7334
4,105
4,094
$
6,844,260
$
2,959,323
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

Item
Economic
Sub­
Sector
1997
Count
of
Companies
by
Company
Employee
Classes
Company
1997
Revenues
($
1,000s)
by
Company
Employee
Classes
Name
NAICS
SIC
code
Total**
<
500
employees*
NAICS
<
500
employees*

73
99.7%
43.2%

12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
Services
8111
7530
151,821
151,791
$
62,200,597
$
58,966,166
99.9%
94.8%

13
Military
Bases
92812
9721
5
0
$
0
$
0
Subtotal
Users
=
369,637
364,803
$
2,707,152,723
$
1,136,310,665
98.7%
42.0%

B.
Other
Handlers
of
Solvent­
Contaminated
Industrial
Wipes:

14
Solid
Waste
Mgmt
Non­
hazardous
waste
5
codes
4953
8,011
7,982
$
26,883,540
$
11,385,942
99.6%
42.4%

Hazardous
waste
2
codes
703
695
$
3,973,535
$
2,755,437
98.8%
69.3%

15
Linen
supply
&
laundering
(
reusable
wipes)
812332
7218
796
761
$
5,007,637
$
1,397,131
95.6%
27.9%

Subtotal
Other
Handlers
=
9,510
9,438
$
35,864,712
$
15,538,510
99.2%
43.3%

Column
totals
=
379,147
374,241
$
2,743,017,435
$
1,151,849,175
98.7%
42.0%

Explanatory
Notes:
(
a)
Source:
US
Small
Business
Administration
Office
of
Advocacy
"
1997
Firm
Size
Data
Provided
by
the
US
Census
Bureau",
http://
www.
sba.
gov/
advo/
stats/
us97_
s4.
pdf
(
b)
The
US
Dept
of
Commerce
Census
Bureau
defines
"
company"
as
a
business
organization
consisting
of
one
or
more
establishments
(
i.
e.
facilities
or
plants)
under
common
ownership
or
control.
(
c)
*
Less
than
500
employees
does
not
necessarily
represent
in
this
table
the
SBA
small
business
standard
for
each
sub­
sector;
this
numerical
limit
serves
in
this
table,
as
a
uniform
benchmark
for
characterizing
the
proportion
of
small
companies
across
all
sub­
sectors.
(
d)
**
Count
of
companies
(
firms)
may
be
based
on
either
the
corresponding
NAICS
or
SIC
code
total
for
each
sub­
sector
(
i.
e.
1997
Census
firm
count
data
by
NAICS
code
were
unavailable
for
manufacturing
sub­
sectors
from
the
Census
website
at
the
date
of
this
study).
(
e)
Company
revenues
in
this
table
only
associated
with
company­
owned
establishments
classified
in
these
particular
sub­
sectors,
which
may
not
represent
all
company­
owned
establishments
and
all
sources
of
company
revenues
for
any
given
company.
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

74
The
next
table
displays
the
US
Small
Business
Administration's
small
business
size
standards
for
the
15
sub­
sectors
which
use
or
otherwise
handle
spent
industrial
wipes.
The
next
table
also
provides
a
count
of
the
number
of
small­
sized
companies
relative
to
the
total
number
of
companies
in
each
sub­
sector,
and
a
count
(
for
five
component
sub­
sectors)
of
the
number
of
establishments
(
i.
e.
individual
facilities
or
plants)
operated
by
small
companies,
relative
to
the
number
of
all
establishments
in
each
sub­
sector.
This
table
indicates
that
small
businesses
constitute
from
93%
to
nearly
100%
of
companies
within
the
15
sub­
sectors,
with
an
overall
average
of
99%
(
i.
e.
374,241
small
companies
out
of
a
total
379,147
companies).
In
comparison,
a
smaller
percentage
of
revenues
in
these
sub­
sectors
are
earned
by
small
companies,
ranging
from
8%
to
95%,
with
an
overall
average
of
42%
(
i.
e.
$
1.151
trillion
of
the
sub­
total
$
2.743
trillion
in
1997
annual
revenues
earned
across
these
15
sub­
sectors).

Small
Business
Size
Determination
for
Economic
Sub­
Sectors
Using
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
Item
Economic
Sub­
Sector
SBA
Small
Business
Size
Standards
1997
Count
of
Companies
(
Firms)
1997
Count
of
Establishments
(
Facilities
or
Plants)

Maximum
Company
Annual
Revenues
Maximum
Company
Employees
Total
Count
SBA
Small
Firms
NAICS
Total
Count
SBA
Small
Firm
Establishments
Name
NAICS
Code
Small
%
Small
Small
%
Small
A.
Sub­
Sectors
With
Establishments
That
Use
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes:

1
Printing
Mfg
323
500
38,797
38,398
99.0%
42,916
No
data
No
data
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
Mfg
325
500**
8,808
8,227
93.4%
13,513
No
data
No
data
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
Products
Mfg
326
500**
13,762
13,043
94.8%
16,876
No
data
No
data
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
Mfg
332
500**
35,149
34,250
97.4%
62,501
No
data
No
data
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
Mfg
333
500**
24,563
23,654
96.3%
30,665
No
data
No
data
6
Electronics
&
Computers
Mfg
3344
500**
5,986
5,646
94.3%
6,270
No
data
No
data
7
Transportation
Eqpt
Mfg
336
500**
11,159
10,653
95.5%
12,980
No
data
No
data
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
Mfg
337
500
11,442
11,217
98.0%
20,758
No
data
No
data
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
4411
$
17
to
$
21
million
46,220
38,825
84.0%
49,237
39,347
79.9%

10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
5111
500
17,820
17,679
99.2%
21,806
19,789
90.8%
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
(
17
July
2003)

75
11
Business
Services
(
photocopy
shops)
561439
$
5
million
4,105
4,008
97.6%
5,780
4,000
69.2%

12
Auto
Repair
&
Maint.
Services
8111
$
5
million
151,821
151,236
99.6%
164,360
154,162
93.8%

13
Military
Bases
92812
NA
NA
5
0
0%
588
0
0%

Subtotal
Users
=
369,637
356,836
96.5%
448,250
373,953
(
est.*)
83.4%
(
est.*)

B.
Sub­
Sectors
With
Establishments
That
Otherwise
Handle
Solvent­
Contaminated
Industrial
Wipes:

14
Solid
Waste
Mgmnt
Non­
haz
5
codes
$
10
million
8,011
7,655
95.6%
9,650
7,746
80.3%

Haz
2
codes
$
10
million
703
613
87.2%
926
628
67.8%

15
Linen
supply
&
laundering
812332
$
10.5
million
796
744
93.5%
1,613
756
46.9%

Subtotal
Other
Handlers
=
9,510
9,012
94.8%
12,189
9,130
74.9%

Column
totals
=
379,147
365,848
96.5%
460,439
405,524
88.1%

Explanatory
Notes:
(
a)
Sources:
(
1)
US
Small
Business
Administration
(
SBA)
"
size
standards"
(
http://
www.
sba.
gov/
size).
The
1980
Regulatory
Flexibility
Act
(
Section
601(
3))
requires
Federal
regulatory
agencies
to
apply
the
SBA
definition
of
"
small
business",
which
are
maximum
thresholds
based
on
annual
revenues
or
number
of
employees.
(
2)
Company
and
establishment
data
from
US
Dept
of
Commerce
Census
Bureau
"
1997
Economic
Census"
(
http://
www.
census.
gov/
epcd/
www/
econ97.
html).
(
b)
*
est.
=
estimates
by
USEPA­
OSW­
EMRAD,
based
on
subtotal
percentage
of
small
company
establishments
for
sub­
sector
items
9
to
12,
applied
to
the
total
count
of
establishments
(
i.
e.
[
79.9%
+
90.8%
+
69.2%
+
93.8%]/
4
=
83.4%).
Over
the
small
company
establishment
percentage
range
for
the
six
sub­
sectors
above
of
46.9%
to
93.8%
(
items
9­
12,14,15),
this
estimate
of
total
small
company
establishments
ranges
from
210,229
to
420,458.
(
c)
**
Indicates
that
500
employees
applied
in
this
document
as
the
SBA
size
standard
for
six
sub­
sectors
which
are
composed
of
some
industries
that
have
750
or
1,000
employee
size
standards
as
set
by
the
SBA.
Use
of
500
employees
for
these
six
sub­
sectors
facilitates
the
convenient
use
of
employment
size
of
firm
data
from
the
"
1997
Economic
Census"
(
as
compiled
by
the
SBA
Office
of
Advocacy
http://
www.
sba.
gov/
advo/
stats/
data.
html)
 
which
is
categorized
into
"<
20
employees",
"<
500
employees"
and
"
500+
employees"
data
bins
 
to
determine
the
number
of
small
companies
in
these
sub­
sectors.
(
d)
***
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
estimate
based
on
NAICS
code
small
company
total
counts,
multiplied
by
SIC
code
small
company
percentages.
76
Economic
Analysis
for
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
OMB
Review
Draft
 
Not
For
Public
Release
(
25
April
2003)

IV.
Attachments
(
Spreadsheets
&
Tables)

IV.
A.
Supplemental
Data
Set
A:
Count
of
Establishments
&
Count
of
Industrial
Wipes
Data
Set
B:
Industrial
Laundry
Data
Set
C:
Industrial
Cleaning/
Degreasing
Solvent
Data
Set
D:
Price­
Elasticity
of
Demand
for
Industrial
Wipes:
Meta­
Analysis
IV.
B.
Impact
Estimation
Set
E:
Direct
Impact
Elements
Set
F:
Induced
Market
Impacts
(
partial
equilibrium
model)
Set
G:
Small
Business
Impacts
77
Attachment
Set
A
Count
of
Establishments
&
Count
of
Industrial
Wipes
Data
78
Data
Sources
for
Facility
Count
&
Wipes
Quantities
Applied
in
the
Economic
Impact
Model
For
OSW's
"
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes"
Rule
A.
Count
of
Wipes
User
Facilities:

Disposable
wipes:
Source:
1997
estimates
of
all
industrial
disposable
wipes­
using
facilities
(
i.
e.
CESQGs
+
SQGs
+
LQGs)
w/
and
without
solvents,
for
both
"
printer"
(
n=
4,948)
and
"
non­
printer"
(
n=
34,948)
industries,
as
provided
to
Jim
O'Leary
(
USEPA­
OSW),
by
the
"
INDA"
(
Assoc.
of
the
Nonwoven
Fabrics
Industry).

Reusable
wipes:
Source:
The
mathematical
difference
between
the
448,250
total
1997
Census
(
NAICS
code)
count
of
establishments
(
i.
e.
CESQGs
+
SQGs
+
LQGs)
in
the
13
industries
known
to
use
industrial
wipes
w/
&
wout
solvents,
and
the
INDA
estimates
for
disposables.
OSW
made
distinction
in
the
total
Census
count
between
three
"
printer"
industries
(
n=
70,502)
and
ten
"
non­
printer"
industries
(
n=
377,748).
The
resultant
1997
total
count
of
reusable
wipes
facilities
(
w
&
w/
out
solvents)
is
65,554
printers
&
342,800
non­
printers.

OSW
adjustments
to
facility
data:
!
2001
update:
Updated
1997
facility
count
data
to
year
2001
based
on
extrapolating
the
1987­
1992­
1997
Census
trend
of
establishments
in
each
of
the
13
industries
(
1.050
multiplier)

!
Solvent
wipes
subset:
OSW
estimated
the
subset
of
facilities
which
apply
RCRA­
listed
solvents
to
industrial
wipes,
by
"
most­
likely"
assuming:

!
100%
of
printers
(
90%
LB
to
100%
UB)

!
35%
of
non­
printers
(
30%
LB
to
40%
UB)
apply
solvents
to
both
disposable
&
reusable
wipes.

!
CESQG/
SQG/
LQG:
!
LQGs
based
on
actual
count
of
LQGs
in
the
1995
RCRA
"
Biennial
Reporting
System"
registry
of
RCRA
LQGs;

!
SQGs
for
printer
industries
assumed
to
constitute
all
remaining
facilities
(
i.
e.
zero
CESQGs);

!
SQGs
for
non­
printer
industries
assumed
50%
of
all
facilities,
with
CESQGs
the
mathematical
remainder.

!
%
states
adopting:
Applied
75%
"
most
likely"
multiplier
to
facility
count
(
50%
LB
to
100%
UB).

B.
Quantity
of
Annual
Solvent
Wipes:

Disposable
wipes
Same
1997
source
as
facility
data
(
see
above)
=
1.009
billion
wipes,
consisting
of:
49.8
million
printer
wipes
+
959.2
million
non­
printer
wipes
(
CESQGs+
SQGs+
LQGs)

Reusable
wipes
USEPA
Office
of
Water
data
from
1994
industrial
laundry
industry
Section
308
survey
for
prior
OW
rulemaking
regarding
laundry
effluent
wastewaters:

!
Printers:
136.5
million
lbs
wipes
(
w/
&
w/
out
solvents)
x
11
wipes/
lb
!
Non­
printers:
344.7
million
lbs
wipes
(
w/
&
w/
out
solvents)
x
16
wipes/
lb
OSW
adjustments
to
wipes
data:
!
2001
update:
!
1994
reusables
wipes
data
standardized
to
1997
facility
data
benchmark
year
according
to
10%
sales
growth
in
industrial
laundry
sector
(
SIC
7218)
between
1994
&
1997
!
Both
reusables
&
disposables
wipes
data
updated
to
2001
based
on
average
annual
growth
1986­
2000
in
"
Industrial
Production
Index"
in
each
of
the
13
wipes
using
subsectors
(
1.128
multiplier).

!
Solvent
wipes
subset:
Same
adjustment
as
applied
to
facility
data
(
see
above).

!
CESQG/
SQG/
LQG:
OSW
"
best
judgement"
assumptions
that:

!
CESQGs
use
20%
of
both
disposable
&
reusable
wipes
!
SQGs
use
70%
of
both
disposable
&
reusable
wipes
!
LQGs
use
10%
of
both
disposable
&
reusable
wipes
!
%
states
adopting:
Same
adjustment
as
applied
to
facility
data
(
see
above).
79
1997
Economic
Characteristics
of
Sub­
Sectors
With
Establishments
That
Use
or
Handle
Industrial
Wipes
Item
Sub­
sector
or
Industry
Census
NAICS
code
Census
SIC
code
1997
Census
count
of
companies*
1997
NAICS
count
of
estblshmts
1997
NAICS
count
of
employees
1997
NAICS
revenues
($
1,000)

A.
Sub­
Sectors
With
Establishments
That
Use
Industrial
Wipes:
1
Printing
323
2750
to
2790
38,797
42,916
838,240
$
97,944,985
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
325
2800
8,808
13,513
884,321
$
419,617,444
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
326
3000
13,762
16,876
1,029,976
$
160,317,732
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
332
3400
35,149
62,501
1,774,874
$
243,254,492
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
333
3520
to
3560
24,563
30,665
1,421,820
$
270,357,157
6
Electronics
&
Computers
3344
3670
5,986
6,270
588,938
$
139,708,587
7
Transportation
Eqpt
336
3700
11,159
12,980
1,848,558
$
571,979,634
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
337
2500
11,442
20,758
604,845
$
63,939,540
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
4411
5511
+
5521
46,220
49,237
1,138,995
$
553,652,292
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
5111
2710
to
2740
17,820
21,806
739,834
$
117,336,003
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
561439
7334
4,105
5,780
87,221
$
6,844,260
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
8111
7530
151,821
164,360
815,149
$
62,200,597
13
Military
Bases
92812
9721
5
580
1,438,562
$
0
Subtotals
(
1+...+
13)
=
369,637
448,242
13,211,333
$
2,707,152,723
B.
Sub­
Sectors
With
Establishments
That
Otherwise
Handle
Industrial
Wipes:
14
Solid
Waste
Mgmt
Non­
haz
wastes
5
codes
(
562xxx)
4953
8,011
9,650
183,407
$
26,883,540
Haz
wastes
562112
&
562211
with
4953
703
926
26,284
$
3,973,535
15
Linen
Supply
&
Laundering**
812332
7218
796
1,613
81,908
$
5,007,637
Cleaning
industrial
wipes
(
73%***)
8123326303
1,175
$
407,897
Only
cleaning
ind.
wipes
(
1.4%****)
23
Subtotals
(
14+...+
15)
=
8,807
11,263
265,315
$
31,891,177
C.
Total
All
Establishments
That
Use
or
Handle
Industrial
Wipes:
Item
totals
(
1+...+
15)
=
378,444
459,505
13,476,648
$
2,739,043,900
Explanatory
Notes:
(
1)
*
Company
count
may
be
based
on
either
NAICS
or
SIC
code
for
a
particular
sub­
sector,
depending
upon
data
availability
from
the
Bureau
of
Census
"
1997
Economic
Census"
website,
at
the
date
of
this
research
by
OSW­
EMRAD
(
Feb
2001).
(
2)
**
Linen
Supply
&
Laundering
facilities
launder
up
to
20
different
types
of
textile
items.
(
3)
***
73%
of
industrial
laundries,
based
on
"
1997
Economic
Census"
NAICS
product
code
8123326303
for
"
industrial
wiping
cloths":
(
http://
www.
census.
gov/
prod/
ec97/
97s81­
1s.
pdf).
In
comparison,
USEPA
Office
of
Water
estimated
78%
in
the
following
report:
"
Economic
Assessment
for
the
Final
Action
Regarding
Pretreatment
Standards
for
the
Industrial
Laundries
Point
Point
Source
Category",
EPA­
821­
R­
00­
004,
March
2000,
p.
3­
8,
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
ost/
guide/
laundry/
final/
economics.
pdf.
(
4)
****
USEPA
Office
of
Water
estimates
that
only
1.4%
of
these
laundries
exclusively
devoted
to
industrial
wipes
laundering
(
ibid,
p.
3­
10).
(
5)
Additional
descriptive
information
about
industrial
laundries
is
available
from
the
USEPA
report:
"
Technical
Development
Document
for
the
Final
Action
Regarding
Pretreatment
Standards
for
the
Industrial
Laundries
Point
Source
Category",
EPA­
821­
R­
00­
006,
March
2000,
pp.
4­
7
to
4­
11,
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
ost/
guide/
laundry/
final/
section1.
pdf.
80
US
CENSUS
ESTABLISHMENTS
1987
­
1997
SUB­
SECTORS
WHICH
USE
INDUSTRIAL
WIPES
(
with
or
without
solvents)

Item
Sub­
sector
Sub­
sector
SIC
codes
Component
SIC
codes
Count
of
Establishments*
Average
annual
10­
year
change
Implied
update
multiplier
1997­
2001
1987
1992
1997
1
Printing
275
to
279
Subtotal
=
43,452
45,374
40,123
­
0.79%
0.969
275
36,111
38,441
34,000
276
856
921
922
277
162
172
152
278
1,546
1,649
1,704
279
4,777
4,191
3,345
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
28
12,039
12,004
12,371
0.27%
1.011
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
30
14,589
15,842
16,892
1.48%
1.060
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
34
36,092
36,429
37,985
0.51%
1.021
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
352
to
356
Subtotal
=
25,227
25,492
26,145
0.36%
1.014
352
1,799
1,774
1,656
353
3,473
3,341
3,523
354
11,446
11,506
11,706
355
4,557
4,739
4,781
356
3,952
4,132
4,479
6
Electronics
&
Computers
367
5,836
6,655
6,605
1.25%
1.051
7
Transportation
Eqpt
37
10,505
11,287
12,387
1.66%
1.068
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
25
11,636
11,658
12,095
0.39%
1.016
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
5511+
5521
Subtotal
=
43,268
43,052
49,237
1.30%
1.053
5511
28,320
24,380
25,897
5521
14,948
18,672
23,340
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
271
to
274
Subtotal
=
18,339
20,018
22,332
1.99%
1.082
271
9,091
8,668
8,773
272
4,020
4,700
6,331
273
2,859
3,265
3,693
274
2,369
3,385
3,535
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
7334
4,474
4,949
5,780
2.59%
1.108
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
753
114,601
128,738
142,372
2.19%
1.091
13
Military
Bases
9721
622
601
580
­
0.70%
0.972
Printer
subtotal
(
items
1+
10+
11)
=
66,265
70,341
68,235
0.29%
1.012
Non­
printer
subtotal
=
274,415
291,758
316,669
1.44%
1.059
Totals
=
340,680
362,099
384,904
1.23%
1.050
*
Data
sources:
Items
1
to
12:
1997
&
1992
data:
http://
www.
census.
gov/
epcd/
ec97sic/
E97SUS.
HTM
1987
data:
provided
to
USEPA­
OSWER­
OSW­
EMRAD
by
Mr.
Paul
Zeisset,
Economist,
US
Bureau
of
Census
(
301­
457­
4151).
Item
13:
http://
www.
defenselink.
mil/
pubs/
installations/
index.
html
and
http://
www.
defenselink.
mil/
faq/
pis/
17.
html
81
1997
ECONOMIC
CENSUS
DATA:
FIRM
&
ESTABLISHMENT
SIZE
for
the
SOLID
WASTE
MANAGEMENT
SUB­
SECTOR
I.
NON­
HAZARDOUS
SOLID
WASTE
INDUSTRIES:
Item
NAICS
Code
>
562111
562212
562213
562219
56292
Row
totals
%
of
total
A.
Economic
Characteristics:
1
Count
of
establishments
(
facilities)
7,083
1,403
105
294
765
9,650
100%
2
Count
of
companies
(
firms)
6,045
964
80
225
697
8,011
100%
3
Count
of
establishment
employees
137,049
27,454
2,976
5,082
10,846
183,407
100%
4
Establishment
1997
receipts
($
1,000)
$
18,211,495
$
5,493,433
$
1,128,551
$
751,028
$
1,299,033
$
26,883,540
100%
B.
Establishment
Size:
General
(
uniform)
small
size
benchmarks:
5
Count
of
establishments
w<
20
employees
5,359
1,013
60
215
586
7,233
75.0%
6
Count
of
companies
w/<
500
employees
6,031
956
79
221
696
7,982
99.6%
7
Subtotal
revenues
if
<
500
employees
($
1,000)
$
7,618,106
$
2,056,529
$
292,712
$
369,986
$
1,048,609
$
11,385,942
42.4%
Medium­
and
large­
size
benchmark:
8
Count
of
estbl
w/$
10
million+
receipts
530
175
29
25
25
784
8.1%
9
Receipts
of
estbl
w/$
10
million+
($
1,000)
$
10,483,376
$
3,283,716
$
980,469
$
420,622
$
461,977
$
15,630,161
58.1%
10
Count
of
companies
w/$
10
million+
252
55
14
16
19
356
4.4%
11
Count
of
estb.
w/
companies
$
10million+
1,198
517
39
79
71
1,904
19.7%
12
Receipts
of
estb
w/
cos.
$
10
million+
($
1,000)
$
13,115,703
$
4,473,886
$
1,085,905
$
612,782
$
601,474
$
19,889,750
74.0%
SBA
small
size
standard:
13
Count
of
small
companies
<$
10million
5,793
909
66
209
678
7,655
95.6%
14
Count
of
small
company
establishments
5,885
886
66
215
694
7,746
80.3%
II.
HAZARDOUS
SOLID
WASTE
INDUSTRIES:
Item
NAICS
Code
>
562112
562211
Row
totals
%
of
total
A.
Economic
Characteristics:
1
Count
of
establishments
(
facilities)
414
512
926
100%
2
Count
of
companies
(
firms)
341
362
703
100%
3
Count
of
establishment
employees
8,468
17,816
26,284
100%
4
Establishment
1997
receipts
($
1,000)
$
1,095,553
$
2,877,982
$
3,973,535
100%
B.
Establishment
Size:
General
(
uniform)
small
size
benchmarks:
5
Count
of
establishments
w<
20
employees
299
299
598
64.6%
6
Count
of
companies
w/<
500
employees
337
357
695
98.8%
7
Subtotal
revenues
if
<
500
employees
($
1,000)
$
826,136
$
1,929,301
$
2,755,437
69.3%
Medium­
and
large­
size
benchmark:
8
Count
of
estbl
w/$
10
million+
receipts
24
99
123
13.3%
9
Receipts
of
estbl
w/$
10
million+
($
1,000)
$
538,387
$
2,040,079
$
2,578,466
64.9%
10
Count
of
companies
w/$
10
million+
30
60
90
12.8%
11
Count
of
estb.
w/
companies
$
10million+
94
204
298
32.2%
12
Receipts
of
estb
w/
cos.
$
10
million+
($
1,000)
$
840,566
$
2,392,606
$
3,233,172
81.4%
SBA
small
size
standard:
13
Count
of
small
companies
<$
10million
311
302
613
87.2%
14
Count
of
small
company
establishments
320
308
628
67.8%
Source:
US
Dept
of
Commerce
Bureau
of
Census,
"
1997
Economic
Census:
Establishment
and
Firm
Size
­­
Administrative
Support
and
Waste
Management
&
Remediation
Services",
Oct
2000,
http://
www.
census.
gov/
prod/
ec97/
97s56­
sz.
pdf
82
1987
1992
1997
11,900
12,000
12,100
12,200
12,300
12,400
Census
Count
of
US
Establishments
2.
Chemicals
&
Allied
Products
Mfg
(
SIC
28)

1987
1992
1997
39,000
40,000
41,000
42,000
43,000
44,000
45,000
46,000
Census
Count
of
US
Establishments
1.
Printing
Mfg
(
SIC
275
to
279)

1987
1992
1997
35,500
36,000
36,500
37,000
37,500
38,000
38,500
Census
Count
of
US
Establishments
4.
Fabricated
Metal
Products
Mfg
(
SIC
34)

1987
1992
1997
14,000
14,500
15,000
15,500
16,000
16,500
17,000
17,500
Census
Count
of
US
Establishments
3.
Plastics
&
Rubber
Mfg
(
SIC
30)
1987­
1997
US
Economic
Census
Count
of
Establishments
in
13
Industrial
Wipes
Using
Sub­
Sectors
83
1987
1992
1997
25,000
25,200
25,400
25,600
25,800
26,000
26,200
Census
Count
of
US
Establishments
5.
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
Mfg
(
SIC
352
to
356)

1987
1992
1997
5,700
5,800
5,900
6,000
6,100
6,200
6,300
6,400
6,500
6,600
6,700
Census
Count
of
US
Establishments
6.
Electronics
&
Computers
Mfg
(
SIC
367)

1987
1992
1997
10,000
10,500
11,000
11,500
12,000
12,500
Census
Count
of
US
Establishments
7.
Transportation
Eqpt
Mfg
(
SIC
37)

1987
1992
1997
11,600
11,700
11,800
11,900
12,000
12,100
12,200
Census
Count
of
US
Establishments
8.
Furniture
&
Fixtures
Mfg
(
SIC
25)
1987­
1997
US
Economic
Census
Count
of
Establishments
in
13
Industrial
Wipes
Using
Sub­
Sectors
(
cont'd)
84
1987
1992
1997
18,000
19,000
20,000
21,000
22,000
23,000
Census
Count
of
Establishments
10.
Publishing
Printed
Matter
Mfg
(
SIC
271
to
274)

1987
1992
1997
42,000
43,000
44,000
45,000
46,000
47,000
48,000
49,000
50,000
Census
Count
of
US
Establishments
9.
Auto
Dealers
Retail
Trade
(
SIC
5511+
5521)

1987
1992
1997
570
580
590
600
610
620
630
Census
Count
of
US
Establishments
13.
US
Military
Bases
Worldwide
(
SIC
9721)
1987
1992
1997
110,000
115,000
120,000
125,000
130,000
135,000
140,000
145,000
Census
Count
of
US
Establishments
12.
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
(
SIC
753)

1987
1992
1997
4,000
4,500
5,000
5,500
6,000
Census
Count
of
US
Establishments
11.
Business
Services
Copy
Shops
(
SIC
7334)
1987­
1997
US
Economic
Census
Count
of
Establishments
in
13
Industrial
Wipes
Using
Sub­
Sectors
(
cont'd)
85
DERIVATION
OF
INDUSTRIAL
WIPES
ANNUAL
QUANTITY
UPDATE
MULTIPLIER
FOR
UPDATE
OF
1997
REFERENCE
DATA
TO
YEAR
2001
Item
Sub­
sector
Census
SIC
code
Census
NAICS
code
1997
NAICS
count
of
establishments
Industrial
Production
Index
(
IPI)

1986­
2000
average
annual
growth
in
IPI
end­
points
1986­
2000
annual
IPI
growth
regression
smoothed
Implied
1997
to
2001
update
multiplier
multiplier
1
Printing
275
to
279
323
42,916
2.55%
1.71%
1.070
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
28
325
13,513
2.90%
2.64%
1.110
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
30
326
16,876
4.20%
4.31%
1.184
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
34
332
62,501
2.48%
2.34%
1.097
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
352
to
356
333
30,665
7.81%
8.81%
1.402
6
Electronics
&
Computers
367
3344
6,270
28.88%
28.88%
2.759
7
Transportation
Eqpt
37
336
12,980
2.35%
2.15%
1.089
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
25
337
20,758
2.88%
2.57%
1.107
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
5511
&
5521
4411
49,237
2.35%
2.15%
1.089
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
271
to
274
5111
21,806
2.55%
1.71%
1.070
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
7334
561439
5,780
1.87%
1.33%
1.054
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
753
8111
164,360
2.35%
2.15%
1.089
13
Military
Bases
9721
92812
588
5.27%
5.06%
1.218
<
Avg
1
to
12
Printer
subtotal
(
items
1+
10+
11)
=
70,502
2.50%
1.68%
1.069
Non­
printer
subtotal
=
377,748
3.39%
3.31%
1.139
Total
=
448,250
3.25%
3.05%
1.128
IPI
data
source:
http://
www.
federalreserve.
gov/
releases/
G17/
table1_
2.
htm
86
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
70
80
90
100
110
120
130
Index
(
1992
=
100)

Data
Trendline
2.
Chemicals
&
Allied
Products
Mfg
(
NAICS
325)
Industrial
Production
Index
(
IPI)

1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
70
80
90
100
110
120
Index
(
1992
=
100)

Data
Trendline
*
This
NAICS
code
also
used
to
represent
"
publishing
wholesale
trade"
(
NAICS
5111)
1
&
10.
Printing
Manufacturing
(
NAICS
323)*
Industrial
Production
Index
(
IPI)

1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
70
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
150
Index
(
1992
=
100)

Data
Trendline
3.
Plastics
&
Rubber
Products
Mfg
(
NAICS
326)
Industrial
Production
Index
(
IPI)

1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
90
100
110
120
130
140
Index
(
1992
=
100)

Data
Trendline
4.
Fabricated
Metal
Products
Mfg
(
NAICS
332)
Industrial
Production
Index
(
IPI)
US
Industrial
Production
Index
(
IPI)
1986­
2000
for
Industrial
Wipes
Using
Sub­
Sectors
87
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
85
90
95
100
105
110
115
120
Index
(
1992
=
100)

Data
Trendline
*
This
NAICS
code
used
to
represent
"
business
services
copy
shops"
(
NAICS
561439)
11.
General
Business
Supplies
(
Subset
of
NAICS
42)*
Intermediate
Wholesale
Products
IPI
Data
Group
Industrial
Production
Index
(
IPI)
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
150
Index
(
1992
=
100)

Data
Trendline
8.
Furniture
&
Fixtures
Mfg
(
NAICS
337)

1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
Index
(
1992
=
100)

Data
Trendline
7,
9,
&
12.
Transportation
Eqpt
Mfg
(
NAICS
336)
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
50
100
150
200
250
300
Index
(
1992
=
100)

Data
Trendline
5.
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
Mfg
(
NAICS
333)
Industrial
Production
Index
(
IPI)

1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
Index
(
1992
=
100)

Data
Trendline
6.
Electronics
&
Computers
Mfg
(
NAICS
3344)
Industrial
Production
Index
(
IPI)
US
Industrial
Production
Index
(
IPI)
1986­
2000
for
Industrial
Wipes
Using
Sub­
Sectors
(
continued)
88
INDUSTRIAL
PRODUCTION
INDEX
(
IPI)
1978­
1993
Seasonally
Adjusted
IPI
Historical
Data
(
1992
=
100):
SIC
codes>
274­
6,8,9
28
30
34
35
367
37
25
S54003
Avg*
Facility
weighted
average
Percent
annual
change
Sub­
sector
items>
1,
10
2
3
4
5
6
7,
9,
12
8
11
13
Year
1978
54.031
77.479
59.475
97.988
63.252
11.969
77.265
80.651
72.125
66.026
74.351
Base
1979
56.796
79.728
56.998
102.335
71.223
15.425
80.389
79.606
74.666
68.574
77.492
4.2%
1980
54.730
72.931
47.285
89.632
68.339
17.748
67.433
77.087
70.910
62.899
67.961
­
12.3%
1981
58.152
79.289
58.299
93.380
76.645
21.108
69.590
80.237
75.200
67.989
71.495
5.2%
1982
63.011
70.996
57.081
85.948
65.737
26.333
66.133
74.003
75.599
64.982
68.156
­
4.7%
1983
65.324
75.890
63.089
85.787
63.664
28.954
69.903
78.931
78.704
67.805
70.914
4.0%
1984
71.798
80.331
73.520
95.882
79.974
40.816
79.977
89.311
86.542
77.572
80.751
13.9%
1985
76.202
78.923
72.819
95.645
80.130
41.523
88.678
88.125
87.666
78.857
85.670
6.1%
1986
76.039
81.991
77.358
94.019
81.171
43.430
94.241
92.611
89.079
81.104
88.823
3.7%
1987
95.307
86.777
87.088
102.480
86.077
51.128
94.283
104.775
101.108
89.891
94.486
6.4%
1988
92.344
90.996
87.725
106.337
96.392
58.233
101.322
100.437
99.836
92.625
98.898
4.7%
1989
97.227
95.164
91.123
105.457
105.501
64.796
105.344
103.369
102.689
96.741
102.660
3.8%
1990
94.929
97.525
93.632
101.553
100.192
71.993
106.368
102.170
100.834
96.577
102.124
­
0.5%
1991
96.238
95.854
90.291
96.008
95.244
79.578
96.939
96.173
97.972
93.811
96.043
­
6.0%
1992
98.855
99.923
100.637
100.187
100.756
98.987
99.308
98.065
99.988
99.634
99.480
3.6%
1993
98.517
99.924
105.914
103.223
108.152
113.832
105.083
105.540
100.561
104.527
104.045
4.6%
1997
facilities>
64,722
13,513
16,876
62,501
30,665
6,270
226,577
20,758
5,780
580
448,242
IPI
data
source:
Federal
Reserve
(
http://
www.
federalreserve.
gov/
releases/
G17/
table1_
2.
htm).
*
Average
of
all
other
sectors
used
to
represent
SIC
code
97
(
sub­
sector
item
13)
89
EMPLOYMENT
IN
INDUSTRIES
WHICH
USE
INDUSTRIAL
WIPES
1978­
1993
Seasonally
Adjusted
Historical
Data
(
nr.
workers
x1,000):
SIC
codes>
27
28
30
34
35
36
37
25
551
73
75
Avg*
Row
totals
Percent
annual
change
Sub­
sector
items>
1,
10
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
11
12
13
Year
1978
1,196
1,096
796
1,662
2,340
1,694
1,970
495
841
2,173
551
No
data
14,814
1979
1,235
1,114
828
1,726
2,527
1,804
2,083
497
844
2,419
576
No
data
15,653
5.7%
1980
1,251
1,107
737
1,571
2,513
1,746
1,819
455
728
2,538
571
No
data
15,036
­
3.9%
1981
1,264
1,114
777
1,601
2,529
1,778
1,910
470
708
2,696
567
No
data
15,414
2.5%
1982
1,269
1,077
731
1,431
2,291
1,710
1,729
430
695
2,710
586
No
data
14,659
­
4.9%
1983
1,294
1,043
736
1,357
2,032
1,689
1,714
445
717
2,928
616
No
data
14,571
­
0.6%
1984
1,375
1,050
816
1,463
2,224
1,871
1,878
488
793
3,345
684
No
data
15,987
9.7%
1985
1,425
1,045
815
1,465
2,204
1,863
1,958
491
855
3,664
727
No
data
16,512
3.3%
1986
1,453
1,021
820
1,424
2,080
1,772
1,999
498
892
3,943
759
No
data
16,661
0.9%
1987
1,501
1,012
837
1,393
2,021
1,736
2,022
513
924
4,267
794
No
data
17,020
2.2%
1988
1,543
1,059
867
1,431
2,085
1,763
2,035
525
959
4,615
831
No
data
17,713
4.1%
1989
1,556
1,075
888
1,449
2,130
1,746
2,057
526
955
4,932
882
No
data
18,196
2.7%
1990
1,572
1,087
893
1,426
2,100
1,679
2,027
509
928
5,161
917
No
data
18,299
0.6%
1991
1,534
1,072
855
1,354
1,998
1,595
1,887
473
877
5,067
880
No
data
17,592
­
3.9%
1992
1,506
1,086
878
1,330
1,932
1,528
1,843
478
878
5,308
876
No
data
17,643
0.3%
1993
1,517
1,082
909
1,333
1,927
1,521
1,745
486
905
5,715
927
No
data
18,067
2.4%
1997
facilities>
64,722
13,513
16,876
62,501
30,665
6,270
12,980
20,758
49,237
5,780
164,360
580
448,242
Employment
data
source:
Bureau
of
Labor
Statistics
(
http://
www.
bls.
gov/
webapps/
legacy/
cesbtab1.
htm).
*
Average
of
all
other
sectors
used
to
represent
SIC
code
97
(
sub­
sector
item
13)
90
SUB­
SECTORS
GENERATING
RCRA
SOLVENT
INDUSTRIAL
WIPES
ESTIMATION
OF
RCRA
REGULATORY
STATUS
Category
Item
Economic
Sector
Sub­
sector
Sub­
sector
Census
SIC
code
Sub­
sector
Census
NAICS
code
1997
NAICS
count
of
sub­
sector
estblshmts
RCRA
Regulatory
Status
Subtotal
SQGs
+
LQGs
CESQGs
SQGs**
LQGs*
A.
1997
ESTIMATE
OF
ESTABLISHMENTS
WHICH
USE
INDUSTRIAL
WIPES
(
with
&
w/
out
solvents):
Printers>
1
Manufacturing
Printing
275
to
279
323
42,916
0
42,325
591
42,916
Non­
printers>
2
Manufacturing
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
28
325
13,513
6,328
6,328
858
7,186
Non­
printers>
3
Manufacturing
Plastics
&
Rubber
30
326
16,876
8,117
8,117
642
8,759
Non­
printers>
4
Manufacturing
Fabricated
Metal
Products
34
332
62,501
30,581
30,581
1,339
31,920
Non­
printers>
5
Manufacturing
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
352
to
356
333
30,665
15,186
15,186
294
15,480
Non­
printers>
6
Manufacturing
Electronics
&
Computers
367
3344
6,270
2,805
2,805
661
3,466
Non­
printers>
7
Manufacturing
Transportation
Eqpt
37
336
12,980
6,009
6,009
963
6,972
Non­
printers>
8
Manufacturing
Furniture
&
Fixtures
25
337
20,758
10,270
10,270
219
10,489
Non­
printers>
9
Retail
Trade
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
5511+
5521
4411
49,237
23,909
23,909
1,420
25,328
Printers>
10
Information
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
271
to
274
5111
21,806
0
21,457
349
21,806
Printers>
11
Administrative
Services
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
7334
561439
5,780
0
5,665
115
5,780
Non­
printers>
12
Other
Services
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
753
8111
164,360
82,151
82,151
59
82,210
Non­
printers>
13
Public
Administration
Military
Bases
9721
92812
580
243
243
95
338
Column
Totals:
448,242
185,595
255,042
7,604
262,647
100.0%
41.4%
56.9%
1.7%
58.6%
Subtotals:
All
NAICS
CESQGs
SQGs
LQGs
SQG+
LQG
Printers>
70,502
0
69,447
1,055
70,502
Non­
printers>
377,740
185,595
185,595
6,550
192,145
B.
1997
ESTIMATE
OF
RCRA
SOLVENT
WASTE
INDUSTRIAL
WIPES
GENERATORS:

Category
Item
Economic
Sector
Sub­
sector
%
facilities
using
solvent
wipes
%
states
assumed
adopting
rule
Total
applicable
facilities
RCRA
Regulatory
Status
Subtotal
SQGs
+
LQGs
CESQGs
SQGs**
LQGs*
Printers>
1
Manufacturing
Printing
100%
75%
32,187
0
31,744
443
32,187
Non­
printers>
2
Manufacturing
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
35%
75%
3,547
1,661
1,661
225
1,886
Non­
printers>
3
Manufacturing
Plastics
&
Rubber
35%
75%
4,430
2,131
2,131
169
2,299
Non­
printers>
4
Manufacturing
Fabricated
Metal
Products
35%
75%
16,407
8,028
8,028
351
8,379
Non­
printers>
5
Manufacturing
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
35%
75%
8,050
3,986
3,986
77
4,063
Non­
printers>
6
Manufacturing
Electronics
&
Computers
35%
75%
1,646
736
736
174
910
Non­
printers>
7
Manufacturing
Transportation
Eqpt
35%
75%
3,407
1,577
1,577
253
1,830
Non­
printers>
8
Manufacturing
Furniture
&
Fixtures
35%
75%
5,449
2,696
2,696
57
2,753
Non­
printers>
9
Retail
Trade
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
35%
75%
12,925
6,276
6,276
373
6,649
Printers>
10
Information
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
100%
75%
16,355
0
16,093
262
16,355
Printers>
11
Administrative
Services
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
100%
75%
4,335
0
4,249
86
4,335
Non­
printers>
12
Other
Services
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
35%
75%
43,145
21,565
21,565
15
21,580
Non­
printers>
13
Public
Administration
Military
Bases
35%
75%
152
64
64
25
89
Category
Item
Economic
Sector
Sub­
sector
%
facilities
using
solvent
wipes
%
states
assumed
adopting
rule
Total
applicable
facilities
RCRA
Regulatory
Status
Subtotal
SQGs
+
LQGs
CESQGs
SQGs**
LQGs*

91
Column
Totals:
152,033
48,719
100,804
2,510
103,315
100.0%
32.0%
66.3%
1.7%
68.0%
Subtotals:
All
NAICS
CESQGs
SQGs
LQGs
SQG+
LQG
Printers>
52,877
0
52,085
791
52,877
Non­
printers>
99,157
48,719
48,719
1,719
50,438
Explanatory
Notes:
(
a)
RCRA
Regulatory
Status
Definitions
for
Establishments
(
i.
e.
establishment
size
classes):
!
CESQGs
=
conditionally
exempt
small
quantity
generator
<
100
kilograms
(
220.5
pounds)
haz
waste
in
a
calendar
month
(
40
CFR
261.5(
a)).
!
SQGs
=
small
quantity
generator
<
1,000
kilograms
(
2,205
pounds)
haz
waste
in
a
calendar
month
(
40
CFR
261.10).
!
LQGs
=
large
quantity
generator
>
1,000
kilograms
(
2,205
pounds)
haz
waste
in
a
calendar
month
(
not
defined
in
40
CFR).
(
b)
Size
Class
Estimation
Methodology:
*
LQGs
assigned
based
on
count
from
1995
USEPA
"
Biennial
Reporting
System"
(
BRS)
database
of
RCRA
hazardous
waste
LQGs.
Shaded
cells
proportionally
assigned
by
OSW­
EMRAD
in
absence
of
BRS
data,
according
to
LQG
proportion
from
SAIC­
NEMC
=
2.1%
**
SQGs
assumed
to
represent
following
percentage
of
all
facilities
in
each
sub­
sector,
after
subtracting
LQGs:
!
Printer
sub­
sectors
(
items
1,
10,
11)
=
98.5%
!
Non­
printer
sub­
sectors
=
50.0%
CESQGs
estimated
as
remainder
of
facilities,
after
subtracting
LQGs
and
SQGs,
from
1997
NAICS
Census
totals
in
each
sub­
sector.
(
c)
Data
sources
for
total
establishment
counts
in
each
sub­
sector:
1997
NAICS
code
establishment
count
for
manufacturing
sub­
sectors:
http://
www.
census.
gov/
epcd/
ec97.
1995
benchmark
year
count
of
US
military
bases
(
worldwide
installations,
major,
minor,
other):
http://
www.
defenselink.
mil/
pubs/
installations/
index.
html.
!
NAICS
=
North
American
Industrial
Classification
system
(
http://
www.
census.
gov/
epcd/
www/
naics.
html).
!
SIC
=
Standard
Industrial
Classification
system.
92
ESTABLISHMENTS
USING
INDUSTRIAL
WIPES
WITH
&
WITHOUT
SOLVENTS
BY
SUB­
SECTOR
&
BY
TYPE
OF
INDUSTRIAL
WIPES
A.
1997
REFERENCE
DATA:
RCRA
Regulatory
Status>>>
CESQGs
(
nr.
establishments)
SQGs
(
nr.
establishments)
LQGs
(
nr.
establishments)
Total
establishments
Item
Sub­
sector
Reusables
Disposables
Subtotal
Reusables
Disposables
Subtotal
Reusables
Disposables
Subtotal
Reusables
Disposables
Totals
Printer>
1
Printing
0
0
0
39,355
2,970
42,325
550
41
591
39,904
3,012
42,916
Non­
printer>
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
5,883
444
6,328
5,883
444
6,328
798
60
858
12,565
948
13,513
Non­
printer>
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
7,547
570
8,117
7,547
570
8,117
597
45
642
15,692
1,184
16,876
Non­
printer>
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
28,435
2,146
30,581
28,435
2,146
30,581
1,245
94
1,339
58,115
4,386
62,501
Non­
printer>
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
14,120
1,066
15,186
14,120
1,066
15,186
273
21
294
28,513
2,152
30,665
Non­
printer>
6
Electronics
&
Computers
2,608
197
2,805
2,608
197
2,805
615
46
661
5,830
440
6,270
Non­
printer>
7
Transportation
Eqpt
5,587
422
6,009
5,587
422
6,009
895
68
963
12,069
911
12,980
Non­
printer>
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
9,549
721
10,270
9,549
721
10,270
204
15
219
19,301
1,457
20,758
Non­
printer>
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
22,231
1,678
23,909
22,231
1,678
23,909
1,320
100
1,420
45,781
3,456
49,237
Printer>
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
0
0
0
19,951
1,506
21,457
324
24
349
20,276
1,530
21,806
Printer>
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
0
0
0
5,267
398
5,665
107
8
115
5,374
406
5,780
Non­
printer>
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
76,385
5,766
82,151
76,385
5,766
82,151
55
4
59
152,825
11,535
164,360
Non­
printer>
13
Military
Bases
225
17
243
225
17
243
88
7
95
539
41
580
Totals
=
172,570
13,026
185,595
237,143
17,899
255,042
7,071
534
7,604
416,783
31,459
448,242
41.4%
56.9%
1.7%
93.0%
7.0%
100.0%

Printer
subtotal
(
items
1+
10+
11)
=
0
0
0
64,573
4,874
69,447
981
74
1,055
65,554
4,948
70,502
Non­
printer
subtotal
=
172,570
13,026
185,595
172,570
13,026
185,595
6,090
460
6,550
351,229
26,511
377,740
B.
UPDATE
TO
YEAR
2001:

RCRA
Regulatory
Status>>>
CESQGs
(
nr.
establishments)
SQGs
(
nr.
establishments)
LQGs
(
nr.
establishments)
Total
establishments
Item
Sub­
sector
Reusables
Disposables
Subtotal
Reusables
Disposables
Subtotal
Reusables
Disposables
Subtotal
Reusables
Disposables
Totals
Printer>
1
Printing
0
0
0
38,120
2,877
40,997
532
40
572
38,652
2,917
41,569
Non­
printer>
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
5,948
449
6,397
5,948
449
6,397
807
61
867
12,702
959
13,661
Non­
printer>
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
8,003
604
8,607
8,003
604
8,607
633
48
681
16,639
1,256
17,895
Non­
printer>
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
29,022
2,191
31,213
29,022
2,191
31,213
1,271
96
1,367
59,315
4,477
63,792
Non­
printer>
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
14,323
1,081
15,404
14,323
1,081
15,404
277
21
298
28,923
2,183
31,107
Non­
printer>
6
Electronics
&
Computers
2,740
207
2,947
2,740
207
2,947
646
49
695
6,126
462
6,588
Non­
printer>
7
Transportation
Eqpt
5,967
450
6,418
5,967
450
6,418
956
72
1,029
12,891
973
13,864
Non­
printer>
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
9,698
732
10,430
9,698
732
10,430
207
16
222
19,602
1,480
21,082
Non­
printer>
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
23,410
1,767
25,177
23,410
1,767
25,177
1,390
105
1,495
48,210
3,639
51,849
Printer>
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
0
0
0
21,587
1,629
23,216
351
26
377
21,938
1,656
23,594
Printer>
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
0
0
0
5,836
440
6,276
118
9
127
5,954
449
6,404
Non­
printer>
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
83,311
6,288
89,599
83,311
6,288
89,599
60
5
64
166,682
12,581
179,263
Non­
printer>
13
Military
Bases
219
17
236
219
17
236
86
6
92
524
40
564
Totals
=
182,642
13,786
196,427
248,184
18,733
266,917
7,334
554
7,888
438,160
33,072
471,232
41.7%
56.6%
1.7%
93.0%
7.0%
100.0%

Printer
subtotal
(
items
1+
10+
11)
=
0
0
0
65,542
4,947
70,489
1,002
76
1,077
66,544
5,023
71,567
Non­
printer
subtotal
=
182,642
13,786
196,427
182,642
13,786
196,427
6,332
478
6,810
371,616
28,049
399,665
93
MOST­
LIKELY
ESTIMATE
SUB­
SECTOR
REFERENCE
DATA
UPDATED
TO
YEAR
2001
I.
ESTABLISHMENTS
GENERATING
RCRA
SOLVENT
WASTE
INDUSTRIAL
WIPES
BY
SUB­
SECTOR
&
TYPE
OF
WIPES
1997
to
2001
multi
plier
Item
RCRA
Regulatory
Status>>>
CESQGs
(
number
of
establishments)
SQGs
(
number
of
establishments)
LQGs
(
number
of
establishments)
TOTALS
(
CESQGs
+
SQGs
+
LQGs)
Subtotal
Affected
Entities
(
SQGs
+
LQGs)

Sub­
sector
Reusables
Disposables
Subtotal
Reusables
Disposables
Subtotal
Reusables
Disposables
Subtotal
Reusables
Disposables
Totals
Reusables
Disposables
Totals
Printer>
1
Printing
0
0
0
28,590
2,158
30,748
399
30
429
28,989
2,188
31,177
28,989
2,188
31,177
0.969
Non­
printer>
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
1,524
155
1,679
1,524
155
1,679
212
16
228
3,259
327
3,586
1,735
171
1,907
1.011
Non­
printer>
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
2,050
209
2,259
2,050
209
2,259
166
13
179
4,267
431
4,697
2,216
222
2,438
1.060
Non­
printer>
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
7,435
758
8,193
7,435
758
8,193
334
25
359
15,204
1,541
16,745
7,769
783
8,552
1.021
Non­
printer>
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
3,669
374
4,044
3,669
374
4,044
73
5
78
7,412
754
8,165
3,742
380
4,122
1.014
Non­
printer>
6
Electronics
&
Computers
702
72
774
702
72
774
170
13
182
1,573
156
1,729
872
84
956
1.051
Non­
printer>
7
Transportation
Eqpt
1,529
156
1,685
1,529
156
1,685
251
19
270
3,309
331
3,639
1,780
175
1,955
1.068
Non­
printer>
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
2,484
253
2,738
2,484
253
2,738
54
4
58
5,023
511
5,534
2,539
257
2,796
1.016
Non­
printer>
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
5,998
611
6,609
5,998
611
6,609
365
28
392
12,360
1,250
13,610
6,362
639
7,001
1.053
Printer>
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
0
0
0
16,190
1,222
17,412
263
20
283
16,453
1,242
17,695
16,453
1,242
17,695
1.082
Printer>
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
0
0
0
4,377
330
4,707
89
7
95
4,466
337
4,803
4,466
337
4,803
1.108
Non­
printer>
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
21,344
2,176
23,520
21,344
2,176
23,520
16
1
17
42,703
4,353
47,057
21,360
2,177
23,537
1.091
Non­
printer>
13
Military
Bases
56
6
62
56
6
62
23
2
24
135
13
148
79
7
86
0.972
Totals
=
46,792
4,770
51,562
95,948
8,481
104,429
2,413
182
2,596
145,154
13,433
158,587
98,362
8,663
107,025
1.043
32.5%
65.8%
1.6%
91.5%
8.5%
100.0%
67.5%
Printer
subtotal
(
items
1+
10+
11)
=
0
0
0
49,157
3,710
52,867
751
57
808
49,908
3,767
53,675
49,908
3,767
53,675
50.2%
Non­
printer
subtotal
=
46,792
4,770
51,562
46,792
4,770
51,562
1,662
125
1,788
95,246
9,666
104,912
48,454
4,896
53,350
49.8%

II.
ANNUAL
NUMBER
OF
RCRA
SOLVENT
WASTE
INDUSTRIAL
WIPES
GENERATED
BY
APPLICABLE
ESTABLISHMENTS
Item
RCRA
Regulatory
Status>>>
CESQGs
(
number
of
industrial
wipes)
SQGs
(
number
of
industrial
wipes)
LQGs
(
number
of
industrial
wipes)
TOTALS
(
CESQGs
+
SQGs
+
LQGs)
Subtotal
Affected
Entities
(
SQGs
+
LQGs)
1997
to
2001
multiplier
Sub­
sector
Reusables
Disposables
Subtotal
Reusables
Disposables
Subtotal
Reusables
Disposables
Subtotal
Reusables
Disposables
Totals
Reusables
Disposables
Totals
Printer>
1
Printing
0
0
0
565,659,591
17,050,706
582,710,298
74,303,831
2,237,036
76,540,867
639,963,423
19,287,742
659,251,165
639,963,423
19,287,742
659,251,165
1.070
Non­
printer>
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
12,053,232
1,908,983
13,962,216
42,186,313
6,670,343
48,856,656
23,718,009
2,774,685
26,492,694
77,957,554
11,354,012
89,311,565
65,904,321
9,445,028
75,349,349
1.110
Non­
printer>
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
16,489,634
2,604,250
19,093,884
57,707,802
9,126,711
66,834,512
18,928,159
2,213,612
21,141,771
93,125,595
13,944,572
107,070,167
76,635,961
11,340,323
87,976,283
1.184
Non­
printer>
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
57,577,964
9,106,271
66,684,235
201,522,873
31,860,977
233,383,850
36,600,626
4,278,850
40,879,476
295,701,463
45,246,098
340,947,561
238,123,499
36,139,827
274,263,326
1.097
Non­
printer>
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
36,527,334
5,774,851
42,302,185
127,845,668
20,211,978
148,057,646
10,260,172
1,205,430
11,465,602
174,633,174
27,192,259
201,825,433
138,105,840
21,417,408
159,523,248
1.402
Non­
printer>
6
Electronics
&
Computers
13,270,139
2,096,737
15,366,876
46,459,279
7,338,580
53,797,859
45,438,499
5,324,609
50,763,108
105,167,917
14,759,925
119,927,843
91,897,779
12,663,188
104,560,967
2.759
Non­
printer>
7
Transportation
Eqpt
11,226,160
1,774,844
13,001,004
39,297,004
6,217,398
45,514,402
26,121,783
3,059,700
29,181,483
76,644,947
11,051,942
87,696,889
65,418,787
9,277,098
74,695,885
1.089
Non­
printer>
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
19,502,346
3,088,056
22,590,402
68,269,281
10,791,594
79,060,874
6,043,292
708,371
6,751,664
93,814,920
14,588,021
108,402,940
74,312,573
11,499,965
85,812,538
1.107
Non­
printer>
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
44,675,979
7,066,710
51,742,689
156,360,483
24,728,040
181,088,523
38,513,024
4,507,886
43,020,910
239,549,486
36,302,636
275,852,122
194,873,507
29,235,926
224,109,433
1.089
Printer>
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
0
0
0
286,768,691
8,648,444
295,417,134
43,841,615
1,327,236
45,168,852
330,610,306
9,975,680
340,585,986
330,610,306
9,975,680
340,585,986
1.070
Printer>
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
0
0
0
74,581,196
2,245,659
76,826,855
14,233,053
432,263
14,665,316
88,814,248
2,677,922
91,492,171
88,814,248
2,677,922
91,492,171
1.054
Non­
printer>
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
153,507,666
24,270,718
177,778,385
537,276,832
84,952,959
622,229,791
1,600,626
185,106
1,785,733
692,385,125
109,408,784
801,793,908
538,877,458
85,138,065
624,015,523
1.089
Non­
printer>
13
Military
Bases
511,749
85,291
597,040
1,778,937
280,243
2,059,180
2,887,726
341,166
3,228,892
5,178,412
706,701
5,885,113
4,666,663
621,409
5,288,073
1.218
Totals
=
365,342,203
57,776,711
423,118,915
2,205,713,949
230,123,632
2,435,837,581
342,490,416
28,595,951
371,086,367
2,913,546,569
316,496,294
3,230,042,863
2,548,204,365
258,719,583
2,806,923,948
1.128
13.1%
75.4%
11.5%
90.2%
9.8%
100.0%
86.9%
Printer
subtotal
(
items
1+
10+
11)
=
0
0
0
927,009,478
27,944,809
954,954,287
132,378,499
3,996,535
136,375,034
1,059,387,977
31,941,344
1,091,329,321
1,059,387,977
31,941,344
1,091,329,321
38.9%
Non­
printer
subtotal
=
365,342,203
57,776,711
423,118,915
1,278,704,471
202,178,823
1,480,883,294
210,111,917
24,599,416
234,711,333
1,854,158,592
284,554,950
2,138,713,542
1,488,816,388
226,778,238
1,715,594,627
61.1%
94
III.
ANNUAL
RCRA
SOLVENT
WASTE
INDUSTRIAL
WIPES
GENERATED
PER
APPLICABLE
ESTABLISHMENT
Item
RCRA
Regulatory
Status>>>
CESQGs
(
wipes
per
establishment)
SQGs
(
wipes
per
establishment)
LQGs
(
wipes
per
establishment)
TOTALS
(
CESQGs
+
SQGs
+
LQGs)
Subtotal
Affected
Entities
(
SQGs
+
LQGs)
Sub­
sector
Reusables
Disposables
Subtotal
Reusables
Disposables
Subtotal
Reusables
Disposables
Subtotal
Reusables
Disposables
Totals
Reusables
Disposables
Totals
Printer>
1
Printing
0
0
0
19,785
7,901
18,951
186,128
74,241
178,275
22,076
8,815
21,145
22,076
8,815
21,145
Non­
printer>
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
7,910
12,288
8,315
27,685
42,937
29,096
112,031
173,637
116,355
23,919
34,755
24,906
37,974
55,127
39,515
Non­
printer>
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
8,042
12,459
8,451
28,146
43,661
29,581
113,916
176,501
118,308
21,825
32,383
22,793
34,575
51,180
36,084
Non­
printer>
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
7,744
12,013
8,139
27,103
42,031
28,485
109,724
169,945
113,950
19,449
29,357
20,361
30,651
46,143
32,070
Non­
printer>
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
9,954
15,436
10,462
34,840
54,027
36,615
140,952
219,396
146,457
23,562
36,078
24,717
36,904
56,421
38,702
Non­
printer>
6
Electronics
&
Computers
18,904
29,297
19,865
66,183
102,540
69,547
268,036
416,127
278,429
66,838
94,657
69,346
105,447
150,103
109,388
Non­
printer>
7
Transportation
Eqpt
7,343
11,387
7,717
25,704
39,889
27,016
104,045
161,461
108,075
23,164
33,422
24,096
36,754
53,068
38,213
Non­
printer>
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
7,850
12,191
8,251
27,478
42,605
28,878
111,322
172,877
115,642
18,676
28,565
19,589
29,271
44,678
30,689
Non­
printer>
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
7,449
11,557
7,829
26,071
40,441
27,400
105,542
163,666
109,621
19,381
29,032
20,268
30,629
45,753
32,009
Printer>
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
0
0
0
17,712
7,077
16,966
166,605
66,822
159,602
20,094
8,033
19,247
20,094
8,033
19,247
Printer>
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
0
0
0
17,040
6,798
16,321
160,313
64,504
153,588
19,889
7,945
19,050
19,889
7,945
19,050
Non­
printer>
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
7,192
11,154
7,559
25,173
39,040
26,456
101,910
156,141
105,716
16,214
25,133
17,039
25,229
39,104
26,512
Non­
printer>
13
Military
Bases
9,110
14,893
9,645
31,668
48,934
33,266
128,071
200,461
133,151
38,388
53,718
39,750
59,281
83,648
61,382
Totals
=
7,808
12,111
8,206
22,989
27,135
23,325
141,912
156,980
142,969
20,072
23,560
20,368
25,906
29,865
26,227
Printer
average
(
items
1,10,11)=
0
0
0
18,858
7,532
18,063
176,237
70,491
168,816
21,227
8,479
20,332
21,227
8,479
20,332
Non­
printer
average
=
7,808
12,111
8,206
27,328
42,381
28,720
126,401
196,062
131,290
19,467
29,438
20,386
30,726
46,320
32,157
IV.
WEEKLY
SOLVENT
INDUSTRIAL
WIPES
USAGE
RATES
PER
ESTABLISHMENT
Item
RCRA
Regulatory
Status>>>
CESQGs
(
wipes
per
establishment)
SQGs
(
wipes
per
establishment)
LQGs
(
wipes
per
establishment)
TOTALS
(
CESQGs
+
SQGs
+
LQGs)
Subtotal
Affected
Entities
(
SQGs
+
LQGs)
Sub­
sector
Reusables
Disposables
Subtotal
Reusables
Disposables
Subtotal
Reusables
Disposables
Subtotal
Reusables
Disposables
Totals
Reusables
Disposables
Totals
Printer>
1
Printing
0
0
0
396
158
379
3,723
1,485
3,566
442
176
423
442
176
423
Non­
printer>
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
158
246
166
554
859
582
2,241
3,473
2,327
478
695
498
759
1,103
790
Non­
printer>
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
161
249
169
563
873
592
2,278
3,530
2,366
437
648
456
692
1,024
722
Non­
printer>
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
155
240
163
542
841
570
2,194
3,399
2,279
389
587
407
613
923
641
Non­
printer>
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
199
309
209
697
1,081
732
2,819
4,388
2,929
471
722
494
738
1,128
774
Non­
printer>
6
Electronics
&
Computers
378
586
397
1,324
2,051
1,391
5,361
8,323
5,569
1,337
1,893
1,387
2,109
3,002
2,188
Non­
printer>
7
Transportation
Eqpt
147
228
154
514
798
540
2,081
3,229
2,161
463
668
482
735
1,061
764
Non­
printer>
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
157
244
165
550
852
578
2,226
3,458
2,313
374
571
392
585
894
614
Non­
printer>
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
149
231
157
521
809
548
2,111
3,273
2,192
388
581
405
613
915
640
Printer>
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
0
0
0
354
142
339
3,332
1,336
3,192
402
161
385
402
161
385
Printer>
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
0
0
0
341
136
326
3,206
1,290
3,072
398
159
381
398
159
381
Non­
printer>
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
144
223
151
503
781
529
2,038
3,123
2,114
324
503
341
505
782
530
Non­
printer>
13
Military
Bases
182
298
193
633
979
665
2,561
4,009
2,663
768
1,074
795
1,186
1,673
1,228
Totals
=
156
242
164
460
543
467
2,838
3,140
2,859
401
471
407
518
597
525
Printer
average
(
items
1,10,11)=
0
0
0
377
151
361
3,525
1,410
3,376
425
170
407
425
170
407
Non­
printer
average
=
156
242
164
547
848
574
2,528
3,921
2,626
389
589
408
615
926
643
95
Pie­
Chart
Summary
from
Section
I
of
Previous
Spreadsheet
(
Disposables
+
Reusables)
96
Pie­
Chart
Summary
of
Section
II
of
Prior
Spreadsheet
(
Disposables
+
Reusables)
97
YEAR
2001
UPDATE
COUNT
INDUSTRIAL
WIPES
(
with
&
w/
o
solvents)

Item
Sub­
sector
Total
Wipe
Uses
(
CESQGs
+
SQGs
+
LQGs)
Reusables
Disposables
Totals
%
Printer>
1
Printing
853,300,000
25,700,000
879,000,000
9.2%
Non­
printer>
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
297,000,000
43,300,000
340,300,000
3.5%
Non­
printer>
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
354,800,000
53,100,000
407,900,000
4.2%
Non­
printer>
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
1,126,500,000
172,400,000
1,298,900,000
13.5%
Non­
printer>
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
665,300,000
103,600,000
768,900,000
8.0%
Non­
printer>
6
Electronics
&
Computers
400,600,000
56,200,000
456,800,000
4.8%
Non­
printer>
7
Transportation
Eqpt
292,000,000
42,100,000
334,100,000
3.5%
Non­
printer>
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
357,400,000
55,600,000
413,000,000
4.3%
Non­
printer>
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
912,600,000
138,300,000
1,050,900,000
10.9%
Printer>
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
440,800,000
13,300,000
454,100,000
4.7%
Printer>
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
118,400,000
3,600,000
122,000,000
1.3%
Non­
printer>
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
2,637,700,000
416,800,000
3,054,500,000
31.8%
Non­
printer>
13
Military
Bases
19,700,000
2,700,000
22,400,000
0.2%
Totals
=
8,476,100,000
1,126,700,000
9,602,800,000
100.0%
National
marketshare
=
88.3%
11.7%
100.0%
Printer
subtotal
(
items
1+
10+
11)
=
1,412,500,000
42,600,000
1,455,100,000
15.2%
Non­
printer
subtotal
=
7,063,600,000
1,084,100,000
8,147,700,000
84.8%
98
Estimated
Number
of
Workers
in
Industries
Using
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
(
2001)

Item
Sub­
sector
1997
Census
employees
in
sub­
sector
2001
facility
count
update
multiplier
Year
2001
estimated
employees
%
facilities
"
most
likely"
using
solvent
wipes
Employees
in
solvent
wipes
using
facilities
Printer>
1
Printing
838,240
0.969
811,936
100.0%
811,936
Non­
printer>
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
884,321
1.011
893,996
35.0%
312,899
Non­
printer>
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
1,029,976
1.060
1,092,168
35.0%
382,259
Non­
printer>
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
1,774,874
1.021
1,811,540
35.0%
634,039
Non­
printer>
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
1,421,820
1.014
1,442,294
35.0%
504,803
Non­
printer>
6
Electronics
&
Computers
588,938
1.051
618,832
35.0%
216,591
Non­
printer>
7
Transportation
Eqpt
1,848,558
1.068
1,974,518
35.0%
691,081
Non­
printer>
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
604,845
1.016
614,278
35.0%
214,997
Non­
printer>
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
1,138,995
1.053
1,199,421
35.0%
419,797
Printer>
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
739,834
1.082
800,488
100.0%
800,488
Printer>
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
87,221
1.108
96,630
100.0%
96,630
Non­
printer>
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
815,149
1.091
889,061
35.0%
311,171
Non­
printer>
13
Military
Bases
1,438,562
0.972
1,398,890
35.0%
489,612
Totals
=
13,211,333
1.043
13,600,000
5,900,000
Percent
=
100.0%
43.4%
Printer
subtotal
(
items
1+
10+
11)
=
1,665,295
1,709,055
1,709,055
Non­
printer
subtotal
=
11,546,038
11,890,945
4,190,945
99
Printing
13.8%

Chemical
&
Allied
Products
5.3%

Plastics
&
Rubber
6.5%

Fabricated
Metal
Products
10.8%

Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
8.6%
Electronics
&
Computers
3.7%
Transportation
Eqpt
11.7%
Furniture
&
Fixtures
3.7%
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
7.1%
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
13.6%
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
1.6%
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
5.3%
Military
Bases
8.3%
Proportion
of
Employees
Working
in
13
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
Sub­
Sectors
(
Based
on
estimated
5.9
million
employees
in
facilities
using
solvent
industrial
wipes)
100
INDUSTRIAL
WIPES
PROPOSED
EXCLUSIONS
COUNT
OF
AFFECTED
SMALL
FIRM
ESTABLISHMENTS
IN
STATES
WHICH
MAY
ADOPT
THE
EXCLUSIONS
(
Disposable
+
Reusable
Wipes
Generators
&
Laundries)

Item
Sub­
sector
NAICS
subsector
code
NAICS
code
used
to
represent
subsector*
Small
Firm
Size
Bins
(
1997
Economic
Census)
Subtotal
small
firm
facilities
Nonsmall
facilities
Total
facilities
all
sizes
Bin#
1
Bin#
2
Bin#
3
Bin#
4
Bin#
5
Bin#
6
Bin#
7
1
Printing
323*
323110
15,496
9,902
7,058
5,224
2,089
1,317
353
41,440
129
41,569
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
325*
325998
675
389
540
535
235
126
33
2,534
9
2,542
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
326*
326199
585
371
522
749
454
413
125
3,219
32
3,251
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
332*
332322
2,395
1,918
2,633
2,748
1,073
539
84
11,390
13
11,403
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
333*
333514
1,907
1,236
1,118
879
233
107
12
5,491
5
5,496
6
Electronics
&
Computers
3344*
334419
392
196
194
202
125
109
42
1,260
15
1,274
7
Transportation
Eqpt
336*
336399
597
311
337
448
277
291
214
2,475
131
2,606
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
337*
337122
1,944
619
446
311
160
125
77
3,682
46
3,728
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
4411
4411
1,063
1,146
1,323
1,388
741
644
862
7,166
2,170
9,335
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
5111
5111
8,495
3,553
2,921
2,626
1,330
1,355
1,132
21,411
2,182
23,594
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
561439
561439
520
1,128
1,094
806
579
304
0
4,431
1,972
6,404
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
8111
8111
3,868
9,768
8,239
4,663
2,265
632
0
29,435
1,947
31,382
13
Military
Bases
92812
92812
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
115
Column
subtotals
(
1+...+
13)
=
37,938
30,537
26,425
20,578
9,561
5,961
2,934
133,934
8,651
142,700
93.9%
6.1%
100.0%

14
Linen
Supply
&
Laundering
812332
812332
54
102
89
68
95
81
61
551
624
1,175
46.9%
53.1%
100.0%

Grand
totals
(
1+...+
14)
=
134,485
9,275
143,875
93.6%
6.4%
100%

Explanatory
Notes:
(
a)
*
Indicates
that
in
absence
of
1997
Economic
Census
firm
size
data
for
the
3­
digit
NAICS
code
manufacturing
sub­
sectors,
the
respective
largest
number
of
establishments
6­
digit
NAICS
code
industry
used
to
represent
the
size­
bin
percentage
distribution
of
establishments
in
each
sub­
sector.
(
b)
The
6­
digit
industry
code
shown
represents
the
single
largest
industry
by
number
of
establishments
within
the
sub­
sector,
ranging
from
7.2%
to
51.0%
subsector
coverages.
(
c)
Items
9­
14
firm
size
bin
distributions
based
on
exact
data
(
1997
Economic
Census)
matching
the
NAICS
code
displayed.
101
102
BASELINE
EFFECTIVE
ANNUAL
COST
OF
USING
INDUSTRIAL
WIPES
AS
A
PERCENTAGE
OF
WIPES
GENERATOR
ANNUAL
OPERATING
COSTS
Item
Sub­
sector
NAICS
code
Natl
Avg.
Baseline
Unit
Cost*
($/
wipe)
National
Annual
Effective
Cost
for
Industrial
Wipers
Annual
Average
Wipes
Cost
Per
Facility
Operating
Costs
as
%
of
Business
Revenues
Weighted­
avg
Operating
Revenues
Per
Facility
Baseline
Wipes
Annual
Cost
as
%
of
Operating
Costs
A.
DISPOSABLE
WIPES:
1
Printing
323
$
0.2336
$
6,011,894
$
2,061
77.3%
$
2,082,921
0.10%
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
325
$
0.2336
$
2,943,200
$
12,884
59.6%
$
6,648,640
0.19%
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
326
$
0.2336
$
3,534,606
$
11,964
89.7%
$
6,878,990
0.17%
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
332
$
0.2336
$
11,260,922
$
10,783
78.1%
$
2,760,591
0.39%
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
333
$
0.2336
$
6,670,906
$
13,180
80.7%
$
1,400,455
0.94%
6
Electronics
&
Computers
3344
$
0.2336
$
3,944,864
$
35,070
75.1%
$
4,246,377
0.83%
7
Transportation
Eqpt
336
$
0.2336
$
2,887,478
$
12,388
77.9%
$
17,610,264
0.07%
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
337
$
0.2336
$
3,581,632
$
10,436
75.3%
$
2,201,434
0.47%
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
4411
$
0.2336
$
9,105,096
$
10,687
11.7%
$
668,734
1.60%
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
5111
$
0.2336
$
3,105,979
$
1,876
51.0%
$
2,998,041
0.06%
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
561439
$
0.2336
$
832,590
$
1,853
72.0%
$
947,461
0.20%
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
8111
$
0.2336
$
26,521,549
$
9,136
56.3%
$
238,037
3.84%
13
Military
Bases
92812
$
0.2336
$
193,583
$
19,544
NR
NR
NR
Subtotal
(
or
weighted
average)
=
$
80,594,299
$
6,977
63.3%
$
2,224,169
0.31%

B.
REUSABLE
WIPES:
1
Printing
323
$
0.0535
$
45,652,141
$
1,181
77.3%
$
2,082,921
0.06%
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
325
$
0.0535
$
4,701,064
$
2,032
59.6%
$
6,648,640
0.03%
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
326
$
0.0535
$
5,468,066
$
1,850
89.7%
$
6,878,990
0.03%
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
332
$
0.0535
$
16,986,653
$
1,640
78.1%
$
2,760,591
0.06%
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
333
$
0.0535
$
9,852,232
$
1,975
80.7%
$
1,400,455
0.14%
6
Electronics
&
Computers
3344
$
0.0535
$
6,556,480
$
5,642
75.1%
$
4,246,377
0.13%
7
Transportation
Eqpt
336
$
0.0535
$
4,666,821
$
1,966
77.9%
$
17,610,264
0.01%
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
337
$
0.0535
$
5,300,469
$
1,566
75.3%
$
2,201,434
0.07%
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
4411
$
0.0535
$
13,901,428
$
1,639
11.7%
$
668,734
0.25%
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
5111
$
0.0535
$
23,584,544
$
1,075
51.0%
$
2,998,041
0.04%
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
561439
$
0.0535
$
6,334,969
$
1,064
72.0%
$
947,461
0.11%
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
8111
$
0.0535
$
38,440,248
$
1,350
56.3%
$
238,037
0.57%
13
Military
Bases
92812
$
0.0535
$
332,460
$
3,167
NR
NR
NR
Subtotal
(
or
weighted
average)
=
$
181,777,576
$
1,386
63.3%
$
2,246,399
0.06%

SUMMARY
STATISTICS
(
Disposables
&
Reusables):
Min
=
0.01%
Max
=
3.84%

Average
=
0.08%

Explanatory
Notes:
(
a)
*
Unit
Cost
Sources:
Disposable
wipes:
Current
price
for
wipes
plus
cost
for
hazardous
waste
incineration
of
spent
wipes.
Reusable
wipes:
US
Bureau
of
Census
data
for
industrial
laundries
(
annual
$
revenues
/
annual
wipes).
(
b)
Derivation
of
each
unit
cost
using
these
data
sources
is
displayed
on
another
table
elsewhere
in
this
study.
103
Attachment
Set
B
Industrial
Laundry
Data
104
US
Census
Bureau
Industry
Quick
Report:
Industrial
Launderers
(
NAICS
code
=
812332)
Selected
Industry
Statistics
by
State:
1997
and
1992
Geography
Number
of
Establishments
Number
of
Employees
Annual
Payroll
($
1,000)
Shipments/
Sales/
Receipts
($
1,000)
Population
Estimate
1992
1997
1992
1997
1992
1997
1992
1997
1992
1997
TAXABLE
INDUSTRIES
United
States
1,613
1,435
81,908
63,172
1,670,672
1,199,428
5,007,637
3,649,671
267,743,595
255,077,536
Alabama
37
23
1,956
1,352
36,152
24,209
106,212
69,381
4,322,113
4,137,511
Alaska
1
1
a
e
D
D
D
D
609,655
587,766
Arizona
25
21
1,073
676
21,360
12,414
73,880
37,802
4,553,249
3,832,368
Arkansas
26
26
1,291
967
19,846
15,083
57,057
44,927
2,523,186
2,394,253
California
194
165
9,394
7,379
208,356
157,295
630,257
468,151
32,182,118
30,895,356
Colorado
19
20
828
479
16,904
8,982
47,160
28,481
3,892,029
3,464,675
Connecticut
15
14
766
618
17,377
13,890
49,841
34,979
3,267,240
3,279,116
Delaware
3
3
198
c
6,012
D
15,143
D
735,143
690,884
District
of
Columbia
1
2
a
a
D
D
D
D
529,895
585,221
Florida
67
54
3,826
2,927
72,405
56,260
214,132
171,343
14,677,181
13,482,716
Georgia
55
40
2,135
2,011
44,405
37,637
131,340
110,419
7,489,982
6,773,364
Hawaii
4
2
30
b
206
D
977
D
1,192,057
1,155,726
Idaho
6
5
163
143
2,575
2,498
7,798
6,446
1,208,865
1,065,885
Illinois
70
66
4,455
2,754
92,480
54,113
289,114
176,080
11,989,352
11,612,906
Indiana
50
41
2,978
1,969
55,997
38,252
169,672
118,232
5,864,847
5,658,323
Iowa
22
25
1,349
1,068
25,885
19,602
70,639
56,275
2,854,330
2,802,944
Kansas
15
20
1,066
609
18,859
11,518
54,480
33,232
2,601,437
2,515,320
Kentucky
34
27
1,946
1,507
33,139
26,979
99,840
74,467
3,910,366
3,753,836
Louisiana
24
22
1,101
1,028
23,681
15,943
73,649
54,049
4,353,646
4,278,889
Maine
7
6
270
194
4,884
3,745
16,334
12,458
1,241,895
1,236,348
Geography
Number
of
Establishments
Number
of
Employees
Annual
Payroll
($
1,000)
Shipments/
Sales/
Receipts
($
1,000)
Population
Estimate
1992
1997
1992
1997
1992
1997
1992
1997
1992
1997
105
Maryland
24
23
1,403
1,212
31,821
24,276
106,151
80,221
5,094,924
4,917,269
Massachusetts
34
30
1,406
1,057
33,694
23,565
99,784
75,794
6,114,440
5,992,712
Michigan
80
63
3,591
2,658
73,181
47,933
217,241
137,473
9,779,984
9,433,665
Minnesota
19
22
1,156
971
32,274
20,984
80,823
59,810
4,687,408
4,468,165
Mississippi
10
13
444
586
7,804
8,678
23,328
26,004
2,731,644
2,615,208
Missouri
35
32
1,471
1,188
33,688
22,171
94,545
65,156
5,408,455
5,190,719
Montana
7
11
196
202
3,381
3,005
10,009
8,727
878,730
822,347
Nebraska
12
8
298
253
5,813
3,833
16,051
10,151
1,657,009
1,600,524
Nevada
11
8
e
c
D
D
D
D
1,678,691
1,336,419
New
Hampshire
11
9
669
380
18,025
8,438
53,361
27,410
1,172,140
1,115,087
New
Jersey
35
40
1,800
1,503
39,265
31,034
108,589
91,110
8,058,384
7,820,260
New
Mexico
12
11
421
445
8,738
6,067
28,113
21,100
1,723,965
1,581,830
New
York
80
75
2,898
2,451
62,539
54,125
187,592
171,585
18,146,200
18,109,491
North
Carolina
52
43
3,219
2,120
59,944
35,252
188,155
113,310
7,430,675
6,836,333
North
Dakota
5
2
c
b
D
D
D
D
640,965
634,031
Ohio
84
79
4,866
4,366
99,414
79,196
302,228
269,099
11,192,932
11,021,419
Oklahoma
22
18
1,149
857
19,680
13,451
60,587
41,624
3,321,611
3,205,234
Oregon
18
19
1,228
722
25,286
15,916
70,438
40,793
3,243,272
2,971,567
Pennsylvania
60
63
3,121
2,878
68,220
57,655
216,376
197,392
12,011,278
11,995,405
Rhode
Island
5
3
76
b
1,832
D
8,277
D
987,263
1,001,344
South
Carolina
28
23
1,255
826
22,757
11,325
73,609
36,165
3,788,119
3,602,854
South
Dakota
5
5
128
99
2,489
1,580
5,980
4,484
737,755
708,411
Tennessee
43
32
2,602
1,525
49,964
31,032
134,141
78,604
5,371,693
5,025,261
Texas
121
124
6,971
5,580
123,186
91,647
385,896
285,415
19,385,699
17,682,538
Geography
Number
of
Establishments
Number
of
Employees
Annual
Payroll
($
1,000)
Shipments/
Sales/
Receipts
($
1,000)
Population
Estimate
1992
1997
1992
1997
1992
1997
1992
1997
1992
1997
106
Utah
11
13
f
449
D
7,357
D
20,607
2,065,001
1,811,215
Vermont
2
1
b
a
D
D
D
D
588,632
571,334
Virginia
40
33
2,059
1,697
41,291
31,364
119,969
89,819
6,737,489
6,394,481
Washington
27
15
1,101
749
26,289
20,786
69,530
50,399
5,614,151
5,142,746
West
Virginia
9
6
408
e
8,068
D
31,346
D
1,815,231
1,808,860
Wisconsin
32
25
1,968
1,239
45,890
24,742
139,402
69,581
5,201,226
4,992,664
Wyoming
4
3
b
c
D
D
D
D
480,043
464,736
Explanatory
Notes:
(
a)
Source:
Data
based
on
the
US
Dept
of
Commerce,
Census
Bureau,
1997
Economic
Census:
http://
factfinder.
census.
gov/
home/
en/
datanotes/
exp_
econ97.
html.
Excludes
data
for
auxiliaries.
For
Manufacturing
industries,
only
states
with
100
employees
or
more
are
shown.
(
b)
Key
to
footnote
letters
shown
in
table:
D:
Withheld
to
avoid
disclosing
data
of
individual
companies;
data
are
included
in
higher
level
totals
N:
Not
available
or
not
comparable
S:
Withheld
because
estimate
did
not
meet
publication
standards
Z:
Less
than
half
the
unit
shown
a:
0
­
19
employees
b:
20
­
99
employees
c:
100
­
249
employees
e:
250
­
499
employees
f:
500
­
999
employees
g:
1,000
­
2,499
employees
h:
2,500
­
4,999
employees
i:
5,000
­
9,999
employees
j:
10,000
­
24,999
employees
k:
25,000
­
49,999
employees
l:
50,000
­
99,999
employees
m:
100,000
or
more
employees
p:
10
to
19
percent
estimated
q:
20
to
29
percent
estimated
r:
Revised
s:
Sampling
error
exceeds
40
percent
107
108
Laundry
Cleaning
&
Garment
Services
Sub­
Sector
(
SIC=
721)
Business
Operating
Annual
Expenses
Item
Business
Expense
Element
1997
1992
USEPA­
OSW
Estimated
(
millions)
%
of
revenues
(
millions)
%
of
revenues
Avg
%
of
revenues
Type
of
expense
A.
Operating
Expenses
Compared
to
Revenues:
A1
Annual
receipts
or
revenues
(
income)
$
22,399
100.0%
$
18,805
100.0%
Implied
average
annual
growth
in
revenues
(
5­
years)
=
3.6%
A2
Operating
expenses
total
$
17,186
76.7%
$
14,121
75.1%
75.9%
A3
Gross
profit
=
gross
margin
=
net
income
(
A1
­
A2)
$
5,213
23.3%
$
4,684
24.9%
24.1%
A4
Tax
on
gross
profit
(
Federal
+
State)*
$
2,097
9.4%
$
1,884
10.0%
9.7%
A5
After­
tax
profit
(
A3
­
A4)
$
3,116
13.9%
$
2,800
14.9%
14.4%
Implied
average
annual
growth
in
after­
tax
profit
(
5
years)
=
2.2%
B.
Break­
down
of
Operating
Expenses:
Operating
expenses
total
(
item
A2)
$
17,186
100.0%
$
14,121
100.0%
100.1%
B1
Annual
payroll
$
7,020
40.8%
NR
NR
40.8%
Fixed
B2
Employer
costs
for
fringe
benefits
$
1,206
7.0%
NR
NR
7.0%
Fixed
B3
Cost
of
contract
labor
$
297
1.7%
NR
NR
1.7%
Variable
B4
Taxes
&
license
fees
$
226
1.3%
$
158
1.1%
1.2%
Fixed
B5
Depreciation
&
amortization
charges
$
1,082
6.3%
$
927
6.6%
6.4%
Fixed
B6
Lease
&
rental
payments
$
1,381
8.0%
$
1,052
7.4%
7.7%
Fixed
B7
Telephone
&
other
purchased
communications
$
215
1.3%
$
155
1.1%
1.2%
Fixed
B8
Purchased
utilities
(
e.
g.
fuels,
electricity)
$
1,173
6.8%
$
1,075
7.6%
7.2%
90%
variable
B9
Purchased
materials
$
138
0.8%
$
131
0.9%
0.9%
Variable
B10
Advertising
services
$
334
1.9%
$
242
1.7%
1.8%
Fixed
B11
Purchased
repair
&
maintenance
services
$
445
2.6%
$
381
2.7%
2.6%
Variable
B12
Cost
of
purchased
legal
services
$
53
0.3%
$
58
0.4%
0.4%
Fixed
B13
Cost
of
purchased
accounting,
auditing,
&
book­
keeping
services
$
104
0.6%
$
84
0.6%
0.6%
Fixed
B14
Cost
of
data
processing
&
other
computer­
related
services
$
33
0.2%
$
21
0.1%
0.2%
Fixed
B15
Other
operating
expenses**
$
3,479
20.2%
$
2,858
20.2%
20.2%
90%
variable
Fixed
>
70.0%
Variable
>
30.0%

Explanatory
Notes:
(
a)
Source:
US
Bureau
of
Census,
1997
Economic
Census
"
Business
Expenses",
EC97CS­
8,
Dec
2000,
pp.
56­
96,
http://
www.
census.
gov/
prod/
ec97/
e97cs­
8.
pdf
(
b)
*
Tax
estimated
by
multiplying
gross
profit
by
marginal
income
tax
rate
(
EPA­
821­
R­
00­
004,
pp.
B­
3
to
B­
11,
March
2000):
Federal
income
tax
rate
=
34.00%
Average
state
income
tax
rate
(
avg
of
corporate
&
personal)
=
6.23%
Combined
rate
(
Federal
+
State)
=
40.23%
(
c)
NR
=
Data
not
reported
in
source
document.
(
d)
**
Other
operating
expenses
=
inventory
storage,
shipping
costs,
insurance
expense
(
non­
employee),
uninsured
casualty
losses,
bad
debt
losses,
&
refuse
removal
(
including
haz
waste).
109
110
111
112
113
Survey
Sample
of
US
Industrial
Laundries
(
1994
USEPA)
Annual
Quantities
Distribution
of
Resuable
Wipes
Laundered
A
B
C
D
E
F
(
D
x
E)
G
(
F/
weight)
H
I
J
(
G
x
price)

Laundry
facility
count
Cumltv
%
of
sample
Survey
blind
ID
Total
annual
all
items
laundered
(
pounds)
%
of
annual
items
which
are
reusable
wipes*
Annual
reusable
wipes
laundered
(
pounds)
Annual
reusable
wipes
laundered**
(
nr.
wipes)
Cumulative
reusable
wipes
laundered**
(
nr.
wipes)
Cumltv
%
annual
wipes
2001
implied
annual
wipes
revenues***
per
laundry
1
0.7%
S3636
229,276
2%
4,586
36,684
36,684
0.005%
$
1,963
2
1.4%
S5204
483,600
1%
4,836
38,688
75,372
0.01%
$
2,070
3
2.1%
S7286
646,764
1%
6,468
51,741
127,113
0.02%
$
2,768
4
2.8%
S7211
501,636
2%
10,033
80,262
207,375
0.03%
$
4,294
5
3.4%
S3663
1,271,980
1%
12,720
101,758
309,133
0.04%
$
5,444
6
4.1%
S2098
1,508,366
1%
15,084
120,669
429,803
0.06%
$
6,456
7
4.8%
S3916
948,965
2%
18,979
151,834
581,637
0.07%
$
8,123
8
5.5%
S6248
1,180,608
2%
23,612
188,897
770,534
0.10%
$
10,106
9
6.2%
S7499
302,956
9%
27,266
218,128
988,663
0.13%
$
11,670
10
6.9%
S3908
2,741,834
1%
27,418
219,347
1,208,009
0.15%
$
11,735
11
7.6%
S7374
3,000,000
1%
30,000
240,000
1,448,009
0.19%
$
12,840
12
8.3%
S7383
3,256,744
1%
32,567
260,540
1,708,549
0.22%
$
13,939
13
9.0%
S6924
3,283,118
1%
32,831
262,649
1,971,198
0.25%
$
14,052
14
9.7%
S7766
3,409,652
1%
34,097
272,772
2,243,971
0.29%
$
14,594
15
10.3%
S5152
3,554,170
1%
35,542
284,334
2,528,304
0.32%
$
15,212
16
11.0%
S4370
1,209,400
3%
36,282
290,256
2,818,560
0.36%
$
15,529
17
11.7%
S2446
4,353,336
1%
43,533
348,267
3,166,827
0.41%
$
18,633
18
12.4%
S8572
1,494,087
3%
44,823
358,581
3,525,408
0.45%
$
19,184
19
13.1%
S1045
2,464,339
2%
49,287
394,294
3,919,702
0.50%
$
21,095
20
13.8%
S8272
1,253,200
4%
50,128
401,024
4,320,726
0.55%
$
21,455
21
14.5%
S3023
840,000
6%
50,400
403,200
4,723,926
0.61%
$
21,572
22
15.2%
S7539
1,698,991
3%
50,970
407,758
5,131,684
0.66%
$
21,815
23
15.9%
S1032
2,571,239
2%
51,425
411,398
5,543,082
0.71%
$
22,010
24
16.6%
S6197
5,167,100
1%
51,671
413,368
5,956,450
0.76%
$
22,116
25
17.2%
S2877
5,317,487
1%
53,175
425,399
6,381,849
0.82%
$
22,759
26
17.9%
S6502
5,720,000
1%
57,200
457,600
6,839,449
0.88%
$
24,482
27
18.6%
S9066
6,440,344
1%
64,403
515,228
7,354,677
0.94%
$
27,565
28
19.3%
S6185
6,937,000
1%
69,370
554,960
7,909,637
1.0%
$
29,691
29
20.0%
S6220
7,008,543
1%
70,085
560,683
8,470,320
1.1%
$
29,997
30
20.7%
S2014
658,948
11%
72,484
579,874
9,050,194
1.2%
$
31,024
31
21.4%
S8214
7,603,619
1%
76,036
608,290
9,658,484
1.2%
$
32,544
32
22.1%
S1370
7,612,995
1%
76,130
609,040
10,267,524
1.3%
$
32,584
33
22.8%
S4297
1,092,000
7%
76,440
611,520
10,879,044
1.4%
$
32,717
34
23.4%
S8896
7,967,906
1%
79,679
637,432
11,516,476
1.5%
$
34,103
35
24.1%
S6154
3,994,952
2%
79,899
639,192
12,155,668
1.6%
$
34,197
36
24.8%
S3166
243,600
35%
85,260
682,080
12,837,748
1.6%
$
36,492
37
25.5%
S7826
2,142,733
4%
85,709
685,675
13,523,423
1.7%
$
36,684
A
B
C
D
E
F
(
D
x
E)
G
(
F/
weight)
H
I
J
(
G
x
price)

Laundry
facility
count
Cumltv
%
of
sample
Survey
blind
ID
Total
annual
all
items
laundered
(
pounds)
%
of
annual
items
which
are
reusable
wipes*
Annual
reusable
wipes
laundered
(
pounds)
Annual
reusable
wipes
laundered**
(
nr.
wipes)
Cumulative
reusable
wipes
laundered**
(
nr.
wipes)
Cumltv
%
annual
wipes
2001
implied
annual
wipes
revenues***
per
laundry
114
38
26.2%
S8229
2,240,108
4%
89,604
716,835
14,240,257
1.8%
$
38,351
39
26.9%
S2047
9,304,724
1%
93,047
744,378
14,984,635
1.9%
$
39,825
40
27.6%
S2439
1,894,848
5%
94,742
757,939
15,742,575
2.0%
$
40,550
41
28.3%
S5203
2,389,725
4%
95,589
764,712
16,507,287
2.1%
$
40,913
42
29.0%
S5001
1,210,418
8%
96,833
774,668
17,281,954
2.2%
$
41,445
43
29.7%
S2173
1,387,427
7%
97,120
776,959
18,058,913
2.3%
$
41,568
44
30.3%
S6192
1,394,745
7%
97,632
781,057
18,839,970
2.4%
$
41,787
45
31.0%
S6804
2,604,800
4%
104,192
833,536
19,673,506
2.5%
$
44,595
46
31.7%
S3481
1,810,600
6%
108,636
869,088
20,542,594
2.6%
$
46,497
47
32.4%
S6642
3,689,660
3%
110,690
885,518
21,428,113
2.7%
$
47,376
48
33.1%
S3566
948,668
12%
113,840
910,721
22,338,834
2.9%
$
48,724
49
33.8%
S7409
11,741,500
1%
117,415
939,320
23,278,154
3.0%
$
50,255
50
34.5%
S5612
1,748,898
7%
122,423
979,383
24,257,537
3.1%
$
52,398
51
35.2%
S3743
12,480,000
1%
124,800
998,400
25,255,937
3.2%
$
53,415
52
35.9%
S7325
3,327,102
4%
133,084
1,064,673
26,320,610
3.4%
$
56,961
53
36.6%
S2181
4,483,200
3%
134,496
1,075,968
27,396,578
3.5%
$
57,565
54
37.2%
S6128
3,449,812
4%
137,992
1,103,940
28,500,517
3.7%
$
59,062
55
37.9%
S6554
14,061,564
1%
140,616
1,124,925
29,625,443
3.8%
$
60,185
56
38.6%
S2086
1,872,900
8%
149,832
1,198,656
30,824,099
4.0%
$
64,129
57
39.3%
S2310
1,500,000
10%
150,000
1,200,000
32,024,099
4.1%
$
64,201
58
40.0%
S8267
4,391,868
4%
175,675
1,405,398
33,429,496
4.3%
$
75,190
59
40.7%
S2790
17,757,000
1%
177,570
1,420,560
34,850,056
4.5%
$
76,001
60
41.4%
S6934
18,280,102
1%
182,801
1,462,408
36,312,464
4.7%
$
78,240
61
42.1%
S9459
3,050,632
6%
183,038
1,464,303
37,776,768
4.8%
$
78,342
62
42.8%
S7035
1,576,406
12%
189,169
1,513,350
39,290,118
5.0%
$
80,966
63
43.4%
S6089
2,707,229
7%
189,506
1,516,048
40,806,166
5.2%
$
81,110
64
44.1%
S9040
1,804,114
11%
198,453
1,587,620
42,393,786
5.4%
$
84,939
65
44.8%
S5567
5,005,238
4%
200,210
1,601,676
43,995,462
5.6%
$
85,691
66
45.5%
S9164
2,686,898
8%
214,952
1,719,615
45,715,077
5.9%
$
92,001
67
46.2%
S7773
4,515,863
5%
225,793
1,806,345
47,521,422
6.1%
$
96,641
68
46.9%
S2394
6,078,134
4%
243,125
1,945,003
49,466,425
6.3%
$
104,060
69
47.6%
S9337
4,869,126
5%
243,456
1,947,650
51,414,076
6.6%
$
104,201
70
48.3%
S4170
647,540
39%
252,541
2,020,325
53,434,400
6.9%
$
108,089
71
49.0%
S6167
334,500
76%
254,220
2,033,760
55,468,160
7.1%
$
108,808
72
49.7%
S1978
5,188,426
5%
259,421
2,075,370
57,543,531
7.4%
$
111,034
73
50.3%
S1913
6,671,397
4%
266,856
2,134,847
59,678,378
7.7%
$
114,216
74
51.0%
S2888
4,573,524
6%
274,411
2,195,292
61,873,669
7.9%
$
117,450
75
51.7%
S2208
4,885,520
6%
293,131
2,345,050
64,218,719
8.2%
$
125,462
76
52.4%
S5129
2,721,868
11%
299,405
2,395,244
66,613,963
8.5%
$
128,148
77
53.1%
S7988
2,812,940
11%
309,423
2,475,387
69,089,350
8.9%
$
132,436
A
B
C
D
E
F
(
D
x
E)
G
(
F/
weight)
H
I
J
(
G
x
price)

Laundry
facility
count
Cumltv
%
of
sample
Survey
blind
ID
Total
annual
all
items
laundered
(
pounds)
%
of
annual
items
which
are
reusable
wipes*
Annual
reusable
wipes
laundered
(
pounds)
Annual
reusable
wipes
laundered**
(
nr.
wipes)
Cumulative
reusable
wipes
laundered**
(
nr.
wipes)
Cumltv
%
annual
wipes
2001
implied
annual
wipes
revenues***
per
laundry
115
78
53.8%
S5573
3,601,750
10%
360,175
2,881,400
71,970,750
9.2%
$
154,158
79
54.5%
S5246
3,348,000
11%
368,280
2,946,240
74,916,990
9.6%
$
157,627
80
55.2%
S6654
6,403,896
6%
384,234
3,073,870
77,990,860
10.0%
$
164,455
81
55.9%
S8724
6,466,500
6%
387,990
3,103,920
81,094,780
10.4%
$
166,063
82
56.6%
S3339
4,945,165
8%
395,613
3,164,906
84,259,686
10.8%
$
169,326
83
57.2%
S8363
6,833,671
6%
410,020
3,280,162
87,539,848
11.2%
$
175,492
84
57.9%
S9017
3,812,700
11%
419,397
3,355,176
90,895,024
11.7%
$
179,505
85
58.6%
S3477
8,431,384
5%
421,569
3,372,554
94,267,577
12.1%
$
180,435
86
59.3%
S1407
10,642,836
4%
425,713
3,405,708
97,673,285
12.5%
$
182,209
87
60.0%
S6530
4,949,964
9%
445,497
3,563,974
101,237,259
13.0%
$
190,676
88
60.7%
S3941
6,978,400
7%
488,488
3,907,904
105,145,163
13.5%
$
209,077
89
61.4%
S4767
6,113,872
8%
489,110
3,912,878
109,058,041
14.0%
$
209,343
90
62.1%
S4996
5,539,560
9%
498,560
3,988,483
113,046,524
14.5%
$
213,388
91
62.8%
S6983
12,473,000
4%
498,920
3,991,360
117,037,884
15.0%
$
213,542
92
63.4%
S9778
7,293,722
7%
510,561
4,084,484
121,122,368
15.5%
$
218,524
93
64.1%
S1452
6,395,584
8%
511,647
4,093,174
125,215,542
16.1%
$
218,989
94
64.8%
S9832
3,630,698
15%
544,605
4,356,838
129,572,380
16.6%
$
233,095
95
65.5%
S9372
9,618,000
6%
577,080
4,616,640
134,189,020
17.2%
$
246,995
96
66.2%
S6812
845,000
69%
583,050
4,664,400
138,853,420
17.8%
$
249,550
97
66.9%
S9223
4,859,520
12%
583,142
4,665,139
143,518,559
18.4%
$
249,590
98
67.6%
S2136
9,765,661
6%
585,940
4,687,517
148,206,076
19.0%
$
250,787
99
68.3%
S7387
1,767,350
34%
600,899
4,807,192
153,013,268
19.6%
$
257,190
100
69.0%
S5510
693,000
87%
602,910
4,823,280
157,836,548
20.3%
$
258,050
101
69.7%
S5003
4,350,840
14%
609,118
4,872,941
162,709,489
20.9%
$
260,707
102
70.3%
S2798
4,502,249
14%
630,315
5,042,519
167,752,008
21.5%
$
269,780
103
71.0%
S5467
5,852,600
11%
643,786
5,150,288
172,902,296
22.2%
$
275,546
104
71.7%
S4436
5,444,820
12%
653,378
5,227,027
178,129,323
22.9%
$
279,651
105
72.4%
S1515
672,543
100%
672,543
5,380,344
183,509,667
23.5%
$
287,854
106
73.1%
S3334
16,880,551
4%
675,222
5,401,776
188,911,444
24.2%
$
289,000
107
73.8%
S8052
3,602,874
19%
684,546
5,476,368
194,387,812
24.9%
$
292,991
108
74.5%
S8942
11,463,000
6%
687,780
5,502,240
199,890,052
25.6%
$
294,375
109
75.2%
S1200
4,129,424
17%
702,002
5,616,017
205,506,069
26.4%
$
300,462
110
75.9%
S3895
11,704,000
6%
702,240
5,617,920
211,123,989
27.1%
$
300,564
111
76.6%
S4261
3,364,400
23%
773,812
6,190,496
217,314,485
27.9%
$
331,198
112
77.2%
S6893
5,223,696
15%
783,554
6,268,435
223,582,920
28.7%
$
335,367
113
77.9%
S2494
13,476,190
6%
808,571
6,468,571
230,051,491
29.5%
$
346,075
114
78.6%
S6385
4,414,132
19%
838,685
6,709,481
236,760,972
30.4%
$
358,964
115
79.3%
S1351
5,700,786
15%
855,118
6,840,943
243,601,915
31.3%
$
365,997
116
80.0%
S9044
22,010,000
4%
880,400
7,043,200
250,645,115
32.2%
$
376,818
117
80.7%
S9279
9,902,160
9%
891,194
7,129,555
257,774,670
33.1%
$
381,438
A
B
C
D
E
F
(
D
x
E)
G
(
F/
weight)
H
I
J
(
G
x
price)

Laundry
facility
count
Cumltv
%
of
sample
Survey
blind
ID
Total
annual
all
items
laundered
(
pounds)
%
of
annual
items
which
are
reusable
wipes*
Annual
reusable
wipes
laundered
(
pounds)
Annual
reusable
wipes
laundered**
(
nr.
wipes)
Cumulative
reusable
wipes
laundered**
(
nr.
wipes)
Cumltv
%
annual
wipes
2001
implied
annual
wipes
revenues***
per
laundry
116
118
81.4%
S3354
30,383,488
3%
911,505
7,292,037
265,066,707
34.0%
$
390,131
119
82.1%
S8535
3,789,160
26%
985,182
7,881,453
272,948,160
35.0%
$
421,666
120
82.8%
S3316
8,985,987
11%
988,459
7,907,669
280,855,829
36.0%
$
423,068
121
83.4%
S5555
12,580,735
8%
1,006,459
8,051,670
288,907,499
37.1%
$
430,772
122
84.1%
S7782
1,534,595
68%
1,043,525
8,348,197
297,255,696
38.1%
$
446,637
123
84.8%
S8371
7,153,000
15%
1,072,950
8,583,600
305,839,296
39.2%
$
459,231
124
85.5%
S8987
6,914,960
16%
1,106,394
8,851,149
314,690,445
40.4%
$
473,545
125
86.2%
S2381
10,245,664
11%
1,127,023
9,016,184
323,706,629
41.5%
$
482,375
126
86.9%
S5433
10,341,760
11%
1,137,594
9,100,749
332,807,378
42.7%
$
486,899
127
87.6%
S3803
11,581,224
10%
1,158,122
9,264,979
342,072,357
43.9%
$
495,686
128
88.3%
S3233
7,529,300
17%
1,279,981
10,239,848
352,312,205
45.2%
$
547,842
129
89.0%
S6747
26,150,797
5%
1,307,540
10,460,319
362,772,524
46.5%
$
559,637
130
89.7%
S4242
13,774,506
10%
1,377,451
11,019,605
373,792,128
48.0%
$
589,560
131
90.3%
S1744
8,371,375
17%
1,423,134
11,385,070
385,177,198
49.4%
$
609,113
132
91.0%
S1243
13,173,000
14%
1,844,220
14,753,760
399,930,958
51.3%
$
789,341
133
91.7%
S8392
12,296,230
15%
1,844,435
14,755,476
414,686,434
53.2%
$
789,433
134
92.4%
S2627
3,016,350
74%
2,232,099
17,856,792
432,543,226
55.5%
$
955,356
135
93.1%
S9892
5,264,740
43%
2,263,838
18,110,706
450,653,932
57.8%
$
968,941
136
93.8%
S1937
8,122,459
29%
2,355,513
18,844,105
469,498,037
60.2%
$
1,008,178
137
94.5%
S9672
18,313,017
13%
2,380,692
19,045,538
488,543,575
62.7%
$
1,018,955
138
95.2%
S8250
8,016,817
31%
2,485,213
19,881,706
508,425,281
65.2%
$
1,063,691
139
95.9%
S1029
2,588,045
100%
2,588,045
20,704,360
529,129,641
67.9%
$
1,107,704
140
96.6%
S9807
5,875,600
45%
2,644,020
21,152,160
550,281,801
70.6%
$
1,131,661
141
97.2%
S3274
22,397,023
17%
3,807,494
30,459,951
580,741,752
74.5%
$
1,629,638
142
97.9%
S1341
18,707,661
25%
4,676,915
37,415,322
618,157,074
79.3%
$
2,001,757
143
98.6%
S7222
18,875,800
28%
5,285,224
42,281,792
660,438,866
84.7%
$
2,262,118
144
99.3%
S3738
14,369,400
47%
6,753,618
54,028,944
714,467,810
91.7%
$
2,890,602
145
100.0%
S4660
24,607,500
33%
8,120,475
64,963,800
779,431,610
100.0%
$
3,475,628
Summary
Statistics:
Column
total
=
897,274,203
97,428,951
779,431,610
$
41,700,362
D&
E,
E&
F
correlation
coefficients****
=
­
0.104
0.417
J&
E
correlation
coefficient****
=
0.417
Median
=
4,515,863
6%
266,856
2,134,847
$
114,216
Pounds­
weighted
mean
=
11%
Min
=
229,276
1%
4,586
36,684
$
1,963
Max
=
30,383,488
100%
8,120,475
64,963,800
$
3,475,628
Simple
mean
=
6,188,098
13%
671,924
5,375,390
$
287,589
Skewness*****
=
1.73
2.98
3.86
3.86
Kurtosis*****
=
3.24
9.28
17.74
17.74
Explanatory
Notes:
A
B
C
D
E
F
(
D
x
E)
G
(
F/
weight)
H
I
J
(
G
x
price)

Laundry
facility
count
Cumltv
%
of
sample
Survey
blind
ID
Total
annual
all
items
laundered
(
pounds)
%
of
annual
items
which
are
reusable
wipes*
Annual
reusable
wipes
laundered
(
pounds)
Annual
reusable
wipes
laundered**
(
nr.
wipes)
Cumulative
reusable
wipes
laundered**
(
nr.
wipes)
Cumltv
%
annual
wipes
2001
implied
annual
wipes
revenues***
per
laundry
117
!
Source:
USEPA
Office
of
Water,
1994
Section
308
National
Survey
Sample
(
EPA­
821­
R­
00­
004,
March
2000).
!
*
Reusable
wipes
=
Shop
and/
or
printer
towels
!
**
Number
wipes
estimated
assuming
average
weight
per
soiled
(
solvent­
contaminated)
reusable
wipe
(
lbs/
wipe)
=
0.125
!
***
Implied
annual
wipes
revenues
per
laundry
estimated
by
multiplying
wipes
quantity
by
2001
average
price
($/
wipe)
=
$
0.0535
!
Three
alternative
indicators
of
sample
size
(
for
purpose
of
benchmarking
sample
relative
to
industrial
laundry
national
universe):
(
1)
Reusable
wipes
revenues:
Estimate
of
industrial
laundry
resuable
wipes
national
revenues
in
2001
=
$
412,900,000
Survey
sample
subtotal
revenues
as
percentage
of
2001
national
revenues
=
10.1%
(
2)
Laundry
facility
universe:
National
total
industrial
laundries
handling
reusable
industrial
wipes
=
1,175
Survey
sample
subtotal
facility
count
as
percentage
of
national
total
=
12.3%
(
3)
Reusable
wipes
universe:
2001
national
annual
total
reusable
industrial
wipes
uses
=
8,476,100,000
Survey
sample
subtotal
facility
count
as
percentage
of
national
total
=
9.2%
(
4)
Wipes
containers
equivalents:
Number
of
container
equivalents
for
above
reusable
wipes
universe
=
15,302,833
Survey
sample
subtotal
container
equivalents
as
percentage
of
universe
=
9.2%
!
****
Correlation
coefficient:
measures
the
strength
of
linear
relationship
between
two
variables
(­
1
=
negative;
+
1
=
positive;
0=
none).
!
*****
Skewness
and
kurtosis
indicate
data
distribution
shape
relative
to
normal
curve.
Skewness
>
0
indicates
distribution
shape
elongated
to
right
(
mean
>
median).
Kurtosis
>
0
indicates
distribution
shape
is
a
peaked
or
pointed
distribution.
118
119
120
Attachment
Set
C
Industrial
Cleaning/
Degreasing
Solvent
Data
121
CHEMICAL
IDENTITY,
US
HAZARD
STATUS,
US
PRICE
DATA,
AND
US
CONSUMPTION
OF
INDUSTRIAL
CLEANING/
DEGREASING
SOLVENTS
A.
Chemical
Identity:
B.
US
Hazard
Status:
C.
US
Average
Price:
D.
US
Consumption:

Item
Solvent
Chemical
Name
Synonyms
Cas
Number
RCRA
hazardous
wastecode*
(
40
CFR
261)
Toxic
Air
Pollutant
Price
data
source
Reference
price
basis
1994­
99
price
range
Current
US
avg
price**
Current
avg
price
standardized
($/
gal)***
X
if
Fxxx
X
if
not
Fxxx
1997
all
solvent
uses****
(
mill
lbs)
1997
solvents
for
cleaning
&
degrease
(
mill.
lbs)
X
if
wipes
landfill
disposal
ineligible
UAT
HAP1
HAP2
Low
High
1
Acetone
2­
Propanone,
Methyl
ketone
67­
64­
1
F003,
U002
A
$/
pound
$
0.39
$
0.42
$
0.42
$
3.28
X
420
187
B
$/
pound
$
0.24
$
1.87
X
2
Benzene
71­
43­
2
D018,
F005,
U019
X
X
X
A
$/
gallon
$
0.82
$
1.55
$
0.75
$
0.75
X
Small
0
X
3
n­
butanol
n­
Butyl
alcohol
71­
36­
3
F003,
U031
A
$/
pound
$
0.36
$
0.50
$
0.50
$
3.90
X
18
18
4
n­
butyl
acetate
Acetic
acid
n­
butyl
ester
123­
86­
4
A
$/
pound
$
0.39
$
0.61
$
0.54
$
4.21
X
186
8
B
$/
metric
ton
$
1,100
$
3.89
X
5
Carbon
disulfide
75­
15­
0
F005,
P022
X
X
A
$/
ton
$
465
$
485
$
485
$
1.89
X
18
18
6
Carbon
tetrachloride
Tetrachloromethane
56­
23­
5
D019,
F001,
U211
X
X
X
X
7
Small
X
7
Chlorobenzene
108­
90­
7
D021,
F002,
U037
X
X
A
$/
pound
$
0.38
$
0.55
$
0.55
$
4.29
X
20
0
X
8
Chloroform
Trichloromethane
67­
66­
3
D022,
U044
X
X
X
A
$/
pound
$
0.30
$
0.45
$
0.40
$
3.08
X
12
0
$/
metric
ton
$
550
$
1.95
X
9
o­
Cresol
95­
48­
7
D023,
F004
X
X
X
2
2
X
10
Cresylic
acid
1319­
77­
3
D026,
F004,
U052
X
X
A
$/
pound
$
0.45
$
0.80
$
0.60
$
4.68
X
13
2
11
Cyclohexane
110­
82­
7
U056
A
$/
gallon
$
1.05
$
1.44
$
1.44
$
1.44
X
195
0
12
Cyclohexanone
Cyclohexyl
ketone,
Anone
108­
94­
1
F003,
U057
B
$/
pound
$
0.54
$
4.21
X
26
0.3
13
o­
Dichlorobenzene
1,2­
Dichlorobenzene
95­
50­
1
F002,
U070
A
$/
pound
$
0.45
$
0.67
$
0.67
$
5.23
X
3
2
14
Diethylene
glycol
(
DEG)
111­
46­
6
C
$/
pound
$
0.20
$
0.23
$
0.23
$
1.79
X
63
Unknown
15
Dipropylene
glycol
(
DIG)
25265­
71­
8
A
$/
pound
$
0.41
$
0.69
$
0.69
$
5.38
X
20
0
B
$/
pound
$
0.65
$
5.07
X
16
Ethanol
Ethyl
alcohol
64­
17­
5
A
$/
gallon
$
1.40
$
3.00
$
1.90
$
1.90
X
1,053
55
17
Ethyl
acetate
141­
78­
6
F003,
U112
A
$/
pound
$
0.37
$
0.59
$
0.59
$
4.60
X
254
38
B
$/
pound
$
0.47
$
3.67
X
18
Ethylbenzene
100­
41­
4
F003
A
$/
pound
$
0.25
$
0.25
$
0.25
$
1.95
X
Small
Small
19
Ethyl
ether
60­
29­
7
F003,
U117
X
6
0
20
Isobutanol
2­
methyl­
1­
proponal,
isobutyl
alchohol
78­
83­
1
F005,
U140
B
$/
metric
ton
$
760
$
2.69
X
125
0
21
Isobutyl
acetate
110­
19­
0
C
$/
pound
$
0.59
$
4.60
X
69
0
22
Isopropanol
Isopropyl
alcohol,
2­
propanol
67­
63­
0
A
$/
pound
$
0.20
$
0.34
$
0.34
$
2.65
X
553
11
B
$/
metric
ton
$
947
$
3.35
X
23
Isopropyl
acetate
108­
21­
4
C
$/
pound
$
0.61
$
4.76
X
58
5
24
Methanol
Methyl
alcohol
67­
56­
1
F003,
U154
X
X
A
$/
gallon
$
0.28
$
1.55
$
1.55
$
1.55
X
827
143
B
$/
metric
ton
$
425
$
1.50
X
25
Methyl
acetate
79­
20­
9
X
710
0
26
Methyl
chloride
Chloromethane
74­
87­
3
U045
X
X
A
$/
pound
$
0.28
$
0.39
$
0.39
$
3.00
X
7
0
27
Methyl
ethyl
ketone
(
MEK)
2­
Butanone
78­
93­
3
D035,
F005,
U159
X
X
A
$/
pound
$
0.24
$
0.46
$
0.46
$
3.59
X
155
24
X
B
$/
pound
$
0.43
$
3.35
X
28
Methyl
isobutyl
ketone
(
MIBK)
4­
methyl­
2­
pentanone,
Hexone
108­
10­
1
F003,
U161
X
X
A
$/
pound
$
0.35
$
0.63
$
0.63
$
4.91
X
122
2
B
$/
pound
$
0.57
$
4.45
X
29
Methylene
chloride
Dichloromethane
75­
09­
2
F001,
F002,
U080
X
X
A
$/
pound
$
0.40
$
0.43
$
0.42
$
3.28
X
266
20
X
B
$/
pound
$
0.27
$
2.11
X
30
Monoethylene
glycol
(
MEG)
Ethylene
glycol
107­
21­
1
C
$/
pound
$
0.15
$
0.26
$
0.26
$
2.03
X
29
0
31
Naphtha
Petroleum
solvent;
mineral
spirits
8030­
30­
6
X
4,908
982
32
Nitrobenzene
98­
95­
3
D036,
F004,
U169
X
X
A
$/
pound
$
0.30
$
0.34
$
0.34
$
2.65
X
14
0
X
33
2­
Nitropropane
79­
46­
9
F005,
U171
X
X
X
Unknown
Unknown
X
34
n­
propyl
acetate
109­
60­
4
C
$/
pound
$
0.65
$
5.07
X
61
0
35
Pyridine
110­
86­
1
D038,
F005,
U196
X
2
0
X
36
Toluene
108­
88­
3
F005,
U220
X
X
A
$/
gallon
$
0.66
$
1.26
$
1.11
$
1.11
X
872
131
37
Perchloroethylene
(
PERC)
Tetrachloroethylene
127­
18­
4
D039,
F001,
F002,
U210
X
X
X
A
$/
pound
$
0.32
$
0.35
$
0.35
$
2.73
X
300
45
X
B
$/
metric
ton
$
590
$
2.09
X
38
1,1,1­
Trichloroethane
(
TCA)
Methyl
chloroform
71­
55­
6
F001,
F002,
U226
B
$/
metric
ton
$
1,750
$
6.19
X
209
0
39
Trichloroethylene
(
TCE)
79­
01­
6
D040,
F001,
F002,
U228
X
X
X
A
$/
pound
$
0.60
$
0.65
$
0.60
$
4.68
X
178
100
X
B
$/
pound
$
0.38
$
2.96
X
40
1,1,2­
Trichloro­
1,2,2­
trifluoroethane
CFC­
113
76­
13­
1
F002
X
11
11
41
Triethylene
glycol
(
TEG)
112­
27­
6
B
$/
metric
ton
$
940
$
3.33
X
12
Unknown
42
Turpentine
Gum
or
wood
turpentine
9005­
90­
7
B
$/
metric
ton
$
555
$
1.96
X
243
Unknown
43
Xylene
(
mixed
isomers
o­,
m­,
p­)
Dimethylbenzene
1330­
20­
7
F003,
U239
X
X
B
$/
metric
ton
$
495
$
1.75
X
617
0
A.
Chemical
Identity:
B.
US
Hazard
Status:
C.
US
Average
Price:
D.
US
Consumption:

Item
Solvent
Chemical
Name
Synonyms
Cas
Number
RCRA
hazardous
wastecode*
(
40
CFR
261)
Toxic
Air
Pollutant
Price
data
source
Reference
price
basis
1994­
99
price
range
Current
US
avg
price**
Current
avg
price
standardized
($/
gal)***
X
if
Fxxx
X
if
not
Fxxx
1997
all
solvent
uses****
(
mill
lbs)
1997
solvents
for
cleaning
&
degrease
(
mill.
lbs)
X
if
wipes
landfill
disposal
ineligible
UAT
HAP1
HAP2
Low
High
122
Price
Data
Summary:
Count
=
5
18
18
Count
=
47
29
18
35
21
11
Min
=
$
0.75
$
0.75
$
1.44
$
0.75
Max
=
$
6.19
$
6.19
$
5.38
$
4.68
Std.
dev
=
$
1.34
$
1.38
$
1.31
$
1.29
Midpoint
=
$
3.47
$
3.47
$
3.41
$
2.72
Mean
=
$
3.22
$
3.17
$
3.30
$
3.14
Median
=
$
3.28
%
of
cleaning/
degreasing>
11%

Skewness*****
=
0.17
Total
mill.
lbs
=
12,664.4
1,804.0
191.0
Kurtosis*****
=
­
1.00
Mill.
tons
eqvlnt
=
6.332
0.902
0.096
Gallons
equivalent
***
(
millions)
=
1,623.6
231.3
24.5
Explanatory
Notes:
!
The
chemicals
listed
above
do
not
represent
all
chemicals
used
historically,
currently,
or
in
the
future
as
solvents;
there
are
at
least
180
chemicals
used
as
common
industrial
solvents
(
source:
Kirk­
Othmer
"
Encyclopedia
of
Chemical
Technology",
4th
ed.,
John
Wiley
&
Sons
Inc.,
Vol.
22:
"
Solvents,
Industrial"
Table
2,
1998;
http://
www.
wiley.
co.
uk/
products/
subject/
reference/
kirk_
index.
html).
!
*
RCRA
wastecodes
shown
only
as
pertaining
to
chemicals
in
solvent
applications;
these
chemicals
may
have
other
RCRA
wastecodes
associated
with
other
industrial
applications
and
sources.
!
**
"
Current"
price
represents
year
1999
or
2000
price
(
if
data
Source
A),
or
April
2001
price
(
if
data
Source
B).
!
***
$/
pound
and
$/
ton
prices
standardized
to
$/
gallon
common
units,
by
applying
an
average
pounds­
per­
gallon
solvent
specific
gravity
conversion
factor
=
7.8
!
Price
data
sources:
Source
A
=
http://
www.
chemexpo.
com
Source
B
=
http://
www.
allchem.
com/
products/
price.
html
Source
C
=
http://
ceh.
sric.
sri.
com
!
UAT
=
urban
air
toxic
(
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
ttn/
atw/
urban/
list33.
html).
!
HAP
=
hazardous
air
pollutant
(
HAP1=
1990
original
Clean
Air
Act
listing
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
ttn/
atw/
orig189.
html;
HAP2=
EPA
2001
revised
listing
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
ttn/
atw/
188polls.
html)
!
****
Consumption
data
source:
Stanford
Research
Institute
(
SRI)
"
Chemical
Economics
Handbook"
(
http://
ceh.
sric.
sri.
com);
other
solvent
uses
include
chemical
production
solvents
and
coatings/
adhesives
carrier
solvents.
!
****
Skewness
(
horizontal
elongation
in
one
direction)
and
kurtosis
(
vertical
peakedness)
are
two
complementary
measures
of
the
relative
"
normal"
or
"
bell"
shape
of
the
numerical
distributions
implied
by
the
price
data
in
this
table;
normal
distributions
(
i.
e.
bell­
shaped
curves)
have
skew
=
0
and
kurtosis
=
0,
and
are
symmetrical
about
the
mean.
123
124
CONSUMPTION
OF
INDUSTRIAL
SOLVENT
CHEMICALS
FOR
CLEANING/
DEGREASING
OPERATIONS
IN
THE
US
ECONOMY
(
1997*)

Item
CAS
Nr.
Industrial
Solvent
(
chemical
name)
All
solvent
uses**
(
mill
lbs)
Cleaning
degreasing
solvents***
(
mill.
lbs)
X
if
wipes
landfill
disposal
ineligible
Cumulative
%
RCRA
haz
waste
status
(
40
CFR
261)****

40
CFR
268.48
RCRA
haz
waste
non­
wastewater
UTS
(
ppm)*****
Waste
as
containedin
constituent
Waste
as
used
solvents
Waste
as
discarded
spilled
solvent
1
8030­
30­
6
Naphtha
4,908
982
54.4%
No
numerical
UTS
2
67­
64­
1
Acetone
420
187
64.8%
F003
160
3
67­
56­
1
Methanol
827
143
72.7%
F003
0.75
TCLP
4
108­
88­
3
Toluene
872
131
80.0%
F005
U220
10
5
79­
01­
6
Trichloroethylene
(
TCE)
178
100
X
85.5%
D040
F001,
F002
U228
6
6
64­
17­
5
Ethanol
1,053
55
88.6%
No
numerical
UTS
7
127­
18­
4
Perchloroethylene
(
PERC)
300
45
X
91.1%
D039
F001,
F002
U210
6
8
141­
78­
6
Ethyl
acetate
254
38
93.2%
F003
33
9
78­
93­
3
Methyl
ethyl
ketone
(
MEK)
155
24
X
94.5%
D035
F005
U159
36
10
75­
09­
2
Methylene
chloride
266
20
X
95.6%
F001,
F002
U080
30
11
71­
36­
3
n­
butanol
18
18
96.6%
F003
2.6
12
75­
15­
0
Carbon
disulfide
18
18
97.6%
F005
P022
4.8
TCLP
13
67­
63­
0
Isopropanol
553
11
98.2%
No
numerical
UTS
14
76­
13­
1
1,1,2­
Trichloro­
1,2,2­
trifluoroethane
11
11
98.8%
F001,
F002
30
15
123­
86­
4
n­
butyl
acetate
186
8
99.3%
No
numerical
UTS
16
108­
21­
4
Isopropyl
acetate
58
5
99.5%
No
numerical
UTS
17
108­
10­
1
Methyl
isobutyl
ketone
(
MIBK)
122
2
99.6%
F003
33
18
1319­
77­
3
Cresylic
acid
13
2
99.8%
F004
U052
No
numerical
UTS
19
95­
50­
1
o­
Dichlorobenzene
3
2
99.9%
F002
U070
6
20
95­
48­
7
o­
Cresol
2
2
X
100.0%
D023
F004
5.6
21
108­
94­
1
Cyclohexanone
26
0.3
100.0%
F003
0.75
TCLP
22
9005­
90­
7
Turpentine
243
Unknown
100.0%
No
numerical
UTS
23
111­
46­
6
Diethylene
glycol
(
DEG)
63
Unknown
100.0%
No
numerical
UTS
24
112­
27­
6
Triethylene
glycol
(
TEG)
12
Unknown
100.0%
No
numerical
UTS
25
56­
23­
5
Carbon
tetrachloride
7
Small
X
100.0%
D019
F001
U211
6
26
100­
41­
4
Ethylbenzene
Small
Small
100.0%
F003
10
27
79­
20­
9
Methyl
acetate
710
0
No
numerical
UTS
28
1330­
20­
7
Xylene
(
mixed
isomers
o­,
m­,
p­)
617
0
F003
30
29
71­
55­
6
1,1,1­
Trichloroethane
(
TCA)
209
0
F001,
F002
U227
6
30
110­
82­
7
Cyclohexane
195
0
No
numerical
UTS
31
78­
83­
1
Isobutanol
125
0
F005
U140
170
32
110­
19­
0
Isobutyl
acetate
69
0
No
numerical
UTS
33
109­
60­
4
n­
propyl
acetate
61
0
No
numerical
UTS
34
107­
21­
1
Monoethylene
glycol
(
MEG)
29
0
No
numerical
UTS
35
25265­
71­
8
Dipropylene
glycol
(
DIG)
20
0
No
numerical
UTS
36
108­
90­
7
Chlorobenzene
20
0
X
D021
F002
U037
6
37
98­
95­
3
Nitrobenzene
14
0
X
D036
F004
U169
14
38
67­
66­
3
Chloroform
12
0
D022
U044
6
39
74­
87­
3
Methyl
chloride
7
0
U045
No
numerical
UTS
40
60­
29­
7
Ethyl
ether
6
0
F003
160
Item
CAS
Nr.
Industrial
Solvent
(
chemical
name)
All
solvent
uses**
(
mill
lbs)
Cleaning
degreasing
solvents***
(
mill.
lbs)
X
if
wipes
landfill
disposal
ineligible
Cumulative
%
RCRA
haz
waste
status
(
40
CFR
261)****

40
CFR
268.48
RCRA
haz
waste
non­
wastewater
UTS
(
ppm)*****
Waste
as
containedin
constituent
Waste
as
used
solvents
Waste
as
discarded
spilled
solvent
125
41
110­
86­
1
Pyridine
2
0
X
D038
F005
U196
16
42
71­
43­
2
Benzene
Small
0
X
D018
F005
U019
10
43
79­
46­
9
2­
Nitropropane
Unknown
Unknown
X
F005
U171
No
numerical
UTS
Column
Summaries:
Count
=
43
11
Ineligible
10
27
18
Million
pounds
=
12,664.4
1,804.0
191.0
11%
690.0
4,485.0
2,201.0
Million
tons
equivalent
=
6.332
0.902
0.096
%
of
0.345
2.243
1.101
Million
gallons
equivalent
=
1,623.6
231.3
24.5
cleaning
88.5
575.0
282.2
Percentage
of
all
solvents
use
annual
quantity
(
w/
data)
=
100%
14%
2%
solvents
5%
35%
17%

Explanatory
Notes:

!
*
Source:
Stanford
Research
Institute
(
SRI)
"
Chemical
Economics
Handbook"
(
http://
ceh.
sric.
sri.
com).
This
list
of
chemicals
used
as
solvents
does
not
represent
all
such
chemicals,
only
those
solvents
with
SRI­
CEH
data.
The
US
produced
at
least
54,089
million
pounds
(
27.044
million
tons)
of
43
solvents
in
1991
(
Kirk­
Othmer,
"
Encyclopedia
of
Chemical
Technology,
4th
ed.,
John
Wiley
&
Sons
Inc.,
Vol.
22:
"
Solvents,
Industrial"
Table
5,
1998;
http://
www.
wiley.
co.
uk/
products/
subject/
reference/
kirk_
index.
html).
!
**
"
All
solvent
use"
quantities
do
not
include
other
possible
chemical
uses,
such
as
feedstocks
for
chemical
manufacturing.

!
***
Cleaning/
degreasing
quantities
include
other
cleaning/
degreasing
applications,
in
addition
to
industrial
wipes.

!
****
RCRA
hazardous
waste
status
according
to
whether
a
chemical
is
the
basis
for
a
hazardous
waste
"
toxicity
characteristic"
(
D004
to
D043)
or
a
"
listed"
hazardous
waste
(
Fxxx,
Kxxx,
Pxxx
acutely
hazardous,
Uxxx);
in
addition,
hazardous
wastes
may
be
ignitable
(
D001),
corrosive
(
D002),
or
reactive
(
D003);
see
40
CFR
261
Subpart
C
and
Subpart
D
for
definitions
of
RCRA
hazardous
waste
codes.
F001
to
F005
pertain
to
spent
solvents.
­­
Dxxx
wastecodes
pertain
generically
to
all
types
of
economic
uses,
processes,
and
products,
unless
otherwise
exempt/
excluded
from
RCRA
waste
regulation.
A
chemical
in
pure
form
may
be
ignitable
(
e.
g.
naptha),
corrosive,
or
reactive,
but
it's
the
entire
waste
matrix
which
determines
whether
a
waste
is
D001,
D002,
D003.
­­
F001
to
F005
wastecodes
pertain
to
spent
solvents
used
in
degreasing
and
other
solvent
applications.

­­
Pxxx
and
Uxxx
wastecodes
pertain
to
these
solvents
when
discarded
or
off­
specification
commercial
products,
or
in
container
or
spill
residues.
!
*****
UTS
=
"
Universal
Treatment
Standards";
all
hazardous
constituents
in
a
RCRA­
listed
waste
(
or
waste
treatment
residue)
must
be
at
or
below
the
values
found
in
the
RCRA
treatment
standards
of
40
CFR
268
Subpart
D.
!
TCLP
=
"
Toxicity
Characteristic
Leaching
Procedure"
chemical
concentration
analysis
method
(
see
40
CFR
261.24).
126
Other
Industrial
Solvent
Uses
86%
Industrial
Cleaning/
Degreasing*
14%

*
Note:
Solvents
Applied
to
Industrial
Wipes
Represents
a
Small
Fraction
of
Cleaning/
Degreasing.
Solvents
Used
for
Industrial
Cleaning/
Degreasing,
Compared
to
Other
Industrial
Solvent
Uses
(
1997
US
Proportions)
(
Based
on
1997
data
representing
6.3
million
tons
(
1.62
billion
gallons)
industrial
solvent
consumption)
Pie­
Chart
Summary
of
Previous
Spreadsheet
127
Pie­
Chart
Summary
of
Previous
Spreadsheet
128
Attachment
Set
D
Price­
Elasticity
of
Demand
for
Industrial
Wipes:
Results
of
Meta­
Analysis
129
Price
Elasticity
of
Demand
for
Industrial
Wipes:
Meta­
Analysis
of
Internet­
Published
Economic
Studies
to
Collect
and
Analyze
Empirical
Data
on
Own­
and
Cross­
Price
Elasticities
of
Demand
A.
Meta­
Analysis
Study
Overview:

!
Background:
As
presented
in
a
prior
section
in
this
document,
OSW­
EMRAD
computed
an
indicator
to
use
as
the
own­
price
elasticity
for
reusable
wipes,
based
on
US
historical
annual
data
(
1978­
1993)
on
pounds
and
revenue
of
all
items
laundered
at
industrial
laundries.
However,
we
did
not
obtain
comparable
disposable
wipes
market
data
for
developing
a
cross­
price
elasticity
indicator.
Consequently,
conducted
a
meta­
analysis
study
of
price
elasticity
data
published
in
other
economic
studies,
because
the
"
partial
equilibrium"
market
model
descriped
and
applied
elsewhere
in
this
document
requires
estimates
of
both
"
own"
and
"
cross"
price
elasticities
as
inputs
into
the
mathematical
modeling
of
potential
"
induced
impacts"
of
the
rule
on
the
US
national
market
for
reusable
and
disposable
wipes.

!
Meta­
analysis:
A
research
technique
which
involves
collecting
and
analyzing
information
or
data
on
a
single
research
topic
or
parameter
of
interest
(
e.
g.
data
variable
or
numerical
factor)
from
a
sample
of
published
sources.
Meta­
analysis
is
a
type
of
comparative
analysis
method
by
which
the
data,
information
or
results
of
different
studies
or
cases
may
be
compared.
This
technique
is
relatively
widely
applied
in
the
fields
of
medicine,
sociology,
and
psychology,
but
less
wide­
spread
in
the
field
of
economics
research.
For
a
historical
overview
and
"
pros"
and
"
cons"
of
meta­
analysis
as
applied
in
economics
research,
see
http://
www.
cpb.
nl/
eng/
cpbreport/
2002_
2/
s4_
1.
pdf.
Three
recent
publications
(
1998­
2000)
also
provide
information
about
this
research
technique
applied
within
the
field
of
environmental
economics:
J.
van
den
Bergh,
K.
Button,
P.
Nijkamp,
G.
Pepping,
Meta­
Analysis
in
Environmental
Economics,
Kluwer
Academic
Publishers,
1998;
K.
Button,
S.
M.
Jongma,
&
J.
Kerr,
"
Meta­
Analysis
Approaches
and
Applied
Microeconomics,"
International
Journal
of
Development
Planning
Literature,
Vol.
14,
Nr.
1,
1999,
pp.
73­
103;
and
R.
Florax,
P.
Nijkamp,
K.
Willis
(
eds.),
Meta­
Analysis
and
Research
Synthesis
in
Environmental
Policy,
Edward
Elgar
Publishing,
2000.

!
Objective:
To
search
the
internet
for
published
economic
studies
containing
empirical
data
on
both
own­
and
cross­
price
elasticities
of
demand:
!
Own­
price
elasticity
:
Equal
to
the
percentage
change
in
the
demand
for
product
1,
divided
by
the
percentage
change
in
the
price
of
product
1.
For
example,
an
own­
price
elasticity
of
­
0.5
for
product
1
implies
that
the
demand
for
product
1
decreases
by
0.5%
for
every
+
1%
increase
in
its
own
price.
130
!
Cross­
price
elasticity:
Equal
to
the
percentage
change
in
the
demand
for
product
1,
divided
by
the
percentage
change
in
the
price
of
product
2.
For
example,
a
cross­
price
elasticity
of
+
0.5
for
product
1
implies
that
the
demand
for
product
1
increases
by
0.5%
for
every
+
1%
increase
in
the
price
of
product
2
(
products
with
cross­
price
elasticities
>
0
are
"
substitutes",
products
with
<
0
are
"
complements",
and
products
=
0
are
"
unrelated").

!
Purpose:
In
absence
of
actual
market
research
on
the
relative
price/
quantity
or
price­
elasticity
data
for
the
US
industrial
wipes
market,
the
purpose
of
this
internet
search
was
to
derive
an
empirically­
based,
demand
elasticity
factor
to
apply
in
this
"
Economics
Background
Document",
for
purpose
of
modelling
induced
impacts
on
the
industrial
wipes
market
resulting
from
changes
in
the
relative
price
of
"
disposable"
and
"
reusable"
industrial
wipes,
caused
by
differential
direct
impacts
of
the
proposed
rule
on
these
two
industrial
wipes
categories.

B.
Meta­
Analysis
Study
Scope:

!
The
scope
of
this
search
was
not
limited
to
industrial
wipes,
because
did
not
locate
any
internet­
published
economic
studies
containing
demand
elasticity
data
for
either
reusable
or
disposable
industrial
wipes.

!
Consequently,
collected
demand
elasticity
data
from
a
variety
of
product
market
studies.

!
Conducted
the
internet
search
in
June
2001,
using
the
following
internet
browser
search
terms
to
locate
potentially
relevant
studies:
"
own"
"
cross"
"
price"
"
elasticity"
"
demand"

C.
Internet
Search
Findings
for
Price
Elasticity
Data:

!
The
internet
search
produced
a
"
hit­
list"
of
over
17,000
weblinks.
Scrolled
through
the
first
2,000
to
4,000
of
the
weblinks
on
the
hit­
list
to
search
for
studies
that
appeared
to
contain
relevant
data,
based
on
the
brief
internet
browser
descriptions
for
each
weblink.

!
Skipped­
over
many
weblinks
from
this
search,
such
as
those
which
appeared
to
provide
only
definitions
of
own­
and
cross­
elasticities
(
e.
g.
university
course
weblinks),
rather
than
actual
empirical
data
(
paired
data)
from
specific
product
markets.

!
Only
collected
data
if
own­
elasticity
was
<
0
(
represents
a
"
normal"
good),
and
the
associated
cross­
elasticity
was
>
0
(
served
to
restrict
131
the
data
collection
only
to
product
"
substitutes"
 
as
reusable
and
disposable
wipes
are
to
some
degree
­­­
rather
than
"
complementary"
products).

!
Did
not
attempt
to
differentiate
between
"
short­
term"
and
"
long­
term"
elasticity
data.

!
Discontinued
searching
the
hit­
list
after
encountering
repeated
occurrences
of
studies
involving
product
markets
matching
prior
weblinks.

!
This
elasticity
data
collection
approach
represents
a
type
of
"
non­
probability"
sampling
method,
which
limits
the
validity
of
attempting
to
generalize
(
apply)
the
findings
to
other
products/
markets
such
as
industrial
wipes.
This
internet
study
represents
a
relative
low­
cost
and
fast
method
for
operationalizing
a
parameter
in
absence
of
other
specific
data.
Application
of
an
uncertainty
range
to
the
value
assigned
this
parameter,
as
described
below,
serves
to
acknowledge
this
explicit
limitation.

D.
Results
of
Price
Elasticity
Data
Collection
&
Meta­
Analysis:

!
Compared
data
from
17
studies
(
a
following
page
in
this
document
presents
a
bibliography).

!
Data
comparison
made
by
computing
the
ratios
of
the
numerical
values
(
absolute
values)
of
own­
price
to
cross­
price
elasticities
for
each
data
pair.

!
Because
of
the
ranges
in
elasticity
values
and
skewed
distributions
in
elasticity
ratios,
median
values
used
as
central
tendency
indicators
for
this
study.

!
Data
collected
for
460
sets
of
own­
and
cross­
price
elasticity
data
pairs:
!
Own­
price
elasticities
(
negative)
findings:
­
0.049
to
­
12.62
(
median
=
­
2.5)
!
Cross­
price
elasticities
(
positive)
findings:
+
0.0001
to
+
2.011
(
median
=
+
0.057)
!
Paired­
data
elasticity
ratios
(
absolute
value
own:
to:
cross
x
100)
findings:
0.001%
to
95.72%
(
median
=
2.1%)

!
Data
represent
seven
economic
sectors:
food
&
beverages,
services,
transportation,
manufacturing
operations,
chemical
products,
energy,
agriculture.

!
Data
represent
26
products/
markets:
paints
(
solvent­
borne,
water­
borne),
pesticides,
breakfast
cereals,
postal
cards,
grocery
milk
(
whole/
skim),
grocery
fruit,
school
tuition
(
public/
private),
beverages,
automobiles,
building
energy
(
fuel,
natural
gas,
electricity,
coal),
animal
husbandry,
telephones,
telecommunications
service
providers,
personal
computers
(
desktop/
laptop).
Data­
pairs
in
each
132
product/
market
grouping
ranged
from
one
to
72
data­
pairs;
the
median
values
of
the
26
grouped
data­
pairs
are:

!
Paired­
data
elasticity
ratios
(
absolute
value
own:
to:
cross
x
100)
findings:
0.3%
to
95.3%
(
median
=
26.4%)

!
Values
assigned
in
the
industrial
wipes
economic
analysis
for
simulating
possible
induced
market
effects:

!
Most­
likely
value:
To
reduce
redundancy
over­
weighting
of
products
in
the
data
sample,
applied
the
26%
median
value
based
on
the
product
grouping
aggregation,
as
the
"
most­
likely"
empirical
value
in
this
"
Economics
Background
Document".

!
Upper­
bound
value:
The
most­
likely
value
also
constituted
the
"
upper­
bound"
value
in
the
sensitivity
analysis
for
this
parameter,
because
values
>
26%
would
represent
easier
substitution
between
reusable
and
disposable
wipes,
which
is
reportedly
not
the
case
because
of
wipes
performance
characteristics
preferences
by
most
industrial
users
(
e.
g.
wipes
durability,
wipes
lint,
wipes
absorbency).

!
Lower­
bound
value:
Applied
11%
as
the
"
lower­
bound"
value
to
represent
more
restricted
wipes
substitution
scenario,
derived
from
two
standard
deviations*
below
the
median
(
26.4%
­
(
2
x
7.4%)
=
11%).
[*
According
to
the
statistical
"
Empirical
Rule"
of
mound­
shaped
(
approximately
symmetric)
frequency
distributions,
about
95%
of
the
measurements
within
a
range
will
fall
within
+/­
two
standard
deviations
of
the
mean.]
133
Price
Elasticity
Summary
by
Commodity
Groups
(
median
values,
n
=
36
datapoints)
134
Price
Elasticity
Summary
for
All
Data
Collected
in
Study
(
n
=
420
datapoints)
135
Findings
of
USEPA­
OSW
June
2001
Internet
Search
for
Economic
Studies
Containing
Both
Own­
and
Cross­
Price
Elasticity
Data
(
Results
of
a
Non­
Probability
Purposive
Sampling
Approach)

1.
"
Appendix
A:
Market
Definition,
Demand
Estimation,
and
Data"
in
Economic
Impact
and
Regulatory
Flexibility
Analyses
of
the
Final
Architectual
Coatings
VOC
Rule".
EPA­
452/
R­
98­
002,
Office
Air­
Quality
Planning
and
Standards,
July
1998,
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
ttn/
uatw/
183e/
aim/
appa.
pdf
2.
"
Committee
on
Commodity
Problems
Sub­
Group
on
Tropical
Fruits",
Pattaya,
Thailand,
May
1998,
http://
www.
fao.
org/
UNFAO/
Bodies/
ccp/
sgtf/
98/
TF98­
3E.
HTM
3.
"
Response
of
United
States
Postal
Service
Witness
Tolley
to
Interrogatories
of
the
Newspaper
Association
of
America",
Docket
Section,
Postal
Rate
and
Fee
Changes,
1997,
24pp.,
http://
www.
prc.
gov/
docs/
5/
5099/
rsp­
naa­
usps­
t6.
pdf
4.
Agbola,
Frank
Wogbe,
"
The
Structure
of
Production
and
Investment
in
Australia's
Pastoral
Zone",
January
2001,
http://
www.
curtin.
edu.
au/
curtin/
muresk/
publications/
invest.
htm
5.
Agne,
Stefan,
"
The
Impact
of
Pesticide
Taxation
on
Pesticide
Use
and
Income
in
Costa
Rica's
Coffee
Production",
March
2000,
241
pp.,
http://
www.
ifgb.
uni­
hannover.
de/
institut/
projekte/
gtz/
ppp_
s02.
pdf
6.
Glick
Peter
and
Sahn
David,
"
The
Demand
for
Primary
Schooling
in
Rural
Madagascar:
Price,
Quality,
and
the
Choice
Between
Public
and
Private
Providers",
Cornell
University
Food
and
Nutrition
Policy
Program,
September
2000,
47
pp.,
http://
mango.
human.
cornell.
edu/
cfnpp/
images/
wp113.
pdf
7.
Gould,
Brian
W.,
"
Factors
Affecting
U.
S.
Demand
for
Reduced­
Fat
Milk",
University
of
Wisconsin­
Madison,
October
1995,
30
pp.,
http://
www.
aae.
wisc.
edu/
www/
pub/
sps/
stpap386.
pdf
8.
Irwin,
Douglas
and
Nina
Pavcnik,
"
Airbus
versus
Boeing
Revisited:
International
Competition
in
the
Aircraft
Market",
May
2001,
37pp.,
http://
www.
dartmouth.
edu/~
npavcnik/
Research_
files/
airbus.
pdf
9.
Larivière
Éric,
Larue
Bruno,
and
Chalfant
James,
"
Modeling
the
Demand
for
Alcoholic
Beverages
and
Advertising
Specifications",
Universite
Laval,
April
1998,
37
pp.,
http://
alpha.
eru.
ulaval.
ca/
crea/
PUBLICATIONS/
larue/
SR­
98­
02.
PDF
136
10.
Martin,
Will,
"
Reducing
Carbon
Dioxide
Emissions
through
Joint
Implementation
of
Projects",
Development
Research
Group,
World
Bank,
April
1998,
26
pp.,
http://
econ.
worldbank.
org/
docs/
1113.
pdf.

11.
Nevo,
Aviv,
"
Mergers
With
Differentiated
Products:
The
Case
of
the
Ready­
To­
Eat
Cereal
Industry",
University
of
California,
Berkeley,
November
1997,
59
pp.,
http://
www.
haas.
berkeley.
edu/
groups/
cpc/
WPs/
99­
2.
pdf
12.
Patterson
Paul
and
Richards
Timothy,
"
Print
Advertisement
Characteristics
and
Apple
Variety
Attraction:
A
MIMIC
Model
Approach",
Arizona
State
University,
April
1998,
33
pp.,
http://
www.
east.
asu.
edu/
msabr/
research/
workingpapers/
msabr9803_
print.
pdf
13.
Ramaswamy
K.
V.,
R.
R
Vaidya
,
M.
J.
Bennis
and
J.
G.
M.
Hoogeveen,
"
Input
Substitution
in
the
Indian
Paper
Industry:
a
Variable
Cost
Function
Approach",
CREED
Working
Paper
No
7,
July
1996,
25
pp.,
http://
www.
iied.
org/
pdf/
creed07e.
pdf
14.
Slade,
Margaret
E.,
"
Assessing
Market
Power
in
UK
Brewing",
Journal
of
Economic
Literature,
March
2001,
53pp.,
http://
www.
arts.
ubc.
ca/
econ/
discpapers/
DP0104.
PDF
15.
Stavrev,
Emil
and
Gueorgui
Kambourov,
"
Share
Equations
versus
Double
Logarithmic
Functions
in
the
Estimation
of
Income,
Own­
and
Cross­
Price
Elasticities:
An
Application
for
Bulgaria",
Transition
Economics
Series,
March
1999,
19
pp,
http://
www.
ihs.
ac.
at/
publications/
tec/
te­
7.
pdf
16.
Viard,
B.,
N.
Polson,
A.
Gron,
"
Solving
for
Market
Equilibrium
Using
Random
Coefficient
Random
Utility
Models",
May
2000,
38
pp.,
http://
faculty­
gsb.
stanford.
edu/
viard/
personal/
PDF/
equil.
pdf
17.
Wade,
Steven
H.,
"
Price
Responsiveness
in
the
NEMS
Buildings
Sector
Model",
Energy
Information
Administration,
Office
of
Integrated
Analysis
and
Forecasting,
http://
www.
eia.
doe.
gov/
oiaf/
issues/
pricetbl1.
html
137
Attachment
Set
E
Direct
Impact
Elements
138
Impact
Element
1
Private
Sector
Labor
Wage
Rates
(
Year
2001
US
national
averages)
Derivation
of
Benefits­
and
Overhead­
Loaded
Wage
Rates
Item
Occupational
Category
BLS
Standard
Occupational
Code
A
B
C
D
(
AxBxC)
E
F
(
D
x
E)
1999
median
non­
loaded
wage
rate
($/
hour)
Total
benefits*
multiplier
Benefitted
wage
rate
overhead**
multiplier
1999
Loaded
wage
rate
($/
hour)
Year
2001
update
multiplier
2001
Loaded
wage
rate
($/
hour)
1
Clerical
(
general
office)
43­
9061
$
9.77
1.354
1.219
$
16.12
1.119
$
18.05
2
Technical
(
production
industries)
51­
9061
$
11.68
1.354
1.219
$
19.28
1.119
$
21.58
3
Managerial
(
production
industries)
51­
1011
$
18.61
1.354
1.219
$
30.71
1.119
$
34.38
4
Legal
(
lawyers)
23­
1011
$
42.81
1.354
1.219
$
70.65
1.119
$
79.09
5
Janitors
&
cleaners
(
except
maids/
housecleaners)
37­
2011
$
7.90
1.435
1.219
$
13.82
1.119
$
15.47
Explanatory
Notes:
(
a)
*
Total
benefits
as
defined/
measured
in
the
BLS
"
Employment
Cost"
database
include:
(
1)
Paid
leave
(
vcation,
holiday,
sick,
other)
(
2)
Supplemental
pay
(
premium,
shift
differentials,
non­
production
bonuses)
(
3)
Insurance
(
life,
health,
short­
term
disability,
long­
term
disability)
(
4)
Retirement
&
savings
(
defined
benefit,
defined
contribution)
(
5)
Legally
required
benefits
(
social
security,
OASDI,
medicare,
Federal
&
state
unemployment
insurance,
worker's
compensation)
(
6)
Other
benefits
(
b)
**
Overhead:
proportionate
share
of
management
and
office
support
costs
(
e.
g.
office
rent,
office
equipment,
office
utilities).

(
c)
Data
sources:

Column
A:
1999
non­
loaded
wage
rates:
US
Dept
of
Labor,
Bureau
of
Labor
Statistics
(
http://
www.
bls.
gov/
oes/
1999/)
Column
B:
Benefits
multiplier:
US
Dept
of
Labor,
Bureau
of
Labor
Statistics
(
http://
www.
bls.
gov/
news.
release/
ecec.
t06htm).
Items
1
to
4:
based
on
private
industry
white
collar
workers
(
national
average).
Item
5:
based
on
private
industry
blue
collar
workers
(
national
average).
Column
C:
Average
of
three
case
studies
(
4
cases)
provided
in
two
US
EPA
full
cost
accounting
reports
for
solid/
hazardous
waste
management:
Case
data
elements
(
dept
annual
totals
all
labor)
Case
A1
Case
A2
Case
B
Case
C
Average
Base
labor
wages/
salaries
$
843,046
$
843,046
$
3,038,226
Labor
benefits
$
291,467
$
291,467
$
1,481,576
Benefits­
loaded
wages
$
1,134,513
$
1,134,513
$
11,964,368
$
4,519,802
Implied
benefits
multiplier
(
relative
to
base
wages)
=
1.346
1.346
1.488
1.393
Administrative
(
office)
overhead
$
598,279
$
257,998
$
1,029,220
$
157,223
Total
loaded
wages
$
1,732,792
$
1,392,511
$
12,993,588
$
4,677,025
Implied
overhead
multiplier
(
relative
to
base
wages)
=
1.710
1.306
1.052
1.356
Implied
overhead
multiplier
(
relative
to
benefit­
load
wage)
1.527
1.227
1.086
1.035
1.219
Implied
composite
multiplier
(
benefits
+
overhead)
=
2.055
1.652
1.539
1.749
Case
A:
USEPA,
"
Full
Cost
Accounting
in
Action:
Case
Studies
of
Six
Solid
Waste
Management
Activities",
EPA­
530­
R­
98­
018,
Dec
1998,
p.
13.
Case
A1
represents
inclusion
of
the
full­
set
of
24
administrative
operating
cost
items
listed
in
the
Case
A
study
(
e.
g.
as
may
be
representative
of
white
collar
overhead
associated
with
RCRA
LQG
regulatory
burden,
or
with
large
company
white
collar
occupations).
Case
A2
represents
a
subset
of
13
cost
items
from
Case
A
(
i.
e.
excluding
business
travel,
motor
pool,
dues/
memberships,
subscriptions,
and
overhead
cost
from
other
depts);
Case
A2
may
be
representative
of
white
collar
overhead
associated
with
RCRA
SQG
regulatory
burden
or
with
small
company
white
collar
occupations,
or
representative
of
overhead
associated
with
blue
collar
occupations.
Case
B:
ibid,
Table
10,
page
34.
Case
C:
USEPA,
"
Full
Cost
Accounting
for
Municipal
Solid
Waste
Management:
A
Handbook",
EPA­
530­
R­
95­
041,
Sept
1997,
Exhibit
4­
6,
page
40.
Column
E:
"
Employment
Cost
Index"
for
private
industry,
US
Dept
of
Labor,
Bureau
of
Labor
Statistics
(
http://
www.
bls.
gov/
news.
release/
eci.
nr0.
htm):
June
1999
June
2000
June
2001
12­
month
%
change
in
private
industry
wages
&
salaries
=
3.6%
4.1%
3.8%
1.119
<
Implied
1999
to
2001
multiplier
139
Impact
Element
1
(
continued)

READ
&
DISSEMINATE
FINAL
RULE
AFTER
PROMULGATION:
UNIT
COST
ASSUMPTIONS*
Item
Computation
Element
SQG
LQG
A.
ALL
INDUSTRIAL
WIPES
USERS:
read
rule
or
read
summary
of
rule**
1
Avg
number
persons
per
facility
who
intially
read
rule**>
1
3
2
Average
hours
per
person
to
access
and
read
initially>
0.25
0.25
3
Avg
hourly
wage
(
manager
or
legal
or
technical
staff)>
$
45
$
45
4
Per
facility
cost
initially
to
read
rule
(
items
1x2x3)>
$
11
$
34
B.
ONLY
SOLVENT
INDUSTRIAL
WIPES
USERS:
disseminate
rule
requirements
5
Avg
nr.
persons
per
facility
who
disseminate
eligibility
requirements>
1
3
6
Average
hours
per
person
to
disseminate
eligibility
requirements>
0.5
0.5
7
Avg
hourly
wage
(
manager
or
legal
or
technical
staff)>
$
45
$
45
8
Per
facility
cost
initially
to
read
rule
(
items
5x6x7)>
$
23
$
68
Explanatory
Notes:
(
a)
*
Assumptions
in
this
table
based
on
judgement
by
OSW
staff.
(
b)
**
Or
otherwise
read
a
second­
hand
sysnopsis
of
the
rule
(
e.
g.
trade
journal
newsletter
article).
(
c)
NA=
CESQGs
are
exempt
from
RCRA
regulations
(
and
the
proposed
rule).
140
Impact
Element
1
(
continued)

READ
&
DISSEMINATE
RULE:
ESTIMATE
OF
NATIONAL
COST
Item
Sub­
sector
B.
ONLY
SOLVENT
INDUSTRIAL
WIPES
USERS
&
HANDLERS:
B1.
Facilities
Using
Solvent
Wipes:
B2.
One­
Time
Cost
to
Facilities:
NA
$
23
$
68
<
Unit
costs
CESQGs
SQGs
LQGs
Totals
CESQGs
SQGs
LQGs
Totals
DISPOSABLE
INDUSTRIAL
WIPES:
1
Printing
NA
2,970
41
3,012
NA
$
66,862
$
2,801
$
69,663
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
NA
444
60
504
NA
$
9,996
$
4,066
$
14,062
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
NA
570
45
615
NA
$
12,823
$
3,043
$
15,865
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
NA
2,146
94
2,240
NA
$
48,310
$
6,346
$
54,656
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
NA
1,066
21
1,086
NA
$
23,989
$
1,393
$
25,382
6
Electronics
&
Computers
NA
197
46
243
NA
$
4,430
$
3,133
$
7,563
7
Transportation
Eqpt
NA
422
68
489
NA
$
9,492
$
4,564
$
14,056
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
NA
721
15
736
NA
$
16,223
$
1,038
$
17,261
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
NA
1,678
100
1,778
NA
$
37,769
$
6,728
$
44,498
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
NA
1,506
24
1,530
NA
$
33,897
$
1,653
$
35,550
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
NA
398
8
406
NA
$
8,949
$
545
$
9,494
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
NA
5,766
4
5,770
NA
$
129,776
$
280
$
130,056
13
Military
Bases
NA
17
7
24
NA
$
383
$
450
$
833
Subtotals
=
NA
17,899
534
18,433
NA
$
402,901
$
36,039
$
438,940
Annualized
cost
=
$
58,407
REUSABLE
INDUSTRIAL
WIPES:
1
Printing
NA
39,355
550
39,904
NA
$
885,833
$
37,108
$
922,941
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
NA
5,883
798
6,681
NA
$
132,430
$
53,872
$
186,302
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
NA
7,547
597
8,144
NA
$
169,883
$
40,310
$
210,193
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
NA
28,435
1,245
29,680
NA
$
640,039
$
84,073
$
724,113
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
NA
14,120
273
14,393
NA
$
317,822
$
18,460
$
336,282
6
Electronics
&
Computers
NA
2,608
615
3,222
NA
$
58,696
$
41,503
$
100,199
7
Transportation
Eqpt
NA
5,587
895
6,482
NA
$
125,754
$
60,465
$
186,219
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
NA
9,549
204
9,752
NA
$
214,934
$
13,751
$
228,684
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
NA
22,231
1,320
23,551
NA
$
500,391
$
89,142
$
589,534
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
NA
19,951
324
20,276
NA
$
449,086
$
21,897
$
470,983
11
Business
Services
(
copy
shops)
NA
5,267
107
5,374
NA
$
118,566
$
7,215
$
125,782
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
NA
76,385
55
76,440
NA
$
1,719,354
$
3,704
$
1,723,058
13
Military
Bases
NA
225
88
314
NA
$
5,075
$
5,965
$
11,040
Subtotals
=
NA
237,143
7,071
244,214
NA
$
5,337,865
$
477,465
$
5,815,330
Annualized
cost
=
$
773,806
INDUSTRIAL
WIPES
HANDLERS:
AAE
cost
1
Industrial
Wipes
Manufacturers
0
$
0
$
0
2
Reusable
Industrial
Wipes
Laundries
1,175
$
3,519
$
26,448
3
Solid
Waste
Management
Units
Haz
waste
+
MSW
landfills
+
combustors
only>
4,266
$
12,777
$
96,024
Subtotals
=
5,441
$
122,472
Annualized
cost
=
$
16,296
141
Impact
Element
1B
COSTS
ASSOCIATED
WITH
ANNUAL
SURVEY
BY
INDUSTRIAL
LAUNDRIES
OF
CUSTOMERS
TO
DETERMINE
RCRA
REGULATORY
STATUS
Item
Computation
Element
Unit
Cost*
Unit
Cost
Metric
Total
A.
CUSTOMER
SURVEY
LETTER
MAIL­
OUT:
1
Nr
affected
industrial
laundry
facilities
sending
out
survey
(
in
states
adopting
rule)
881
2
Nr
customer
survey
letters
required
(
reusable
wipes
facility
count
CESQGs+
SQGs+
LQGs)
107,025
3
Cost
for
survey
mobilization
(
draft
letter,
access
customer
list)
Managerial
mobilization
cost
=
$
275
Per
laundry
$
242,397
Support
staff
mobilization
cost
=
$
289
Per
laundry
$
254,510
4
Cost
to
reproduce
survey
letters
$
0.15
Per
letter
$
16,054
5
Cost
for
survey
envelopes
&
two­
way
postage
$
0.76
Per
envelope
$
81,339
6
Cost
to
print/
apply
address
labels
for
survey
envelopes
$
0.05
Per
envelope
$
5,351
Subtotal
(
items
2+
3+
4)
=
$
102,744
B.
PROCESS
SURVEY
INFORMATION:
7
Cost
to
enter
customer
response
info
into
ledger
or
database
$
0.30
1
min./
letter
$
32,197
Total
cost
(
first­
year)
=
$
734,592
Annualized
cost**
=
$
261,605
SUB­
SECTOR
BREAK­
DOWN
OF
LAUNDRY
CUSTOMER
SURVEY
COST
Item
Sub­
sector
or
Industry
Facility
count
First­
year
cost
Annualized
cost
REUSABLE
INDUSTRIAL
WIPES:
1
Printing
31,177
$
213,991
$
76,207
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
1,907
$
13,088
$
4,661
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
2,438
$
16,734
$
5,959
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
8,552
$
58,699
$
20,904
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
4,122
$
28,292
$
10,075
6
Electronics
&
Computers
956
$
6,561
$
2,336
7
Transportation
Eqpt
1,955
$
13,417
$
4,778
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
2,796
$
19,192
$
6,835
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
7,001
$
48,056
$
17,114
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
17,695
$
121,456
$
43,253
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
4,803
$
32,964
$
11,739
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
23,537
$
161,550
$
57,532
13
Military
Bases
86
$
591
$
211
Subtotals
=
107,025
$
734,592
$
261,605
CUSTOMER
RESPONSE
TO
SURVEY:
Average
time
for
customers
to
respond
to
survey
letter
(
minutes)
=
10
Labor
cost
for
customers
to
respond
to
survey
letter
($/
hour)
=
$
6
Total
first­
year
cost
=
$
613,297
$
218,409
Explanatory
Notes:
(
a)
Managerial
labor
wage
rate
($/
hour)
for
item
3
=
$
34
(
b)
Clerical
staff
labor
wage
rate
($/
hour)
for
item
3
=
$
18
(
c)
*
Unit
costs
based
on
first
approximation
judgement
by
USEPA­
OSW­
EMRAD
(
d)
**
Customer
re­
survey
frequency
=
3
142
Impact
Elements
2
&
3
UNIT
COSTS
FOR
SPENT
WIPES
CONTAINERS
FOR
ACCUMULATING
&
TRANSPORTING
SOLVENT­
CONTAMINATED
INDUSTRIAL
WIPES
Item
Type
of
Equipment
Price
unit
Year
2001
retail
price
Year
2001
delivered
cost*
Average
lIfespan
(
years)
Year
2001
AAC**
Website
Sources
for
Retail
Prices
Website
reference
cost
date
A.
UNIT
COSTS
FOR
CLOSABLE
TRANSPORT
CONTAINERS:
OPTION:
FLEXIBLE
TRANSPORT
CONTAINERS
(
plastic
bags):
Closeable
containers:
Heavy­
duty
plastic
flexible
container
(
55
gallon
500
lbs):
1
Outer
shell
1
bag
$
19.50
$
22.32
1
$
22.32
ENCO
company
quote
to
Jim
O'Leary
(
USEPA­
OSW­
HWID)
March
2001
2
Inner
liner
1
bag
$
0.31
$
0.35
0.2
$
1.73
Associated
Bag
Company
catalog
(
p.
50)
May
2001
Subtotal
=
$
19.81
$
22.68
$
24.05
3
Heavy
duty
clear
trash
bags
(
34
gals,
75lbs,
30%
post­
cons)
1
bag
$
0.19
$
0.22
1
$
0.22
http://
www.
2kstore.
com/
gragr/
jwod/
nsn2.
htm
March
2001
Container
labels
4
Pre­
printed
vinyl
adhesive
labels
(
Note:
Some
bags
may
be
pre­
printed
not
requiring
label)
1
label
$
0.38
$
0.43
1
$
0.43
http://
www.
labsafety.
com
(
non­
regulated
waste
label
3BG­
484V)
April
2003
OPTION:
RIGID
TRANSPORT
CONTAINERS
(
metal
drums):
Closeable
containers:***
1
55
gallon
drum
(
corrosion
resistant,
leak­
proof)
1
drum
$
79
$
90
5
$
20.61
http://
www.
labsafety.
com
Feb
2001
2
15
gallon
drum
(
corrosion
resistant,
leak­
proof)
1
drum
$
48
$
55
5
$
12.53
http://
www.
labsafety.
com
Feb
2001
Container
labels
3
Pre­
printed
vinyl
adhesive
labels
1
label
$
1.26
$
1.44
5
$
0.33
http://
www.
labsafety.
com/
store/
dept.
asp?
dep
t_
id=
6019
Feb
2001
B.
UNIT
COSTS
FOR
ON­
SITE
ACCUMULATION
CONTAINER:
Steel
oily­
waste
covered
containers
for
solvent
wipes:
1
21
gallon
foot­
lever
cover
drum
(
largest
size)
1
drum
$
105
$
120
7
$
20.85
http://
www.
labsafety.
com
April
2003
2
10
gallon
foot­
lever
cover
drum
(
smallest
size)
1
drum
$
57
$
65
7
$
11.26
http://
www.
labsafety.
com
April
2003
Explanatory
Notes:
!
*
Delivered
cost
=
[(
Retail
price)
+
(
8%
S&
H
cost)
+
(
6%
sales
tax)]
=
Retail
price
multiplied
by
1.145
!
***
One
alternative
type
of
rigid
container
is
a
plastic
drum
($
40
to
$
50/
drum);
it
is
not
listed
above
because
its
price
falls
between
the
other
two
types.
143
Impact
Element
2
&
3
Accumulation
&
Transport
Container
Size
&
Solvent­
Contaminated
Industrial
Wipes
Average
Containment
Capacity
Assumptions
Container
size
(
capacity):
Gallons:
10
15
21
34
55
Cubic
yards:
0.050
0.074
0.104
0.168
0.272
Maximum
quantity
spent
solvent
wipes
per
container:
Reusables
=
233
349
489
791
1,280
Disposables
=
673
1,009
1,413
2,287
3,700
Weight
of
containers
filled
with
spent
solvent
wipes
(
pounds):
Reusables
=
29
44
61
99
160
Disposables
=
36
55
76
124
200
Assumptions
for
Average
Unit
Weight
(
Per
Wipe)
of
Solvent­
Contaminated
Industrial
Wipes
Type
of
Industrial
Wipe
Weight
Equivalencies
pounds
per
wipe
ounces
per
wipe
grams
per
wipe
Reusable
wipes
0.125
2.0
57.1
Disposable
wipes
0.054
0.9
24.7
144
Impact
Element
2
(
continued)

COST
OF
CLOSEABLE
WIPES
ACCUMULATION
CONTAINERS
Item
Sub­
sector
A.
Annual
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
Used:
B.
Factors
C.
Annual
Add'tl
Containers
Filled
D.
Weekly
Contrs
Filled:
E.
Containers
Needed
(
first
year):

F.
First­
Year
Cost
for
Containers:
G.
Annualized
Avg
Cost
B.
%
must
have
containers
C.
%
wipes
w/
out
containers
10
21
<
Gal/
contr
Operating
weeks
per
year
>
50
Transport
cycle
mutiplier
>
2
505
1060
<
Average
spent
wipes
per
container
$
57
$
105
<$/
contnr
$
11.26
$
20.85
<$/
contnr
SQGs
LQGs
Subtotals
SQGs
LQGs
Subtotals
SQGs
LQGs
Subtotals
SQGs
LQGs
Subtotals
SQGs
LQGs
Subtotals
SQGs
LQGs
Subtotals
DISPOSABLE
INDUSTRIAL
WIPES:
1
Printing
17,050,706
2,237,036
19,287,742
100%
50%
3,072
403
3,475
61
8
70
28,590
399
28,989
$
1,621,035
$
41,917
$
1,662,952
$
321,815
$
8,322
$
330,137
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
3,688,283
1,534,228
5,222,511
100%
50%
665
276
941
13
6
19
1,524
212
1,735
$
86,399
$
22,229
$
108,628
$
17,152
$
4,413
$
21,565
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
5,046,501
1,223,989
6,270,490
100%
50%
909
221
1,130
18
4
23
2,050
166
2,216
$
116,254
$
17,447
$
133,701
$
23,079
$
3,464
$
26,543
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
17,617,131
2,365,937
19,983,068
100%
50%
3,174
426
3,601
63
9
72
7,435
334
7,769
$
421,582
$
35,025
$
456,607
$
83,694
$
6,953
$
90,648
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
11,175,962
666,528
11,842,489
100%
50%
2,014
120
2,134
40
2
43
3,669
73
3,742
$
208,060
$
7,643
$
215,703
$
41,305
$
1,517
$
42,822
6
Electronics
&
Computers
4,057,776
2,944,176
7,001,952
100%
50%
731
530
1,262
15
11
25
702
170
872
$
39,802
$
17,800
$
57,602
$
7,902
$
3,534
$
11,435
7
Transportation
Eqpt
3,437,833
1,691,823
5,129,656
100%
50%
619
305
924
12
6
18
1,529
251
1,780
$
86,685
$
26,362
$
113,047
$
17,209
$
5,233
$
22,443
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
5,967,077
391,685
6,358,762
100%
50%
1,075
71
1,146
22
1
23
2,484
54
2,539
$
140,871
$
5,700
$
146,571
$
27,966
$
1,132
$
29,098
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
13,673,062
2,492,579
16,165,642
100%
50%
2,464
449
2,913
49
9
58
5,998
365
6,362
$
340,059
$
38,315
$
378,375
$
67,510
$
7,607
$
75,117
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
8,648,444
1,327,236
9,975,680
100%
50%
1,558
239
1,797
31
5
36
16,190
263
16,453
$
917,988
$
27,630
$
945,618
$
182,243
$
5,485
$
187,728
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
2,245,659
432,263
2,677,922
100%
50%
405
78
483
8
2
10
4,377
89
4,466
$
248,165
$
9,322
$
257,488
$
49,267
$
1,851
$
51,118
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
46,973,682
102,352
47,076,034
100%
50%
8,464
18
8,482
169
0
170
21,344
16
21,360
$
1,210,193
$
1,649
$
1,211,842
$
240,253
$
327
$
240,581
13
Military
Bases
154,957
188,643
343,601
100%
50%
28
34
62
1
1
1
56
23
79
$
3,185
$
2,368
$
5,553
$
632
$
470
$
1,102
Subtotal
Printers
27,944,809
3,996,535
31,941,344
5,035
720
5,755
Subtotal
Non­
Printers
111,792,264
13,601,941
125,394,205
20,143
2,451
22,594
Totals
=
139,737,074
17,598,476
157,335,550
25,178
3,171
28,349
504
63
567
1,007
127
1,134
$
5,440,279
$
253,408
$
5,693,687
1,080,029
$
50,308
$
1,130,337
REUSABLE
WIPES:

175
367
<
Average
spent
wipes
per
container
1
Printing
565,659,591
74,303,831
639,963,423
100%
50%
1,620,379
101,357
1,721,736
32,408
2,027
34,435
32,408
2,027
34,435
$
1,837,510
$
212,850
$
2,050,359
$
364,791
$
42,256
$
407,047
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
42,186,313
23,718,009
65,904,321
100%
50%
120,846
32,353
153,200
2,417
647
3,064
2,417
647
3,064
$
137,040
$
67,942
$
204,982
$
27,206
$
13,488
$
40,694
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
57,707,802
18,928,159
76,635,961
100%
50%
165,309
25,820
191,128
3,306
516
3,823
3,306
516
3,823
$
187,460
$
54,221
$
241,681
$
37,215
$
10,764
$
47,980
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
201,522,873
36,600,626
238,123,499
100%
50%
577,279
49,926
627,206
11,546
999
12,544
11,546
999
12,544
$
654,634
$
104,846
$
759,480
$
129,961
$
20,814
$
150,775
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
127,845,668
10,260,172
138,105,840
100%
50%
366,225
13,996
380,220
7,324
280
7,604
7,324
280
7,604
$
415,299
$
29,391
$
444,690
$
82,447
$
5,835
$
88,282
6
Electronics
&
Computers
46,459,279
45,438,499
91,897,779
100%
50%
133,086
61,982
195,069
2,662
1,240
3,901
2,662
1,240
3,901
$
150,920
$
130,162
$
281,082
$
29,961
$
25,840
$
55,802
7
Transportation
Eqpt
39,297,004
26,121,783
65,418,787
100%
50%
112,570
35,632
148,202
2,251
713
2,964
2,251
713
2,964
$
127,654
$
74,828
$
202,482
$
25,342
$
14,855
$
40,198
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
68,269,281
6,043,292
74,312,573
100%
50%
195,563
8,244
203,807
3,911
165
4,076
3,911
165
4,076
$
221,768
$
17,312
$
239,080
$
44,027
$
3,437
$
47,463
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
156,360,483
38,513,024
194,873,507
100%
50%
447,908
52,535
500,443
8,958
1,051
10,009
8,958
1,051
10,009
$
507,927
$
110,324
$
618,251
$
100,836
$
21,902
$
122,738
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
286,768,691
43,841,615
330,610,306
100%
50%
821,473
59,804
881,277
16,429
1,196
17,626
16,429
1,196
17,626
$
931,550
$
125,588
$
1,057,138
$
184,936
$
24,932
$
209,868
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
74,581,196
14,233,053
88,814,248
100%
50%
213,644
19,415
233,059
4,273
388
4,661
4,273
388
4,661
$
242,272
$
40,772
$
283,044
$
48,097
$
8,094
$
56,191
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
537,276,832
1,600,626
538,877,458
100%
50%
1,539,074
2,183
1,541,258
30,781
44
30,825
30,781
44
30,825
$
1,745,310
$
4,585
$
1,749,895
$
346,487
$
910
$
347,397
13
Military
Bases
1,778,937
2,887,726
4,666,663
100%
50%
5,096
3,939
9,035
102
79
181
102
79
181
$
5,779
$
8,272
$
14,051
$
1,147
$
1,642
$
2,789
Subtotal
Printers
927,009,478
132,378,499
1,059,387,977
2,655,496
180,576
2,836,072
Subtotal
Non­
Printers
1,278,704,471
210,111,917
1,488,816,388
3,662,956
286,611
3,949,567
Totals
=
2,205,713,949
342,490,416
2,548,204,365
6,318,451
467,187
6,785,638
126,369
9,344
135,713
252,738
18,687
271,426
$
7,165,124
$
981,092
$
8,146,216
1,422,453
$
194,771
$
1,617,224
145
Impact
Elements
3A
&
4
TRANSPORT
CONTAINTER
OPTION
1:
COST
OF
PLASTIC
BAG
TRANSPORT
CONTAINERS
SQGs
LQGs
SQGs
LQGs
Size
of
container
(
gallons)
=
34
34
Replace/
yr>
1
1
Average
reusables
loading
for
transport
as
%
of
container
capacity
=
70%
70%
Average
disposables
loading
for
transport
as
%
of
container
capacity
=
50%
50%
Average
quantity
solvent­
contaminated
reusable
wipes
loaded
into
container
=
554
554
69
<
Pounds
per
filled
reusables
bag
Average
quantity
solvent­
contaminated
disposable
wipes
loaded
into
container
=
1,144
1,144
62
<
Pounds
per
filled
disposables
bag
Item
Sub­
sector
A.
Annual
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
Used:
B.
%
must
have
containers
C.
%
wipes
w/
out
containers
D.
Annual
Additional
Containers
Filled:
Operating
weeks/
year
=
50
Transport
cycle
mutiplier
=
1
E.
Weekly
Containers
Filled:
F.
Containers
Needed
(
first
year):
SQGs
LQGs
Subtotals
SQGs
LQGs
Subtotals
SQGs
LQGs
Subtotals
SQGs
LQGs
Subtotals
A.
REUSABLE
INDUSTRIAL
WIPES:
1
Printing
565,659,591
74,303,831
639,963,423
100%
50%
510,624
67,074
577,698
10,212
1,341
11,554
510,624
67,074
577,698
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
42,186,313
23,718,009
65,904,321
100%
50%
38,082
21,410
59,492
762
428
1,190
38,082
21,410
59,492
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
57,707,802
18,928,159
76,635,961
100%
50%
52,093
17,087
69,180
1,042
342
1,384
52,093
17,087
69,180
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
201,522,873
36,600,626
238,123,499
100%
50%
181,916
33,040
214,955
3,638
661
4,299
181,916
33,040
214,955
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
127,845,668
10,260,172
138,105,840
100%
50%
115,407
9,262
124,669
2,308
185
2,493
115,407
9,262
124,669
6
Electronics
&
Computers
46,459,279
45,438,499
91,897,779
100%
50%
41,939
41,018
82,957
839
820
1,659
41,939
41,018
82,957
7
Transportation
Eqpt
39,297,004
26,121,783
65,418,787
100%
50%
35,474
23,580
59,054
709
472
1,181
35,474
23,580
59,054
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
68,269,281
6,043,292
74,312,573
100%
50%
61,627
5,455
67,082
1,233
109
1,342
61,627
5,455
67,082
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
156,360,483
38,513,024
194,873,507
100%
50%
141,147
34,766
175,913
2,823
695
3,518
141,147
34,766
175,913
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
286,768,691
43,841,615
330,610,306
100%
50%
258,867
39,576
298,444
5,177
792
5,969
258,867
39,576
298,444
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
74,581,196
14,233,053
88,814,248
100%
50%
67,325
12,848
80,173
1,346
257
1,603
67,325
12,848
80,173
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
537,276,832
1,600,626
538,877,458
100%
50%
485,002
1,445
486,447
9,700
29
9,729
485,002
1,445
486,447
13
Military
Bases
1,778,937
2,887,726
4,666,663
100%
50%
1,606
2,607
4,213
32
52
84
1,606
2,607
4,213
National
Totals
=
2,205,713,949
342,490,416
2,548,204,365
1,991,109
309,168
2,300,276
39,822
6,183
46,006
1,991,109
309,168
2,300,276
Avg
per
facility
=
26,830
Cubic
yards
equivalent
=
387,225
Avg
per
facility
=
0.484
Avg
per
facility
=
24.220
Tons
equivalent
=
113,759
Printer
containers
filled
=
956,315
42%
Non­
printer
containers
filled
=
1,343,962
58%

B.
DISPOSABLE
INDUSTRIAL
WIPES
(
for
transport
of
eligible
wipes
to
non­
haz
waste
landfills
under
the
exemption):
1
Printing
0
0
0
100%
50%
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
2,982,060
1,240,458
4,222,517
100%
50%
2,608
1,085
3,692
52
22
74
2,608
1,085
3,692
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
4,080,210
989,623
5,069,832
100%
50%
3,568
865
4,433
71
17
89
3,568
865
4,433
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
14,243,846
1,912,913
16,156,759
100%
50%
12,455
1,673
14,128
249
33
283
12,455
1,673
14,128
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
9,036,016
538,902
9,574,919
100%
50%
7,901
471
8,372
158
9
167
7,901
471
8,372
6
Electronics
&
Computers
3,280,803
2,380,433
5,661,236
100%
50%
2,869
2,081
4,950
57
42
99
2,869
2,081
4,950
7
Transportation
Eqpt
2,779,565
1,367,877
4,147,442
100%
50%
2,430
1,196
3,627
49
24
73
2,430
1,196
3,627
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
4,824,516
316,686
5,141,202
100%
50%
4,219
277
4,495
84
6
90
4,219
277
4,495
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
11,054,978
2,015,306
13,070,284
100%
50%
9,667
1,762
11,429
193
35
229
9,667
1,762
11,429
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
0
0
0
100%
50%
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
0
0
0
100%
50%
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
37,979,277
82,754
38,062,031
100%
50%
33,209
72
33,282
664
1
666
33,209
72
33,282
13
Military
Bases
125,286
152,522
277,809
100%
50%
110
133
243
2
3
5
110
133
243
National
Totals
=
90,386,558
10,997,475
101,384,033
79,034
9,616
88,651
1,581
192
1,773
79,034
9,616
88,651
Avg
per
facility
=
12,158
Cubic
yards
equivalent
=
14,923
Avg
per
facility
=
0.213
Avg
per
facility
=
10.631
Tons
equivalent
=
5,480
146
Impact
Elements
3A
&
4
(
continued)

TRANSPORT
CONTAINER
OPTION
1
(
CONTINUED):
COST
OF
PLASTIC
BAG
TRANSPORT
CONTAINERS
Item
Sub­
Sector
FIRST­
YEAR
COSTS:
ANNUALIZED
COSTS:
CONTAINERS
(
first
year):
LABELS
(
first
year):
CONTAINERS
(
annualized):
LABELS
(
annualized):
TOTAL
annualized:
34
34
<
Size
(
gals)
$
0.43
$
0.43
<
Unit
cost
34
34
<
Size
(
gals)
$
0.43
$
0.43
<
Unit
cost
$
0.22
$
0.22
<
Unit
cost
1
1
<
Labels/
cntnr
$
0.22
$
0.22
<
Unit
cost
1
1
<
Labels/
cntnr
SQGs
LQGs
Subtotals
SQGs
LQGs
Subtotals
SQGs
LQGs
Subtotals
SQGs
LQGs
Subtotals
SQGs
LQGs
Subtotals
REUSABLE
WIPES
1
Printing
$
110,739
$
14,546
$
125,286
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
110,739
$
14,546
$
125,286
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
110,739
$
14,546
$
125,286
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
$
8,259
$
4,643
$
12,902
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
8,259
$
4,643
$
12,902
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
8,259
$
4,643
$
12,902
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
$
11,297
$
3,706
$
15,003
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
11,297
$
3,706
$
15,003
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
11,297
$
3,706
$
15,003
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
$
39,452
$
7,165
$
46,618
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
39,452
$
7,165
$
46,618
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
39,452
$
7,165
$
46,618
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
$
25,028
$
2,009
$
27,037
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
25,028
$
2,009
$
27,037
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
25,028
$
2,009
$
27,037
6
Electronics
&
Computers
$
9,095
$
8,896
$
17,991
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
9,095
$
8,896
$
17,991
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
9,095
$
8,896
$
17,991
7
Transportation
Eqpt
$
7,693
$
5,114
$
12,807
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
7,693
$
5,114
$
12,807
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
7,693
$
5,114
$
12,807
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
$
13,365
$
1,183
$
14,548
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
13,365
$
1,183
$
14,548
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
13,365
$
1,183
$
14,548
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
$
30,611
$
7,540
$
38,150
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
30,611
$
7,540
$
38,150
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
30,611
$
7,540
$
38,150
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
$
56,141
$
8,583
$
64,724
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
56,141
$
8,583
$
64,724
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
56,141
$
8,583
$
64,724
11
Business
Services
(
copy
shops)
$
14,601
$
2,786
$
17,387
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
14,601
$
2,786
$
17,387
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
14,601
$
2,786
$
17,387
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
$
105,183
$
313
$
105,496
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
105,183
$
313
$
105,496
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
105,183
$
313
$
105,496
13
Military
Bases
$
348
$
565
$
914
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
348
$
565
$
914
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
348
$
565
$
914
Reusables
totals
=
$
431,814
$
67,049
$
498,863
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
431,814
$
67,049
$
498,863
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
431,814
$
67,049
$
498,863
Avg
per
facility
=
$
5.25
Avg
per
facility
=
$
0.00
Avg
per
facility
=
$
5.25
Avg
per
facility
=
$
0.00
$
4.55
$
0.71
$
5.25
DISPOSABLE
WIPES
1
Printing
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
$
565
$
235
$
801
$
1,119
$
466
$
1,585
$
565
$
235
$
801
$
1,119
$
466
$
1,585
$
1,685
$
701
$
2,386
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
$
774
$
188
$
961
$
1,532
$
371
$
1,903
$
774
$
188
$
961
$
1,532
$
371
$
1,903
$
2,305
$
559
$
2,865
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
$
2,701
$
363
$
3,064
$
5,347
$
718
$
6,065
$
2,701
$
363
$
3,064
$
5,347
$
718
$
6,065
$
8,048
$
1,081
$
9,129
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
$
1,714
$
102
$
1,816
$
3,392
$
202
$
3,594
$
1,714
$
102
$
1,816
$
3,392
$
202
$
3,594
$
5,105
$
304
$
5,410
6
Electronics
&
Computers
$
622
$
451
$
1,074
$
1,232
$
894
$
2,125
$
622
$
451
$
1,074
$
1,232
$
894
$
2,125
$
1,854
$
1,345
$
3,199
7
Transportation
Eqpt
$
527
$
259
$
786
$
1,043
$
513
$
1,557
$
527
$
259
$
786
$
1,043
$
513
$
1,557
$
1,570
$
773
$
2,343
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
$
915
$
60
$
975
$
1,811
$
119
$
1,930
$
915
$
60
$
975
$
1,811
$
119
$
1,930
$
2,726
$
179
$
2,905
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
$
2,096
$
382
$
2,479
$
4,150
$
757
$
4,906
$
2,096
$
382
$
2,479
$
4,150
$
757
$
4,906
$
6,246
$
1,139
$
7,385
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
11
Business
Services
(
copy
shops)
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
$
7,202
$
16
$
7,218
$
14,257
$
31
$
14,288
$
7,202
$
16
$
7,218
$
14,257
$
31
$
14,288
$
21,459
$
47
$
21,506
13
Military
Bases
$
24
$
29
$
53
$
47
$
57
$
104
$
24
$
29
$
53
$
47
$
57
$
104
$
71
$
86
$
157
Disposables
subtotals
=
$
17,140
$
2,085
$
19,226
$
33,929
$
4,128
$
38,058
$
17,140
$
2,085
$
19,226
$
33,929
$
4,128
$
38,058
$
51,070
$
6,214
$
57,283
Avg
per
facility
=
$
2.31
Avg
per
facility
=
$
4.56
Avg
per
facility
=
$
2.31
Avg
per
facility
=
$
4.56
$
4.55
$
0.71
$
6.87
147
Impact
Elements
3A
&
4
(
continued)

TRANSPORT
CONTAINER
OPTION
2:
COST
OF
METAL
DRUM
TRANSPORT
CONTAINERS
SQGs
LQGs
SQGs
LQGs
Size
of
container
(
gallons)
=
55
55
55
55
Average
loading
for
transport
as
%
of
container
capacity
=
75%
75%
Average
quantity
solvent­
contaminated
reusable
wipes
loaded
into
container
=
960
960
120
120
<
Pounds
per
reusable
filled
rigid
container
Average
quantity
solvent­
contaminated
disposable
wipes
loaded
into
container
=
2,775
2,775
150
150
<
Pounds
per
disposable
filled
rigid
container
Item
Sub­
sector
A.
Annual
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
Used:
B.
%
must
have
containers
C.
%
wipes
w/
out
containers
D.
Annual
Additional
Containers
Filled:
Operating
weeks/
year
=
50
Transport
cycle
mutiplier
=
2
E.
Weekly
Containers
Filled:
F.
Containers
Needed
(
first
year):

SQGs
LQGs
Subtotals
SQGs
LQGs
Subtotals
SQGs
LQGs
Subtotals
SQGs
LQGs
Subtotals
A.
REUSABLE
INDUSTRIAL
WIPES:
1
Printing
565,659,591
74,303,831
639,963,423
100%
50%
294,614
38,700
333,314
5,892
774
6,666
11,785
1,548
13,333
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
42,186,313
23,718,009
65,904,321
100%
50%
21,972
12,353
34,325
439
247
687
879
494
1,373
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
57,707,802
18,928,159
76,635,961
100%
50%
30,056
9,858
39,915
601
197
798
1,202
394
1,597
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
201,522,873
36,600,626
238,123,499
100%
50%
104,960
19,063
124,023
2,099
381
2,480
4,198
763
4,961
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
127,845,668
10,260,172
138,105,840
100%
50%
66,586
5,344
71,930
1,332
107
1,439
2,663
214
2,877
6
Electronics
&
Computers
46,459,279
45,438,499
91,897,779
100%
50%
24,198
23,666
47,863
484
473
957
968
947
1,915
7
Transportation
Eqpt
39,297,004
26,121,783
65,418,787
100%
50%
20,467
13,605
34,072
409
272
681
819
544
1,363
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
68,269,281
6,043,292
74,312,573
100%
50%
35,557
3,148
38,704
711
63
774
1,422
126
1,548
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
156,360,483
38,513,024
194,873,507
100%
50%
81,438
20,059
101,497
1,629
401
2,030
3,258
802
4,060
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
286,768,691
43,841,615
330,610,306
100%
50%
149,359
22,834
172,193
2,987
457
3,444
5,974
913
6,888
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
74,581,196
14,233,053
88,814,248
100%
50%
38,844
7,413
46,257
777
148
925
1,554
297
1,850
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
537,276,832
1,600,626
538,877,458
100%
50%
279,832
834
280,665
5,597
17
5,613
11,193
33
11,227
13
Military
Bases
1,778,937
2,887,726
4,666,663
100%
50%
927
1,504
2,431
19
30
49
37
60
97
Reusable
Sub­
Totals
=
2,205,713,949
342,490,416
2,548,204,365
1,148,809
178,380
1,327,190
22,976
3,568
26,544
45,952
7,135
53,088
Avg
per
facility
=
26,830
Avg
per
facility
=
14.0
Avg
per
facility
=
0.279
Avg
per
facility
=
0.559
Cubic
yards
equivalent
=
85,319
48,575
133,894
Tons
equivalent
=
25,065
14,270
39,335
B.
DISPOSABLE
INDUSTRIAL
WIPES
(
for
transport
of
non­
eligible
wipes
to
non­
landfill
disposal
under
the
exemption):
1
Printing
17,050,706
2,237,036
19,287,742
100%
50%
3,072
403
3,475
61
8
70
6,144
806
6,951
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
3,688,283
1,534,228
5,222,511
100%
50%
665
276
941
13
6
19
1,329
553
1,882
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
5,046,501
1,223,989
6,270,490
100%
50%
909
221
1,130
18
4
23
1,819
441
2,260
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
17,617,131
2,365,937
19,983,068
100%
50%
3,174
426
3,601
63
9
72
6,349
853
7,201
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
11,175,962
666,528
11,842,489
100%
50%
2,014
120
2,134
40
2
43
4,027
240
4,268
6
Electronics
&
Computers
4,057,776
2,944,176
7,001,952
100%
50%
731
530
1,262
15
11
25
1,462
1,061
2,523
7
Transportation
Eqpt
3,437,833
1,691,823
5,129,656
100%
50%
619
305
924
12
6
18
1,239
610
1,849
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
5,967,077
391,685
6,358,762
100%
50%
1,075
71
1,146
22
1
23
2,150
141
2,291
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
13,673,062
2,492,579
16,165,642
100%
50%
2,464
449
2,913
49
9
58
4,927
898
5,825
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
8,648,444
1,327,236
9,975,680
100%
50%
1,558
239
1,797
31
5
36
3,117
478
3,595
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
2,245,659
432,263
2,677,922
100%
50%
405
78
483
8
2
10
809
156
965
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
46,973,682
102,352
47,076,034
100%
50%
8,464
18
8,482
169
0
170
16,927
37
16,964
13
Military
Bases
154,957
188,643
343,601
100%
50%
28
34
62
1
1
1
56
68
124
Disposable
Sub­
Totals
=
139,737,074
17,598,476
157,335,550
25,178
3,171
28,349
504
63
567
50,356
6,342
56,697
Avg
per
facility
=
18,867
Avg
per
facility
=
3.4
Avg
per
facility
=
0.068
Avg
per
facility
=
6.799
Cubic
yards
equivalent
=
1,870
863
2,733
Tons
equivalent
=
687
317
1,004
148
Impact
Elements
3A
&
4
(
continued)

TRANSPORT
CONTAINER
OPTION
2
(
CONTINUED):
COST
OF
METAL
DRUM
TRANSPORT
CONTAINERS
Item
Sub­
Sectors
FIRST­
YEAR
COST:
ANNUALIZED
COSTS:
CONTAINERS
(
annualized):
LABELS
(
annualized):
TOTAL
ANNUALIZED:

CONTAINERS
(
first
year):
LABELS
(
first
year):
55
55
<
Size
(
gals)
$
1.44
$
1.44
<
Unit
cost
55
55
<
Size
(
gals)
$
0.33
$
0.33
<
Unit
cost
$
90
$
90
<
Unit
cost
3
3
<
Labels/
cntnr
$
21
$
21
<
Unit
cost
3
3
<
Labels/
cntr
SQGs
LQGs
Subtotals
SQGs
LQGs
Subtotals
SQGs
LQGs
Subtotals
SQGs
LQGs
Subtotals
SQGs
LQGs
Subtotals
REUSABLE
WIPES:
1
Printing
$
1,065,788
$
140,000
$
1,205,787
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
242,931
$
31,911
$
274,841
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
242,931
$
31,911
$
274,841
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
$
79,485
$
44,688
$
124,174
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
18,118
$
10,186
$
28,304
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
18,118
$
10,186
$
28,304
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
$
108,730
$
35,663
$
144,394
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
24,783
$
8,129
$
32,912
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
24,783
$
8,129
$
32,912
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
$
379,699
$
68,961
$
448,660
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
86,547
$
15,719
$
102,266
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
86,547
$
15,719
$
102,266
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
$
240,880
$
19,332
$
260,212
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
54,905
$
4,406
$
59,312
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
54,905
$
4,406
$
59,312
6
Electronics
&
Computers
$
87,536
$
85,613
$
173,149
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
19,953
$
19,514
$
39,467
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
19,953
$
19,514
$
39,467
7
Transportation
Eqpt
$
74,041
$
49,217
$
123,259
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
16,877
$
11,218
$
28,095
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
16,877
$
11,218
$
28,095
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
$
128,630
$
11,386
$
140,016
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
29,319
$
2,595
$
31,915
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
29,319
$
2,595
$
31,915
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
$
294,607
$
72,564
$
367,171
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
67,151
$
16,540
$
83,691
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
67,151
$
16,540
$
83,691
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
$
540,315
$
82,604
$
622,919
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
123,157
$
18,828
$
141,985
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
123,157
$
18,828
$
141,985
11
Business
Services
(
copy
shops)
$
140,522
$
26,817
$
167,339
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
32,030
$
6,113
$
38,143
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
32,030
$
6,113
$
38,143
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
$
1,012,310
$
3,016
$
1,015,326
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
230,741
$
687
$
231,429
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
230,741
$
687
$
231,429
13
Military
Bases
$
3,352
$
5,441
$
8,793
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
764
$
1,240
$
2,004
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
764
$
1,240
$
2,004
Reusable
Sub­
totals
=
$
4,155,896
$
645,303
$
4,801,199
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
947,275
$
147,087
$
1,094,362
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
947,275
$
147,087
$
1,094,362
Avg
per
facility
=
$
50.55
Avg
per
facility
=
$
0.00
Avg
per
facility
=
$
11.52
Avg
per
facility
=
$
0.00
Avg
per
facility
=
$
11.52
DISPOSABLE
WIPES:
1
Printing
$
555,695
$
72,907
$
628,601
$
26,589
$
3,488
$
30,077
$
126,662
$
16,618
$
143,280
$
6,061
$
795
$
6,856
$
132,723
$
17,413
$
150,136
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
$
120,204
$
50,002
$
170,205
$
5,752
$
2,392
$
8,144
$
27,399
$
11,397
$
38,796
$
1,311
$
545
$
1,856
$
28,710
$
11,942
$
40,652
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
$
164,469
$
39,891
$
204,360
$
7,870
$
1,909
$
9,778
$
37,488
$
9,092
$
46,581
$
1,794
$
435
$
2,229
$
39,282
$
9,528
$
48,810
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
$
574,155
$
77,108
$
651,262
$
27,472
$
3,689
$
31,162
$
130,870
$
17,576
$
148,446
$
6,262
$
841
$
7,103
$
137,132
$
18,416
$
155,548
5
Industrial
Machinery
Eqpt
$
364,232
$
21,723
$
385,955
$
17,428
$
1,039
$
18,467
$
83,021
$
4,951
$
87,973
$
3,972
$
237
$
4,209
$
86,994
$
5,188
$
92,182
6
Electronic
&
Computers
$
132,246
$
95,953
$
228,199
$
6,328
$
4,591
$
10,919
$
30,143
$
21,871
$
52,014
$
1,442
$
1,046
$
2,489
$
31,586
$
22,918
$
54,503
7
Transportation
Eqpt
$
112,041
$
55,138
$
167,179
$
5,361
$
2,638
$
7,999
$
25,538
$
12,568
$
38,106
$
1,222
$
601
$
1,823
$
26,760
$
13,169
$
39,929
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
$
194,471
$
12,765
$
207,237
$
9,305
$
611
$
9,916
$
44,327
$
2,910
$
47,237
$
2,121
$
139
$
2,260
$
46,448
$
3,049
$
49,497
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
$
445,615
$
81,235
$
526,850
$
21,322
$
3,887
$
25,209
$
101,571
$
18,516
$
120,088
$
4,860
$
886
$
5,746
$
106,431
$
19,402
$
125,834
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
$
281,859
$
43,256
$
325,114
$
13,486
$
2,070
$
15,556
$
64,246
$
9,859
$
74,105
$
3,074
$
472
$
3,546
$
67,320
$
10,331
$
77,651
11
Business
Services
(
copy
shops)
$
73,188
$
14,088
$
87,275
$
3,502
$
674
$
4,176
$
16,682
$
3,211
$
19,893
$
798
$
154
$
952
$
17,480
$
3,365
$
20,845
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
$
1,530,905
$
3,336
$
1,534,241
$
73,251
$
160
$
73,411
$
348,947
$
760
$
349,708
$
16,696
$
36
$
16,733
$
365,644
$
797
$
366,440
13
Military
Bases
$
5,050
$
6,148
$
11,198
$
242
$
294
$
536
$
1,151
$
1,401
$
2,552
$
55
$
67
$
122
$
1,206
$
1,468
$
2,675
Disposable
Sub­
totals
=
$
4,554,129
$
573,547
$
5,127,676
$
217,906
$
27,443
$
245,350
$
1,038,047
$
130,731
$
1,168,778
$
49,669
$
6,255
$
55,924
$
1,087,715
$
136,987
$
1,224,702
Avg
per
facility
=
$
614.90
Avg
per
facility
=
$
29.42
Avg
per
facility
=
$
140.16
Avg
per
facility
=
$
6.71
Avg
per
facility
=
$
146.86
149
Impact
Element
4
Labor
Cost
to
Affix
Labels
to
Transport
Containers
for
Spent
Disposable
Industrial
Wipes
A.
First­
Year
Cost:
B.
Annualized
Cost:

Labor
minutes/
container
to
affix
labels>
1
1
Subtotals
1
1
Subtotals
Average
hourly
labor
wage
($/
hour)>
$
15.47
$
15.47
$
15.47
$
15.47
SQGs
LQGs
SQGs
LQGs
A.
If
Plastic
Bag
Transport
Containers
Number
of
labels
per
container>
1
1
1
1
1
Printing
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
$
672
$
280
$
952
$
672
$
280
$
952
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
$
920
$
223
$
1,143
$
920
$
223
$
1,143
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
$
3,211
$
431
$
3,642
$
3,211
$
431
$
3,642
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
$
2,037
$
121
$
2,158
$
2,037
$
121
$
2,158
6
Electronics
&
Computers
$
740
$
537
$
1,276
$
740
$
537
$
1,276
7
Transportation
Eqpt
$
627
$
308
$
935
$
627
$
308
$
935
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
$
1,088
$
71
$
1,159
$
1,088
$
71
$
1,159
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
$
2,492
$
454
$
2,946
$
2,492
$
454
$
2,946
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
$
8,562
$
19
$
8,580
$
8,562
$
19
$
8,580
13
Military
Bases
$
28
$
34
$
63
$
28
$
34
$
63
National
Totals
=
$
20,376
$
2,479
$
22,855
$
20,376
$
2,479
$
22,855
B.
If
Metal
Drum
Transport
Containers
Number
of
labels
per
container>
3
3
3
3
1
Printing
$
4,752
$
623
$
5,376
$
1,083
$
142
$
1,225
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
$
1,028
$
428
$
1,456
$
234
$
97
$
332
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
$
1,407
$
341
$
1,748
$
321
$
78
$
398
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
$
4,910
$
659
$
5,570
$
1,119
$
150
$
1,269
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
$
3,115
$
186
$
3,301
$
710
$
42
$
752
6
Electronics
&
Computers
$
1,131
$
821
$
1,952
$
258
$
187
$
445
7
Transportation
Eqpt
$
958
$
472
$
1,430
$
218
$
107
$
326
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
$
1,663
$
109
$
1,772
$
379
$
25
$
404
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
$
3,811
$
695
$
4,506
$
869
$
158
$
1,027
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
$
2,410
$
370
$
2,780
$
549
$
84
$
634
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
$
626
$
120
$
746
$
143
$
27
$
170
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
$
13,092
$
29
$
13,121
$
2,984
$
7
$
2,991
13
Military
Bases
$
43
$
53
$
96
$
10
$
12
$
22
National
Totals
=
$
38,947
$
4,905
$
43,852
$
8,877
$
1,118
$
9,995
150
Impact
Element
#
3B
AVOIDED
RCRA
MANIFEST
COST
FOR
SOLVENT­
CONTAMINATED
DISPOSABLE
WIPES
(
Estimate
Based
on
RCRA
Haz
Waste
Storage
Limit
w/
o
Permit
(
40
CFR
262.30)):
DISPOSABLE
INDUSTRIAL
WIPES:

Item
Sub­
sector
A.
Annual
spent
wipes
containers
generated:
B.
Nr.
containers
per
month
per
facility:
C.
Nr.
containers
per
RCRA
limit/
facility:
D.
Nr.
truckloads
per
RCRA
period:
E.
Nr.
annual
truckloads
(
shipments):
F.
Avoided
RCRA
manifest
cost:

34
34
<
Avg
contr
gals
RCRA
storage
limit
months>
6
3
40
40
<
average
containers
per
truck
$
192
$
199
<
avg
cost
per
manifest
SQGs
LQGs
Totals
SQGs
LQGs
SQGs
LQGs
SQGs
LQGs
SQGs
LQGs
Total
SQGs
LQGs
Totals
1
Printing
14,909
1,956
16,865
0.6
5.4
3.5
16.2
1
1
4,316
121
4,436
$
828,650
$
23,985
$
852,635
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
5,833
2,426
8,259
3.1
12.7
18.8
38.0
1
1
311
64
375
$
59,655
$
12,720
$
72,375
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
7,980
1,936
9,916
3.2
12.9
19.1
38.6
1
1
418
50
468
$
80,269
$
9,983
$
90,252
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
27,859
3,741
31,601
3.1
12.4
18.4
37.2
1
1
1,516
101
1,617
$
291,086
$
20,042
$
311,128
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
17,673
1,054
18,727
3.9
16.0
23.6
48.0
1
2
748
44
792
$
143,657
$
8,747
$
152,404
6
Electronics
&
Computers
6,417
4,656
11,073
7.5
30.3
44.8
91.0
2
3
286
154
440
$
54,964
$
30,556
$
85,520
7
Transportation
Eqpt
5,437
2,675
8,112
2.9
11.8
17.4
35.3
1
1
312
76
388
$
59,853
$
15,084
$
74,937
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
9,436
619
10,056
3.1
12.6
18.6
37.8
1
1
507
16
523
$
97,266
$
3,262
$
100,527
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
21,622
3,942
25,564
2.9
11.9
17.7
35.8
1
1
1,223
110
1,333
$
234,798
$
21,924
$
256,722
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
7,562
1,161
8,723
0.5
4.9
3.1
14.6
1
1
2,444
79
2,524
$
469,262
$
15,810
$
485,072
11
Business
Services
(
copy
shops)
1,964
378
2,342
0.5
4.7
3.0
14.1
1
1
661
27
688
$
126,859
$
5,334
$
132,193
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
74,283
162
74,445
2.8
11.4
17.1
34.1
1
1
4,352
5
4,357
$
835,593
$
944
$
836,536
13
Military
Bases
245
298
543
3.6
14.6
21.4
43.8
1
2
11
14
25
$
2,199
$
2,709
$
4,909
Subtotals
=
201,221
25,004
226,225
2.0
11.4
11.9
34.3
17,105
860
17,965
$
3,284,111
$
171,101
$
3,455,212
151
Impact
Element
3B,
5B
&
8C
(
continued)

Paperwork
Burden
Unit
Cost
($/
manifest)
for
the
RCRA
Hazardous
Waste
Manifest
Item
Entities
Which
Incur
Portions
of
Manifest
Paperwork
Cost
(
types
of
facilities
involved
in
manifest
transport
custody
chain
from
cradle­
to­
grave
movement
of
waste)
Average
Cost*
Per
Manifest
(
year
2000$)

SQG
LQG
1
Waste
generators
(
Note:
the
average
unit
cost*
for
manifesting
solvent­
contaminated
spent
industrial
wipes
is
mostly
associated
with
RCRA
small
quantity
generators
(
SQGs)
because
96.5%
of
spent
industrial
wipes
generators
are
small
companies.)
$
17
$
24
2
Waste
transporters
$
117
3
Waste
receivers
(
for
offsite
treatment,
storage,
disposal,
recycling
of
wastes)
(
Note:
average
for
small,
medium
&
large
waste
treatment,
storage,
disposal
facilities
(
TSDFs))
$
48
4
State
governments
(
Note:
as
of
2001,
24
states
print,
distribute,
and
collect
RCRA
manifests,
compared
to
48
states**
reporting
RCRA
hazardous
waste
shipments
within
or
between
states,
in
the
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
1999
RCRA
Hazardous
Waste
Biennial
Report.)
$
10
Column
total
=
$
192
$
199
Explanatory
Notes:
(
a)
Source:
Derived
from
USEPA
"
Hazardous
Waste
Manifest
Cost
Benefit
Analysis",
prepared
for
the
Office
of
Solid
Waste,
Hazardous
Waste
Identification
Division,
by
Logistics
Management
Institute
(
McLean
VA),
Oct
2000,
Table
3­
9,
page
3­
7,
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
epaoswer/
hazwaste/
gener/
manifest/
pdf/
cba­
rprt.
pdf.
!
The
unit
costs
above
include
the
following
labor
and
equipment
cost
components:
(
1)
preparing
the
manifest,
(
2)
transmitting
the
manifest
between
waste
generator,
waste
transporter,
and
final
waste
processing
(
treating,
disposing,
recycling)
facility,
(
3)
manifest
recordkeeping
for
minimum
of
three
years,
(
4)
obtaining
manifest
forms,
(
5)
submitting
copies
of
final
signed
manifests
to
state
agencies
(
required
by
some
states),
and
(
6)
employee
haz
materials
training
(
USDOT
requires
recurrent
every
three
years).
!
The
unit
costs
above
do
not
include
the
"
information
technology"
component
of
unit
cost
from
this
source
document
for
some
companies
which
may
process
manifests
electronically.
(
b)
*
The
unit
costs
in
this
table
do
not
include
allocated
costs
incurred
by
some
companies
for
purchasing,
installing,
operating,
and
maintaining
information
technology
(
computer)
systems,
which
may
be
used
in
part
or
whole,
for
manifest
processing.
As
of
1996
there
were
28
IT
vendor
companies
providing
waste
manifesting
software
systems
("
Waste
Manifest
Software
Report",
Donley
Technology,
June
1996
http://
www.
donleytech.
com/
de00014
and
http://
www.
donleytech.
com/
wmsr).
For
example,
IT
costs
for
manifest
processing
for
a
hazardous
waste
generating
company
could
include:
!
hardware:
$
5,000
desktop
computer
w/
printer
and
internet
browser
@
five­
year
annualized
cost
of
$
1,000
and
allocates
5%
of
the
annual
cost
($
1,000
x
5%
=
$
50)
to
manifest
processing,
plus:,
!
software:
Option
A:
$
495/
year
internet­
hosted
waste
management
software
service,
which
is
equivalent
to
$
10.48
in
IT
unit
cost
per
manifest,
for
processing
52
manifests
per
year
(
i.
e.
one
waste
pick­
up
manifest
processed
per
week);
(
i.
e.
($
50
hardware
+
$
495
software)/
52);
or
Option
B:
$
6,500
licensed
copy
of
waste
management
software
@
five
year
annualized
cost
$
1,300,
plus
15%
annual
software
support
cost
$
975,
results
in
$
2,325
annual
cost,
which
is
equivalent
to
$
44.71
in
IT
unit
cost
per
manifest,
for
processing
52
manifests
per
year
(
i.
e.
($
50
hardware
+
($
1,300
+
$
975)
software)/
52).
(
c)
A
total
48
of
the
56
states/
territories
reported
receiving
waste
shipments
(
within
plus
out­
of­
state
shipments)
in
the
1999
Biennial
Report.
However,
final
waste
destinations
(
waste
receipts)
are
concentrated
in
only
a
few
states:
the
top­
5
waste
receiving
states
(
OH,
TX,
MI,
IN,
CA)
account
for
46%
(
3.01
of
the
6.55
million
tons
received
in
1999).
152
Impact
Element
5A
LABOR
COST
FOR
DECANTING
SPENT
SOLVENT
WIPES
ACCUMULATION
CONTAINERS
Item
Subsector
or
Industry
Percent
accumulation
containers
needing
decanting
Annual
Labor
Hours*
Annual
Labor
Cost
5
5
<
Minutes
per
container
to
decant
$
15
$
15
<$/
hour
SQGs
LQGs
Totals
SQGs
LQGs
Totals
Disposable
Wipes:
1
Printing
100%
256
34
290
$
3,960
$
520
$
4,480
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
50%
28
12
39
$
428
$
178
$
606
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
50%
38
9
47
$
586
$
142
$
728
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
50%
132
18
150
$
2,046
$
275
$
2,321
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
50%
84
5
89
$
1,298
$
77
$
1,375
6
Electronics
&
Computers
50%
30
22
53
$
471
$
342
$
813
7
Transportation
Eqpt
50%
26
13
39
$
399
$
196
$
596
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
50%
45
3
48
$
693
$
45
$
738
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
50%
103
19
121
$
1,588
$
289
$
1,877
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
100%
130
20
150
$
2,009
$
308
$
2,317
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
100%
34
6
40
$
522
$
100
$
622
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
50%
353
1
353
$
5,455
$
12
$
5,467
13
Military
Bases
50%
1
1
3
$
18
$
22
$
40
Disposable
wipes
subtotals
=
1,259
162
1,421
$
19,473
$
2,508
$
21,981
Reusable
Wipes:
1
Printing
100%
135,032
8,446
143,478
$
2,088,752
$
130,654
$
2,219,406
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
50%
5,035
1,348
6,383
$
77,888
$
20,853
$
98,741
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
50%
6,888
1,076
7,964
$
106,546
$
16,641
$
123,187
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
50%
24,053
2,080
26,134
$
372,071
$
32,179
$
404,250
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
50%
15,259
583
15,843
$
236,041
$
9,021
$
245,062
6
Electronics
&
Computers
50%
5,545
2,583
8,128
$
85,778
$
39,949
$
125,727
7
Transportation
Eqpt
50%
4,690
1,485
6,175
$
72,554
$
22,966
$
95,520
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
50%
8,148
343
8,492
$
126,045
$
5,313
$
131,359
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
50%
18,663
2,189
20,852
$
288,688
$
33,860
$
322,548
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
100%
68,456
4,984
73,440
$
1,058,921
$
77,090
$
1,136,011
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
100%
17,804
1,618
19,422
$
275,398
$
25,027
$
300,425
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
50%
64,128
91
64,219
$
991,973
$
1,407
$
993,380
13
Military
Bases
50%
212
164
376
$
3,284
$
2,539
$
5,823
Reusable
wipes
subtotals
=
373,914
26,990
400,905
$
5,783,940
$
417,500
$
6,201,440
*
Annual
labor
hours
estimated
in
this
table
by
multiplying
the
percentage
of
non­"
dry"
wipes
containers
needing
decanting,
by
the
number
of
containers
estimated
for
Impact
Element
2.
153
Impact
Element
#
5B
COST
TO
SPENT
WIPES
GENERATORS
TO
MANAGE
SPENT
SOLVENT
"
FREE
LIQUIDS"
RECOVERED
FROM
ON­
SITE
GENERATOR
ACCUMULATION
CONTAINERS
Size
of
reference
container
(
gallons)
=
10
21
B.
Gallons
Solvent
Captured
by
Decanting
C.
Fuel
Blender
Cost
($/
year):
>
If
RCRA
"
haz
waste"
blending
D.
Net
Cost
Solvent
Recycling:
>
If
RCRA
"
haz
waste"
recycling
Spent
disposable
wipes/
container
=
505
1,060
Item
Sub­
sector
A.
Wipes
Accumulation
Containers
Filled/
Year
Avg
gals
free
liquids
per
contr
SQGs
LQGs
Subtotals
$
0.91
$
0.91
<
$/
gal
($
1.55)
($
1.55)
<
$/
gal
SQGs
LQGs
Subtotals
SQGs
LQGs
Subtotals
SQGs
LQGs
Subtotals
DISPOSABLE
INDUSTRIAL
WIPES:
1
Printing
3,072
403
3,475
5
2,793
769
3,562
$
2,550
$
703
$
3,252
($
2,065)
($
569)
($
2,634)
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
665
276
941
0.5
60
53
113
$
55
$
48
$
103
($
45)
($
39)
($
84)
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
909
221
1,130
0.5
83
42
125
$
75
$
38
$
114
($
61)
($
31)
($
92)
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
3,174
426
3,601
0.5
289
81
370
$
263
$
74
$
338
($
213)
($
60)
($
274)
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
2,014
120
2,134
0.5
183
23
206
$
167
$
21
$
188
($
135)
($
17)
($
152)
6
Electronics
&
Computers
731
530
1,262
0.5
66
101
168
$
61
$
92
$
153
($
49)
($
75)
($
124)
7
Transportation
Eqpt
619
305
924
0.5
56
58
115
$
51
$
53
$
105
($
42)
($
43)
($
85)
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
1,075
71
1,146
0.5
98
13
111
$
89
$
12
$
102
($
72)
($
10)
($
82)
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
2,464
449
2,913
0.5
224
86
310
$
204
$
78
$
283
($
166)
($
63)
($
229)
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
1,558
239
1,797
5
1,417
457
1,873
$
1,293
$
417
$
1,710
($
1,047)
($
338)
($
1,385)
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
405
78
483
5
368
149
517
$
336
$
136
$
472
($
272)
($
110)
($
382)
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
8,464
18
8,482
0.5
769
4
773
$
702
$
3
$
706
($
569)
($
3)
($
571)
13
Military
Bases
28
34
62
0.5
3
6
9
$
2
$
6
$
8
($
2)
($
5)
($
7)

Disposable
sub­
totals
=
25,178
3,171
28,349
6,409
1,843
8,251
Annual
cost
=
$
7,533
Annual
cost
=
($
6,100)

Ton
equivalent
>
32
Size
of
reference
container
(
gallons)
=
10
21
B.
Gallons
Solvent
Captured
by
Decanting
C.
Fuel
Blender
Cost
($/
year):
>
If
RCRA
"
haz
waste"
blending
D.
Net
Cost
Solvent
Recycling:
>
If
RCRA
"
haz
waste"
recycling
Spent
reusable
wipes/
container
=
175
367
%
of
wipes
not
accumulated
in
containers
=
50%
50%

Item
Sub­
sector
A.
Wipes
Accumulation
Containers
Filled/
Year
Avg
gals
free
liquids
per
container
SQGs
LQGs
Subtotals
$
0.91
$
0.91
<
$/
gal
($
0.74)
($
0.74)
<
$/
gal
SQGs
LQGs
Subtotals
SQGs
LQGs
Subtotals
SQGs
LQGs
Subtotals
REUSABLE
INDUSTRIAL
WIPES:
1
Printing
1,620,379
101,357
1,721,736
5
1,473,072
193,500
1,666,571
$
1,344,915
$
176,665
$
1,521,580
($
1,089,091)
($
143,061)
($
1,232,152)
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
120,846
32,353
153,200
0.5
10,986
6,177
17,163
$
10,030
$
5,639
$
15,669
($
8,122)
($
4,567)
($
12,689)
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
165,309
25,820
191,128
0.5
15,028
4,929
19,957
$
13,721
$
4,500
$
18,221
($
11,111)
($
3,644)
($
14,755)
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
577,279
49,926
627,206
0.5
52,480
9,531
62,011
$
47,914
$
8,702
$
56,616
($
38,800)
($
7,047)
($
45,847)
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
366,225
13,996
380,220
0.5
33,293
2,672
35,965
$
30,397
$
2,439
$
32,836
($
24,615)
($
1,975)
($
26,590)
6
Electronics
&
Computers
133,086
61,982
195,069
0.5
12,099
11,833
23,932
$
11,046
$
10,803
$
21,850
($
8,945)
($
8,748)
($
17,694)
7
Transportation
Eqpt
112,570
35,632
148,202
0.5
10,234
6,803
17,036
$
9,343
$
6,211
$
15,554
($
7,566)
($
5,029)
($
12,595)
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
195,563
8,244
203,807
0.5
17,778
1,574
19,352
$
16,232
$
1,437
$
17,669
($
13,144)
($
1,164)
($
14,308)
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
447,908
52,535
500,443
0.5
40,719
10,029
50,748
$
37,176
$
9,157
$
46,333
($
30,105)
($
7,415)
($
37,520)
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
821,473
59,804
881,277
5
746,793
114,171
860,964
$
681,822
$
104,238
$
786,060
($
552,129)
($
84,410)
($
636,540)
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
213,644
19,415
233,059
5
194,222
37,065
231,287
$
177,325
$
33,841
$
211,165
($
143,595)
($
27,404)
($
170,998)
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
1,539,074
2,183
1,541,258
0.5
139,916
417
140,333
$
127,743
$
381
$
128,124
($
103,444)
($
308)
($
103,753)
13
Military
Bases
5,096
3,939
9,035
0.5
463
752
1,215
$
423
$
687
$
1,110
($
343)
($
556)
($
898)

Reusable
sub­
totals
=
6,318,451
467,187
6,785,638
2,747,083
399,452
3,146,535
Annual
cost
=
$
2,872,787
Annual
cost
=
($
2,326,339)
Ton
equivalent
>
12,271
154
Impact
Element
#
5C
INITIAL
YEAR
EVALUATION
OF
SPENT
SOLVENT
WIPES
CONTAINERS
TO
DETERMINE
ELIGIBILITY
WITH
THE
5
GRAM
"
DRY"
STANDARD:
ONE­
TIME
CONTAINER
SAMPLING
UNIT
COST
PER­
FACILITY
Disposable
Wipes
Item
SQG
LQG
A.
Average
Number
Containers
Sampled
Per
Facility:
1
Average
spent
solvent
wipes
generated
per
week>
158
1,485
2
Avg
size
of
wipes
container
(
gal)>
10
21
3
Avg
wipes
per
container>
505
1,060
4
Nr
weeks
to
fill
one
container>
3.2
0.7
5
Nr.
containers
filled
per
year*>
15.7
70.1
B.
Average
Labor
Time
Needed
To
Sample
Containers
Per
Facility:
6
Number
containers
sampled
in
initial
year**>
2
11
7
Number
wipes
sampled
per
container>
25
25
8
Avg
minutes
to
weigh
each
sample
wipe>
2
2
9
Total
sampling
minutes
per
container>
50
50
10
Total
sampling
hours
per
facility>
2.0
8.8
11
Sampling
task
mobilization/
demobilization
hours***>
2.2
9.6
12
Total
sampling
hours
(
items
10+
11)>
4.1
18.4
C.
Average
Labor
Time
for
Recordkeeping
of
Samples
Per
Facility:
13
Recordkeeping
hours****>
0.4
1.8
D.
Average
Container
Sampling
&
Recordkeeping
Cost
Per
Facility:
14
Total
hours
for
sampling
&
recordkeeping
(
items
12+
13)>
4.5
20.2
15
Avg
labor
hourly
wage
rate
(
technical
labor)>
$
21.58
$
21.58
16
Labor
cost
for
total
hours
(
item
14
x
15)>
$
98
$
437
Explanatory
Notes:
(
a)
*
Item
5
based
on
facility
operating
weeks
per
year
=
50
(
b)
**
Item
6
based
on
sampling
containers
accumulated
in
initial
year
according
to
sampling
rate
=
15%.
(
c)
Items
7
&
8
number
of,
and
time
for,
wipes
sampled
based
on
OSW­
HWID
judgement,
based
on
fieldtrips.
(
d)
***
Item
11
based
on
assumed
percentage
of
subtotal
hours
in
item
10
=
10%
(
e)
****
Item
13
based
on
assumed
percentage
of
total
hours
in
item
12
=
10%
155
Impact
Element
5C
(
continued)

DISPOSABLE
WIPES
GENERATORS:
INITIAL
ASSESSMENT
COST
TO
DETERMINE
COMPLIANCE
WITH
5
GRAM
"
DRY"
STANDARD
Item
Sub­
sector
A.
Facilities
Using
Solvent
Wipes:
B.
%
of
Facilities
which
choose
to
sample
C.
Sampling
Cost
(
initial
year):

SQGs
LQGs
Subtotals
SQGs
LQGs
Subtotals
A.
IF
GENERATOR
FACILITIES
ASSESS
INDIVIDUALLY:
Avg
samping
cost
per
facility
(
see
prior
spreadsheet)
>
$
98
$
437
1
Printing
2,158
30
2,188
0%
$
0
$
0
$
0
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
155
16
171
100%
$
15,159
$
6,977
$
22,136
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
209
13
222
100%
$
20,397
$
5,476
$
25,873
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
758
25
783
100%
$
73,969
$
10,993
$
84,961
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
374
5
380
100%
$
36,505
$
2,399
$
38,904
6
Electronics
&
Computers
72
13
84
100%
$
6,984
$
5,587
$
12,570
7
Transportation
Eqpt
156
19
175
100%
$
15,209
$
8,274
$
23,483
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
253
4
257
100%
$
24,717
$
1,789
$
26,505
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
611
28
639
100%
$
59,665
$
12,025
$
71,690
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
1,222
20
1,242
0%
$
0
$
0
$
0
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
330
7
337
0%
$
0
$
0
$
0
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
2,176
1
2,177
100%
$
212,335
$
518
$
212,853
13
Military
Bases
6
2
7
100%
$
559
$
743
$
1,302
Disposable
Sub­
Totals
=
8,481
182
8,663
$
465,499
$
54,779
$
520,278
Average
annualized
cost
=
$
69,230
Subtotal
sampling
facilities
=
4,896
Avg
per
facility
=
$
106
B.
IF
INDEPENDENT
ORGANIZATION
ASSESSES
SUB­
SECTORS
COLLECTIVELY
Avg
samping
cost
per
facility
(
see
prior
spreadsheet)
>
$
98
$
437
1
Printing
2,158
30
2,188
10%
$
21,057
$
1,316
$
22,373
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
155
16
171
10%
$
1,516
$
698
$
2,214
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
209
13
222
10%
$
2,040
$
548
$
2,587
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
758
25
783
10%
$
7,397
$
1,099
$
8,496
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
374
5
380
10%
$
3,651
$
240
$
3,890
6
Electronics
&
Computers
72
13
84
10%
$
698
$
559
$
1,257
7
Transportation
Eqpt
156
19
175
10%
$
1,521
$
827
$
2,348
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
253
4
257
10%
$
2,472
$
179
$
2,651
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
611
28
639
10%
$
5,967
$
1,203
$
7,169
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
1,222
20
1,242
10%
$
11,925
$
867
$
12,792
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
330
7
337
10%
$
3,224
$
293
$
3,516
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
2,176
1
2,177
10%
$
21,233
$
52
$
21,285
13
Military
Bases
6
2
7
10%
$
56
$
74
$
130
Disposables
Sub­
Totals
=
8,481
182
8,663
$
82,755
$
7,953
$
90,708
Average
annualized
cost
=
$
12,070
Subtotal
sampling
facilities
=
866
Avg
per
facility
=
$
105
156
Impact
Element
8A
AVOIDED
COST
FOR
RCRA
HAZARDOUS
WASTE
DISPOSAL
OF
SPENT
DISPOSABLE
WIPES
A.
ANNUAL
RCRA
SOLVENT
WASTE
SPENT
DISPOSABLE
WIPES
QUANTITIES:
A1.
Annual
Solvent
Industrial
Wipes
A2.
Annual
Wipes
Weight
(
tons)
A3.
Annual
containers
A4.
RCRA
Subtitle
C
Incineration
Cost
34
34
<
Avg
contr
gals
0.054
0.054
<
lbs/
wipe
1144
1144
<
Wipes/
contnr
$
149
$
149
<
Avg
$/
drum*
SQGs
LQGs
Totals
SQGs
LQGs
Totals
SQGs
LQGs
Totals
SQGs
LQGs
Totals
Printer>
1
Printing
17,050,706
2,237,036
19,287,742
461
60
521
14,909
1,956
16,865
$
2,221,471
$
291,455
$
2,512,926
Non­
printer>
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
6,670,343
2,774,685
9,445,028
180
75
255
5,833
2,426
8,259
$
869,053
$
361,503
$
1,230,557
Non­
printer>
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
9,126,711
2,213,612
11,340,323
247
60
306
7,980
1,936
9,916
$
1,189,084
$
288,403
$
1,477,487
Non­
printer>
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
31,860,977
4,278,850
36,139,827
861
116
977
27,859
3,741
31,601
$
4,151,045
$
557,475
$
4,708,520
Non­
printer>
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
20,211,978
1,205,430
21,417,408
546
33
579
17,673
1,054
18,727
$
2,633,341
$
157,051
$
2,790,392
Non­
printer>
6
Electronics
&
Computers
7,338,580
5,324,609
12,663,188
198
144
342
6,417
4,656
11,073
$
956,115
$
693,723
$
1,649,838
Non­
printer>
7
Transportation
Eqpt
6,217,398
3,059,700
9,277,098
168
83
251
5,437
2,675
8,112
$
810,041
$
398,637
$
1,208,678
Non­
printer>
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
10,791,594
708,371
11,499,965
292
19
311
9,436
619
10,056
$
1,405,995
$
92,291
$
1,498,286
Non­
printer>
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
24,728,040
4,507,886
29,235,926
668
122
790
21,622
3,942
25,564
$
3,221,722
$
587,315
$
3,809,037
Printer>
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
8,648,444
1,327,236
9,975,680
234
36
270
7,562
1,161
8,723
$
1,126,773
$
172,921
$
1,299,693
Printer>
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
2,245,659
432,263
2,677,922
61
12
72
1,964
378
2,342
$
292,578
$
56,318
$
348,896
Non­
printer>
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
84,952,959
185,106
85,138,065
2,296
5
2,301
74,283
162
74,445
$
11,068,196
$
24,117
$
11,092,312
Non­
printer>
13
Military
Bases
280,243
341,166
621,409
8
9
17
245
298
543
$
36,512
$
44,449
$
80,961
Column
totals
=
230,123,632
28,595,951
258,719,583
6,220
773
6,992
201,221
25,004
226,225
$
29,981,926
$
3,725,657
$
33,707,583
B.
SAVINGS
FOR
DISPOSAL
OF
DISPOSABLE
SPENT
WIPES
AT
MUNICIPAL
COMBUSTOR:
Landfill
Disposal
In­
Eligibility
Conditions
B2.
Annual
Number
Containers
B3.
Municipal
Combustor
Cost
Estimated
%
wipes
containing
landfill­
ineligible
solvents
=
11%
Estimated
%
printer
disposable
wipes
generated
"
not
dry"
=
100%
Estimated
%
non­
printer
disposable
wipes
generated
"
not
dry"
=
50%
34
34
<
Contnr
gals
$
55
$
55
<
Avg
$/
ton
DISPOSABLE
INDUSTRIAL
WIPES:
B1.
Annual
Eligible
Solvent
Wipes
1144
1144
<
Wipes/
contnr
$
5.50
$
5.50
<
Avg
$/
drum
SQGs
LQGs
Totals
SQGs
LQGs
Totals
SQGs
LQGs
Totals
Printer>
1
Printing
17,050,706
2,237,036
19,287,742
14,909
1,956
16,865
$
82,001
$
10,758
$
92,759
Non­
printer>
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
3,688,283
1,534,228
5,222,511
3,225
1,342
4,567
$
17,738
$
7,378
$
25,116
Non­
printer>
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
5,046,501
1,223,989
6,270,490
4,413
1,070
5,483
$
24,270
$
5,886
$
30,156
Non­
printer>
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
17,617,131
2,365,937
19,983,068
15,404
2,069
17,473
$
84,725
$
11,378
$
96,103
Non­
printer>
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
11,175,962
666,528
11,842,489
9,772
583
10,355
$
53,748
$
3,205
$
56,953
Non­
printer>
0
Electronics
&
Computers
4,057,776
2,944,176
7,001,952
3,548
2,574
6,123
$
19,515
$
14,159
$
33,674
Non­
printer>
7
Transportation
Eqpt
3,437,833
1,691,823
5,129,656
3,006
1,479
4,485
$
16,533
$
8,136
$
24,670
Non­
printer>
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
5,967,077
391,685
6,358,762
5,218
342
5,560
$
28,697
$
1,884
$
30,581
Non­
printer>
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
13,673,062
2,492,579
16,165,642
11,956
2,180
14,135
$
65,757
$
11,987
$
77,744
Printer>
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
8,648,444
1,327,236
9,975,680
7,562
1,161
8,723
$
41,592
$
6,383
$
47,975
Printer>
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
2,245,659
432,263
2,677,922
1,964
378
2,342
$
10,800
$
2,079
$
12,879
Non­
printer>
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
46,973,682
102,352
47,076,034
41,074
89
41,163
$
225,907
$
492
$
226,399
Non­
printer>
13
Military
Bases
154,957
188,643
343,601
135
165
300
$
745
$
907
$
1,652
Column
totals
=
139,737,074
17,598,476
157,335,550
122,187
15,388
137,575
$
672,026
$
84,635
$
756,661
C.
SAVINGS
FOR
DISPOSAL
OF
DISPOSABLE
SPENT
WIPES
AT
NON­
HAZ
WASTE
LANDFILL:
Landfill
Disposal
Eligibility
Conditions:
C2.
Annual
Number
Containers:
C3.
Non­
Haz
Waste
Landfill
Cost
C4.
Avoided
Dispsl
Cost
(
B1­
C3­
D3­
A6)
Estimated
%
spent
wipes
contaminated
with
landfill­
eligible
solvents
=
89%
Estimated
%
printer
disposable
spent
wipes
generated
"
dry"
=
0%
Estimated
%
non­
printer
disposable
spent
wipes
generated
"
dry"
=
50%
34
34
<
Contnr
gals
$
29
$
29
<
Avg
$/
ton
DISPOSABLE
INDUSTRIAL
WIPES:
C1.
Annual
Eligible
Solvent
Wipes
1144
1144
<
Wipes/
contnr
$
2.90
$
2.90
<
Avg
$/
drum
SQGs
LQGs
Totals
SQGs
LQGs
Totals
SQGs
LQGs
Totals
SQGs
LQGs
Totals
Printer>
1
Printing
0
0
0
0
0
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
2,157,762
$
283,096
$
2,440,859
Non­
printer>
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
2,982,060
1,240,458
4,222,517
2,608
1,085
3,692
$
7,562
$
3,146
$
10,707
$
850,910
$
353,956
$
1,204,865
Non­
printer>
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
4,080,210
989,623
5,069,832
3,568
865
4,433
$
10,346
$
2,509
$
12,856
$
1,164,259
$
282,382
$
1,446,641
Non­
printer>
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
14,243,846
1,912,913
16,156,759
12,455
1,673
14,128
$
36,119
$
4,851
$
40,970
$
4,064,381
$
545,836
$
4,610,217
Non­
printer>
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
9,036,016
538,902
9,574,919
7,901
471
8,372
$
22,913
$
1,367
$
24,280
$
2,578,363
$
153,772
$
2,732,135
Non­
printer>
6
Electronics
&
Computers
3,280,803
2,380,433
5,661,236
2,869
2,081
4,950
$
8,319
$
6,036
$
14,356
$
936,154
$
679,240
$
1,615,394
Non­
printer>
7
Transportation
Eqpt
2,779,565
1,367,877
4,147,442
2,430
1,196
3,627
$
7,048
$
3,469
$
10,517
$
793,129
$
390,314
$
1,183,443
Non­
printer>
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
4,824,516
316,686
5,141,202
4,219
277
4,495
$
12,234
$
803
$
13,037
$
1,376,642
$
90,364
$
1,467,006
Non­
printer>
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
11,054,978
2,015,306
13,070,284
9,667
1,762
11,429
$
28,033
$
5,110
$
33,143
$
3,154,460
$
575,053
$
3,729,513
Printer>
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
0
0
0
0
0
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
1,094,458
$
167,961
$
1,262,420
Printer>
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
0
0
0
0
0
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
284,188
$
54,703
$
338,890
Non­
printer>
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
37,979,277
82,754
38,062,031
33,209
72
33,282
$
96,307
$
210
$
96,517
$
10,837,118
$
23,613
$
10,860,731
Non­
printer>
13
Military
Bases
125,286
152,522
277,809
110
133
243
$
318
$
387
$
704
$
35,750
$
43,521
$
79,271
Column
totals
=
90,386,558
10,997,475
101,384,033
79,034
9,616
88,651
$
229,200
$
27,887
$
257,087
$
29,327,573
$
3,643,812
$
32,971,385
%
of
total
disposable
solvent
wipes
=
39%
38%
39%

Total
C
COMBUST
+
D
LANDFILL
=
230,123,632
28,595,951
258,719,583
201,221
25,004
226,225
$
901,226
$
112,522
$
1,013,748
*
Subtitle
C
hazardous
waste
incineration
unit
cost
($/
drum)
is
average
for
drummed
halogen
organics
&
drummed
non­
halogen
organics,
from
Sept
2000
national
cost
survey
by
Environmental
Technology
Council
(
http://
www.
etc.
org/
costsurvey4.
cfm).
157
Impact
Element
8A
(
continued)

Summary
of
Rates
(
Tipping
Fees)
for
Solid
Waste
Managed
in
Non­
Hazardous
Waste
Facilities
in
the
USA
Source:
"
Solid
Waste
Price
Index"
August
1997
regular
posted
gate
rates
($/
ton),
Solid
Waste
Digest,
Vol.
7,
Nr.
8.,
Aug
1997
Item
State
Incinerators
(
Combustors)
Landfills
Nr.
of
facilities
Intake
TPD
Minimum
($/
ton)
Average
($/
ton)
Maximum
($/
ton)
Average
as
%
above
min
in
range
Nr.
of
facilities
Intake
TPD
Minimum
($/
ton)
Average
($/
ton)
Maximum
($/
ton)
Average
as
%
above
min
in
range
1
AL
1
550
$
39.90
$
39.90
$
39.90
11
15,680
$
23.00
$
28.66
$
45.00
26%
2
AK
0
1
1,710
$
27.21
$
27.21
$
27.21
3
AZ
0
5
12,300
$
16.25
$
20.22
$
26.25
40%
4
AR
0
2
5,830
$
20.50
$
22.79
5
CA
4
4,590
$
27.75
$
35.75
$
49.75
36%
41
124,330
$
17.57
$
28.40
$
60.00
26%
6
CO
0
7
17,250
$
13.83
7
CT
4
6,440
$
51.00
$
65.66
$
84.00
44%
0
8
DE
0
2
2,130
$
56.91
$
58.50
9
FL
9
17,470
$
23.00
$
57.66
$
79.00
62%
23
33,340
$
23.00
$
44.16
$
84.15
35%
10
GA
0
11
28,920
$
29.00
$
30.05
$
39.50
10%
11
HI
1
2,000
$
55.25
$
55.25
$
55.25
0
12
ID
0
1
3,650
$
24.44
$
24.44
$
24.44
13
IL
1
2,000
$
56.75
$
56.75
$
56.75
21
46,780
$
10.05
$
29.80
$
50.00
49%
14
IN
1
2,360
$
25.00
$
25.00
$
25.00
15
32,020
$
20.00
$
27.91
$
34.60
54%
15
IA
0
4
8,930
$
29.00
$
31.35
$
35.00
39%
16
KS
0
6
11,660
$
21.25
$
24.75
$
36.00
24%
17
KY
0
8
14,620
$
25.00
$
28.12
$
33.00
39%
18
LA
0
7
10,800
$
13.47
$
20.85
$
27.50
53%
19
ME
2
2,600
$
40.00
$
45.50
$
55.00
37%
0
20
MD
2
4,100
$
44.00
$
56.19
$
67.50
52%
4
9,370
$
45.00
$
49.95
$
59.00
35%
21
MA
6
8,930
$
50.00
$
58.20
$
76.00
32%
5
8,670
$
35.00
$
56.96
$
110.00
29%
22
MI
2
4,970
$
44.99
$
59.51
15
28,990
$
25.50
$
31.39
$
55.00
20%
23
MN
2
3,320
$
60.00
$
92.26
4
4,840
$
52.00
$
57.11
$
70.63
27%
24
MS
0
4
7,200
$
19.98
$
22.29
$
30.00
23%
25
MO
0
4
12,220
$
18.50
$
25.13
26
MT
0
2
2,960
$
16.64
27
NE
0
2
6,410
$
23.46
28
NV
0
3
11,660
$
10.59
29
NH
1
900
$
42.48
$
42.48
$
42.48
2
5,370
$
50.00
$
51.58
$
56.00
26%
30
NJ
4
7,140
$
72.75
$
82.76
$
101.32
35%
5
9,530
$
49.50
$
68.25
$
94.01
42%
31
NM
0
4
8,600
$
19.70
32
NY
8
15,330
$
53.78
$
67.72
$
85.00
45%
11
24,820
$
40.00
$
89.40
33
NC
0
8
22,060
$
25.00
$
29.57
$
37.00
38%
34
ND
0
1
2,000
$
23.83
$
23.83
$
23.83
35
OH
2
2,790
$
39.50
$
39.50
$
39.50
19
42,210
$
20.00
$
30.46
$
47.50
38%
36
OK
1
1,370
$
42.00
$
42.00
$
42.00
4
11,040
$
19.81
37
OR
1
650
$
67.23
$
67.23
$
67.23
5
11,700
$
25.00
$
27.86
$
45.00
14%
38
PA
5
9,080
$
56.00
$
60.63
$
69.00
36%
31
68,730
$
26.00
$
48.99
$
100.00
31%
39
RI
0
1
3,490
$
39.50
$
39.50
$
39.50
40
SC
1
820
$
51.50
$
51.50
$
51.50
7
14,660
$
20.00
$
29.28
$
47.00
34%
41
SD
0
1
1,930
$
27.65
$
27.65
$
27.65
42
TN
1
1,330
$
36.98
$
36.98
$
36.98
6
17,270
$
26.50
$
28.82
$
34.65
28%
Item
State
Incinerators
(
Combustors)
Landfills
Nr.
of
facilities
Intake
TPD
Minimum
($/
ton)
Average
($/
ton)
Maximum
($/
ton)
Average
as
%
above
min
in
range
Nr.
of
facilities
Intake
TPD
Minimum
($/
ton)
Average
($/
ton)
Maximum
($/
ton)
Average
as
%
above
min
in
range
158
43
TX
0
41
68,010
$
15.00
$
23.15
$
56.00
20%
44
UT
0
5
18,000
$
19.00
$
28.31
$
35.00
58%
45
VA
3
5,730
$
25.00
$
37.72
$
45.05
63%
14
33,610
$
28.50
$
39.33
$
53.00
44%
46
WA
1
1,710
$
97.00
$
97.00
$
97.00
6
12,520
$
20.66
$
45.43
$
80.00
42%
47
WV
0
1
5,430
$
40.31
$
40.31
$
40.31
48
WI
0
15
21,690
$
18.50
$
32.51
$
46.00
51%

Summary
Statistics:
Total
=
63
106,180
395
864,940
Minimum=
$
23.00
$
25.00
$
25.00
32%
$
10.05
$
10.59
$
23.83
10%

Maximum=
$
97.00
$
97.00
$
101.32
63%
$
52.00
$
89.40
$
110.00
58%

Simple
mean
=
$
48.04
$
54.72
$
60.21
55%
$
26.60
$
33.26
$
49.12
30%
TPD­
wgtd
mean
=
$
43.28
$
58.39
$
68.44
60%
$
27.58
$
46.59
$
56.51
66%

Median=
$
47.00
$
55.25
$
56.00
92%
$
24.72
$
28.66
$
45.00
19%

Median
as
%
between
min
and
max
=
41%
Median
as
%
between
min
and
max
=
19%

Explanatory
Notes:
(
a)
Note:
This
table
excludes
cost
data
for
facilities
with
tip
fees
reported
as
(
a)
$/
CY
basis,
(
b)
"
no
charge"
(
i.
e.
$
0/
ton),
and
(
c)
"
unknown".
(
b)
Facility
count
in
each
column
in
this
table
represents
all
facilities
listed
in
the
source
document,
regardless
of
cost
basis.
(
c)
TPD
=
tons
per
day;
multiply
by
250
days/
year
(
5
days/
week
x
50
wks/
year),
to
312
days/
year
(
6days/
week
x
52
wks/
year),
for
annual
tons.
(
d)
Solid
Waste
Digest
publishing
company
Chartwell
Information
Publishers
(
Alexandria
VA)
collected
data
by
phone
survey
of
facilities.
Prices
above
represent
commercial
(
i.
e.
non­
residential)
rates,
and
include
any
sales
taxes,
surcharges,
state
licensing
fees,
or
permit
fees.
159
Impact
Elements
8B
&
8C
ESTIMATED
COST
TO
INDUSTRIAL
LAUNDRIES
FOR
DECANTING
&
MANAGING
PERCOLATED
SPENT
SOLVENT
"
FREE
LIQUIDS"
FROM
REUSABLE
WIPES
TRANSPORT
CONTAINERS
A.
Annual
Quantity
of
Percolated
Spent
Solvent
"
Free
Liquids"
Recovered
from
Transport
Containers:

REUSABLE
WIPES:
A1.
Annual
nr.
wipes
laundered:
A2.
Nr.
container
equivalents:
A3.
Annual
nr.
containers
w/
free
liquids:
A4.
Annual
gallons
solvent
free
liquids:
960
960
<
wipes/
contnr
%
containers
free
liquids
SQGs
LQGs
Totals
Gallons
per
55­
gal
contnr
SQGs
LQGs
Totals
Item
Sub­
sector
SQGs
LQGs
Totals
SQGs
LQGs
Totals
1
Printing
565,659,591
74,303,831
639,963,423
589,229
77,400
666,629
5.0%
29,461
3,870
33,331
3
88,384
11,610
99,994
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
42,186,313
23,718,009
65,904,321
43,944
24,706
68,650
2.5%
1,099
618
1,716
1
1,099
618
1,716
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
57,707,802
18,928,159
76,635,961
60,112
19,717
79,829
2.5%
1,503
493
1,996
1
1,503
493
1,996
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
201,522,873
36,600,626
238,123,499
209,920
38,126
248,045
2.5%
5,248
953
6,201
1
5,248
953
6,201
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
127,845,668
10,260,172
138,105,840
133,173
10,688
143,860
2.5%
3,329
267
3,597
1
3,329
267
3,597
6
Electronics
&
Computers
46,459,279
45,438,499
91,897,779
48,395
47,332
95,727
2.5%
1,210
1,183
2,393
1
1,210
1,183
2,393
7
Transportation
Eqpt
39,297,004
26,121,783
65,418,787
40,934
27,210
68,145
2.5%
1,023
680
1,704
1
1,023
680
1,704
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
68,269,281
6,043,292
74,312,573
71,114
6,295
77,409
2.5%
1,778
157
1,935
1
1,778
157
1,935
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
156,360,483
38,513,024
194,873,507
162,876
40,118
202,993
2.5%
4,072
1,003
5,075
1
4,072
1,003
5,075
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
286,768,691
43,841,615
330,610,306
298,717
45,668
344,386
5.0%
14,936
2,283
17,219
3
44,808
6,850
51,658
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
74,581,196
14,233,053
88,814,248
77,689
14,826
92,515
5.0%
3,884
741
4,626
3
11,653
2,224
13,877
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
537,276,832
1,600,626
538,877,458
559,663
1,667
561,331
2.5%
13,992
42
14,033
1
13,992
42
14,033
13
Military
Bases
1,778,937
2,887,726
4,666,663
1,853
3,008
4,861
2.5%
46
75
122
1
46
75
122
Subtotals
=
2,205,713,949
342,490,416
2,548,204,365
2,297,619
356,761
2,654,380
3.5%
81,581
12,366
93,948
2.2
178,145
26,156
204,301
B.
Annual
Cost
for
Management
of
Decanted
"
Free
Liquids":
55­
gal
container
eqvlnts
=
3,715
REUSABLE
WIPES:
B1.
Cost
of
Haz
Fuel
Blending:
B2.
Cost
of
Non­
Haz
Fuel
Blending:
B3.
Cost
of
Haz
Solvent
Recovery:
B4.
Cost
of
Non­
haz
Solvent
Recovery:
Tons
eqvltn=
797
$
0.91
$
0.91
<
$/
gal
$
0.29
$
0.29
<
$/
gal
($
0.74)
($
0.74)
<
$/
gal
($
0.74)
($
0.74)
<
$/
gal
Item
Sub­
sector
SQGs
LQGs
Totals
SQGs
LQGs
Totals
SQGs
LQGs
Totals
SQGs
LQGs
Totals
1
Printing
$
80,695
$
10,600
$
91,295
$
25,190
$
3,309
$
28,498
($
65,345)
($
8,584)
($
73,929)
($
65,345)
($
8,584)
($
73,929)
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
$
1,003
$
564
$
1,567
$
313
$
176
$
489
($
812)
($
457)
($
1,269)
($
812)
($
457)
($
1,269)
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
$
1,372
$
450
$
1,822
$
428
$
140
$
569
($
1,111)
($
364)
($
1,476)
($
1,111)
($
364)
($
1,476)
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
$
4,791
$
870
$
5,662
$
1,496
$
272
$
1,767
($
3,880)
($
705)
($
4,585)
($
3,880)
($
705)
($
4,585)
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
$
3,040
$
244
$
3,284
$
949
$
76
$
1,025
($
2,461)
($
198)
($
2,659)
($
2,461)
($
198)
($
2,659)
6
Electronics
&
Computers
$
1,105
$
1,080
$
2,185
$
345
$
337
$
682
($
895)
($
875)
($
1,769)
($
895)
($
875)
($
1,769)
7
Transportation
Eqpt
$
934
$
621
$
1,555
$
292
$
194
$
486
($
757)
($
503)
($
1,260)
($
757)
($
503)
($
1,260)
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
$
1,623
$
144
$
1,767
$
507
$
45
$
552
($
1,314)
($
116)
($
1,431)
($
1,314)
($
116)
($
1,431)
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
$
3,718
$
916
$
4,633
$
1,160
$
286
$
1,446
($
3,010)
($
742)
($
3,752)
($
3,010)
($
742)
($
3,752)
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
$
40,909
$
6,254
$
47,164
$
12,770
$
1,952
$
14,722
($
33,128)
($
5,065)
($
38,192)
($
33,128)
($
5,065)
($
38,192)
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
$
10,639
$
2,030
$
12,670
$
3,321
$
634
$
3,955
($
8,616)
($
1,644)
($
10,260)
($
8,616)
($
1,644)
($
10,260)
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
$
12,774
$
38
$
12,812
$
3,988
$
12
$
3,999
($
10,344)
($
31)
($
10,375)
($
10,344)
($
31)
($
10,375)
13
Military
Bases
$
42
$
69
$
111
$
13
$
21
$
35
($
34)
($
56)
($
90)
($
34)
($
56)
($
90)

Subtotals
=
$
162,646
$
23,880
$
186,526
$
50,771
$
7,454
$
58,226
($
131,708)
($
19,338)
($
151,046)
($
131,708)
($
19,338)
($
151,046)

C.
Annual
Labor
Cost
for
Decanting
Percolated
"
Free
Liquids"
From
Transport
Containers:
REUSABLE
WIPES:
C1.
Annual
Labor
Hours:
C2.
Annual
Labor
Cost:
5
5
<
Minutes/
contr
$
15.47
$
15.47
<$/
hour
Item
Sub­
sector
SQGs
LQGs
Totals
SQGs
LQGs
Totals
1
Printing
2,455
322
2,778
$
37,977
$
4,989
$
42,966
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
92
51
143
$
1,416
$
796
$
2,212
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
125
41
166
$
1,937
$
635
$
2,573
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
437
79
517
$
6,765
$
1,229
$
7,994
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
277
22
300
$
4,292
$
344
$
4,636
6
Electronics
&
Computers
101
99
199
$
1,560
$
1,525
$
3,085
7
Transportation
Eqpt
85
57
142
$
1,319
$
877
$
2,196
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
148
13
161
$
2,292
$
203
$
2,495
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
339
84
423
$
5,249
$
1,293
$
6,542
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
1,245
190
1,435
$
19,253
$
2,943
$
22,197
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
324
62
385
$
5,007
$
956
$
5,963
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
1,166
3
1,169
$
18,036
$
54
$
18,090
13
Military
Bases
4
6
10
$
60
$
97
$
157
Subtotals
=
6,798
1,031
7,829
$
105,163
$
15,941
$
121,103
160
Impact
Elements
8B
&
8C
(
continued)

ESTIMATED
COST
TO
WASTE
MANAGEMENT
FACILITIES
FOR
DECANTING
&
MANAGING
PERCOLATED
SPENT
SOLVENT
"
FREE
LIQUIDS"
FROM
DISPOSABLE
WIPES
TRANSPORT
CONTAINERS
A.
Annual
Quantity
of
Percolated
Spent
Solvent
"
Free
Liquids"
Recovered
from
Transport
Containers:

DISPOSABLE
WIPES:
A1.
Annual
nr.
wipes
laundered:
A2.
Nr.
container
equivalents:
A3.
Annual
nr.
containers
w/
free
liquids:
A4.
Annual
gallons
solvent
free
liquids:
2,775
2,775
<
wipes/
contnr
%
containers
free
liquids
SQGs
LQGs
Totals
Gallons
per
55­
gal
contnr
SQGs
LQGs
Totals
Item
Sub­
sector
SQGs
LQGs
Totals
SQGs
LQGs
Totals
1
Printing
17,050,706
2,237,036
19,287,742
17,761
2,330
20,091
5.0%
888
117
1,005
3
2,664
350
3,014
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
6,670,343
2,774,685
9,445,028
6,948
2,890
9,839
2.5%
174
72
246
1
174
72
246
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
9,126,711
2,213,612
11,340,323
9,507
2,306
11,813
2.5%
238
58
295
1
238
58
295
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
31,860,977
4,278,850
36,139,827
33,189
4,457
37,646
2.5%
830
111
941
1
830
111
941
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
20,211,978
1,205,430
21,417,408
21,054
1,256
22,310
2.5%
526
31
558
1
526
31
558
6
Electronics
&
Computers
7,338,580
5,324,609
12,663,188
7,644
5,546
13,191
2.5%
191
139
330
1
191
139
330
7
Transportation
Eqpt
6,217,398
3,059,700
9,277,098
6,476
3,187
9,664
2.5%
162
80
242
1
162
80
242
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
10,791,594
708,371
11,499,965
11,241
738
11,979
2.5%
281
18
299
1
281
18
299
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
24,728,040
4,507,886
29,235,926
25,758
4,696
30,454
2.5%
644
117
761
1
644
117
761
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
8,648,444
1,327,236
9,975,680
9,009
1,383
10,391
5.0%
450
69
520
3
1,351
207
1,559
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
2,245,659
432,263
2,677,922
2,339
450
2,790
5.0%
117
23
139
3
351
68
418
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
84,952,959
185,106
85,138,065
88,493
193
88,685
2.5%
2,212
5
2,217
1
2,212
5
2,217
13
Military
Bases
280,243
341,166
621,409
292
355
647
2.5%
7
9
16
1
7
9
16
Subtotals
=
230,123,632
28,595,951
258,719,583
239,712
29,787
269,500
2.8%
6,721
849
7,569
1.4
9,631
1,265
10,897
B.
Annual
Cost
for
Management
of
Decanted
"
Free
Liquids":
55­
gal
container
eqvlnts
=
198
DISPOSABLE
WIPES:
B1.
Cost
of
Haz
Fuel
Blending:
B2.
Cost
of
Non­
Haz
Fuel
Blending:
B3.
Cost
of
Haz
Solvent
Recovery:
B4.
Cost
of
Non­
haz
Solvent
Recovery:
Tons
eqvltn=
42
$
0.91
$
0.91
<
$/
gal
$
0.29
$
0.29
<
$/
gal
($
0.74)
($
0.74)
<
$/
gal
($
0.74)
($
0.74)
<
$/
gal
Item
Sub­
sector
SQGs
LQGs
Totals
SQGs
LQGs
Totals
SQGs
LQGs
Totals
SQGs
LQGs
Totals
1
Printing
$
2,432
$
319
$
2,752
$
759
$
100
$
859
($
1,970)
($
258)
($
2,228)
($
1,970)
($
258)
($
2,228)
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
$
159
$
66
$
225
$
50
$
21
$
70
($
128)
($
53)
($
182)
($
128)
($
53)
($
182)
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
$
217
$
53
$
270
$
68
$
16
$
84
($
176)
($
43)
($
218)
($
176)
($
43)
($
218)
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
$
758
$
102
$
859
$
236
$
32
$
268
($
613)
($
82)
($
696)
($
613)
($
82)
($
696)
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
$
481
$
29
$
509
$
150
$
9
$
159
($
389)
($
23)
($
412)
($
389)
($
23)
($
412)
6
Electronics
&
Computers
$
174
$
127
$
301
$
54
$
40
$
94
($
141)
($
103)
($
244)
($
141)
($
103)
($
244)
7
Transportation
Eqpt
$
148
$
73
$
221
$
46
$
23
$
69
($
120)
($
59)
($
179)
($
120)
($
59)
($
179)
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
$
257
$
17
$
273
$
80
$
5
$
85
($
208)
($
14)
($
221)
($
208)
($
14)
($
221)
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
$
588
$
107
$
695
$
184
$
33
$
217
($
476)
($
87)
($
563)
($
476)
($
87)
($
563)
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
$
1,234
$
189
$
1,423
$
385
$
59
$
444
($
999)
($
153)
($
1,152)
($
999)
($
153)
($
1,152)
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
$
320
$
62
$
382
$
100
$
19
$
119
($
259)
($
50)
($
309)
($
259)
($
50)
($
309)
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
$
2,020
$
4
$
2,024
$
631
$
1
$
632
($
1,636)
($
4)
($
1,639)
($
1,636)
($
4)
($
1,639)
13
Military
Bases
$
7
$
8
$
15
$
2
$
3
$
5
($
5)
($
7)
($
12)
($
5)
($
7)
($
12)

Subtotals
=
$
8,794
$
1,155
$
9,949
$
2,745
$
361
$
3,106
($
7,121)
($
935)
($
8,056)
($
7,121)
($
935)
($
8,056)

C.
Annual
Labor
Cost
for
Decanting
Percolated
"
Free
Liquids"
From
Transport
Containers:
DISPOSABLE
WIPES:
C1.
Annual
Labor
Hours:
C2.
Annual
Labor
Cost:
5
5
<
Minutes/
drum
$
15.47
$
15.47
<$/
hour
Item
Sub­
sector
SQGs
LQGs
Totals
SQGs
LQGs
Totals
1
Printing
74
10
84
$
1,145
$
150
$
1,295
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
14
6
20
$
224
$
93
$
317
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
20
5
25
$
306
$
74
$
381
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
69
9
78
$
1,070
$
144
$
1,213
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
44
3
46
$
678
$
40
$
719
6
Electronics
&
Computers
16
12
27
$
246
$
179
$
425
7
Transportation
Eqpt
13
7
20
$
209
$
103
$
311
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
23
2
25
$
362
$
24
$
386
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
54
10
63
$
830
$
151
$
981
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
38
6
43
$
581
$
89
$
670
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
10
2
12
$
151
$
29
$
180
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
184
0
185
$
2,852
$
6
$
2,858
13
Military
Bases
1
1
1
$
9
$
11
$
21
Subtotals
=
560
71
631
$
8,663
$
1,094
$
9,757
161
Impact
Element
8C
(
continued)

Estimated
Cost
to
Industrial
Laundries
for
RCRA
Manifest
Transporting
Decanted
Spent
Solvent
"
Free
Liquids"
From
Transport
Containers
To
Offsite
RCRA­
Permitted
Hazardous
Waste
Management
Facilities
Nr.
haz
waste
truck
pickups
per
year
A.
Free
Liquids
Truck
Pickup
Frequency
at
Laundry:
B.
RCRA
Manifest
Cost/
Year:
C.
"
Free
Liquids"
Truck
Pickup
Cost/
Year:
(
if
truck
as
RCRA
haz
waste
to
TSDRF)
A1.
If
SQG
Laundry:
A2.
If
LQG
Laundry:
SQG
haz
waste
truck
manifest
cost/
year
LQG
haz
waste
truck
manifest
cost/
year
Total
$/
year
%
affected
laundries
Count
of
affected
laundries
Avg
nr.
free
liquids
drums
per
pickup
Percent
%
affected
laundries
Count
of
affected
laundries
Avg
nr.
free
liquids
drums
per
pickup
200
miles
<
Avg
truck
OW
trip
$
51.47
<
Unit
cost/
drum
if
SQG
if
LQG
Total
$
192
$
199
1
2%
6
3.1
60%
18
23
$
1,167
$
3,628
$
4,795
$
978
$
21,765
$
22,743
2
27%
103
4.5
40%
12
38
$
39,674
$
4,838
$
44,512
$
47,801
$
47,021
$
94,823
3
28%
109
6.6
0%
0
0
$
63,012
$
0
$
63,012
$
111,448
$
0
$
111,448
4
14%
55
9.2
0%
0
0
$
42,008
$
0
$
42,008
$
103,255
$
0
$
103,255
5
9%
36
11.2
0%
0
0
$
35,007
$
0
$
35,007
$
105,044
$
0
$
105,044
6
6%
24
13.6
0%
0
0
$
28,006
$
0
$
28,006
$
102,200
$
0
$
102,200
7
0%
0
0.0
0%
0
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
8
3%
12
18.6
0%
0
0
$
18,670
$
0
$
18,670
$
93,287
$
0
$
93,287
9
0%
0
0.0
0%
0
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
10
6%
24
23.3
0%
0
0
$
46,676
$
0
$
46,676
$
291,855
$
0
$
291,855
11
5%
18
26.0
0%
0
0
$
38,508
$
0
$
38,508
$
268,363
$
0
$
268,363
12
0%
0
0.0
0%
0
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
Totals
=
100%
389
21,842
100%
30
1,336
$
312,728
$
8,466
$
321,194
$
1,124,232
$
68,786
$
1,193,018
Apportionment
of
Manifest
&
Trucking
Costs
According
to
Wipes
Geneator
Industry:
Item
Sub­
Sector
or
Industry
Gallons
"
free
liquids"
Manifest
Haz
Waste
Trucking
1
Printing
99,994
48.9%
$
157,208
$
583,919
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
1,716
0.8%
$
2,698
$
10,022
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
1,996
1.0%
$
3,138
$
11,654
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
6,201
3.0%
$
9,749
$
36,212
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
3,597
1.8%
$
5,654
$
21,002
6
Electronics
&
Computers
2,393
1.2%
$
3,762
$
13,975
7
Transportation
Eqpt
1,704
0.8%
$
2,678
$
9,948
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
1,935
0.9%
$
3,042
$
11,301
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
5,075
2.5%
$
7,978
$
29,635
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
51,658
25.3%
$
81,215
$
301,657
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
13,877
6.8%
$
21,817
$
81,036
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
14,033
6.9%
$
22,063
$
81,948
13
Military
Bases
122
0.1%
$
191
$
710
Column
totals
=
204,301
100.0%
$
321,194
$
1,193,018
Tons/
year
equivalent
=
797
162
Impact
Element
8C
(
continued)

Sample
of
145
Industrial
Laundry
Facilities
Implied
Spent
Solvent
"
Free
Liquid"
Quantities
&
Implied
Laundry
RCRA
Status
if
"
Free
Liquids"
Are
Regulated
as
RCRA
Hazardous
Waste
Laundry
facility
survey
count
Nr.
wipes
containers
laundered
per
year
Nr.
wipes
containers
w/
free
liquids
per
year
A.
Annual
Free
Liquids:
B.
Monthly
Free
Liquids:
C.
Implied
RCRA
Subtitle
C
regulatory
status
D.
Implied
Maximum
Free
Liquids
Accumulation:
E.
Implied
nr.
haz
waste
truck
pickup
manifests
per
year
Gallons
per
year
Pounds
per
year
55­
gal
drum
eqvlnt
per
year
Gallons
per
month
Pounds
per
month
55­
gal
drum
eqvlnt
per
month
Gallons
55­
gal
drum
eqvlnts
Pounds
Tons
if
3.5%

1
66
2
5
40
0.1
0
3
0.0
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
2
70
2
5
42
0.1
0
3
0.0
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
3
93
3
7
56
0.1
1
5
0.0
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
4
145
5
11
87
0.2
1
7
0.0
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
5
184
7
14
110
0.3
1
9
0.0
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
6
218
8
17
131
0.3
1
11
0.0
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
7
274
10
21
165
0.4
2
14
0.0
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
8
341
12
26
205
0.5
2
17
0.0
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
9
394
14
30
236
0.6
3
20
0.0
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
10
396
14
30
238
0.6
3
20
0.0
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
11
433
15
33
260
0.6
3
22
0.1
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
12
470
17
36
282
0.7
3
24
0.1
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
13
474
17
36
285
0.7
3
24
0.1
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
14
492
17
38
296
0.7
3
25
0.1
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
15
513
18
40
308
0.7
3
26
0.1
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
16
524
19
40
315
0.7
3
26
0.1
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
17
629
22
48
377
0.9
4
31
0.1
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
18
647
23
50
389
0.9
4
32
0.1
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
19
712
25
55
427
1.0
5
36
0.1
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
20
724
26
56
435
1.0
5
36
0.1
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
21
728
26
56
437
1.0
5
36
0.1
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
22
736
26
57
442
1.0
5
37
0.1
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
23
743
26
57
446
1.0
5
37
0.1
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
24
746
26
57
448
1.0
5
37
0.1
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
25
768
27
59
461
1.1
5
38
0.1
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
26
826
29
64
496
1.2
5
41
0.1
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
27
930
33
72
558
1.3
6
47
0.1
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
28
1,002
35
77
602
1.4
6
50
0.1
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
29
1,012
36
78
608
1.4
6
51
0.1
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
30
1,047
37
81
629
1.5
7
52
0.1
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
31
1,098
39
85
659
1.5
7
55
0.1
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
32
1,100
39
85
660
1.5
7
55
0.1
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
33
1,104
39
85
663
1.5
7
55
0.1
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
34
1,151
41
89
691
1.6
7
58
0.1
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
35
1,154
41
89
693
1.6
7
58
0.1
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
36
1,231
44
95
739
1.7
8
62
0.1
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
37
1,238
44
95
743
1.7
8
62
0.1
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
38
1,294
46
100
777
1.8
8
65
0.2
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
39
1,344
48
103
807
1.9
9
67
0.2
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
40
1,368
48
105
822
1.9
9
68
0.2
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
41
1,381
49
106
829
1.9
9
69
0.2
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
42
1,399
50
108
840
2.0
9
70
0.2
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
Laundry
facility
survey
count
Nr.
wipes
containers
laundered
per
year
Nr.
wipes
containers
w/
free
liquids
per
year
A.
Annual
Free
Liquids:
B.
Monthly
Free
Liquids:
C.
Implied
RCRA
Subtitle
C
regulatory
status
D.
Implied
Maximum
Free
Liquids
Accumulation:
E.
Implied
nr.
haz
waste
truck
pickup
manifests
per
year
Gallons
per
year
Pounds
per
year
55­
gal
drum
eqvlnt
per
year
Gallons
per
month
Pounds
per
month
55­
gal
drum
eqvlnt
per
month
Gallons
55­
gal
drum
eqvlnts
Pounds
Tons
if
3.5%

163
43
1,403
50
108
842
2.0
9
70
0.2
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
44
1,410
50
109
847
2.0
9
71
0.2
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
45
1,505
53
116
903
2.1
10
75
0.2
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
46
1,569
56
121
942
2.2
10
78
0.2
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
47
1,599
57
123
960
2.2
10
80
0.2
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
48
1,644
58
127
987
2.3
11
82
0.2
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
49
1,696
60
131
1,018
2.4
11
85
0.2
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
50
1,768
63
136
1,062
2.5
11
88
0.2
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
51
1,803
64
139
1,082
2.5
12
90
0.2
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
52
1,922
68
148
1,154
2.7
12
96
0.2
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
53
1,943
69
150
1,166
2.7
12
97
0.2
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
54
1,993
71
153
1,197
2.8
13
100
0.2
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
55
2,031
72
156
1,219
2.8
13
102
0.2
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
56
2,164
77
167
1,299
3.0
14
108
0.3
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
57
2,166
77
167
1,301
3.0
14
108
0.3
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
58
2,537
90
195
1,523
3.6
16
127
0.3
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
59
2,565
91
197
1,540
3.6
16
128
0.3
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
60
2,640
93
203
1,585
3.7
17
132
0.3
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
61
2,644
94
203
1,587
3.7
17
132
0.3
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
62
2,732
97
210
1,640
3.8
18
137
0.3
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
63
2,737
97
211
1,643
3.8
18
137
0.3
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
64
2,866
101
221
1,721
4.0
18
143
0.3
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
65
2,892
102
223
1,736
4.0
19
145
0.3
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
66
3,105
110
239
1,864
4.3
20
155
0.4
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
67
3,261
115
251
1,958
4.6
21
163
0.4
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
68
3,512
124
270
2,108
4.9
23
176
0.4
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
69
3,516
124
271
2,111
4.9
23
176
0.4
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
70
3,648
129
281
2,190
5.1
23
182
0.4
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
71
3,672
130
283
2,204
5.1
24
184
0.4
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
72
3,747
133
288
2,249
5.2
24
187
0.4
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
73
3,854
136
297
2,314
5.4
25
193
0.4
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
74
3,963
140
305
2,379
5.5
25
198
0.5
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
75
4,234
150
326
2,542
5.9
27
212
0.5
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
76
4,324
153
333
2,596
6.1
28
216
0.5
CESQG
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
77
4,469
158
344
2,683
6.3
29
224
0.5
SQG
172
3
1,341
0.7
1
78
5,202
184
400
3,123
7.3
33
260
0.6
SQG
200
4
1,562
0.8
2
79
5,319
188
409
3,193
7.4
34
266
0.6
SQG
205
4
1,597
0.8
2
80
5,550
196
427
3,332
7.8
36
278
0.6
SQG
214
4
1,666
0.8
2
81
5,604
198
431
3,364
7.8
36
280
0.7
SQG
216
4
1,682
0.8
2
82
5,714
202
440
3,430
8.0
37
286
0.7
SQG
220
4
1,715
0.9
2
83
5,922
210
456
3,555
8.3
38
296
0.7
SQG
228
4
1,778
0.9
2
84
6,057
214
466
3,637
8.5
39
303
0.7
SQG
233
4
1,818
0.9
2
85
6,089
216
469
3,655
8.5
39
305
0.7
SQG
234
4
1,828
0.9
2
86
6,149
218
473
3,691
8.6
39
308
0.7
SQG
237
4
1,846
0.9
2
87
6,434
228
495
3,863
9.0
41
322
0.8
SQG
248
5
1,931
1.0
2
88
7,055
250
543
4,236
9.9
45
353
0.8
SQG
272
5
2,118
1.1
2
89
7,064
250
544
4,241
9.9
45
353
0.8
SQG
272
5
2,121
1.1
2
Laundry
facility
survey
count
Nr.
wipes
containers
laundered
per
year
Nr.
wipes
containers
w/
free
liquids
per
year
A.
Annual
Free
Liquids:
B.
Monthly
Free
Liquids:
C.
Implied
RCRA
Subtitle
C
regulatory
status
D.
Implied
Maximum
Free
Liquids
Accumulation:
E.
Implied
nr.
haz
waste
truck
pickup
manifests
per
year
Gallons
per
year
Pounds
per
year
55­
gal
drum
eqvlnt
per
year
Gallons
per
month
Pounds
per
month
55­
gal
drum
eqvlnt
per
month
Gallons
55­
gal
drum
eqvlnts
Pounds
Tons
if
3.5%

164
90
7,201
255
554
4,323
10.1
46
360
0.8
SQG
277
5
2,161
1.1
2
91
7,206
255
555
4,326
10.1
46
361
0.8
SQG
277
5
2,163
1.1
2
92
7,374
261
568
4,427
10.3
47
369
0.9
SQG
284
5
2,214
1.1
2
93
7,390
262
569
4,436
10.3
47
370
0.9
SQG
284
5
2,218
1.1
2
94
7,866
278
605
4,722
11.0
50
394
0.9
SQG
303
6
2,361
1.2
2
95
8,335
295
642
5,004
11.7
53
417
1.0
SQG
321
6
2,502
1.3
3
96
8,421
298
648
5,056
11.8
54
421
1.0
SQG
324
6
2,528
1.3
3
97
8,422
298
648
5,056
11.8
54
421
1.0
SQG
324
6
2,528
1.3
3
98
8,463
300
651
5,081
11.8
54
423
1.0
SQG
326
6
2,540
1.3
3
99
8,679
307
668
5,210
12.1
56
434
1.0
SQG
334
6
2,605
1.3
3
100
8,708
308
670
5,228
12.2
56
436
1.0
SQG
335
6
2,614
1.3
3
101
8,798
311
677
5,282
12.3
56
440
1.0
SQG
339
6
2,641
1.3
3
102
9,104
322
701
5,465
12.7
58
455
1.1
SQG
350
6
2,733
1.4
3
103
9,298
329
716
5,582
13.0
60
465
1.1
SQG
358
7
2,791
1.4
3
104
9,437
334
726
5,665
13.2
61
472
1.1
SQG
363
7
2,833
1.4
3
105
9,714
344
748
5,832
13.6
62
486
1.1
SQG
374
7
2,916
1.5
3
106
9,752
345
751
5,855
13.6
63
488
1.1
SQG
375
7
2,927
1.5
3
107
9,887
350
761
5,936
13.8
63
495
1.2
SQG
380
7
2,968
1.5
3
108
9,934
352
765
5,964
13.9
64
497
1.2
SQG
382
7
2,982
1.5
3
109
10,139
359
780
6,087
14.2
65
507
1.2
SQG
390
7
3,044
1.5
3
110
10,143
359
781
6,089
14.2
65
507
1.2
SQG
390
7
3,045
1.5
3
111
11,176
396
860
6,710
15.6
72
559
1.3
SQG
430
8
3,355
1.7
3
112
11,317
401
871
6,794
15.8
73
566
1.3
SQG
436
8
3,397
1.7
3
113
11,678
413
899
7,011
16.3
75
584
1.4
SQG
449
8
3,506
1.8
4
114
12,113
429
932
7,272
17.0
78
606
1.4
SQG
466
8
3,636
1.8
4
115
12,351
437
951
7,415
17.3
79
618
1.4
SQG
475
9
3,707
1.9
4
116
12,716
450
979
7,634
17.8
82
636
1.5
SQG
489
9
3,817
1.9
4
117
12,872
456
991
7,728
18.0
83
644
1.5
SQG
495
9
3,864
1.9
4
118
13,165
466
1,013
7,904
18.4
84
659
1.5
SQG
507
9
3,952
2.0
4
119
14,229
504
1,095
8,542
19.9
91
712
1.7
SQG
548
10
4,271
2.1
4
120
14,277
505
1,099
8,571
20.0
92
714
1.7
SQG
549
10
4,285
2.1
4
121
14,537
514
1,119
8,727
20.3
93
727
1.7
SQG
559
10
4,363
2.2
4
122
15,072
533
1,160
9,048
21.1
97
754
1.8
SQG
580
11
4,524
2.3
5
123
15,497
548
1,193
9,304
21.7
99
775
1.8
SQG
596
11
4,652
2.3
5
124
15,980
566
1,230
9,593
22.4
102
799
1.9
SQG
615
11
4,797
2.4
5
125
16,278
576
1,253
9,772
22.8
104
814
1.9
SQG
626
11
4,886
2.4
5
126
16,431
582
1,265
9,864
23.0
105
822
1.9
SQG
632
11
4,932
2.5
5
127
16,727
592
1,287
10,042
23.4
107
837
2.0
SQG
644
12
5,021
2.5
5
128
18,487
654
1,423
11,099
25.9
119
925
2.2
SQG
711
13
5,549
2.8
6
129
18,885
668
1,454
11,338
26.4
121
945
2.2
SQG
727
13
5,669
2.8
6
130
19,895
704
1,531
11,944
27.8
128
995
2.3
SQG
766
14
5,972
3.0
6
131
20,555
728
1,582
12,340
28.8
132
1,028
2.4
SQG
791
14
6,170
3.1
6
132
26,637
943
2,050
15,991
37.3
171
1,333
3.1
SQG
1,025
19
7,996
4.0
8
133
26,640
943
2,050
15,993
37.3
171
1,333
3.1
SQG
1,025
19
7,997
4.0
8
134
32,239
1,141
2,481
19,354
45.1
207
1,613
3.8
SQG
1,241
23
9,677
4.8
10
135
32,697
1,157
2,517
19,630
45.8
210
1,636
3.8
SQG
1,258
23
9,815
4.9
10
136
34,021
1,204
2,619
20,425
47.6
218
1,702
4.0
SQG
1,309
24
10,212
5.1
10
Laundry
facility
survey
count
Nr.
wipes
containers
laundered
per
year
Nr.
wipes
containers
w/
free
liquids
per
year
A.
Annual
Free
Liquids:
B.
Monthly
Free
Liquids:
C.
Implied
RCRA
Subtitle
C
regulatory
status
D.
Implied
Maximum
Free
Liquids
Accumulation:
E.
Implied
nr.
haz
waste
truck
pickup
manifests
per
year
Gallons
per
year
Pounds
per
year
55­
gal
drum
eqvlnt
per
year
Gallons
per
month
Pounds
per
month
55­
gal
drum
eqvlnt
per
month
Gallons
55­
gal
drum
eqvlnts
Pounds
Tons
if
3.5%

165
137
34,385
1,217
2,647
20,643
48.1
221
1,720
4.0
SQG
1,323
24
10,321
5.2
10
138
35,895
1,270
2,763
21,549
50.2
230
1,796
4.2
SQG
1,381
25
10,775
5.4
11
139
37,380
1,323
2,877
22,441
52.3
240
1,870
4.4
SQG
1,439
26
11,220
5.6
11
140
38,188
1,352
2,939
22,926
53.4
245
1,911
4.5
SQG
1,470
27
11,463
5.7
11
141
54,993
1,946
4,233
33,015
77.0
353
2,751
6.4
LQG
1,058
19
8,254
4.1
1
142
67,550
2,391
5,199
40,553
94.5
433
3,379
7.9
LQG
1,300
24
10,138
5.1
1
143
76,336
2,702
5,875
45,828
106.8
490
3,819
8.9
LQG
1,469
27
11,457
5.7
1
144
97,544
3,452
7,508
58,560
136.5
626
4,880
11.4
LQG
1,877
34
14,640
7.3
2
145
117,286
4,151
9,027
70,412
164.1
752
5,868
13.7
LQG
2,257
41
17,603
8.8
2
Totals
=
1,407,193
49,805
108,308
844,802
1,969
9,026
70,400
164
Reference
benchmark
=
204,301
Sample
subtotal
as
%
of
benchmark
=
53%
166
Impact
Element
8C
(
continued)

Profile
of
Industrial
Laundries
According
to
Monthly
Quantity
of
"
Free
Liquids"
Which
May
be
Recovered
from
Spent
Reusable
Wipes
Transport
Containers:
Based
on
Business
Operating
Characteristics
for
a
Sample
of
145
Industrial
Laundries
in
Prior
Table
Source:
USEPA
Office
of
Water,
1994
Section
308
National
Survey
Sample,
EPA­
821­
R­
00­
004,
March
2000
If
Exected
"
Free
Liquid"
Monthly
Quantity
=
SQG
If
Expected
"
Free
Liquid"
Monthly
Quantity
=
LQG
Annual
Number
of
RCRA
Manifests
&
Truck
Pickups
If
SQG
Count
of
Sample
Facilities
Annual
Number
of
RCRA
Manifests
&
Truck
Pickups
If
LQG
Count
of
Sample
Facilities
1
2%
1
1
60%
3
2
27%
17
2
40%
2
3
28%
18
3
0%
0
4
14%
9
4
0%
0
5
9%
6
5
0%
0
6
6%
4
6
0%
0
7
0%
0
7
0%
0
8
3%
2
8
0%
0
9
0%
0
9
0%
0
10
6%
4
10
0%
0
11
5%
3
11
0%
0
>
11
0%
0
>
11
0%
0
Checksum
=
100%
64
Checksum
=
100%
5
Note:
The
remainder
76
facilities
in
the
145
sample
are
estimated
to
likely
be
classified
as
RCRA
CESQG
monthly
quantity
facilities.
167
Impact
Elements
9A
&
10A
Estimate
of
Average
Annual
Cost
for
Compliance
With
the
40
CFR
261.2(
f)
RCRA
Exclusion
Documentation
Requirement
Item
Economic
Sub­
Sector
or
Industry
A
B
C
D
E
(
B
x
D
x
$
uc)
F
(
C
x
D
x
$
uc)
E
+
F
G
Count
of
Potentially
Affected
(
Eligible)
Facilities
Assumed
%
of
facilities
which
may
be
subject
to
RCRA
inspections**
Average
Annual
Cost***

Total
facilities
Reusable
wipes
facilities
Disposable
wipes
facilities
Reusable
wipes
facilities
Disposable
wipes
facilities
Total
facilities
(
Reusables
+
Disposables)
Cost
to
EPA
for
inspection
personnel
1
Printing
31,177
28,989
2,188
0.06%
$
1,826
$
138
$
1,964
$
4,489
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
1,907
1,735
171
15.0%
$
27,334
$
2,698
$
30,033
$
68,646
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
2,438
2,216
222
0.06%
$
140
$
14
$
154
$
351
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
8,552
7,769
783
0.06%
$
489
$
49
$
539
$
1,232
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
4,122
3,742
380
0.06%
$
236
$
24
$
260
$
594
6
Electronics
&
Computers
956
872
84
0.06%
$
55
$
5
$
60
$
138
7
Transportation
Eqpt
1,955
1,780
175
0.06%
$
112
$
11
$
123
$
281
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
2,796
2,539
257
0.06%
$
160
$
16
$
176
$
403
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
7,001
6,362
639
0.06%
$
401
$
40
$
441
$
1,008
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
17,695
16,453
1,242
0.06%
$
1,037
$
78
$
1,115
$
2,548
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
4,803
4,466
337
0.06%
$
281
$
21
$
303
$
692
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
23,537
21,360
2,177
0.06%
$
1,346
$
137
$
1,483
$
3,389
13
Military
Bases
86
79
7
0.06%
$
5
$
0
$
5
$
12
Sub­
total
spent
wipes
generators
=
107,025
98,362
8,663
$
33,422
$
3,233
$
36,655
$
83,783
14
Industrial
Laundries
881
881
0
0.4%
$
370
$
0
$
370
$
846
15
Solid
Waste
Management
Facilities
7,238
0
7,238
20%
$
0
$
151,988
$
151,988
$
347,400
Column
totals
("
most­
likely")
=
115,144
99,243
15,900
$
33,792
$
155,221
$
189,013
$
432,029
Explanatory
Notes:
(
a)
*
$
uc=
unit
cost:
Average
of
$
105
per
facility
unit
cost
assigned
(
year
2000$),
based
on
Office
of
Solid
Waste,
Economics,
Methods
&
Risk
Analysis
Division
(
EMRAD)
"
Unit
Cost
Compendium",
30
Sept
2000,
page
1
(
cost
item
nr.
4
­
waste
stream
notification
one­
time
cost).
This
unit
cost
represents
labor
cost
for
facility
personnel
either:
!
To
retrieve
existing
business
records
to
serve
as
documentation,
or
!
To
generate
and
retrieve
other
type
of
documentation,
for
presentation
to
inspector.
EPA
cost
estimated
at
$
240
per
RCRA­
authority
inspection
(
OSW­
EMRAD
judgement),
representing
$
80/
hour
average
loaded
wage
rate
for
three
hours
per
site
(
travel
&
inspection).
(
b)
**
Inspection:
Assumed
inspection
fractions
(
percentages)
applied
in
this
table
based
on
annual
inspection
statistics
provided
in
USEPA
Office
of
Enforcement
&
Compliance
Assurance,
"
Annual
Report
on
Enforcement
&
Compliance
Assurance
Accomplishments
in
1999",
EPA­
300­
R­
00­
005,
July
2000,
according
to
the
following
sector­
based
computations:
!
Item
2
chemical
&
allied
products
based
on
OECA
report
data
page
A­
8
for
"
Industrial
Organics
&
Chemical
Preparations":
[(
3,000
inspections
FY99)
x
(
17%
RCRA
inspections
from
p.
9)]
/
(
3,387
total
OECA
subject
facilities)
=
15%
!
Item
15
based
on
OECA
report
data
page
A­
5
for
"
Dry
cleaning":
[(
111
inspections
FY95)
x
(
78%
RCRA
inspections)]
/
(
22,330
dry
cleaning
plants
1997
Economic
Census)
=
0.4%
!
Item
16:
solid
waste
facilities
based
on
OECA
report
data
page
10:
(
3,100
RCRA
TSDF
universe
FY99)
x
(
63%
inspected
FY99)
=
1,953
inspections.
(
1,953
inspections)
/
(
9,650
solid
waste
management
facilities
from
1997
Economic
Census)
=
20%
!
All
other
items
based
on
OECA
report
data
page
A­
1
for
"
Automotive
Service
&
Repair
Sector"):
[(
1,749
inspections
FY99)
x
(
17%
RCRA
inspections
from
p.
9)]
/
(
500,000
service
shops)
=
0.06%
c)
***
Annual
cost:
The
paperwork
burden
cost
estimated
in
this
table
represents
a
hypothetical
average
annual
cost,
rather
than
a
one­
time
cost
(
e.
g.
cost
which
only
occurs
in
the
first
year
after
implementation
of
the
rule).
Annual
cost
represents
the
regulatory
mechanism
for
documentation
in
40
CFR
261.2(
f),
which
specifies
that
documentation
must
be
provided
by:
"
Respondents
[
i.
e.
owners
or
operators
of
facilities]
in
actions
to
enforce
regulations
implementing
Subtitle
C
of
RCRA
who
raise
a
claim
that
a
certain
material
is
not
a
solid
waste,
or
is
conditionally
exempt
from
regulation..."
168
Impact
Element
9B
AVOIDED
RCRA
ADMINISTRATIVE
COSTS
TO
WIPES
USING
SQGs
WHICH
MAY
BECOME
CESQGs:
DISPOSABLE
INDUSTRIAL
WIPES:
A.
Number
of
solvent
wipes
facilities:
B.
Number
of
SQGs
which
change
status
D.
Avoided
annual
RCRA
admin
cost:

1.7%
0%
$
5,435
<$/
facility/
yr
Item
Sub­
sector
SQGs
LQGs
Totals
SQGs
LQGs
Totals
SQGs
LQGs
Totals
1
Printing
2,158
NA
2,158
37
NA
37
$
199,390
NA
$
199,390
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
155
NA
155
3
NA
3
$
14,354
NA
$
14,354
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
209
NA
209
4
NA
4
$
19,314
NA
$
19,314
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
758
NA
758
13
NA
13
$
70,041
NA
$
70,041
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
374
NA
374
6
NA
6
$
34,567
NA
$
34,567
6
Electronics
&
Computers
72
NA
72
1
NA
1
$
6,613
NA
$
6,613
7
Transportation
Eqpt
156
NA
156
3
NA
3
$
14,402
NA
$
14,402
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
253
NA
253
4
NA
4
$
23,404
NA
$
23,404
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
611
NA
611
10
NA
10
$
56,497
NA
$
56,497
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
1,222
NA
1,222
21
NA
21
$
112,914
NA
$
112,914
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
330
NA
330
6
NA
6
$
30,525
NA
$
30,525
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
2,176
NA
2,176
37
NA
37
$
201,061
NA
$
201,061
13
Military
Bases
6
NA
6
0
NA
0
$
529
NA
$
529
Subtotals
=
8,481
NA
8,481
144
NA
144
$
783,612
NA
$
783,612
169
Impact
Element
10B
State
Hazardous
Waste
Taxes
&
Fees
Item
State
A.
Annual
Haz
Waste
Quantities:
B.
State
Haz
Waste
Taxes/
Fees:
C.
State
Non­
Haz
Waste
Taxes/
Fees:

Land
disposal
(
1993
NHWCS
tons)
Incineration
(
1993
NHWCS
tons)
Haz
waste
generation:
(
source:
1999
BRS
data)
Land
disposal
($/
ton)
Combustion
($/
ton)
Haz
waste
generator
fee:

Land
disposal
($/
ton)
Incineration
($/
ton)
Solid
waste
generator
fee
($/
year)
($/
ton)
($/
year)
(
1999
tons)
(
Count
LQGs)

1
AL
117,282
54,629
491,178
274
$
51.00
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
21.00
$
0
$
0
2
AK
0
0
1,335
42
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
3
AZ
0
0
39,016
193
$
40.00
$
2.00
$
10.00
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
4
AR
640,619
92,320
970,995
241
$
11.00
$
3,000
$
0
$
550
$
0
$
0
$
0
5
CA
92,643
37,090
427,302
1,850
$
45.13
$
5.58
$
0
$
7,000
$
18.22
$
5.58
$
0
6
CO
57,412
0
49,190
163
$
4.40
$
4.40
$
0
$
0
$
2.00
$
2.00
$
0
7
CT
0
5,788
92,201
391
$
15.00
$
15.00
$
9.60
$
0
$
0.50
$
0
$
0
8
DE
0
0
26,071
76
$
21.00
$
4.00
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
9
DC
0
0
1,167
30
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
10
FL
0
0
272,387
366
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
11
GA
0
32,080
209,206
384
$
20.00
$
20.00
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
12
HW
0
0
1,456
37
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
13
ID
571,197
0
851,764
38
$
30.00
$
30.00
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
14
IL
373,006
29,866
2,907,327
1,006
$
61.00
$
20.00
$
0
$
250
$
0.95
$
0
$
0
15
IN
591,942
212,129
984,895
586
$
11.50
$
11.50
$
0
$
1,200
$
0
$
0
$
600
16
IA
0
0
46,828
188
$
50.00
$
10.00
$
10.00
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
17
KS
1,338,813
89,653
1,594,119
224
$
10.00
$
20.00
$
0
$
1,650
$
0
$
0
$
0
18
KY
0
115,092
214,842
340
$
24.10
$
12.05
$
10.50
$
300
$
0
$
0
$
0
19
LA
3,684,421
188,151
4,351,245
440
$
85.00
$
0
$
0
$
384
$
0
$
0
$
0
20
ME
0
0
4,374
102
$
40.00
$
30.00
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
21
MD
0
0
80,256
289
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
22
MA
0
0
1,191,465
448
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
1.00
$
0
$
0
23
MI
213,989
143,083
1,385,375
823
$
10.00
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
24
MN
0
14,162
56,573
262
$
77.11
$
19.28
$
0
$
50
$
0.45
$
0
$
0
25
MS
1,497,900
4,658
1,598,642
136
$
10.00
$
2.00
$
0
$
1,260
$
1.00
$
1.00
$
0
26
MO
7,090
416,686
158,682
312
$
25.00
$
1.00
$
1.00
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
27
MT
0
0
23,986
30
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
800
$
0
$
0
$
0
28
NE
0
0
43,224
85
$
22.40
$
1.92
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
29
NV
71,281
0
11,473
102
$
40.20
$
17.75
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
30
NH
0
0
11,082
168
$
60.00
$
60.00
$
0
$
600
$
1.00
$
0
$
0
31
NJ
46,780
22,797
650,534
1,071
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
1,200
$
0
$
0
$
0
32
NM
0
0
238,558
41
$
0
$
0
$
20.00
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
33
NY
107,726
88,575
548,928
2,647
$
27.00
$
9.00
$
0
$
6,350
$
0
$
0
$
0
34
NC
0
0
74,757
508
$
1.75
$
1.75
$
0
$
2,500
$
0
$
0
$
0
35
ND
0
0
2,675
16
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
36
OH
830,429
162,828
1,644,029
1,181
$
9.00
$
2.00
$
0
$
500
$
0
$
0
$
0
37
OK
88,269
0
417,460
147
$
9.00
$
9.00
$
0
$
250
$
0
$
0
$
0
38
OR
107,641
0
81,270
208
$
135.00
$
90.00
$
0
$
525
$
0
$
0
$
0
39
PA
38,971
94,487
417,477
965
$
12.00
$
5.00
$
0
$
0
$
3.00
$
0
$
0
40
RI
0
0
37,622
145
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
41
SC
73,799
67,398
14,761
347
$
34.00
$
10.00
$
0
$
0
$
13.70
$
10.00
$
0
42
SD
0
0
1,074
21
$
50.00
$
50.00
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
43
TN
11,021
190,970
2,218,753
396
$
5.00
$
2.50
$
0
$
900
$
0
$
0
$
0
44
TX
8,061,824
1,894,789
14,923,520
907
$
30.00
$
16.00
$
0
$
2,500
$
1.45
$
0
$
500
Item
State
A.
Annual
Haz
Waste
Quantities:
B.
State
Haz
Waste
Taxes/
Fees:
C.
State
Non­
Haz
Waste
Taxes/
Fees:

Land
disposal
(
1993
NHWCS
tons)
Incineration
(
1993
NHWCS
tons)
Haz
waste
generation:
(
source:
1999
BRS
data)
Land
disposal
($/
ton)
Combustion
($/
ton)
Haz
waste
generator
fee:

Land
disposal
($/
ton)
Incineration
($/
ton)
Solid
waste
generator
fee
($/
year)
($/
ton)
($/
year)
(
1999
tons)
(
Count
LQGs)

170
45
UT
43,338
3,246
80,427
91
$
28.00
$
9.00
$
0
$
0
$
2.50
$
2.50
$
0
46
VT
0
0
5,275
65
$
112.00
$
56.00
$
0
$
0
$
6.00
$
0
$
0
47
VA
0
40,368
121,787
332
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
48
WA
0
0
91,245
545
$
0
$
0
$
12.90
$
0
$
8.03
$
8.03
$
0
49
WV
28,627
18,877
92,503
139
$
35.29
$
26.47
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
50
WI
0
9,496
159,174
540
$
0.15
$
0.15
$
12.83
$
125
$
0.30
$
0
$
0
51
WY
0
0
4,746
22
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
Column
totals
=
18,696,022
4,029,218
39,924,231
19,960
Count
of
states
with
tax
rate
>
$
0
=
37
34
8
20
16
6
2
Mean
tax
rate
($/
ton)
=
$
25
$
70
$
1.70
$
567
$
1.59
$
0.57
$
22
Tons­
weighted
mean
tax
rate
($/
ton)
=
$
37
$
79
$
0.30
$
1,893
$
1.02
$
0.22
$
40
Median
tax
rate
($/
ton)
=
$
12
$
4
$
0.00
$
0
$
0.00
$
0.00
$
0
Max
tax
rate
($/
ton)
=
$
135
$
3,000
$
20
$
7,000
$
21.00
$
10.00
$
600
Explanatory
Notes:
!
State
solid
&
hazardous
waste
fees/
taxes
data
sources:
­­­
Hilary
Sigman,
Journal
of
Environmental
Economics
&
Management,
Vol.
30,
pp.
199­
217,
1996
(
based
on
chlorinated
solvent
taxes).
­­­
J.
Andrew
Hoerner,
State
Tax
Notes
(
journal),
Vol.
14,
No.
16,
20
April
1998,
Tables
4
&
5.
­­­
"
State
Taxes
and
Fees"
(
hazardous
waste),
HTRW
Center
of
Expertise
Information
­
TSDF,
US
Army
Corps
of
Engineers:
­­­
http://
www.
environmental.
usace.
army.
mil/
library/
pubs/
tsdf/
sec8­
2/
sec8­
2.
html
!
Limitations
of
This
Data
Table:
­­­
This
table
does
not
differentiate
&
include
special
categories
of
waste
taxes
(
batteries,
tires,
used
oil,
acutely
toxic,
out­
of­
state
wastes).
­­­
This
table
does
not
include
indirect
taxes
and
other
tax
provisions
related
to
solid
waste
(
e.
g.
bottle
deposit).
­­­
Municipalities
and
counties
in
some
states
have
waste
management
fees,
which
are
not
included
in
this
table.
!
NHWCS
=
EPA­
OSW
"
National
Hazardous
Waste
Constituent
Survey"
database
(
1993
base).
!
Land
disposal
=
represents
M11x
or
M13x
BRS
system
type
codes
managed
(
but
not
necessarily
generated)
in
state.
!
Incineration
=
represents
M04x
or
M05x
or
M06x
BRS
system
type
codes
managed
(
but
not
necessarily
generated)
in
state.
!
BRS
=
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
"
Biennial
Reporting
System"
for
RCRA
hazardous
waste
handlers.
171
Impact
Element
10B
(
continued)

Estimate
of
Potential
Cost
Savings
to
Industrial
Wipes
Users/
Handlers
for
State
Waste
Fees
Avoided
A.
State
Annual
Fees
for
Waste
Generators:
Tons­
weighted
national
average
annual
fee
per
generator
facility>
$
40
$
40
$
1,893
$
1,893
Item
Industry/
Sub­
Sector
2001
Count
of
Facilities
(
SQGs+
LQGs)
Annual
Cost
as
Solid
Waste
Generators:
Annual
Cost
as
Haz
Waste
Generators:
Reusables
Disposables
Totals
Reusables
Disposables
Totals
Reusables
Disposables
Totals
1
Printing
28,989
2,188
31,177
$
1,169,287
$
88,257
$
1,257,544
$
54,867,692
$
4,141,400
$
59,009,092
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
1,735
171
1,907
$
70,003
$
6,911
$
76,913
$
3,284,803
$
324,282
$
3,609,084
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
2,216
222
2,438
$
89,404
$
8,937
$
98,341
$
4,195,189
$
419,379
$
4,614,568
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
7,769
783
8,552
$
313,363
$
31,592
$
344,955
$
14,704,272
$
1,482,403
$
16,186,675
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
3,742
380
4,122
$
150,947
$
15,312
$
166,259
$
7,083,063
$
718,479
$
7,801,542
6
Electronics
&
Computers
872
84
956
$
35,153
$
3,403
$
38,556
$
1,649,510
$
159,676
$
1,809,186
7
Transportation
Eqpt
1,780
175
1,955
$
71,793
$
7,051
$
78,845
$
3,368,840
$
330,878
$
3,699,717
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
2,539
257
2,796
$
102,403
$
10,382
$
112,785
$
4,805,177
$
487,173
$
5,292,350
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
6,362
639
7,001
$
256,633
$
25,774
$
282,407
$
12,042,256
$
1,209,438
$
13,251,694
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
16,453
1,242
17,695
$
663,659
$
50,093
$
713,752
$
31,141,591
$
2,350,560
$
33,492,151
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
4,466
337
4,803
$
180,123
$
13,596
$
193,719
$
8,452,099
$
637,962
$
9,090,062
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
21,360
2,177
23,537
$
861,550
$
87,819
$
949,369
$
40,427,430
$
4,120,832
$
44,548,262
13
Military
Bases
79
7
86
$
3,175
$
300
$
3,475
$
148,998
$
14,061
$
163,058
Total
generators
=
98,362
8,663
107,025
$
3,967,493
$
349,427
$
4,316,919
$
186,170,919
$
16,396,521
$
202,567,439
14
Industrial
laundries
881
0
881
$
35,546
$
0
$
35,546
$
1,667,954
$
0
$
1,667,954
15
Solid
waste
management
0
7,238
7,238
$
0
$
291,929
$
291,929
$
0
$
13,698,517
$
13,698,517
Grand
total
=
99,243
15,900
115,144
$
4,003,039
$
641,356
$
4,644,395
$
187,838,873
$
30,095,038
$
217,933,910
B.
Fees
for
NonHW
Landfill:
C.
Fees
for
NonHW
Combustion:
Tons­
weighted
national
average
fee
per
ton
>
$
1.02
89%
$
0.22
$
0.22
11%

Item
Industry/
Sub­
Sector
2001
Spent
Wipes
Tons
(
SQGs+
LQGs)
Annual
Cost
as
Solid
Waste
Generators:
20%
Reusables
Disposables
Totals
Reusables
Disposables
Totals
Reusables
Disposables
Totals
1
Printing
36,362
521
36,883
$
0
$
474
$
474
$
1,613
$
12
$
1,625
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
3,745
255
4,000
$
0
$
232
$
232
$
166
$
6
$
172
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
4,354
306
4,661
$
0
$
279
$
279
$
193
$
7
$
200
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
13,530
977
14,506
$
0
$
888
$
888
$
600
$
23
$
623
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
7,847
579
8,426
$
0
$
526
$
526
$
348
$
14
$
362
6
Electronics
&
Computers
5,221
342
5,564
$
0
$
311
$
311
$
232
$
8
$
240
7
Transportation
Eqpt
3,717
251
3,968
$
0
$
228
$
228
$
165
$
6
$
171
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
4,222
311
4,533
$
0
$
283
$
283
$
187
$
7
$
195
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
11,072
790
11,863
$
0
$
719
$
719
$
491
$
19
$
510
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
18,785
270
19,054
$
0
$
245
$
245
$
833
$
6
$
840
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
5,046
72
5,119
$
0
$
66
$
66
$
224
$
2
$
226
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
30,618
2,301
32,919
$
0
$
2,093
$
2,093
$
1,358
$
54
$
1,412
13
Military
Bases
265
17
282
$
0
$
15
$
15
$
12
$
0
$
12
Total
generators
=
144,784
6,992
151,777
$
0
$
6,360
$
6,360
$
6,423
$
164
$
6,587
14
Industrial
laundries
144,784
0
144,784
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
6,423
$
0
$
6,423
15
Solid
waste
management
0
6,992
6,992
$
0
$
6,360
$
6,360
$
0
$
164
$
164
Grand
total
=
144,784
13,985
158,769
$
0
$
12,720
$
12,720
$
6,423
$
328
$
6,751
12
"
Cachet"
=
a
seal
or
mark
used
especially
to
designate
official
approval;
an
indication
of
approval
carrying
great
prestige;
a
characteristic
feature
or
quality
conferring
prestige;
cachet
in
its
positive
set
of
connotations
is
the
opposite
of
"
stigma"
=
a
scar
left
by
a
hot
iron;
a
mark
of
shame
or
discredit;
stain;
an
identifying
mark
or
characteristic;
a
specific
diagnostic
sign
of
disease.
(
source:
Merrian
Webster's
Collegiate
Dictionary,
10th
edition,
1996).
Stigma
may
reduce
the
economic
value
of
a
place
or
product
to
levels
below
what
one
would
expect
when
one
takes
into
account
the
health/
safety
risk
associated
with
it.
There
are
also
mechanisms
which
may
contribute
to
the
social
amplification
of
stigma
such
as
mass
media
reports,
litigation,
and
increased
regulation
of
an
industry
(
Flynn,
et
al.,
2001,
p.
335).

13
This
5%
to
10%
average
value
loss
is
based
on
two
cases
of
empirical
findings
on
environmental­
induced
product
and
property
loss,
respectively,
summarized
in
James
Flynn,
Paul
Slovic,
&
Howard
Kunreuther,
Risk,
Media,
and
Stigma:
Understanding
Public
Challenges
to
Modern
Science
and
Technology,
Earthscan
Publications
Ltd.,
London,
2001,
416
pp.
Economic
loss
from
hazardous
chemical/
material
contamination
stigma
is
basically
defined
and
measured
as
the
difference
in
the
market
value
of
non­
contaminated
product
or
property,
compared
to
the
market
value
of
comparable
but
contaminated
product
or
property
which
has
been
fully
remediated
(
i.
e.
cleaned­
up
or
decontaminated).
Stigma
encompasses
an
intangible
concept
of
perceived
risk
that
lies
beyond
remediation
costs
and
includes
further
discounts
to
compensate
investors,
purchasers,
and/
or
lenders
with
the
perceived
risks
associated
with
formerly
contaminated
products
or
property.
The
inference
is
that
stigma
may
continue
to
affect
product
or
property
values
without
real
or
observable
contamination
(
ibid,
p.
189).
The
5%
loss
is
the
long­
term
stigma
effect
on
sales
marketshare
for
a
household
product
which
became
contaminated
with
a
hazardous
chemical
(
see
case
on
p.
205,
footnote
7),
and
the
10%
loss
is
the
aggregate
long­
term
environmental
contamination
stigma
effect
on
US
property
values
(
see
1991
Patchin
reference
on
p.
189).
Flynn
et
al.
state
that
"
[
C]
hemical
risks
in
general
carry
a
well­
described
burden
of
stigma
in
our
society.
And
in
a
very
interesting
observation,
....
the
rise
of
scientific
risk
assessment
approaches
themselves
in
the
last
quarter­
century
accentuate
this
stigma."
(
p.
266).

172
Impact
Element
11A
Cachet
Benefit
to
Industrial
Laundries
from
Avoided
Waste
"
Stigma"
Associated
with
Reusable
Industrial
Wipes
In
a
23
May
2001
meeting
between
OSW
and
reusable
wipes
suppliers,
at
least
one
supplier
indicated
that
reusable
wipes
suppliers
(
industrial
laundries)
want
to
avoid
the
market
product
"
stigma"
associated
with
regulatory
classification
of
spent
reusable
industrial
wipes
as
a
form
of
"
waste".
USEPA
Office
of
Solid
Waste
estimates
that
about
50%
of
states
currently
exclude
reusable
wipes
from
solid
waste
regulatory
classification,
and
the
other
50%
of
states
currently
exclude
reusable
wipes
from
hazardous
waste
regulatory
classification,
but
not
from
solid
waste
classification
(
i.
e.
0%
of
spent
solvent
reusable
industrial
wipes
are
currently
regulated
as
"
hazardous
wastes").
Consequently,
under
the
proposed
exclusion
of
spent
solvent
reusable
wipes
from
"
solid
waste"
designation,
the
market
for
reusable
wipes
in
states
which
currently
only
exclude
reusable
wipes
from
"
hazardous
waste"
classification,
could
realize
cachet
value12
from
avoided
product
stigma
of
classification
as
a
solid
waste
material.
The
potential
magnitude
of
this
benefit
may
be
estimated
as
follows:

!
Affected
wipes
sub­
market:
Assuming
that
50%
of
the
56
RCRA­
authorized
states/
tribes/
territories
currently
exclude
spent
solvent
reusable
industrial
wipes
from
"
hazardous
waste"
but
not
from
"
solid
waste"
regulatory
classification,
represents
50%
of
the
potentially
affected
spent
solvent
reusable
wipes
sub­
market
(
50%
x
2.55
billion
wipes/
year
=
1.27
billion
wipes/
year);
!
Affected
sub­
market
revenues:
Assuming
that
this
potentially
affected
reusable
wipes
quantity
represents
$
69
million/
year
in
industrial
laundry
revenues
(
1.27
billion
wipes/
year
x
$
0.054
laundry
revenue/
wipe);
and
!
Stigma
product
value
loss:
Assuming
environmental­
induced
stigma
may
result
in
5%
to
10%
average
loss13
in
product
value
(
i.
e.
loss
in
sales
revenues);

the
cachet
benefit
of
the
proposed
solid
waste
exclusion
for
spent
reusable
wipes,
represents
$
3.4
to
$
6.9
million/
year
product
catchet
value
(
sales
revenue)
benefit
to
industrial
laundries
from
avoided
stigma
as
a
"
waste"
[
i.
e.
($
69
million/
year)
x
(
5%
to
10%)].
At
14.4%
average
industrial
laundry
profit
rate,
this
benefit
represents
$
0.5
to
$
1.0
million/
year
cachet
value
in
avoided
lost
profit
for
industrial
laundries
from
avoided
stigma
[
i.
e.
($
3.4
to
$
6.9
million/
year)
x
(
14.4%)].
173
Impact
Element
11B
Avoided
RCRA
Generator
Administrative
(
Paperwork
Burden)
Costs
to
Industrial
Laundries
Under
Alternative
Baseline
(
i.
e.
If
Baseline
Defined
as
Hypothetical
Full
Compliance
With
RCRA
Subtitle
C
Regulations)
A.
Estimated
Number
of
Affected
Industrial
Laundries:
Facilities
%
Total
number
of
industrial
wipes
laundries
in
states
adopting
rule
=
881
100%
Number
of
laundries
which
may
become
RCRA
LQGs
=
30
3%
Number
of
laundries
which
may
become
RCRA
SQGs
=
389
44%
Total
number
laundries
which
may
become
RCRA
generators
(
SQGs+
LQGs)
=
419
48%
B.
Unit
Costs
(
Average
Per
Facility
in
2001$)
for
RCRA
Generator
Administrative
Requirements:
Item
RCRA
Generator
Administrative
Requirement
Code
of
Federal
Regulations
citations
One­
time
cost
per
facility
Annual
cost
per
facility
Annualized
cost/
facility
1
Obtain
EPA
ID
number
(
EPA
Form
8700­
12)
40
CFR
262.12
$
206
$
104
$
135
2
RCRA
waste
determination
(
apply
knowledge
cost
represented
in
this
table,
not
testing)
40
CFR
262.11
&
268.7
$
11
$
0
$
1
3
RCRA
preparedness
&
prevention
40
CFR
265
Subpart
C
3a
Must
have
internal
emergency
communications
or
alarm
system,
with
immediate
access
40
CFR
265.32(
a)
&
265.34
Assume
already
implemented
at
laundries
3b
Must
have
phone
or
radio
for
emergency
local
fire/
police
contact
40
CFR
265.32(
b)
Assume
already
implemented
at
laundries
3c
Must
have
portable
fire
extinguishers
&
special
extinguishing
eqpmt
40
CFR
265.32(
c)
Assume
already
implemented
at
laundries
3d
Must
have
spill
control
equipment
40
CFR
265.32(
c)
Assume
already
implemented
at
laundries
3e
Must
have
decontamination
equipment
40
CFR
265.32(
c)
Assume
already
implemented
at
laundries
3f
Must
have
adequate
water
volume
&
pressure
to
supply
fire
protection
systems
40
CFR
265.32(
d)
Assume
already
implemented
at
laundries
3g
Must
test/
maintain
emergency
communications
equipment
40
CFR
265.33
Assume
already
implemented
at
laundries
3h
Provide
unobstructed
aisle
space
for
emergency
access
to
any
area
of
facility
40
CFR
265.35
Assume
already
implemented
at
laundries
3i
Arrange
to
familiarize
State
&
local
police,
fire,
&
hospitals
with
facility
&
haz
waste
40
CFR
265.37
$
40
$
0
$
5.3
3j
Document
whether
State
or
local
authorities
decline
to
participate
40
CFR
265.37(
4)(
b)
$
4
$
0
$
0.5
4
RCRA
contingency
plan
&
emergency
procedures
40
CFR
265
Subpart
D
Prepare
contingency
plan
40
CFR
265.51
&
265.52
$
227
$
0
$
30
Maintain
copy
of
contingency
plan
at
facility
40
CFR
265.53(
a)
$
2
$
0
$
0.2
Submit
copies
of
contingency
plan
to
all
state
&
local
emergency
centers
40
CFR
265.53(
b)
$
9
$
0
$
1.1
Amend
contingency
plan
as
appropriate
40
CFR
265.54
$
0
$
40
$
40
Designation
&
provision
of
on­
call
employee
as
emergency
coordinator
40
CFR
265.55
$
0
$
21
$
21
Implement
14**
emergency
procedures
during
imminent
or
actual
emergency
40
CFR
265.56
$
0
$
310
$
310
5
Personnel
training
(
classroom
or
on­
the­
job
using
haz
waste
professional)
40
CFR
265.16
$
2,485
$
2,020
$
2,350
6
Prepare
RCRA
manifests
(
EPA
Form
8700­
22)
for
waste
transport
40
CFR
262
Subpart
B
Estimated
in
another
table
7
Mark
each
package
&
container
of
haz
waste
for
transport
40
CFR
262.32
$
0
$
11
$
11
8
Offer
USDOT
placard
to
waste
transporter
40
CFR
262.33
Estimated
in
another
table
9
Prepare
&
submit
RCRA
Biennial
Report
40
CFR
262.41
$
0
$
801
$
801
10
Exception
reporting:
40
CFR
262.42
10a*
Contact
TSDF
if
do
not
receive
manifest
receipt
in
35
days
40
CFR
262.42(
a)(
1)
$
0
$
56
$
56
10b*
Submit
exception
report
to
EPA
regional
office
if
don't
receive
manifest
receipt
40
CFR
262.42(
a)(
2)
$
0
$
56
$
56
11
Prepare
procedures
to
comply
with
haz
waste
accumulation
storage
time
limits
40
CFR
262.34
$
0
$
92
$
92
12
Indicate
accumulation
start
date
and
label
each
accumulation
container
40
CFR
262.34(
a)(
2)&(
3)
$
0
$
11
$
11
Item
RCRA
Generator
Administrative
Requirement
Code
of
Federal
Regulations
citations
One­
time
cost
per
facility
Annual
cost
per
facility
Annualized
cost/
facility
174
13
Inspect
waste
accumulation
container
areas
weekly
40
CFR
265.174
$
1,201
$
1,267
$
1,427
14
Additional
reporting
as
requested
by
EPA
40
CFR
262.43
$
0
$
11
$
11
15
RCRA
recordkeeping
(
manifest
receipts,
inspection
records;
includes
cost
for
file
cabinet)
40
CFR
262.40
$
550
$
2
$
75
Column
totals
(
average
cost
per
facility)
=
$
4,733
$
4,802
$
5,435
C.
Total
RCRA
Administrative
Cost
to
Affected
Industrial
Laundries:
Initial
Annual
Annualized
$
1,980,000
$
2,014,000
$
2,279,000
Explanatory
Notes:
(
a)
*
Not
required
of
SQGs
(
i.
e.
generators
between
220
to
2,200
pounds
haz
waste
in
a
calendar
month).
(
b)
**
The
14
emergency
procedures
of
40
CFR
265.56
include
activating,
notifying,
identifying,
assessing,
reporting,
ensuring,
monitoring,
providing,
&
cleaning
activities.
(
c)
Unit
cost
sources:
!
USEPA­
OSW
"
Supporting
Statement
for
Information
Collection
Request
(
ICR)
Nr.
0820.08:
Hazardous
Waste
Generator
Standards",
22
June
2001.
Unit
costs
adapted
from
the
ICR
source
document
for
purpose
of
estimating
economic
costs,
not
just
paperwork
burden
costs
of
the
ICR;
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
icr/
icrlist.
html;
labor
hour
data
applied
from
this
source,
with
2001$
wage
rates
based
on
data
from
Bureau
of
Labor
Statistics
(
BLS).
!
USEPA­
OSW
"
Supporting
Statement
for
Information
Collection
Request
(
ICR)
Nr.
261.13:
Notification
of
Regulated
Waste
Activity",
22
July
1999.
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
opperid1/
icrs/
icrpages/
0261ss13.
htm;
labor
hour
data
applied
from
this
source,
with
2001$
wage
rates
based
on
data
from
BLS.
!
USEPA­
OECA­
ORE
"
Estimating
Costs
for
the
Economic
Benefits
of
RCRA
Noncompliance",
Table
3­
3:
Typical
Cost
Estimates
for
Generators,
Sept
1997.
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
epaoswer/
hazwaste/
gener/
f006/
s0004.
pdf;
Data
from
this
source
updated
from
1996$
to
2001$
by
the
labor
cost
update
multiplier
(
based
on
BLS
Employment
Cost
Index)
=
1.244
(
d)
CFR
=
Code
of
Federal
Regulations:
http://
www.
gpo.
gov/
nara/
cfr/
index.
html
14
Average
annual
sludge
generation
by
industrial
laundries
derived
from
the
USEPA's
1994
Section
308
survey
of
industrial
laundries.

15
The
RCRA
Subtitle
C
hazardous
waste
regulations
basically
require
hazardous
waste
generators
to:
(
a)
apply
for
a
USEPA
ID
number
(
40
CFR
262.12),
(
b)
avoid
accumulating
hazardous
wastes
more
than
90
days
on­
site
(
40
CFR
262.34),
(
c)
package,
mark,
placard
and
manifest
all
hazardous
waste
shipments
(
40
CFR
262.20
to
262.33),
and
(
d)
submit
a
biennial
report
to
USEPA
(
40
CFR
262.40
to
262.44).
Relative
to
an
average
81
tons
sludge
per
laundry
per
year,
the
90­
day
on­
site
waste
accumulation
limit
translates
into
a
minimum
of
four
20­
ton
shipments
per
year
per
laundry
(
20
tons
is
equal
to
one
full
truckload).
The
national
average,
one­
way
truck
transport
distance
to
RCRA­
permitted
hazardous
waste
incinerators
from
industrial
waste
generators
is
about
200
miles,
and
the
average
truck
transport
cost
(
with
a
RCRA
haz
waste
manifest)
is
about
$
0.35/
ton­
mile
for
drummed
waste
(
source:
USEPA­
OSW­
EMRAD
"
Unit
Cost
Compendium").
The
average
facility
cost
for
waste
transport
may
be
estimated
by
the
following
computation:
[($
0.35/
ton­
mile)
x
(
200
miles)
x
(
20
tons/
trip)
x
(
4
trips/
year)]
=
$
5,600
per
year
per
laundry
The
$
900
per­
ton
US
national
average
cost
for
commercial
incineration
of
hazardous
wastes
(
drummed
pumpable
sludges)
is
derived
from
the
$
225
per
drum
national
average
cost
reported
by
the
Environmental
Technology
Council's
Sept
2000
national
survey
database
(
http://
www.
etc.
org/
costsurvey4.
cfm
),
assuming
an
average
55­
gallon
drum
container
of
sludge
weighs
500
pounds
(
i.
e.
4
drums
per
ton).

175
Impact
Element
11C
Estimation
of
Hypothetical
Annual
Cost
Savings
for
Management
of
Industrial
Laundry
Sludge
if
Sludges
Were
Regulated
as
RCRA
"
Derived­
From"
Hazardous
Waste
!
The
average
annual
sludge
generation
from
an
industrial
laundry
that
manages
reusable
wipes
is
estimated
at
81
tons
per
year.
14
!
Assuming
a
$
900
per­
ton
national
average
cost
for
RCRA
Subtitle
C
permitted
hazardous
waste
incineration
of
these
sludges,
plus
another
$
5,600
per
laundry
per
year
for
manifesting
and
transporting
these
sludges
from
the
laundries
to
the
RCRA­
permitted
incinerator15,
the
annual
cost
of
RCRA
hazardous
waste
management
for
these
sludges
could
be
as
high
as
$
78,500
per
laundry
(
i.
e.
[
81
tons
x
$
900/
ton]
+
$
5,600).

!
The
national
annual
total
cost
to
590
to
1,175
industrial
laundries
could
be
$
46
to
$
92
million
per
year
(
i.
e.
(
590
x
$
78,500/
year)
to
(
1,175
x
$
78,500/
year).
176
Summary
of
"
Most­
Likely"
Direct
Impact
Estimates
Summary
of
Estimated
Direct
Impacts
Potential
Incremental
Costs
&
Savings
Relative
to
Current
State
Policy
Baseline
Impact
Category
Impact
Item
Impact
Component
(
list
not
in
sequential
or
magnitude
order)
A
B
C
D
(
A
+
C)
(
B
+
D)
DISPOSABLE
WIPES
REUSABLE
WIPES
COMBINED
IMPACT
First­
year
Annualized*
First­
year
Annualized*
First­
year
Annualized*
Fixed
1A
Read
&
disseminate
rule
Spent
solvent
wipes
generators
=
$
439,000
$
58,000
$
5,815,000
$
774,000
$
6,254,000
$
832,000
Other
handlers
(
e.
g.
solid
waste
mgmt;
laundries)
=
$
96,000
$
13,000
$
26,000
$
4,000
$
122,000
$
17,000
Fixed
1B
Laundries
assess
customers'
RCRA
status
Industrial
laundry
survey
cost
=
$
0
$
0
$
735,000
$
262,000
$
735,000
$
262,000
Laundry
customer
response
cost
=
$
0
$
0
$
613,000
$
218,000
$
613,000
$
218,000
Variable
2
Wipes
accumulation
containers
$
5,694,000
$
1,130,000
$
8,146,000
$
1,617,000
$
13,840,000
$
2,747,000
Variable
3A
Closed
transport
containers
for
spent
wipes
(
2
options)
If
plastic
bags
$
19,000
$
19,000
$
499,000
$
499,000
$
518,000
$
518,000
If
metal
drums
$
12,442,000
$
2,836,000
$
4,801,000
$
1,094,000
$
17,243,000
$
3,930,000
Variable
3B
Avoid
RCRA
manifest
cost
for
spent
disposables
($
3,455,000)
($
3,455,000)
$
0
$
0
($
3,455,000)
($
3,455,000)
Variable
4
Container
labels
+
affixing
labor
cost
(
2
options)
If
labels
for
plastic
bags
$
61,000
$
61,000
$
0
$
0
$
61,000
$
61,000
If
labels
for
metal
drums
$
702,000
$
80,000
$
0
$
0
$
702,000
$
80,000
Variable
5A
Labor
cost
for
decanting
accumulation
containers
$
22,000
$
22,000
$
6,201,000
$
6,201,000
$
6,223,000
$
6,223,000
Variable
5B
Manage
"
free
liquids"
collected
from
accumulation
containers
(
2
options):
If
fuel
blenders
=
$
8,000
$
8,000
$
2,873,000
$
2,873,000
$
2,881,000
$
2,881,000
If
solvent
recycling
=
($
6,000)
($
6,000)
($
2,326,000)
($
2,326,000)
($
2,332,000)
($
2,332,000)
Fixed
5C
Sample
wipes
for
5­
gram
"
dry"
(
2
options)
$
520,000
$
69,000
$
0
$
0
$
520,000
$
69,000
Variable
6
Intra­
company
transfers
If
plastic
bags
$
4,000
$
4,000
$
0
$
0
$
4,000
$
4,000
If
metal
drums
$
657,000
$
146,000
$
0
$
0
$
657,000
$
146,000
Variable
7
Transfers
to
intermediate
handler
(
another
company)
If
plastic
bags
$
4,000
$
4,000
$
0
$
0
$
4,000
$
4,000
If
metal
drums
$
657,000
$
146,000
$
0
$
0
$
657,000
$
146,000
Variable
8A
Avoid
RCRA
Subtitle
C
disposal
cost
for
spent
disposables:
($
32,971,000)
($
32,971,000)
$
0
$
0
($
32,971,000)
($
32,971,000)
Variable
8B
Labor
for
decanting
percolated
"
free
liquids"
$
10,000
$
10,000
$
121,000
$
121,000
$
131,000
$
131,000
Variable
8C
Manage
"
free
liquids"
collected
from
transport
containers
(
2
options):
Manifest
+
truck
>
$
0
$
0
$
1,514,000
$
1,514,000
$
1,514,000
$
1,514,000
If
fuel
blenders
=
$
10,000
$
10,000
$
187,000
$
187,000
$
197,000
$
197,000
If
solvent
recycling
=
($
8,000)
($
8,000)
($
151,000)
($
151,000)
($
159,000)
($
159,000)
Fixed
9A
Demonstrate
RCRA
exclusion
to
inspectors
Cost
to
wipes
generators
=
$
3,000
$
3,000
$
33,000
$
33,000
$
36,000
$
36,000
Cost
to
other
wipes
handlers
=
$
152,000
$
152,000
$
400
$
400
$
152,400
$
152,400
Cost
to
state
agencies
=
$
52,000
$
52,000
$
380,000
$
380,000
$
432,000
$
432,000
Fixed
9B
Avoid
SQG
RCRA
Subtitle
C
regulatory
cost
($
784,000)
($
784,000)
$
0
$
0
($
784,000)
($
784,000)

SUMMARIES:
Max
net
savings
impact
(
lowest
costs
+
highest
savings)
=
($
30,150,000)
($
35,630,000)
$
21,610,000
$
9,150,000
($
8,540,000)
($
26,480,000)
Fixed
(
independent
of
annual
wipes
quantity)
=
$
271,000
($
644,000)
$
7,189,000
$
1,258,000
$
7,460,000
$
614,000
Variable
(
dependent
on
annual
wipes
quantity)
=
($
30,421,000)
($
34,986,000)
$
14,421,000
$
7,892,000
($
16,000,000)
($
27,094,000)
%
variable
impact
component
=
99%
98%
67%
86%
68%
98%
Max
net
cost
impact
(
highest
costs
+
lowest
savings)
=
($
15,750,000)
($
32,480,000)
$
31,450,000
$
15,280,000
$
15,700,000
($
17,200,000)
Fixed
(
independent
of
annual
wipes
quantity)
=
$
271,000
($
644,000)
$
7,189,000
$
1,258,000
$
7,460,000
$
614,000
Variable
(
dependent
on
annual
wipes
quantity)
=
($
16,021,000)
($
31,836,000)
$
24,261,000
$
14,022,000
$
8,240,000
($
17,814,000)
%
variable
impact
component
=
98%
98%
77%
92%
52%
97%
Mid­
point
impact
(
average
of
max
net
savings
&
max
net
cost)
=
($
22,950,000)
($
34,055,000)
$
26,530,000
$
12,215,000
$
3,580,000
($
21,840,000)
Implementation
costs
without
annualized
cost
savings
added:
Min
cost
(
lower
cost
options)
=
$
7,074,000
$
1,594,000
$
24,087,000
$
11,627,000
$
31,161,000
$
13,221,000
Max
cost
(
higher
cost
options)
=
$
21,460,000
$
4,730,000
$
31,450,000
$
15,280,000
$
52,910,000
$
20,010,000
Potential
Cost
Savings
w/
out
implementation
costs:
($
37,224,000)
($
37,224,000)
($
2,477,000)
($
2,477,000)
($
39,701,000)
($
39,701,000)

Reusable
wipes
impact
items
used
as
input
to
simulation
of
induced
market
impact
on
industrial
laundries:
Min
cost
(
low­
cost
options
for
1A+
1B+
3A+
4+
5B+
8B+
8C+
9A)
=
$
418,000
($
77,000)
Max
cost
(
if
also
include
5A
+
high­
cost
options)
=
$
16,458,000
$
12,256,000
EXPLANATORY
NOTES:
(
a)
*
Annualized
impacts
equal
first­
year
impacts
for
those
components
which
are
annually­
recurring.
(
b)
Non­
recurring,
first­
year
lump­
sum
impacts
annualized
by
applying
discount
rate
=
7.0%
(
c)
Zero
($
0)
indicates
impact
elements
which
are
not
incremental
to
the
proposed
rule,
because
incurred
under
current
baseline.
(
d)
Parentheses
indicate
anticipated
avoided
costs
(
i.
e.
cost
savings),
incremental
to
current
baseline.
!
**
Other
entities
=
(
1)
solid
waste
management
facilities
(
i.
e.
operators
of
incinerators,
combustors
&
landfills),
and
(
2)
industrial
laundries
(
i.
e.
suppliers
of
reusable
wipes).
!
***
These
items
are
"
fixed"
from
perspective
of
wipes
generators;
however,
these
items
are
"
variable"
according
to
number
of
customers,
from
perspective
of
laundries.
177
Attachment
Set
F
Induced
Market
Impacts
(
cobweb­
type
partial
equilibrium
model
for
simulation
of
potential
impact
of
exclusions
on
US
marketshare
and
relative
price
for
industrial
wipes)
16
The
name
"
cobweb"
comes
from
the
graphical
representation
of
this
model
as
a
two­
axis
diagram
of
price
versus
quantity,
where
the
sequential
time­
lagged
adjustment
mechanism
tracks­
out
a
two­
dimensional
geometric
path
resembling
a
cobweb
(
spider
web)
pattern,
after
multiple
iterations
of
the
mechanism.
Cobweb­
type
models
of
market
pricing
adjustment
date
back
to
1917,
mostly
applied
to
agricultural
markets,
but
have
similar
applicability
for
modelling
price
adjustments
in
manufactured
goods
markets.
A
convenient
review
of
cobweb
modelling
history,
attributes,
and
economics
applications
is
provided
in
Waugh,
Frederick
V.,
"
Cobweb
Models",
Journal
of
Farm
Economics,
Vol.
46,
1964,
pp.
732­
750.
In
addition
to
the
cobweb
model,
there
are
other
published
market
price
adjustment
models
based
on
alternative
economic
theories
and
mathematical
formulations
(
in
varying
degrees
of
simplicity
and
complexity)
available
for
simulating
and
explaining
market
adjustment
processes
such
as
the:
(
a)
Tatonnement
process
model,
(
b)
Edgeworth
exchange
model,
and
(
c)
Marshall
stability
hypothesis
model.

17
The
following
USEPA
economic
analysis
guidance
documents
provide
descriptive
information
about
the
"
partial
equilibrium
analysis"
method:
!
USEPA
Office
of
the
Administrator,
"
Guidelines
for
Preparing
Economic
Analyses",
EPA­
240­
R­
00­
003,
Sept
2000,
Section
8.4.3,
pp.
125
to
126
(
http://
yosemite.
epa.
gov/
ee/
epa/
eed.
nsf/
pages/
guidelines).
!
USEPA
Office
of
Air
Quality
Planning
and
Standards
(
OAQPS),
Innovative
Strategies
and
Economics
Group,
"
OAQPS
Economic
Analysis
Resource
Document",
April
1999,
Section
5.1.2,
pp.
5­
3
to
5­
50
(
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
ttn/
ecas/
econdata/
6807­
305.
pdf).

178
Description
of
the
Cobweb­
Type
Partial
Equilibrium
Market
Model
Applied
in
this
Study
for
Simulating
Possible
Induced
Effects
on
the
US
National
Market
for
Industrial
Wipes
The
following
spreadsheets
present
the
cobweb16­
type
partial
equilibrium
market
model
developed
in
this
study,
for
purpose
of
simulating
potential
induced
effects
of
the
proposed
rule,
on
the
US
industrial
wipes
market.
Basically,
a
"
partial
equilibrium
model"
is
a
mathematical
economics
method
which
may
be
applied,
among
other
purposes,
for
modeling
the
economic
effects
of
regulatory
compliance
costs
on
producers
(
market
supply)
and
consumers
(
market
demand)
in
a
single
affected
market.
17
In
this
study,
the
partial
equilibrium
model
simulates
the
following
supply
and
demand
features
of
the
national
market
for
industrial
wipes,
by
including
these
features
as
exogenous
computational
elements
in
the
model
(
i.
e.
elements
whose
values
are
determined
outside
the
model,
and
which
are
used
as
inputs
to
the
model):

Elements
of
Cobweb­
Type
Partial
Equilibrium
Model
for
the
US
National
Market
for
Industrial
Wipes
Element
Definition
Wipes
products
&
market
conditions:
This
market
is
defined
as
consisting
of
two
categories
of
potentially
substitutable
(
i.
e.
price­
competing)
types
of
industrial
wipes
products:
!
disposable
wipes
(
e.
g.
paper
&
recycled
rags)
!
reusable
wipes
(
cloth)
each
with
its
own
unique
US
national
average
price
($/
wipe)
and
proportion
of
the
total
US
national
sales
marketshare
for
industrial
wipes
(
i.
e.
annual
quantity
industrial
wipes
supplied
to
(
sold)
on
the
US
national
market).

Regulatory
compliance
costs:
The
model
presents
two
alternative
responses
by
industrial
laundry
suppliers
of
reusable
wipes,
in
dealing
with
regulatory
exemption
compliance
costs
(
reflecting
two
alternative
laundry­
to­
customer
relationship
scenarios):
!
Lower­
bound:
Industrial
laundries
incur
only
their
share
of
regulatory
exemption
compliance
costs.

!
Upper­
bound:
Industrial
laundries
incur
their
own
share
plus
their
customers'
share
of
regulatory
exemption
compliance
costs.
179
Regulatory
compliance
cost
pass­
thru:
For
both
customer
relationship
scenarios
above,
the
model
also
distinguishes
two
possible
business
(
firm­
level)
behavioral
responses
to
regulatory
exemption
compliance
costs
on
the
behalf
of
industrial
laundry
suppliers
of
reusable
wipes
(
source:
these
percentages
are
from
the
USEPA
Office
of
Water,
"
Economic
Assessment
for
the
Final
Action
Regarding
Pretreatment
Standards
for
the
Industrial
Laundries
Point
Source
Category",
EPA­
821­
R­
00­
004,
March
2000,
p.
A­
23,
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
ost/
guide/
laundry/
final/
economics.
pdf).
Industrial
laundries
absorb
a
portion
(
68%)
of
compliance
costs
by
cutting
annual
business
profits.

Industrial
laundries
pass­
thru
a
portion
(
32%)
of
compliance
costs
in
the
form
of
higher
reusable
wipes
prices.

Industrial
wipes
profit
margin:
The
model
applies
an
exogenously
determined
average
national
industrial
laundry
profit
margin
on
industrial
reusable
wipes,
in
order
to
establish
a
baseline
from
which
to
subtract
the
fraction
of
compliance
costs
that
are
assumed
internalized
(
incurred)
by
industrial
laundries
rather
than
passed­
thru
to
reusable
wipes
customers.

Price
elasticities
of
demand:
There
are
two
separate
but
complementary
marketshare
equilibrium
adjustment
components
to
the
model
(
each
with
its
own
spreadsheet
presented
in
this
document):
!
Own­
price
elasticity:
Assigns
a
percentage
decrease
in
national
aggregate
demand
for
reusable
wipes
in
relation
to
a
percentage
increase
in
the
national
average
reusable
wipes
price
after
compliance
cost
pass­
thru.

!
Cross­
price
elasticity:
Assigns
a
percentage
decrease
in
national
aggregate
demand
for
reusable
wipes
in
relation
to
a
percentage
decrease
in
the
national
average
disposable
wipes
price
after
compliance
savings.

Sensitivity
analysis:
This
model
is
subject
to
the
same
set
of
sensitivity
analysis
involving
the
computational
(
input)
parameters
identified
elsewhere
in
this
document.

The
endogenous
mechanism
in
the
model
is
a
cobweb­
type
price
adjustment,
which
endogenously
simulates
a
recursive
(
iterative)
time­
lagged
process
whereby
the
national
industrial
wipes
market
establishes
a
new
equilibrium
between
supply
and
demand
for
industrial
wipes,
in
response
to
a
hypothetical
disturbance
(
fluctuation)
in
the
base­
year
national
average
price
of
wipes
in
this
market.
The
estimated
impacts
of
the
proposed
rule
on
both
reusable
and
disposable
wipes
constitute
the
hypothetical
disturbance
in
wipes
prices,
assuming
that
these
impacts
­­­
in
part
and
in
whole,
respectively
 
manifest
themselves
in
the
form
of:

!
higher
average
prices
charged
by
industrial
launderers
for
supplying
reusable
wipes,
and
!
lower
average
life
cycle
costs
to
disposable
wipes
users.

This
equilibrium
adjustment
is
founded
on
the
assumption
that
reusable
and
disposable
industrial
wipes
are
to
some
degree,
price­
competing
substitutes
to
some
users
in
some
applications.
The
degree
of
this
substitution
is
expressed
numerically
by
price­
elasticities
of
demand
as
factors
built­
in
to
the
cobweb­
type
market
model.
Basically,
the
mathematically
iterative
nature
of
the
model
simulates
temporal
dynamics
in
the
market,
and
is
based
on
the
premise
that
there
is
a
time­
lag
between
a
change
in
price
and
market
demand,
according
to
the
following
basic
cobweb
modeling
steps
(
mathematical
iterations):
180
!
Baseline
condition:
The
first
step
of
the
model
(
time
period
=
base
year)
simulates
an
increase
in
the
national
average
price
for
reusable
industrial
wipes,
as
an
induced
effect
from
the
proposed
rule,
under
the
assumption
that
industrial
laundry
suppliers
of
reusable
wipes
may
pass­
through
some
portion
of
the
regulatory
exemption
compliance
costs
to
wipes
customers,
in
the
form
of
higher
prices
for
reusable
wipes.

!
First
model
iteration:
The
second
step
of
the
model
(
time
period
=
base
year
+
1
year)
simulates
a
decrease
in
the
national
aggregate
demand
for
resusable
wipes,
as
a
possible
customer
response
according
to
the
price
elasticity
of
market
demand
for
reusable
wipes
(
i.
e.
as
the
price
of
reusable
wipes
increases,
customer
demand
decreases).

!
Second
iteration:
The
model
subsequently
shifts
this
decreased
market
demand
for
reusable
wipes,
to
an
increase
in
market
demand
for
disposable
wipes,
under
the
constraint
that
the
same
national
annual
demand
for
wipes
(
reusables
+
disposables)
before
the
market
disturbance
(
i.
e.
pre­
regulation),
must
be
met
after
the
disturbance
(
i.
e.
post­
regulation).

!
Subsequent
iterations:
However,
because
of
the
fact
that
the
cost
pass­
thru
component
of
the
cobweb
model
calculates
(
in
time
period
=
base
year
+
1
year)
a
new
higher
price
for
reusable
wipes
based
on
the
rule's
estimated
implementation
(
compliance)
cost
pass­
thru
in
relation
to
the
base­
year
reusable
wipes
marketshare
(
i.
e.
time
period
=
baseline),
there
is
a
time­
lag
built
into
the
model,
whereby
each
increment
in
time
is
simulated
as
one­
year
(
i.
e.
annual
time­
lag),
although
actual
price
adjustment
processes
may
occur
in
smaller
time
increments
of
hours,
days,
weeks,
or
months,
depending
upon
the
type
and
size
of
economic
market.
Consequently,
the
model
simulates
a
new
reusable
wipes
national
average
price
in
each
subsequent
year
(
time
period),
based
on
prior
year
marketshare
(
annual
wipes
quantity
sold),
by
maintaining
both
a
constant
after­
tax
profit
margin
(
as
percentage
of
reusable
wipes
annual
sales
revenues)
and
a
constant
annual
after­
tax
profit,
for
industrial
laundry
suppliers
of
reusable
wipes.
The
model
endogenously
makes
multiple
year
iterations
(
i.
e.
(
base
year
+
1
year),
to
(
base
year
+
6
years))
to
mathematically
converge
to
a
market
equilibrium
reusable
wipes
price.

The
outputs
of
the
model
are
mathematically­
simulated,
potential
new
equilibrium
values
for
the
following
US
national
market
characteristics
for
industrial
wipes:

!
Industrial
laundry
implementation
(
rule
compliance)
costs
under
the
model­
simulated
dynamic
market
conditions
(
which
may
be
more
or
less
than
compliance
costs
as
estimated
under
initial
static
market
conditions).
!
National
average
unit
costs
($/
wipe)
for
both
reusable
and
disposable
industrial
wipes
(
wipes
"
unit
cost"
in
the
model
includes
the
market
supplier
price
for
the
wipe,
plus
any
additional
costs
to
the
wipes
user
for
life­
cycle
management
of
the
wipe,
such
as
cost
for
disposal
of
the
spent
wipe
as
solid
waste).
!
National
marketshare
for
both
reusable
and
disposable
industrial
wipes.
!
National
annual
total
market
cost
(
i.
e.
annual
real
resource
cost)
for
both
reusable
and
disposable
industrial
wipes.

USEPA
operationalized
this
model
as
three
distinct
computation
(
spreadsheet)
modules:

!
Module
I:
Potential
reusable
wipes
price
adjustment
and
national
market
response
according
to
own­
price
elasticity
mechanism.
!
Module
II:
Same
as
Module
I
but
with
cross­
price
elasticity
applied
in
place
of
own­
price
elasticity.
!
Module
III:
A
possible
composite
(
net)
effect
taking
both
types
of
price
elasticity
into
account.

The
following
table
displays
the
mathematical
components
of
the
cobweb­
type
spreadsheet
model
according
to
the
three
modules.
The
computation
results
for
each
module
are
displayed
in
three
spreadsheets
which
follow
the
table.
181
Mathematical
Components
of
the
Cobweb­
Type
Partial
Equilibrium
Market
Model
Developed
in
this
Study
for
Simulation
of
Potential
Induced
Effects
on
the
US
National
Market
for
Industrial
Wipes
Mathematical
symbol
key:
!
First
character
(
capital
letter)
designates
economic
variable
(
P=
price;
Q=
quantity;
R=
revenue;
F=
profit;
I=
impact*;
E=
elasticity**)
!
Second
character
(
small
letter)
designates
type
of
wipe
(
r=
reusable;
d=
disposable;
n=
national)
!
Third
character
(
number)
designates
time
period
(
0=
base
year;
1=
base
+
1
year;
2=
base
+
2;
t=
base
+
t­
years);
absence
designates
constant
element.

Model
Module
Reusable
Wipes
Market
Disposable
Wipes
Market
Combined
National
Market
(
Reusables
&
Disposables)

Module
I.
Own­
Price
Elasticity
Module
!
Fr
remains
constant
!
Rr0
=
Qr0
x
Pr0
!
Fr0
=
Rr0
x
14%
!
Pr1
=
(
Rr0
+
Ir0)/
Qr0
(
initial
price
adjustment)
!
Qr1
=
Qr0
+
[
E(
own)
r
x
((
Pr1
­
Pr0)/
Pr0)
x
Qr0]
!
Rr1
=
Qr1
x
Pr1
!
Ir1
=
[(
Qr1/
Qr0)
x
(
Ir0
x
95%)]
+
[
Ir0
x
(
100%
­
95%)]
!
Fr1
=
(
Rr1
­
Ir1)
­
(
Pr0
x
(
100%
­
14%)
x
Qr1)
!
Pd
decreases
!
Qd
increases
!
Id
remains
constant
!
Rd0
=
Qd0
x
Pd0
!
Pd1
=
(
Rd0
+
Id)/
Qd0
!
Qd1
=
Qn
­
Qr1
!
Rd1
=
Qd1
x
Pd1
!
Qr0
+
Qd0
=
Qn
!
Qr1
+
Qd1
=
Qn
.....
!
Qrt
+
Qdt
=
Qn
Module
II.
Cross­
Price
Elasticity
Module
!
Pr1
=
(
Rr0
+
Ir0)/
Qr0
!
Qr1
=
Qr0
+
[
E(
cross)
r
x
((
Pd1­
Pd0)/
Pd0)
x
Qr0]
!
Rr1
=
Qr1
x
Pr1
!
Ir1
=
[(
Qr1/
Qr0)
x
(
Ir0
x
95%)]
+
[
Ir0
x
(
100%
­
95%)]
!
Fr1
=
(
Rr1
­
Ir1)
­
[(
Pr0
x
(
100%
­
14%)
x
Qr1)]

Module
III.
Composite
Effect
Module
(
own­
&
cross­
price
elasticity)
!
Qr1
=
Qr0
+
[(
Qr1
­
Qr0)
+
(
Qr1
­
Qr0)]
module
I
module
II
!
Pr1
=
(
Rr0
+
Ir)/
Qr0
!
Ir1
=
[(
Qr1/
Qr0)
+
(
Ir0
x
95%)]
x
[
Ir0
x
(
100%
­
95%)]
!
Fr1
=
(
Rr1
­
Ir1)
­
[(
Pr0
x
(
100%
­
14%)
x
Qr1]
!
Qr2
=
Qr0
+
(
Qr2
­
Qr0)
+
(
Qr2
­
Qr0)]
module
I
module
II
!
Pr2
=
((
Rr1
+
(
Fr0
­
Fr1))/
Qr2
Explanatory
Notes:
(
a)
*
Ir
>$
0
(
i.
e.
net
annual
cost,
depends
upon
%
pass­
thru
and
%
absorbed
into
industrial
launderer
profits);
Id
<$
0
(
net
annual
cost
savings).
(
b)
**
Price
elasticities
of
demand
are
defined
mathematically
as
follows:
!
Own­
price
demand
elasticity:
E(
own)
=
(%
change
Qr)/(%
change
Pr)
=
[(
Qr1
­
Qr0)/
Qr0]
/
[(
Pr1
­
Pr0)/
Pr0]
!
Cross­
price
demand
elasticity:
E(
cross)
=
(%
change
Qr)/(%
change
Pd)
=
[(
Qr1
­
Qr0)/
Qr0]
/
[(
Pd1
­
Pd0)/
Pr0]
(
c)
14%
represents
the
US
national
average
(
1992
&
1997)
after­
tax
profit
rate
for
the
laundry
cleaning
&
garment
services
industry
(
SIC
code
721).
(
d)
95%
represents
the
overall
%
of
compliance
impacts
on
industrial
laundries
(
reusable
wipes)
which
are
variable
according
to
annual
wipes
quantity.
182
Module
I:
Simulation
of
Own­
Price
Elasticity
Effect
on
Industrial
Wipes
Market
(
Under
"
Most
Likely"
Uncertainty
Settings)

MODULE
I:
OWN­
PRICE
ELASTICITY
MODEL
RELATIVE
PRICE/
QUANTITY
OF
REUSABLE
&
DISPOSABLE
INDUSTRIAL
SOLVENT
WIPES
SIMULATION
OF
POTENTIAL
CHANGE
IN
RELATIVE
PRICE
&
MARKETSHARE
Percent
of
annualized
compliance
cost
which
is
variable
to
annual
quantity
wipes
supplied>
97%

Row
Item
Simulation
Iteration
Period
REUSABLE
WIPES
MARKET
DISPOSABLE
WIPES
MARKET
COMBINED
MARKET
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
Annual
Qnty
Affected
Reusable
Wipes
Used
Effective
Unit
Cost
Per
Use
($/
wipe)
Implied
%
change
unit
cost
Annual
Affected
Reusable
Revenues
Annual
After­
tax
Profit
to
Affected
Laundries
Annualized
Compliance
Cost
Pass­
thru
Annual
Quantity
Disposables
Wipes
Used
Effective
Unit
Cost
Per
Use
($/
wipe)
Annual
Effective
Cost
Impact
Annual
Disposable
Effective
Cost
to
Users
Annual
Qnty
Unaffected
Solvent
Wipes
(
CEGs+
contrzd)
(
A
+
G
+
K)
Annual
Demand
for
Solvent
Wipes
(
Reusbl+
Dispbl)
Annual
Total
Effective
Cost
for
All
Solvent
Wipes
32%
­
0.527
<
Reusables
"
own"
elasticity
coefficient*
14.4%
<
Baseline
after­
tax
profit
rate
(
SIC
code
721)
1
Baseline
2,548,204,365
$
0.0535
$
136,331,455
$
19,632,117
$
0
258,719,583
$
0.2336
$
0
$
60,447,558
423,118,915
3,230,042,863
$
229,824,203
2
Base+
1
$
1,948,800
($
34,060,000)

3
Base+
1
$
0.0543
1.429%
$
0.1020
4
Base+
1
2,529,000,671
$
137,238,152
$
15,342,559
277,923,277
$
28,346,198
423,118,915
3,230,042,863
$
198,629,540
5
Base+
2
$
1,934,521
6
Base+
2
$
0.0543
1.562%
7
Base+
2
2,527,226,356
$
137,320,443
$
15,537,771
279,697,592
$
28,527,165
423,118,915
3,230,042,863
$
198,892,799
8
Base+
3
$
1,933,202
9
Base+
3
$
0.0543
1.551%
10
Base+
3
2,527,362,545
$
137,314,136
$
15,527,929
279,561,404
$
28,513,275
423,118,915
3,230,042,863
$
198,872,601
11
Base+
4
$
1,933,303
12
Base+
4
$
0.0543
1.548%
13
Base+
4
2,527,403,078
$
137,312,258
$
15,523,949
279,520,870
$
28,509,141
423,118,915
3,230,042,863
$
198,866,589
14
Base+
5
$
1,933,333
15
Base+
5
$
0.0543
1.548%
16
Base+
5
2,527,404,713
$
137,312,182
$
15,523,733
279,519,235
$
28,508,974
423,118,915
3,230,042,863
$
198,866,347
17
Base+
6
$
1,933,334
18
Base+
6
$
0.0543
1.548%

19
Base+
6
2,527,404,229
$
137,312,205
$
15,523,776
279,519,719
$
28,509,024
423,118,915
3,230,042,863
$
198,866,419
Return
on
revenue>
11.3%
$
1,933,334
Induced
change=
(
20,800,136)
$
980,750
($
4,108,342)
20,800,136
($
31,938,534)
($
30,957,784)

%
change
=
­
0.8%
1.5%
0.7%
­
20.9%
­
0.8%
8.0%
­
56.3%
­
52.8%
­
13.5%
%
all
reusable
wipes
revenue
=
0.2%
­
1.0%
%
laundry
revenue
=
0.0%
­
0.2%
*
OSW­
EMRAD
derived
an
estimated
"
own"
price
elasticity
based
on
statistical
regression
analysis
of
1978­
1993
historical
market
data
for
industrial
laundries
from
USEPA
Office
of
Water
(
EPA­
821­
R­
00­
004,
March
2000).
183
Module
II:
Simulation
of
Cross­
Price
Elasticity
Effect
on
Industrial
Wipes
Market
(
Under
"
Most
Likely"
Uncertainty
Settings)

MODULE
II:
CROSS­
PRICE
ELASTICITY
MODEL
RELATIVE
PRICE/
QUANTITY
OF
REUSABLE
&
DISPOSABLE
INDUSTRIAL
SOLVENT
WIPES
SIMULATION
OF
POTENTIAL
CHANGE
IN
RELATIVE
PRICE
&
MARKETSHARE
Percent
of
annualized
compliance
cost
which
is
variable
to
annual
quantity
wipes
supplied>
97%

Row
Item
Simulation
Iteration
Period
REUSABLE
WIPES
MARKET
DISPOSABLE
WIPES
MARKET
COMBINED
MARKET
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
Annual
Qnty
Affected
Reusable
Wipes
Used
Effective
Unit
Cost
Per
Use
($/
wipe)
Annual
Affected
Reusable
Revenues
Annual
After­
tax
Profit
to
Affected
Laundries
Annualized
Compliance
Cost
Pass­
thru
Annual
Quantity
Disposables
Wipes
Used
Effective
Unit
Cost
Per
Use
($/
wipe)
Annual
Effective
Cost
Impact
Annual
Disposable
Effective
Cost
to
Users
Annual
Qnty
Unaffected
Solvent
Wipes
(
CESQGs)
(
A
+
F
+
J)
Annual
Demand
for
Solvent
Wipes
(
Reusbl+
Dispbl)
Annual
Total
Effective
Cost
for
All
Solvent
Wipes
32%

0.137
<"
Cross"
elasticity
coefficient*
14.4%
<
Baseline
after­
tax
profit
rate
(
SIC
code
721)
1
Baseline
2,548,204,365
$
0.0535
$
136,331,455
$
19,632,117
$
0
258,719,583
$
0.2336
$
0
$
60,447,558
423,118,915
3,230,042,863
$
229,824,203
2
Base+
1
$
1,948,800
($
34,060,000)

3
Base+
1
$
0.0543
$
0.1020
4
Base+
1
2,351,391,805
$
127,600,071
$
13,970,440
455,532,143
$
46,461,039
423,118,915
3,230,042,863
$
207,106,300
5
Base+
2
$
1,802,458
6
Base+
2
$
0.0550
7
Base+
2
2,351,391,805
$
129,431,525
$
16,112,870
455,532,143
$
46,461,039
423,118,915
3,230,042,863
$
208,937,754
8
Base+
3
$
1,802,458
9
Base+
3
$
0.0549
10
Base+
3
2,351,391,805
$
129,120,548
$
15,801,894
455,532,143
$
46,461,039
423,118,915
3,230,042,863
$
208,626,778
11
Base+
4
$
1,802,458
12
Base+
4
$
0.0549
13
Base+
4
2,351,391,805
$
129,120,548
$
15,801,894
455,532,143
$
46,461,039
423,118,915
3,230,042,863
$
208,626,778
14
Base+
5
$
1,802,458
15
Base+
5
$
0.0549
16
Base+
5
2,351,391,805
$
129,120,548
$
15,801,894
455,532,143
$
46,461,039
423,118,915
3,230,042,863
$
208,626,778
17
Base+
6
$
1,802,458
18
Base+
6
$
0.0549
19
Base+
6
2,351,391,805
$
129,120,548
$
15,801,894
455,532,143
$
46,461,039
423,118,915
3,230,042,863
$
208,626,778
Return
on
revenue>
12.2%
$
1,802,458
$
0.0565
Induced
change=
(
196,812,560)
($
7,210,907)
($
3,830,224)
196,812,560
($
13,986,519)
($
21,197,425)

%
change
=
­
7.7%
5.7%
­
5.3%
­
19.5%
­
7.5%
76.1%
­
56.3%
­
23.1%
­
9.2%
%
all
reusable
revenue
=
­
1.7%
­
0.9%
%
laundry
revenue
=
­
0.3%
­
0.2%

*
In
absence
of
market
data,
OSW­
EMRAD
estimated
"
cross"
price
elasticity,
by
multiplying
the
absolute
value
of
"
own"
elasticity,
by
an
average
ratio
own:
to:
cross
elasticities
based
on
other
published
studies
=
26.0%
184
Module
III:
Simulation
of
Composite
(
Own
+
Cross)
Price
Elasticity
Effect
on
Industrial
Wipes
Market
(
Under
"
Most
Likely"
Settings)

MODULE
III:
COMPOSITE
MODEL
MODULE
(
OWN
+
CROSS
ELASTICITY
EFFECTS)

RELATIVE
PRICE/
QUANTITY
OF
REUSABLE
&
DISPOSABLE
INDUSTRIAL
SOLVENT
WIPES
SIMULATION
OF
POTENTIAL
CHANGE
IN
RELATIVE
PRICE
&
MARKETSHARE
Select
%
variable>
97.2%

Row
Item
Simulation
Iteration
Period
REUSABLE
WIPES
MARKET
DISPOSABLE
WIPES
MARKET
COMBINED
MARKET
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
Own+
Cross
Change
in
in
Annual
Reusable
Qnty
Annual
Qnty
Affected
Reusable
Wipes
Used
Effective
Unit
Cost
Per
Use
($/
wipe)
Annual
Affected
Reusable
Revenues
Annual
After­
tax
Profit
to
Affected
Laundries
Annualized
Compliance
Cost
Pass­
thru
Annual
Quantity
Disposables
Wipes
Used
Effective
Unit
Cost
Per
Use
($/
wipe)
Annual
Effective
Cost
Impact
Annual
Disposable
Effective
Cost
to
Users
Annual
Qnty
Unaffected
Solvent
Wipes
(
CESQGs)
(
B
+
G
+
K)
Annual
Demand
for
Solvent
Wipes
(
Reusbl+
Dispbl)
Annual
Total
Effective
Cost
for
All
Solvent
Wipes
32%

Composite
Effect
(
own­
+
cross­
price
elasticities):
14.4%
<
Baseline
after­
tax
profit
rate
(
SIC
code
721)
1
Baseline
2,548,204,365
$
0.0535
$
136,331,455
$
19,632,117
$
0
258,719,583
$
0.2336
$
0
$
60,447,558
423,118,915
3,230,042,863
$
229,824,203
2
Base+
1
$
1,948,800
($
34,060,000)

3
Base+
1
$
0.0543
$
0.1020
4
Base+
1
(
216,016,254)
2,332,188,111
$
126,557,968
$
13,822,082
474,735,837
$
48,419,679
423,118,915
3,230,042,863
$
208,022,838
5
Base+
2
$
1,788,179
6
Base+
2
$
0.0551
7
Base+
2
(
217,790,569)
2,330,413,796
$
128,470,309
$
16,158,320
476,510,152
$
48,600,647
423,118,915
3,230,042,863
$
210,116,146
8
Base+
3
$
1,786,860
9
Base+
3
$
0.0550
10
Base+
3
(
217,654,381)
2,330,549,984
$
128,154,519
$
15,838,995
476,373,964
$
48,586,757
423,118,915
3,230,042,863
$
209,786,466
11
Base+
4
$
1,786,961
12
Base+
4
$
0.0550
13
Base+
4
(
217,613,847)
2,330,590,518
$
128,152,578
$
15,834,952
476,333,430
$
48,582,622
423,118,915
3,230,042,863
$
209,780,391
14
Base+
5
$
1,786,991
15
Base+
5
$
0.0550
16
Base+
5
(
217,612,212)
2,330,592,153
$
128,152,477
$
15,834,711
476,331,795
$
48,582,456
423,118,915
3,230,042,863
$
209,780,123
17
Base+
6
$
1,786,992
18
Base+
6
$
0.0550
19
Base+
6
(
217,612,212)
2,330,592,153
$
128,152,525
$
15,834,756
476,331,795
$
48,582,456
423,118,915
3,230,042,863
$
209,780,171
Return
on
revenue>
12.4%
$
1,786,992
$
0.0566
Induced
change=
(
217,612,212)
($
8,178,930)
($
3,800,000)
217,612,212
($
11,865,102)
($
20,044,032)

%
change
=
­
8.5%
5.8%
­
6.0%
­
19.4%
­
100.0%
84.1%
­
56.3%
­
19.6%
­
8.7%
%
all
reusable
revenue
=
­
2.0%
­
0.9%
%
laundry
revenue
=
­
0.4%
­
0.2%

*
In
absence
of
market
data,
OSW­
EMRAD
estimated
"
cross"
price
elasticity,
by
multiplying
the
absolute
value
of
"
own"
elasticity,
by
an
average
ratio
own:
to:
cross
elasticities
based
on
other
published
studies
=
26.0%
185
Attachment
Set
G
Small
Business
Impacts
186
Small
Business
Impacts
The
following
series
of
spreadsheets
display
the
results
of
the
small
business
impact
analysis,
as
well
as
contains
supplementary
small
business
data
and
impact
estimation
tables.
The
following
analysis
applied
US
Small
Business
Administration
definitions
of
"
small
firms"
(
based
either
on
company
number
of
employees,
or
company
annual
revenues),
in
relation
to
1997
Bureau
of
Census
data
categorized
into
seven
small
firm
size
bins.
These
findings
are
presented
for
two
separate
small
business
categories:

!
Industrial
wipes
users
("
generators")
!
Reusable
industrial
wipes
laundries
For
the
industrial
laundry
small
business
impact
analysis,
the
1997
Bureau
of
Census
count
of
establishments
were
categorized
into
ten
(
decile)
wipes
business
volume
bins,
reflecting
the
fact
that
industrial
laundries
receive
and
launder
other
types
of
items.
The
small
business
impact
analysis
includes
both
direct
and
induced
impact
estimates,
expressed
on
an
average
annualized
basis
at
the
firm
level.
The
USEPA's
small
business
impact
guidance
is
applied
for
purpose
of
benchmarking
the
estimated
number
of
impacted
small
firms,
and
the
monetary
magnitude
significance
of
such
potential
impacts.
187
DEFINITION
OF
"
SMALL"
BUSINESS
ESTABLISHMENT
SIZE
BINS
(
BASED
ON
1997
ECONOMIC
CENSUS
FIRM
SIZE
DATA)

Item
Sub­
Sector
NAICS
subsector
code
NAICS
industry
code
Small
firm
bin
size
units
Small
Firm
Size
Bins
SBA
Small
Firm
Size
Standard*
Bin#
1
Bin#
2
Bin#
3
Bin#
4
Bin#
5
Bin#
6
Bin#
7
1
Printing
323
323110
Employees
1
to
4
5
to
9
10
to
19
20
to
49
50
to
99
100
to
249
250
to
499
500
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
325
325998
Employees
1
to
4
5
to
9
10
to
19
20
to
49
50
to
99
100
to
249
250
to
499
500**
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
326
326199
Employees
1
to
4
5
to
9
10
to
19
20
to
49
50
to
99
100
to
249
250
to
499
500**
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
332
332322
Employees
1
to
4
5
to
9
10
to
19
20
to
49
50
to
99
100
to
249
250
to
499
500**
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
333
333514
Employees
1
to
4
5
to
9
10
to
19
20
to
49
50
to
99
100
to
249
250
to
499
500**
6
Electronics
&
Computers
3344
334419
Employees
1
to
4
5
to
9
10
to
19
20
to
49
50
to
99
100
to
249
250
to
499
500**
7
Transportation
Eqpt
336
336399
Employees
1
to
4
5
to
9
10
to
19
20
to
49
50
to
99
100
to
249
250
to
499
500**
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
337
337122
Employees
1
to
4
5
to
9
10
to
19
20
to
49
50
to
99
100
to
249
250
to
499
500
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
441
441
Revenues
<$
250k
$
250k
to
$
499k
$
500k
to
$
999k
$
1000k
to
$
2499k
$
2500k
to
$
4999k
$
5.0
to
$
9.9mil
$
10mill
to
24.9mil
$
17
­
$
21
million
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
5111
5111
Employees
<
5
5
to
9
10
to
19
20
to
49
50
to
99
100
to
249
250
to
499
500
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
561439
561439
Revenues
<$
100k
$
100k
to
$
249k
$
250k
to
$
499k
$
500k
to
$
999k
$
1000k
to
$
2499k
$
2500k
to
$
4999k
Not
applicable
$
5
million
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
8111
8111
Revenues
<$
100k
$
100k
to
$
249k
$
250k
to
$
499k
$
500k
to
$
999k
$
1000k
to
$
2499k
$
2500k
to
$
4999k
Not
applicable
$
5
million
13
Military
Bases
92812
92812
Not
relevant
 
not
a
business
establishment
category
14
Industrial
Laundries
812332
812332
Revenues
<$
100k
$
100k
to
$
249k
$
250k
to
$
499k
$
500k
to
$
999k
$
1000k
to
$
2499k
$
2500k
to
$
4999k
$
5mil
to
$
10mil
$
10.5
million
Explanatory
Notes:
(
a)
*
SBA
small
firm
size
standards:
http://
www.
sba.
gov/
size
(
b)
**
Indicates
that
500
employees
applied
in
this
document
as
the
SBA
size
standard
for
six
sub­
sectors
which
are
composed
of
some
industries
that
have
750
or
1,000
employee
size
standards.
(
c)
Use
of
500
employees
for
these
six
sub­
sectors
facilitates
the
convenient
use
of
NAICS
code
data
from
the
1997
Economic
Census:
http://
www.
census.
gov/
epcd/
www/
econ97.
html
188
Histogram
Summary
of
Industrial
Laundry
Facility
Sizes
189
Economic
Model
Calibration
for
Disaggregating
Industrial
Laundry
Impacts
by
Facility
Size
Assignment
of
Annual
Wipes
Revenue
by
Laundry
Facility
Size
Class
(
2001)
Note:
This
table
used
to
calibrate
the
economic
model
to
Bureau
of
Census
benchmark
datum
(
revenues)
Percentage
of
laundry
revenues
from
wipes
$
37,514
$
99,014
$
215,494
$
410,581
$
916,538
$
1,818,905
$
2,774,987
$
841,665
$
2,867,698
<<<
Imputed
median
Small­
1
Small­
2
Small­
3
Small­
4
Small­
5
Small­
6
Small­
7
All
Small
Non­
small
All
sizes
10%
$
3,751
$
9,901
$
21,549
$
41,058
$
91,654
$
181,890
$
277,499
$
84,166
$
286,770
$
183,551
20%
$
7,503
$
19,803
$
43,099
$
82,116
$
183,308
$
363,781
$
554,997
$
168,333
$
573,540
$
367,102
30%
$
11,254
$
29,704
$
64,648
$
123,174
$
274,961
$
545,671
$
832,496
$
252,499
$
860,310
$
550,653
40%
$
15,006
$
39,606
$
86,198
$
164,232
$
366,615
$
727,562
$
1,109,995
$
336,666
$
1,147,079
$
734,204
50%
$
18,757
$
49,507
$
107,747
$
205,291
$
458,269
$
909,452
$
1,387,493
$
420,832
$
1,433,849
$
917,755
60%
$
22,508
$
59,408
$
129,296
$
246,349
$
549,923
$
1,091,343
$
1,664,992
$
504,999
$
1,720,619
$
1,101,306
70%
$
26,260
$
69,310
$
150,846
$
287,407
$
641,577
$
1,273,233
$
1,942,491
$
589,165
$
2,007,389
$
1,284,857
80%
$
30,011
$
79,211
$
172,395
$
328,465
$
733,230
$
1,455,124
$
2,219,989
$
673,332
$
2,294,159
$
1,468,408
90%
$
33,763
$
89,112
$
193,945
$
369,523
$
824,884
$
1,637,014
$
2,497,488
$
757,498
$
2,580,929
$
1,651,959
100%
$
37,514
$
99,014
$
215,494
$
410,581
$
916,538
$
1,818,905
$
2,774,987
$
841,665
$
2,867,698
$
1,835,510
Weighted
average
wipes
revenue
per
laundry
=
$
351,601
National
Annual
Wipes
Revenues
Subtotaled
by
Size
Class
(
2001):
10%
$
135,051
$
663,392
$
1,249,866
$
1,847,615
$
5,774,190
$
9,640,194
$
11,099,947
$
30,410,255
$
117,288,865
$
147,699,120
35.8%
20%
$
82,531
$
415,858
$
775,779
$
1,149,627
$
3,666,152
$
6,184,275
$
7,214,966
$
19,489,188
$
73,986,619
$
93,475,807
22.6%
30%
$
22,508
$
118,817
$
193,945
$
246,349
$
824,884
$
1,637,014
$
1,664,992
$
4,708,509
$
18,926,810
$
23,635,318
5.7%
40%
$
30,011
$
158,422
$
258,593
$
328,465
$
1,099,846
$
2,182,685
$
2,219,989
$
6,278,012
$
25,235,746
$
31,513,758
7.6%
50%
$
18,757
$
99,014
$
215,494
$
205,291
$
916,538
$
1,818,905
$
1,387,493
$
4,661,491
$
18,640,040
$
23,301,531
5.6%
60%
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
$
0
0.0%
70%
$
26,260
$
69,310
$
150,846
$
287,407
$
641,577
$
1,273,233
$
1,942,491
$
4,391,123
$
18,066,500
$
22,457,623
5.4%
80%
$
30,011
$
79,211
$
172,395
$
328,465
$
733,230
$
1,455,124
$
2,219,989
$
5,018,426
$
20,647,429
$
25,665,855
6.2%
90%
$
0
$
89,112
$
193,945
$
0
$
824,884
$
1,637,014
$
0
$
2,744,955
$
10,323,714
$
13,068,670
3.2%
100%
$
37,514
$
99,014
$
215,494
$
410,581
$
916,538
$
1,818,905
$
2,774,987
$
6,273,032
$
25,809,286
$
32,082,318
7.8%

Col.
totals
=
$
382,644
$
1,792,150
$
3,426,356
$
4,803,799
$
15,397,840
$
27,647,349
$
30,524,854
$
83,974,991
$
328,925,009
$
412,900,000
100.0%

2001­
updated
Census
data
benchmark
(
annual
reusable
wipes
revenues)
used
to
impute
(
backsolve)
laundry
size
bin
median
revenues*
>
$
412,900,000
Explanatory
Notes:
!
Calibration
performed
by
setting
"
percentage
of
states
adopting"
the
exclusions
to
100%.

!
*$
412.9
million
in
annual
revenues
used
for
calibration
point;
based
on
1997
Economic
Census
revenues
for
SIC
code
7218
"
Industrial
Laundries"
(
NAICS
code
812332),
updated
by
USEPA­
OSW
to
year
2001
by
multiplying
with
the
factor
=
1.0124
(
which
is
the
2001/
1997
ratio
in
average
lease
price
for
reusable
wipes
=
114.2/
112.8).
190
"
Most­
Likely"
Impact
Estimate
SUMMARY
OF
ESTIMATED
AVERAGE
ANNUAL
IMPACTS
ACCORDING
TO
AVERAGE
ANNUAL
IMPACT
PER
AFFECTED
(
ELIGIBLE)
SOLVENT
WIPES
GENERATOR
&
HANDLING
FACILITY
Item
Sub­
sector
NAICS
sub­
sector
code
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Count
of
Affected
LQGs
+
SQGs
(
facilities)
Direct
&
induced
sub­
sector
annualized
impact
(
2
/
1)
Avg
ann'l
impact
per
solvent
wipes
facility
Quantity
of
affected
solvent
wipes/
year
(
2
/
4)
Ann.
impact
per
solvent
wipe
Average
revenues
per
establishment
(
all
estabs)
(
1
x
6)
Sub­
total
revenues
of
affected
estabs
(
2
/
7)
Impact
as
%
of
affected
facility
annual
revenue
Fixed
cost
component
of
annualized
impact/
facility
Variable
component
annualized
impact/
facilty
A.
If
Disposable
Solvent
Wipes
Annualized
Impact
Allocated
Across
Sub­
Sector
Users:
1
Printing
323
2,188
($
8,602,806)
($
3,932)
19,287,742
($
0.4460)
$
2,694,593
$
5,895,972,072
­
0.1459%
($
131)
($
3,801)
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
325
171
($
673,621)
($
3,932)
9,445,028
($
0.0713)
$
11,155,436
$
1,911,279,520
­
0.0352%
($
131)
($
3,801)
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
326
222
($
871,163)
($
3,932)
11,340,323
($
0.0768)
$
7,668,885
$
1,699,236,283
­
0.0513%
($
131)
($
3,801)
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
332
783
($
3,079,351)
($
3,932)
36,139,827
($
0.0852)
$
3,534,688
$
2,768,422,319
­
0.1112%
($
131)
($
3,801)
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
333
380
($
1,492,474)
($
3,932)
21,417,408
($
0.0697)
$
1,735,384
$
658,755,579
­
0.2266%
($
131)
($
3,801)
6
Electronics
&
Computers
3344
84
($
331,690)
($
3,932)
12,663,188
($
0.0262)
$
5,654,297
$
477,015,439
­
0.0695%
($
131)
($
3,801)
7
Transportation
Eqpt
336
175
($
687,323)
($
3,932)
9,277,098
($
0.0741)
$
22,606,244
$
3,951,946,786
­
0.0174%
($
131)
($
3,801)
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
337
257
($
1,011,990)
($
3,932)
11,499,965
($
0.0880)
$
2,923,551
$
752,504,040
­
0.1345%
($
131)
($
3,801)
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
4411
639
($
2,512,328)
($
3,932)
29,235,926
($
0.0859)
$
5,715,674
$
3,652,296,140
­
0.0688%
($
131)
($
3,801)
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
5111
1,242
($
4,882,747)
($
3,932)
9,975,680
($
0.4895)
$
5,878,513
$
7,300,519,594
­
0.0669%
($
131)
($
3,801)
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
561439
337
($
1,325,220)
($
3,932)
2,677,922
($
0.4949)
$
1,315,918
$
443,546,201
­
0.2988%
($
131)
($
3,801)
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
8111
2,177
($
8,560,080)
($
3,932)
85,138,065
($
0.1005)
$
422,800
$
920,523,910
­
0.9299%
($
131)
($
3,801)
13
Military
Bases
92812
7
($
29,208)
($
3,932)
621,409
($
0.0470)
Not
relevant
Not
relevant
Not
relevant
($
131)
($
3,801)

Subtotals
(
or
weighted
average)
=
8,663
($
34,060,000)
($
3,932)
258,719,583
($
0.1316)
$
3,515,901
$
30,432,017,883
­
0.1119%
($
131)
($
3,801)

Min
=
($
0.4949)
3.3%
96.7%
Max
=
($
0.0262)

B.
If
Reusable
Solvent
Wipes
Annualized
Impact
Allocated
Across
Sub­
Sector
Users:
1
Printing
323
28,989
$
2,914,749
$
101
639,963,423
$
0.0046
$
2,694,593
$
78,113,288,848
0.0037%
$
3
$
97
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
325
1,735
$
174,499
$
101
65,904,321
$
0.0026
$
11,155,436
$
19,360,244,604
0.0009%
$
3
$
97
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
326
2,216
$
222,862
$
101
76,635,961
$
0.0029
$
7,668,885
$
16,998,036,538
0.0013%
$
3
$
97
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
332
7,769
$
781,138
$
101
238,123,499
$
0.0033
$
3,534,688
$
27,460,571,785
0.0028%
$
3
$
97
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
333
3,742
$
376,275
$
101
138,105,840
$
0.0027
$
1,735,384
$
6,494,288,848
0.0058%
$
3
$
97
6
Electronics
&
Computers
3344
872
$
87,627
$
101
91,897,779
$
0.0010
$
5,654,297
$
4,927,749,907
0.0018%
$
3
$
97
7
Transportation
Eqpt
336
1,780
$
178,964
$
101
65,418,787
$
0.0027
$
22,606,244
$
40,236,829,371
0.0004%
$
3
$
97
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
337
2,539
$
255,267
$
101
74,312,573
$
0.0034
$
2,923,551
$
7,422,242,102
0.0034%
$
3
$
97
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
4411
6,362
$
639,723
$
101
194,873,507
$
0.0033
$
5,715,674
$
36,365,566,787
0.0018%
$
3
$
97
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
5111
16,453
$
1,654,342
$
101
330,610,306
$
0.0050
$
5,878,513
$
96,721,556,477
0.0017%
$
3
$
97
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
561439
4,466
$
449,003
$
101
88,814,248
$
0.0051
$
1,315,918
$
5,876,359,677
0.0076%
$
3
$
97
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
8111
21,360
$
2,147,636
$
101
538,877,458
$
0.0040
$
422,800
$
9,030,802,627
0.0238%
$
3
$
97
13
Military
Bases
92812
79
$
7,915
$
101
4,666,663
$
0.0017
Not
relevant
Not
relevant
Not
relevant
$
3
$
97
Subtotals
(
or
weighted
average)
=
98,362
$
9,890,000
$
101
2,548,204,365
$
0.0039
$
3,551,041
$
349,007,537,572
0.0028%
$
3
$
97
Min
=
$
0.0010
$
3
$
97
Max
=
$
0.0051
3.3%
96.7%

Total
(
Disposables
+
Reusables)
=
107,025
2,806,923,948
C.
Annualized
Impact
Allocated
to
Industrial
Laundries
in
Form
of
Potential
Reduced
Profit:

Item
Sub­
sector
NAICS
Product
Line
Code
1997
Census
Facilities
Annualized
laundry
impact
(
direct
&
induced)
Avg
impact
per
affected
laundry
($/
yr)
Annual
reusable
wipes
potentially
affected
(
2001)
Annualized
impact
per
reusable
wipe
1997
Census
avg
revenues
per
laundry
1997
Census
annual
revenues
all
laundry
items
Ann.
impact
as
%
of
total
annual
laundry
revenue
Annual
revenue
from
wipes
2001
Impact
as
%
wipes
laundry
revenue
19%
14
Linen
Supply
&
Laundering
(
industrial)
812332
1,613
$
1,835,510
$
2,960,677,822
Laundries
supplying
industrial
wipes
=
8123326303
1,175
8,476,100,000
$
1,835,510
$
2,156,724,390
$
412,900,000
Subset
of
laundries
in
states
adopting
rule
=
75%
881
2,548,204,365
$
1,835,510
$
1,617,543,292
$
309,675,000
Composite
annualized
impact
(
direct
+
induced)
on
laundry
profits
=
($
3,800,000)
($
4,312)
($
0.0015)
­
0.235%
­
1.227%

Fixed­
magnitude
component
(
i.
e.
same
for
each
laundry)
=
($
474)
11%
­
0.026%
­
0.135%
Variable­
magnitude
component
(
i.
e.
depends
on
annual
wipes
quantity
laundered)
=
($
3,838)
89%
­
0.209%
­
1.092%
191
"
Most­
Likely"
Impact
Estimate
(
continued)

ESTABLISHMENT
FIRM­
SIZE
BINS
COMPARISON
OF
ANNUALIZED
IMPACTS
TO
ANNUAL
FIRM
REVENUES
POTENTIAL
COST
IMPACT
ON
REUSABLE
WIPES
USERS
(
spent
solvent
wipes
generators):

Item
Sub­
sector
NAICS
subsector
code
NAICS
code
used
to
represent
subsector*
Small
Firm
Size
Bins
(
1997
Economic
Census)
Reusable
wipes
small
firm
SQG+
LQG
establishmts
Reusable
wipes
Non­
small
SQG+
LQG
estabmts
Reusable
wipes
SQG+
LQG
establishmts
Bin#
1
Bin#
2
Bin#
3
Bin#
4
Bin#
5
Bin#
6
Bin#
7
1
Printing
323*
323110
37.3%
23.8%
17.0%
12.6%
5.0%
3.2%
0.8%
99.7%
0.3%
100%
a
Nr.
of
reusable
wipes
establishments
10,807
6,906
4,922
3,643
1,457
918
246
28,899
90
28,989
b
Estab
average
annual
revenues
(
1997)
$
166,773
$
540,361
$
1,211,816
$
3,219,174
$
8,292,818
$
21,696,276
$
48,942,823
$
2,694,593
c
Estimated
annualized
impact
to
estab
$
9
$
23
$
47
$
119
$
302
$
786
$
1,769
$
101
d
Impact
as
%
of
estabmnt
revenue
0.0056%
0.0042%
0.0039%
0.0037%
0.0036%
0.0036%
0.0036%
0.0037%
2
Chemical
&
Allied
Products
325*
325998
26.5%
15.3%
21.2%
21.1%
9.2%
5.0%
1.3%
99.7%
0.3%
100%
a
Nr.
of
reusable
wipes
establishments
461
266
369
366
160
86
23
1,729
6
1,735
b
Estab
average
annual
revenues
(
1997)
$
811,613
$
2,067,119
$
5,067,393
$
10,157,731
$
24,525,830
$
46,423,351
$
156,459,467
$
11,155,436
c
Estimated
annualized
impact
to
estab
$
10
$
21
$
48
$
92
$
217
$
408
$
1,367
$
101
d
Impact
as
%
of
estabmnt
revenue
0.0013%
0.0010%
0.0009%
0.0009%
0.0009%
0.0009%
0.0009%
0.0009%
3
Plastics
&
Rubber
326*
326199
18.0%
11.4%
16.1%
23.0%
14.0%
12.7%
3.8%
99.0%
1.0%
100%
a
Nr.
of
reusable
wipes
establishments
399
253
356
511
310
281
85
2,195
22
2,216
b
Estab
average
annual
revenues
(
1997)
$
232,163
$
749,746
$
1,548,088
$
3,670,055
$
8,121,002
$
19,183,242
$
45,312,970
$
7,668,885
c
Estimated
annualized
impact
to
estab
$
6
$
13
$
23
$
50
$
106
$
246
$
578
$
101
d
Impact
as
%
of
estabmnt
revenue
0.0027%
0.0017%
0.0015%
0.0014%
0.0013%
0.0013%
0.0013%
0.0013%
4
Fabricated
Metal
Products
332*
332322
21.0%
16.8%
23.1%
24.1%
9.4%
4.7%
0.7%
99.9%
0.1%
100%
a
Nr.
of
reusable
wipes
establishments
1,632
1,307
1,794
1,872
731
367
57
7,760
9
7,769
b
Estab
average
annual
revenues
(
1997)
$
236,301
$
727,509
$
1,725,943
$
3,878,829
$
7,908,748
$
18,766,057
$
41,763,485
$
3,534,688
c
Estimated
annualized
impact
to
estab
$
10
$
23
$
51
$
110
$
221
$
519
$
1,152
$
101
d
Impact
as
%
of
estabmnt
revenue
0.0042%
0.0032%
0.0029%
0.0028%
0.0028%
0.0028%
0.0028%
0.0028%
5
Industrial
Machinery
&
Eqpt
333*
333514
34.7%
22.5%
20.3%
16.0%
4.2%
1.9%
0.2%
99.9%
0.1%
100%
a
Nr.
of
reusable
wipes
establishments
1,299
842
761
598
159
73
8
3,739
3
3,742
b
Estab
average
annual
revenues
(
1997)
$
159,044
$
529,145
$
1,234,547
$
3,133,995
$
7,603,592
$
17,079,837
$
35,781,500
$
1,735,384
c
Estimated
annualized
impact
to
estab
$
12
$
33
$
72
$
179
$
429
$
960
$
2,007
$
101
d
Impact
as
%
of
estabmnt
revenue
0.0077%
0.0062%
0.0059%
0.0057%
0.0056%
0.0056%
0.0056%
0.0058%
6
Electronics
&
Computers
3344*
334419
30.8%
15.4%
15.2%
15.9%
9.8%
8.6%
3.3%
98.9%
1.1%
100%
a
Nr.
of
reusable
wipes
establishments
268
134
133
138
85
75
28
862
10
872
b
Estab
average
annual
revenues
(
1997)
$
182,117
$
715,720
$
1,356,921
$
3,467,357
$
7,769,417
$
16,990,567
$
43,934,817
$
5,654,297
c
Estimated
annualized
impact
to
estab
$
6
$
16
$
27
$
63
$
137
$
295
$
759
$
101
d
Impact
as
%
of
estabmnt
revenue
0.0036%
0.0022%
0.0020%
0.0018%
0.0018%
0.0017%
0.0017%
0.0018%
7
Transportation
Eqpt
336*
336399
22.9%
11.9%
12.9%
17.2%
10.6%
11.1%
8.2%
95.0%
5.0%
100%
a
Nr.
of
reusable
wipes
establishments
407
213
230
306
189
198
146
1,690
90
1,780
b
Estab
average
annual
revenues
(
1997)
$
271,638
$
906,161
$
2,184,036
$
4,575,185
$
9,801,975
$
27,305,030
$
60,861,476
$
22,606,244
c
Estimated
annualized
impact
to
estab
$
5
$
7
$
13
$
23
$
45
$
121
$
265
$
101
d
Impact
as
%
of
estabmnt
revenue
0.0017%
0.0008%
0.0006%
0.0005%
0.0005%
0.0004%
0.0004%
0.0004%
8
Furniture
&
Fixtures
337*
337122
52.1%
16.6%
12.0%
8.3%
4.3%
3.4%
2.1%
98.8%
1.2%
100%
a
Nr.
of
reusable
wipes
establishments
1,324
421
303
212
109
85
53
2,507
32
2,539
b
Estab
average
annual
revenues
(
1997)
$
114,767
$
434,557
$
935,315
$
2,258,826
$
5,780,285
$
13,961,163
$
33,148,300
$
2,923,551
c
Estimated
annualized
impact
to
estab
$
7
$
18
$
34
$
78
$
196
$
468
$
1,105
$
101
d
Impact
as
%
of
estabmnt
revenue
0.0062%
0.0041%
0.0037%
0.0035%
0.0034%
0.0033%
0.0033%
0.0034%
9
Auto
Dealers
(
retail
trade)
4411
4411
11.4%
12.3%
14.2%
14.9%
7.9%
6.9%
9.2%
76.8%
23.2%
100%
a
Nr.
of
reusable
wipes
establishments
724
781
902
946
505
439
587
4,884
1,479
6,362
Firm
avg
revenues
(
1997)
$
147,805
$
364,309
$
714,842
$
1,562,899
$
3,516,204
$
7,205,978
$
16,391,207
$
7,553,575
b
Estab
average
annual
revenues
(
1997)
$
147,546
$
362,377
$
699,884
$
1,430,123
$
2,820,889
$
5,376,398
$
12,592,814
$
5,715,674
c
Estimated
annualized
impact
to
estab
$
6
$
10
$
15
$
28
$
51
$
95
$
217
$
101
d
Impact
as
%
of
estabmnt
revenue
0.0040%
0.0026%
0.0021%
0.0018%
0.0015%
0.0013%
0.0013%
0.0013%
10
Publishing
(
printed
matter)
5111
5111
36.0%
15.1%
12.4%
11.1%
5.6%
5.7%
4.8%
90.8%
9.2%
100%
a
Nr.
of
reusable
wipes
establishments
5,924
2,478
2,037
1,831
927
945
789
14,932
1,522
16,453
Firm
avg
revenues
(
1997)
$
294,086
$
811,844
$
1,804,575
$
3,923,123
$
9,714,883
$
28,334,463
$
83,761,571
$
7,451,525
b
Estab
average
annual
revenues
(
1997)
$
292,748
$
794,184
$
1,707,675
$
3,209,894
$
6,078,029
$
12,218,049
$
15,305,829
$
5,878,513
c
Estimated
annualized
impact
to
estab
$
8
$
16
$
32
$
56
$
104
$
205
$
256
$
101
d
Impact
as
%
of
estabmnt
revenue
0.0028%
0.0020%
0.0018%
0.0014%
0.0011%
0.0007%
0.0003%
0.0013%
11
Business
services
(
copy
shops)
561439
561439
8.1%
17.6%
17.1%
12.6%
9.0%
4.7%
Not
relevant
69.2%
30.8%
100%
a
Nr.
of
reusable
wipes
establishments
363
787
763
562
404
212
3,090
1,375
4,466
Firm
avg
revenues
(
1997)
$
62,017
$
173,524
$
353,733
$
705,248
$
1,492,477
$
3,397,878
$
1,956,416
b
Estab
average
annual
revenues
(
1997)
$
62,017
$
173,524
$
350,485
$
682,179
$
1,311,178
$
2,064,000
$
1,315,918
c
Estimated
annualized
impact
to
estab
$
8
$
16
$
29
$
54
$
100
$
156
$
101
d
Impact
as
%
of
estabmnt
revenue
0.0128%
0.0093%
0.0083%
0.0076%
0.0067%
0.0046%
0.0051%
12
Auto
Repair
&
Maintenance
8111
8111
12.3%
31.1%
26.3%
14.9%
7.2%
2.0%
Not
relevant
93.8%
6.2%
100%
a
Nr.
of
reusable
wipes
establishments
2,633
6,648
5,608
3,174
1,541
430
20,034
1,325
21,360
Item
Sub­
sector
NAICS
subsector
code
NAICS
code
used
to
represent
subsector*
Small
Firm
Size
Bins
(
1997
Economic
Census)
Reusable
wipes
small
firm
SQG+
LQG
establishmts
Reusable
wipes
Non­
small
SQG+
LQG
estabmts
Reusable
wipes
SQG+
LQG
establishmts
Bin#
1
Bin#
2
Bin#
3
Bin#
4
Bin#
5
Bin#
6
Bin#
7
192
Firm
avg
revenues
(
1997)
$
64,908
$
170,162
$
351,875
$
679,335
$
1,447,114
$
3,326,605
$
464,358
b
Estab
average
annual
revenues
(
1997)
$
64,852
$
169,836
$
348,987
$
654,999
$
1,201,655
$
1,587,994
$
422,800
c
Estimated
annualized
impact
to
estab
$
18
$
42
$
84
$
154
$
280
$
368
$
101
d
Impact
as
%
of
estabmnt
revenue
0.0281%
0.0249%
0.0238%
0.0227%
0.0193%
0.0111%
0.0217%
13
Military
Bases
92812
92812
Not
relevant
Not
relevant
Not
relevant
Not
relevant
Not
relevant
Not
relevant
Not
relevant
100%
a
Nr.
of
reusable
wipes
establishments
79
b
Estab
average
annual
revenues
(
1997)
Not
relevant
c
Estimated
annualized
impact
to
estab
$
101
d
Impact
as
%
of
estabmnt
revenue
Not
relevant
Optional
exponential
factor
for
scaling
costs
to
firm
sizes
=
1.000
Column
totals
=
92,321
5,962
98,362
93.9%
6.1%
100%

Count
of
facilities
>
1%
revenue
=
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Count
of
facilities
>
3%
revenue
=
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
*
Indicates
that
in
absence
of
1997
Economic
Census
firm
size
data
for
the
3­
digit
NAICS
code
manufacturing
sub­
sectors,
the
respective
largest
number
of
establishments
6­
digit
NAICS
code
industry
used
to
represent
the
size­
bin
percentage
distribution
for
each
sub­
sector.
The
6­
digit
industry
code
shown
represents
the
single
largest
industry
by
number
of
establishments
within
the
sub­
sector,
ranging
from
7.2%
to
51.0%
subsector
coverages.
Items
9­
14
firm
size
bin
distributions
based
on
exact
data
(
1997
Economic
Census)
matching
the
NAICS
code
displayed
for
these
sub­
sectors.
193
"
Most­
Likely"
Impact
Estimate
(
continued)

POTENTIAL
IMPACT
ON
INDUSTRIAL
LAUNDRIES
(
Suppliers
of
Reusable
Wipes)
BY
SMALL
BUSINESS
SIZE
CATEGORIES
Small
firm
size
bins>
Small
Business
Size
Bins
Non­
small
All
sizes
%
Small­
1
Small­
2
Small­
3
Small­
4
Small­
5
Small­
6
Small­
7
All
Small
Linen
Supply
&
Laundering
4.6%
8.7%
7.5%
5.8%
8.1%
6.9%
5.2%
46.9%
53.1%
100%

Total
number
of
wipes
laundries
(
1997)
54
102
89
68
95
81
61
551
624
1,175
100.0%
Nr.
of
affected
wipes
laundries
(
1997)
41
77
66
51
72
61
46
413
468
881
75.0%

Firm
average
annual
revenues
(
1997)
$
63,451
$
167,470
$
367,652
$
710,414
$
1,614,808
$
3,583,571
$
6,705,089
$
1,522,847
$
84,313,936
$
6,291,001
Estab
average
annual
revenues
(
1997)
$
63,451
$
167,470
$
364,483
$
694,449
$
1,550,216
$
3,076,462
$
4,693,563
$
1,423,577
$
4,850,373
$
3,104,549
Imputed
median
annual
revenues
(
2001)>
$
37,514
$
99,014
$
215,494
$
410,581
$
916,538
$
1,818,905
$
2,774,987
$
841,665
$
2,867,698
$
1,835,510
58.4%

A.
Estimated
Number
Establishments
by
Small
Parent
Firm
Size
Bin:
Sample
Wipes
as
%
of
lbs
laundered
10%
27
50
44
33
47
40
30
271
307
578
65.5%
20%
8
16
14
11
15
13
9
85
97
182
20.7%
30%
1
3
2
2
2
2
2
14
16
30
3.4%
40%
1
3
2
2
2
2
2
14
16
30
3.4%
50%
1
2
1
1
2
1
1
9
10
19
2.1%
60%
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0%
70%
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
6
6
12
1.4%
80%
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
6
6
12
1.4%
90%
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
3
3
6
0.7%
100%
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
6
6
12
1.4%

Column
subtotals
(
subject
to
integer
rounding)
=
41
78
66
52
71
61
47
414
467
881
100.0%

B.
Estimated
Annualized
Impact
to
Industrial
Laundry
Small
Firms
($
per
firm):
Wipes
as
%
of
lbs
laundered
10%
($
46)
($
121)
($
264)
($
504)
($
1,125)
($
2,232)
($
3,405)
($
2,479)
20%
($
92)
($
243)
($
529)
($
1,008)
($
2,249)
($
4,464)
($
6,810)
($
4,484)
30%
($
138)
($
364)
($
793)
($
1,511)
($
3,374)
($
6,696)
($
10,215)
($
6,488)
40%
($
184)
($
486)
($
1,058)
($
2,015)
($
4,499)
($
8,928)
($
13,621)
($
8,493)
50%
($
230)
($
607)
($
1,322)
($
2,519)
($
5,623)
($
11,160)
($
17,026)
($
10,498)
60%
($
276)
($
729)
($
1,587)
($
3,023)
($
6,748)
($
13,392)
($
20,431)
($
12,503)
70%
($
322)
($
850)
($
1,851)
($
3,527)
($
7,873)
($
15,624)
($
23,836)
($
14,507)
80%
($
368)
($
972)
($
2,115)
($
4,031)
($
8,997)
($
17,856)
($
27,241)
($
16,512)
90%
($
414)
($
1,093)
($
2,380)
($
4,534)
($
10,122)
($
20,088)
($
30,646)
($
18,517)
100%
($
460)
($
1,215)
($
2,644)
($
5,038)
($
11,247)
($
22,320)
($
34,052)
($
20,522)

C.
Annualized
Impact
as
Percentage
of
Small
Firm
Annual
Revenue:
Wipes
as
%
of
lbs
laundered
10%
­
0.07%
­
0.07%
­
0.07%
­
0.07%
­
0.07%
­
0.06%
­
0.05%
­
0.039%
20%
­
0.15%
­
0.15%
­
0.14%
­
0.14%
­
0.14%
­
0.12%
­
0.10%
­
0.071%
30%
­
0.22%
­
0.22%
­
0.22%
­
0.21%
­
0.21%
­
0.19%
­
0.15%
­
0.103%
40%
­
0.29%
­
0.29%
­
0.29%
­
0.28%
­
0.28%
­
0.25%
­
0.20%
­
0.135%
50%
­
0.36%
­
0.36%
­
0.36%
­
0.35%
­
0.35%
­
0.31%
­
0.25%
­
0.167%
60%
­
0.44%
­
0.44%
­
0.43%
­
0.43%
­
0.42%
­
0.37%
­
0.30%
­
0.199%
70%
­
0.51%
­
0.51%
­
0.50%
­
0.50%
­
0.49%
­
0.44%
­
0.36%
­
0.231%
80%
­
0.58%
­
0.58%
­
0.58%
­
0.57%
­
0.56%
­
0.50%
­
0.41%
­
0.262%
90%
­
0.65%
­
0.65%
­
0.65%
­
0.64%
­
0.63%
­
0.56%
­
0.46%
­
0.294%
100%
­
0.73%
­
0.73%
­
0.72%
­
0.71%
­
0.70%
­
0.62%
­
0.51%
­
0.326%
Small
firm
size
bins>
Small
Business
Size
Bins
Non­
small
All
sizes
%
Small­
1
Small­
2
Small­
3
Small­
4
Small­
5
Small­
6
Small­
7
All
Small
194
D.
Number
of
Small
Business
Establishments
Impacted
>
1%
Annual
Firm
Revenues:
Wipes
as
%
of
lbs
laundered
10%
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
20%
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
30%
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
40%
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
50%
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
60%
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
70%
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
80%
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
90%
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
100%
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Column
totals
=
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Percent
of
small
industrial
laundries
impacted
>
1%
of
annual
revenues
=
0.0%
414
Percent
of
all
affected
small
wipes
users
+
small
laundries
=
0.000%
92,735
E.
Number
of
Small
Business
Establishments
Impacted
>
3%
Annual
Firm
Revenues:
10%
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
20%
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
30%
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
40%
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
50%
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
60%
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
70%
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
80%
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
90%
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
100%
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Column
totals
=
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Percent
of
small
industrial
laundries
impacted
>
3%
of
annual
revenues
=
0.0%
414
Percent
of
all
affected
small
generators
+
small
laundries
=
0.000%
92,735