Author of National
Publication Articles
Industry News -
February 2002
Listed as a Paint Industry
Expert in 2000-2004 NPCA expert guide
Qualifications: Environmental Consultant for eight years, five years in
field experience. Hazardous Materials Manager, Environmental Assessor, Confined
Space Sup., HAZWOP, Sup., Environmental Auditor. Environmental Specialist,
Incident Responder, EHS-Trainer. Hazardous Materials Manager, Lakeshore Tech.
Cleveland, WI, MS (working) , Environmental Resource Management, Chadwick
University, Birmingham, AL.
Subject Areas: Air Quality, Asbestos -- Removal, Abatement, In-Place
Management, Lead-Based Paint Removal -- Abatement, Lead-Based Paint Removal --
In-Place Management, Clean Air Act Operating Permit Program, Disposal, EPA
Regulation, Fire Protection, Hazardous Waste Disposal/Management, Product
Safety, Recycling, Storm Water Permits
Regulatory Management: Welcome
to the Next Level
By Christopher
Haase/ Environmental Health and Safety
Manager,
|
In the coatings industry, environmental and employee safety regulations are
having an increasing impact on corporate decisions. In the past, companies
have often passed safety to Human Resource (HR) departments and their
environmental issues to outside consultants to save money. To be a player in
this global economy, companies are doing eve<<Selection in Document>>rything
they can to stay competitive. Protecting our greatest investments — people and
the environment — is now becoming a recognizable competitive advantage.
What does global economics have to do with environmental health and safety?
More than you would think. No longer can we move away from or bury our
problems. The global concerns about the environment and employee work
conditions are forcing companies to rethink and restructure. The ability to
plan for future laws and regulations can be overwhelming, and the financial
and public relations consequences that a company can suffer by being out of
compliance are nearly crippling.
It’s not only about complying with regulations anymore — it’s about planning
and sustaining economic growth that is free from regulatory burden. Many
companies focus on the fact that they are in compliance with regulations and
not on the reality that the company is still at risk of being out of
compliance in the near future. That is why it is no accident that profitable
companies typically pave the road to the next generation of environmental
health and safety programs. ISO-14000 is not only a new generation of
environmental programs — it is becoming an industry standard. This corporate
focus has also resulted in a new generation of environmental health and safety
professionals.
|
|
Environmental Health and Safety Professionals
Environmental health and safety professionals are no longer limited to
continued education, regulatory guides, vendor conferences, seminars and law
studies. The new generation of professionals is business smart, owner
friendly, and specialists in public relations and information. Regulations and
their interpretation change daily. The real key to a dynamic and profitable
environmental health and safety program is having a long-term outlook on
future regulations, and designing in-house programs that financially prepare
for those regulations.
Designing in-house programs that evolve with your business and regulations is
crucial. The process of implementing a successful environmental health and
safety program may be more familiar to business owners than they realize. A
solid program is very similar to a small business plan. Why would business
owners want to be involved? For the same reason owners are involved in
business plans: because they are financially liable.
|
|
Step 1:
Strategic Planning
Like all business plans, there are basic steps that are vital for success. The
first step is strategic planning within your organization. Getting current
in-house professionals involved in the development of environmental health and
safety programs is essential. In-house management programs, similar to ISO,
can provide a solid infrastructure for a company’s environmental health and
safety program. Much like planning for ISO certification, a company needs to
financially plan for long-term environmental health and safety programs.
Internal audits and regulatory programs need to be established based on
deficiencies.
If your company is already using a quality assurance program, similar to ISO,
this transition will be easy to obtain. If not, don’t panic. Starting from
scratch on a solid environmental health and safety program can be a
financially beneficial process for most corporate strategic planning
committees. When your committee members discover how many OSHA, EPA, DOT, DNR
and state regulatory programs are required for your industry, they will
understand why this is a company concern, not just a concern of the
environmental health and safety individual.
During strategic planning, your organization should implement a compliance
assurance program (CAP) (see Figures). The basic principal of a CAP outlines
what regulations apply to your company and how compliance is met. This can be
done using a corporate matrix or a flow chart outlining permits, reporting and
training requirements. It is imperative to your business that the CAP defines
what to do if your environmental health and safety manager is not available.
The involvement of a consultant or your state regulatory agency may be
required at this step. If the laws and regulations that apply to your business
are not precisely calculated, tens of thousands of dollars could be wastefully
spent on non-applicable training and in-house regulatory programs. Worse yet,
by misinterpretation of the law, your company could be set up for a severe
violation. Baseline compliance audits are offered by most state agencies and
UW extensions at no cost. However, consultants can offer baseline audits and
assistance with getting your program started for under a $1,000 for most small
businesses.
|
|
Step 2:
Budgeting
The next step is budgeting. Many good environmental health and safety programs
are shot down by upper management due to the lack of thought put into the
economic side. Believe it or not, most regulations have strong economic
foundation. All departments need to be involved. Human Resources (HR) should
be involved in all aspects of regulatory training programs, medical
monitoring, baseline physical evaluations, safety policies and injury
prevention programs. These programs involve access to personal employee
information. Your HR department will not want an untrained or unqualified
environmental health and safety professional changing the existing systems.
Most HR departments welcome the involvement. However, the merger of this
relationship may be a short-term challenge. If it becomes a corporate
obstacle, delegate the affected programs to HR.
There are more than 11 OSHA applicable programs to general industry alone.
Without even adding EPA or DOT training, this could be 10–80 hours of training
a year, ranging from basic office staff awareness to plant manager responders.
It is imperative to your business that effective training is planned wisely.
All training has to merge into the daily operations. Integrating environmental
health and safety programs into written operating procedures, policies, and
trained skills can meet this objective. It is only when regulatory training is
integrated into the daily routine that compliance assurance is obtainable.
Many companies fall into the regulatory rut of training once a year, when it
is required — not when it is needed — costing companies hundreds of hours in
downtime. Worse yet, employee retention and comprehension of all the
applicable training programs is nearly impossible
when training is conducted in this manner. Without employee retention and
comprehension, these programs will not be worth the paper they are written on.
Manufacturing involvement is a necessity to your in-house program’s success.
Manufacturing could inadvertently compromise regulatory compliance on a daily
basis if every employee is not trained on general awareness. Don’t make it an
option; write policies that protect people and your company. This does not
require a lot of extra training. Employee training should be focused on
policies that do not compromise regulatory compliance, what is wrong, and how
to correct or report it. Manufacturing managers have to understand the
importance of a quality regulatory program. Manufacturing training should be
applied with the same diligence and priority as preventive maintenance. Before
a new process is brought online, it is tested and fine tuned for optimal
performance. People should be treated with equal importance. People, like a
process, need to be tested and fine tuned for optimal performance.
Manufacturing training must be conducted based on compliance and deficiencies.
If people have to be trained anyway, why wouldn’t it be done before they go
online? Without constant support and feedback from manufacturing, programs
will not evolve or become streamlined. There is no perfect recipe during
implementation. Feedback provides the ingredients that refine good programs
into great ones.
Purchasing should be integrated into your hazardous materials (Hazmat)
programs. Purchasing agents have a better understanding of what measures and
balances are required to track improvements and deficiencies. Inventory
control is an inherent quality used in both Hazmat management and warehouse
management. Both Hazmat management and warehouse management require prior
knowledge of the physical state, quantity and location of raw materials that
are ordered. The physical state and quantity in which a material is initially
being handled or ordered could have a substantial affect on how the material
is regulated. If your purchasing department was aware that ordering of raw
material as a liquid compared to a powder could remove a regulated status or
eliminate the material as a hazardous waste, they would want to be involved.
Purchasing managers can also help with the economics of short-term disposal
options versus long-term treatment solutions. Finding best source options for
hazardous materials is a never-ending process; you need all the help you can
get.
Using a warehouse management vender rating system on disposal facilities and
consultants will ensure consistency and performance. When it comes to
compliance, consistency is extremely important.
Other warehouse management systems that incorporate cycle counting and
shortage reports are the heart of a hazardous waste minimization program. Why
duplicate efforts? If you have a current system that works, use it. If
warehouse management systems can be used to predict and track usage of
materials months ahead of schedule, why couldn’t those same systems be used to
predict and track how much hazardous waste will be generated? Knowing this
gives companies the ability to design and implement waste-reduction programs
before the waste begins. The basic integration environmental management and
warehouse management typically saves companies thousands of dollars on
disposal, hazardous materials handling, and personnel involvement. It could
also save hundreds of hours wasted on environmental tracking and reporting.
|
|
Step 3:
Forecasting
When corporate management and training systems merge together, the final step
becomes obtainable, sustainable, and consistent. The last step in the process
is forecasting. Knowing what regulations are coming is imperative. Imagine the
competitive edge your company would have, if you knew the price raw materials
and taxes would be in two years or even six months. This kind of forecasting
is actually obtainable in the environmental health and safety world. OSHA and
the EPA are prime examples of regulatory agencies that offer draft regulations
to the public years in advance. Currently, both agencies offer small business
assistance over the Internet that includes training and internal audit
programs. These agencies even conduct financial feasibility studies to reflect
what impact the new regulations will have on business. State and federal
agencies have round-table discussions, live Internet forums, outreach programs
and committees going around the clock. As long as you stay focused on your
organizations needs, this gives you a huge competitive forecasting advantage.
Don’t reinvent the wheel — the solutions are out there. And finding help has
never been easier or more financially feasible. The whole world is involved
through the Internet. Universities, nonprofit organizations and most
regulatory agencies have “low profile” out-reach consultant programs that are
free of charge. Accessing this global repository of information is the real
advantage of the Internet. When used effectively, the Internet can be one of
the most efficient sources of environmental health and safety information, as
well as a vehicle for regulatory communication and reporting. It can deliver
instant access to professionals and regulators ready to answer your questions
on any topic. It can provide real-time discussions, economic solutions,
thousands of free periodicals, regulations, or more importantly, draft and
proposed regulatory forums all to your desk, wherever, and whenever, you want
it.
The problem is that almost 130 million Internet users have proven that the
Internet can be an addictive waste of time. And unfortunately, for that
portion that is actually passed off as information, the vast majority of it is
unedited, unreviewed data, mixed with personal speculation that no
one has verified. The wrong information can lead to violations and the demise
of a company’s environmental health and safety program. A good environmental
health and safety manager is a great information manager that values solid
information provided by regulatory and nonprofit organizations that are not
financially or politically motivated.
The following websites offer some of the best online information currently
available at no cost to the user.
In the past, the environmental health and safety field,
always had a backwards “what if” strategy. What if we are out of compliance?
What if OSHA came knocking? What if that regulation passes?
The “What if” has changed. What if we refine our waste material into a raw
material? What if we integrate our safety training into existing training
programs to increase efficiency and awareness? What if we could forecast
environmental health and safety problems ahead and design them out? What if we
turned our environmental health and safety department into a profitable
department?
In a regulated industry, a good environmental health and safety program can be
a huge competitive edge. Companies that live by regulations are also
controlled by regulations. The financial decisions those companies make are
sometimes only based on avoiding or just complying with regulations and not on
the financial long-term benefits to their process. The original intention of
all government regulations and policies is to protect workers, the environment
and job security by increasing efficiency, productivity and growth. The key is
not making decisions based solely on complying with regulations, but working
with the government to make better regulations based on good business
decisions that benefit us all.
Following this simple recipe can help any company create a successful
environmental health and safety program. The overwhelming benefits and
long-term cost savings greatly outweigh the initial time and financial
investment. The resources are out there to create an effective program.
Economics, networking, solid infrastructure, competitive
edge, dynamic: Does this sound like your company’s environmental, health and
safety department?
|
Cover Story
Capitol Gains? - Dealing
With New Environmental Regs
Joan Hustace Walker
Similar to taking the SAT exam, new environmental legislation is creating many
questions with uncertain answers for paint and coatings formulators. Last year's
concerns have transformed into this year's proposed rules, with industry members
paying close attention to two key issues: air quality controls developing in
Northeastern states and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA)
proposed listing of paint wastes.
If 13 Northeastern states follow the Ozone Transportation Commission's (OTC)
recommendation, architectural and industrial maintenance (AIM) coatings sold in
these states could be required to meet nearly the same stringent, and much
contested, volatile organic compound (VOC) limits as California's Suggested
Control Measure (SCM) for AIM coatings. The OTC was created by the Clean Air Act
Amendments to develop plans to curb ground-level ozone, a component in the
creation of smog, in the following states: Connecticut, Delaware, the District
of Columbia, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New
York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Virginia and Vermont.
In June 2000, OTC signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the 13 states
regarding the commission's efforts to develop a regional strategy and short-term
priority control measures by early 2001. The model rule would be used as a
template for the states to use in adopting their own regulations. The OTC chose
to adopt a model proposed by the Territorial Air Pollution Program
Administrators (STAPPA) and the Association of Local Air Pollution Control
Officials (ALAPCO). The STAPPA-ALAPCO model set VOC limits for AIM coatings
along the same lines as
California's SCM.
The proposed model rule was discussed with industry members in December 2000,
and after "substantial stakeholder comments," a final model rule was released by
OTC on March 28. "Although we didn't take all the recommendations we received,
we did incorporate several important revisions that we think respond to the
concerns of manufacturers and provide flexibility for the industry," said Bruce Carhart, OTC executive director.
OTC set an effective date of
Jan. 1, 2005 for the VOC content limit for all coatings
categories. By placing the OTC dates after CARB's
[California Air Resource Board] dates, manufacturers as well as states will have
"an opportunity to take advantage of the lessons learned in implementing those
limits in
California," Carhart explained.
A second modification made to the proposed model rule was increasing the VOC
content limit for industrial maintenance coatings from 250 to 340 grams per
liter (g/l). OTC had previously proposed the lower limit along with a petition
process for those manufacturers producing coatings that required a less
stringent limit for performance reasons. In the California SCM, manufacturers of
industrial maintenance coatings in specific areas of the
Golden
State (with low temperatures, high humidity and persistent
fog) are allowed to petition for a less stringent limit. OTC related that it
recognized these coatings are needed for essential public services, such as
bridges, and industrial facilities, such as storage tanks, so the commission
waived the petition process entirely and allowed a less stringent VOC content
limit.
"We're very pleased to see that they have recognized that the
California 250 g/l limit is really too low for that category,"
said Christine Stanley, vice president technology, Ameron Coatings. "We feel the 340 g/l limit is much more
attainable."
Additionally, the OTC final model created a separate category for conversion
varnishes and used a VOC content limit of 725 g/l, which is consistent with the
federal AIM rule. Conversion varnishes are used in the hardwood floor finish
market and estimated by OTC to consist of approximately 3 percent of that
market, with three manufacturers. The proposed VOC content limit had been 350
g/l, which OTC concluded was "not technologically feasible at this time." "The
only issue that we have with the model is that we'd like to further discuss
smaller coatings categories, and we feel we're going to need some higher
limits,"
Stanley said. "It is our understanding that will happen at the
state level."
However, the battle may not be over. The National Paint and Coatings Association
(NPCA) is expressing technical arguments of this model,
according to Steve Sides, vice president of environmental health and
international affairs for NPCA. "Even with good technical arguments, someone has
to begin to accept them within the OTC and be a proponent of them. That's a
tough thing to get."
A fourth change to the model is the effective date of the rule. The sell-through
provisions were modified so products manufactured before the effective date can
be sold after
Jan. 1, 2005,
OTC said.
Recycled coatings will receive a break, too, Carhart
said, with higher allowable VOC content limits than previously listed with the
proposed model rule. The final model rule also includes an exemption of coatings
in containers of one liter or less. "We've been trying to provide flexibility to
the industry while at the same time, providing for a model rule that our states
can use," he said. "The model rule that we have here has been developed over
several years and many of our states are facing a federal regulatory deadline of
October."
What the OTC is trying to avoid, Carhart said, is a
patchwork of regulations that vary from state to state. "What we've heard is
that manufacturers of commercial and consumer products would like to have
consistency in regulatory limits, so we've tried to encourage consistency and
avoid [the situation] where one state will do one set of limits and another
state will do another set of limits."
Carhart pointed out that the coatings model rule is only one of
six released. "It is a part of a much larger package addressing sources of
emissions," he explained. "Together, the models are intended to provide a set of
guidelines that individual states can use to meet their own air quality needs."
PAINT WASTE SCRUTINIZED
How the proposed paint waste rule released by EPA in February will affect paint
makers is still uncertain, as is the environmental benefit of the rule.
"Certainly, some waste streams that now are managed as non-hazardous wastes--not
within the hazardous waste system--are going to get sucked into the hole that
RCRA has as waste management under the current proposal,"
NPCA's Sides said.
The proposed rule is based on concentration levels for certain chemicals in
waste solids (acrylamide, acrilonitrile,
antimony, methyl isobutyl ketone and methyl methacrylate) and waste liquids (acrylamide,
acrilonitrile, antimony, ethyl benzene, formaldehyde,
methyl isobutyl ketone, methyl
methacrylate,
methylene chloride, N-butyl
alchohol, styrene, toluene and xylene). EPA
estimates the economic impact on the coatings industry will be around $7.3
million annually. The impact on an individual facility would depend on the
facility's waste, said Patricia Cohn, an EPA environmental protection
specialist.
"If the facility generated less than 40 tons per year of waste solids or less
than 100 tons of waste liquids, it could use knowledge of the waste in order to
make that determination," Cohn said. "If it's more than [those threshold
levels], it would have to do testing."
The fact that the listing is based on concentration levels is a significant
difference with EPA's proposal, Cohn added. "Industry representatives were very
interested in a concentration-based approach because the waste from facility to
facility can be so different, depending on what kind of paints
are being made."
But because of the concentration-base approach, EPA has not been able to
quantify the environmental benefits of the proposed rule. "We didn't go out and
sample waste because we felt it would be very difficult to get samples that were
going to be representative," Cohn explained. "So what we were trying to do was
identify those constituents that are most likely to be in paint and that most
likely pose a risk at excessive levels. Because we don't have data on actually
what's there and what levels it is at, we couldn't quantify the benefits."
Cohn listed benefits of the proposed rule as "avoiding future risks to human
health and the environment by ensuring that any wastes that have concentrations
exceeding the listing level will be managed properly as hazardous waste."
The other benefit is waste minimization. "Raw materials are such a large cost
for paint manufacturers anyway," Cohn said, "there's an advantage to make sure
you're not letting those things get away to the extent possible."
Christopher Haase, environmental health and safety manager, ESS Corp, said EPA's
proposed rule includes some "nasty things, chemicals that scare even consumers."
He added that "if this were already in your paint, you should have been handling
it as a listed hazardous material as it was, under the law. I think EPA is
trying to clarify that."
"However, there are some big costs associated with that," warned Haase, adding
that the proposed rule may cause facilities currently recycling their wastes
some problems. "If [EPA] says that my recycling or any industry's recycling
effort is considered 'treatment' of hazardous material, that
would shut us down."
Facilities that treat paint wastes require special permits and must follow other
regulations to be in compliance. "EPA needs to support in-house recycling
efforts and the waste should be categorized--not in house--but the minute it
leaves the facility," Haase said.
NPCA indicated there may be additional problems with the proposed rule. "The
paint industry is already following good management practices with the waste
that it has," Sides said. "What's happening now is that EPA is looking at other
waste streams and trying to draw them into the RCRA net on the basis of
components that they have surveyed are in our wastes. So our thrust is to look
at the data collection and analysis EPA engaged in to be certain that the agency
has properly called it."
PAINT FEES?
In a recent development, a proposal introduced in
Minnesota and likely to be considered
in
California and other states involves imposing a special fee to
cover recycling post-consumer architectural paints and coatings, or a mandatory
"take-back" of leftover paint by the industry. "This is a critical issue," Sides
said, expressing concern over waste management practices being mandated. "The
view of the industry is that we sell these products to be used, not disposed
of."
Sides pointed to
Canada, where industry is involved in the management of
post-consumer paints with differing results. "They're having difficulty
maintaining what they call the transparent eco fee that the consumer pays," he
noted. "Some of the provinces have decided they don't like the eco fee to be on
the sales. They're requiring that the company, the paint manufacturer, or
retailer pay the fee and not charge the consumer overtly in the bill of sale.
"What this does is create a lot of consternation in the pricing of the product.
And they're not quite sure how to handle this issue from a regulatory
standpoint," Sides said. "While the system was originally one that was quite
acceptable to the industry in
Canada, it is now being modified and moved in directions where
it is becoming increasingly problematic. We don't want to have that kind of
track roll down south of the border."
ESS's Haase noted the recycling effort of cans and aluminum
products of the 1960s and 1970s "worked phenomenally well" and that a similar
effort could work for paint cans and aerosols. "Tacking on a recycling fee that
would give the consumer money back when the container is returned to the vendor
or a drop-off area would work," he said. "It's the deposit fee that makes [the
consumer] come back for a reason. If consumers are willing to do it with
recyclables, why wouldn't they be willing to do it with something hazardous to
begin with?"
Lean,
Mean and Green
Environmental excellence and process safety go hand-in-hand
Link to:
http://www.fetinc.org/FeatureArticle/Lean,%20Mean%20Green.htm
The
U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board (CSB) recently approved
several new recommendations to reduce the number of serious industrial
accidents caused by uncontrolled chemical reactions. Both OSHA and EPA were
called upon to issue new mandatory safety regulations under the Process Safety
Management (PSM) standard and the Risk Management Program (RMP) rule,
respectively. Some experts believe that the potential for a serious incident
is higher today than ever before. In fact, the recordable injury rate of the
top companies in the American Chemistry Council (ACC) has increased in recent
years.*
The
reality is that most company “safety” programs are administered by Human
Resource staff, plant managers and team leaders that have minimal hazardous
chemical, risk management, incident experience or emergency training.
While
most environmental professionals do not consider themselves to be “safety”
managers, they receive more “safety” training during annual certification and
review courses than anyone in their organization, making them “safety”
expert by default.
In
the FET organization we now see more and more professionals taking on the role
of safety. These professionals are getting more involved in their own
companies’ safety programs and decisions. This involvement is leading to a
higher level of compliance and protection.
By
relating the inherent principals applied to resolving environmental issues,
these professionals are achieving equal Health and Safety results reducing
injuries, risk exposure and incidents. The incentive is that this achievement
is not only career rewarding, it is also personally rewarding knowing you have
prevented people from injury, exposure and a potential lifetime of ailments.
This
"Green chemistry" approach has been proven for years in the chemical industry
to produce lower operating costs, reduce waste, eliminate injuries and
increase profits.
Industry leading companies rely on this "Green chemistry" to become more cost
effective, reduce complex operation and simplify procedures to make operations
easier and more reliable, thus, keeping safety simple and obtainable on all
levels.
What
can you do?
Focus
on strengths
Use
the strengths of the current “safety” staff and focus on resolution and
improvement. If current “safety” staff is technically underdeveloped, send
them out for certification and training. If safety is not your area of
expertise, the best involvement may be a “supportive role” offering regulatory
information, guidance and direction.
Be
involved
EHS
professionals need to be involved in the early stages of training; if not,
personnel and process changes or opportunities to apply valuable principals
will be lost. Even a “supportive role” in safety can have dramatic impact on
improving an organization.
Stay
current
Keep
up-to-date on current OSHA regulations and industry safety practices that can
help you and your organization. If you aren’t able to stay current, make sure
someone in your organization is.
FET
can help
On
May 20th, FET is holding an “Environmental Health & Safety Update”
focused on these principals.
Who
will be presenting?
(Please see full announcement for details)
OSHA,
a top insurance company, a global manufacturing company, a leading safety
consultant, a national engineering firm, the Council of EHS Certification, a
leading edge defense supplier and industrial manufacturing leaders.
Did we leave anyone out?
What
are they presenting?
Overview of Regulatory Changes, Employee Orientation Training, Emergency
Medical and Incident Response, EHS Assessments, Loss Control and MOD
Reduction, Certification and Accreditation Overview, Five Minute Safety
Meetings, Site Security and Personnel Control, and Personal Protective
Equipment.
Who
should attend?
Environmental, human resource, and manufacture managers, owners and anyone who
is involved or wants to become involved in safety training, certification,
leadership, and improvement.
Summary
Environmental professionals must become much more actively involved in the
future of safety in order to achieve common goals.
We
still don't know all the answers, but we do know that root causes of both
environmental and safety issues go hand in hand, putting the resolution to
those problems in your hands.
Christopher Haase
FET
Health & Safety Chair
Seminar Details:
May 20th, “Environmental Health & Safety Update,” located at
the Midway Hotel Milwaukee/Brookfield, 1005 S. Moorland Road, Brookfield, WI.
This is a full day workshop dedicated to improving the safety of our
membership.
*Information obtained from AIChE Safety and Health
Division, www.shdiv.aiche.org
Who I work for - About ESS
Clean, naturally
Business, environment not
incompatible, Mequon company finds
By JULIE LARRIVEE - GM Today Correspondent
MEQUON - Environmentally Sensitive Solutions, Inc. (ESS) of Mequon hopes to
make the world a cleaner, safer place.
"Our mission is to increase public awareness of what true environmentally
friendly cleaning products are and to make people aware that cleaning can be
done with more finesse and less brute force," says Matt Pliszka, ESS technical
service representative.
The company recently received a 2004 Governor’s Award for Excellence in
Environmental Performance. ESS was the only small company to be recognized.
The other seven recipients were large corporations.
Two important factors helped ESS earn the Governor’s Award: company products
have helped reduce by 83 million pounds the amount of hazardous materials and
waste emitted by their client’s businesses since 1997; and ESS has
significantly reduced or eliminated costs of wastewater treatment and/or
disposal for their customers.
In the process of manufacturing, Pliszka explains, the part or piece being
fabricated must be cleaned before it can go on to the next step. This process
cleaning means that the part is cleaned several times before it is finished.
The existing products used to clean away things like lubricants, processing
aids and buffing or drawing compounds were solvents that were highly alkaline,
caustic cleaners.
"Our products have a neutral ph - the same as water," he notes. "They will not
burn people’s skin. They aren’t corrosive to the metals being cleaned and they
aren’t hazardous."
Manufacturing companies were somewhat skeptical about the products - until ESS
proved that their products work and that they save the customers money.
"Most people these days are passive environmentalists," Pliszka says. "What we
had to show them was that they could save money by reducing the amount of
wastewater and by reducing the costs of industrial accidents. Their equipment
maintenance costs are lower and there are fewer rejected parts because the
parts get cleaner with our products."
The company wants to retain its small size - employees are "hands-on,
multitaskers," according to Pliszka - as they branch out into consumer
products. The first offering, a dishwasher detergent, will be available this
fall once the naming and labeling process is completed.
"In industrial cleaning, the whole purpose is to clean without human touch,"
Pliszka explains. "That’s exactly what your dishwasher does. Right now,
there’s no real gentle cleaner out there. What is available is harsh. The
purpose of the cleaner is to ‘chew’ the soil off. They are caustic and attack
both the soil and the surface.
"Our cleaner uses a ‘spatula effect’ where it works under the debris and lifts
it off with no harm to the surface. So, you’ll be able to put your fine china,
crystal and pots and pans in the dishwasher without damaging them."
More information about Environmentally Sensitive Solution can be found at
www.neutralsolution.com.
