United States
            Environmental Protection
Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
September 1995
&EPA     WasteWiSe Update

WasteWi$e Update
Making  Gents
of  Waste
          As part of the WasteWi$e program, partner compa
          nies measure success in preventing waste, recy-
          cling, and buying or manufacturing products
          made with recycled content. WasteWi$e partners'
          1994 achievements will be highlighted in the
WasteWi$e First-Year Progress Report to be published this
fall (see notice on page 9). While most partners have
launched recycling programs and un-
derstand how to measure results in this
area, many of the methods used to
quantify waste prevention benefits are
not well developed or documented.
   This issue of the Waste Wi$e Update
is dedicated to sharing information about
techniques and tools for measuring the
effectiveness of waste prevention. Waste
       prevention is using less material
           to get a job done, creating
              less waste before recy-
                 cling. For compa-
 By measuring our progress
and sharing results, we:

 I  Document and better understand
   our accomplishments
~\  Generate pride, participation,
   and momentum
 I  Identify areas for improvement
   Justify the need for additional
nies, this can involve cutting waste that goes into their own
dumpsters as well as eliminating materials that can become
waste for customers. Waste prevention offers opportunities to
conserve materials and reduce costs. Because it encompasses
many different types of activities (substituting or reusing mate-
rials and purchasing in bulk, for example), there's no "one size
fits  all" measurement technique.
  Nonetheless, more and more companies are gauging the
results of their waste prevention efforts. Many are using this
information to improve their programs and to invest scarce
resources in the most effective waste prevention efforts. In
this issue, we share the experiences of several WasteWi$e
partners and report on the results they've achieved.
  WasteWi$e charter partners General Motors and the
Eastman Kodak Company, for example, explain the value
that measurement  adds to their waste reduction activities.
You'll see how companies tailor measurement approaches and
tools to fit their own structure,  operations, and WasteWi$e
                  goals. And you'll discover a wide array
                  of measurement systems currently being
                  used by companies.
                     WasteWi$e partners measure waste
                  prevention for a variety of reasons. First,
                  measuring progress helps partners dis-
                  tinguish between efforts that work and
                  those that don't. It allows companies to
                  replicate successes, set realistic goals for
                  future projects,  and invest their efforts
                  in initiatives that work. Measuring the
                  amount of waste prevented also helps
                  companies determine how much money
                  these initiatives save each year.
                  Reporting these figures to upper man-
                  agement and employees helps build mo-
                  mentum for waste prevention.
                  Promoting waste prevention achieve-
    ments to stockholders, customers, and the general public
    also can enhance a company's image. In most cases, pre-
     cision is not necessary; reasonable estimates can be very
     useful for gauging progress.
         Voluntary programs like WasteWi$e depend on
     measurement of partners' progress to demonstrate that
     creative, nonregulatory approaches to environmental
    protection deliver tangible results. Measurement also
    enables  us to showcase the successful efforts of our
  WasteWi$e partners and to identify high-impact waste
prevention  actions from which others can benefit.
  Waste prevention measurement is a relatively new and
evolving field. WasteWi$e will continue to look for more
effective ways to measure  results  and will share them with our
partners and endorsers. We would also like to hear from you
about your  successes in measuring solid waste reduction.
                                                   —Larry Long, Manager of
                                                    safety and environmental
                                           initiatives, Anheuser-Busch Company

                                                                                         WasteWi$e Update
GM  Meets  tKe  Measurement
        General Motors (GM), headquartered in Detroit,
        Michigan, is one company that has worked hard
        over the past few years to measure its waste reduc-
        tion progress more accurately. The company's re-
        sulting benefits include cost savings, increased
efficiency, and a heightened sense of corporate responsibility.
"We look at waste reduction as one big cost-savings opportu-
nity," says Sandra Brewer of GM headquarters' Worldwide
Facilities Group,  Environmental Regulatory Support.
"Measuring helps us manage our business better by showing
us where we're saving money and where we're not."
  With 330,000 employees, several divisions, and 125 man-
ufacturing and assembly plants nationwide, however, mea-
surement has not been easy. "Until recently, we've been a few
years behind  with the numbers," said Brewer. "We're so big
that it takes a long time to pull information together. There
were always initiatives taking place somewhere within the
company, like a change in packaging or manufacturing, that
we didn't know about."
  When GM's waste reduction program began in 1990,
measurement was an inexact science. The company had only
a "rudimentary" waste reduction survey form that a limited
number of plants filled out (on paper) and returned to head-
quarters. When the waste reduction program went corpo-
ra tewide in 1991, the company revised the survey to better
focus on measurement.
  "Assembly and manufacturing plants generally hate sur-
veys," Brewer said, "so we knew we had to keep it simple."
The new survey continued to ask for figures on waste gener-
ation, waste types, and management methods. But to better
measure the company's waste reduction progress, the survey
also requested basic information on recently implemented
waste reduction projects, including type and amount of
waste prevented, cost savings, and initial capital outlay for
the projects. The survey now picks up  on most of the new
                  initiatives that previously went unde-
                     tected by  headquarters. Brewer said,
                   i  however, that a large  company
                  rj)  shouldn't worry about discovering
                     every last initiative that could be re-
                    ducing waste. "If it's successful
                     enough, you'll hear about the activi-
                     ty sooner or later."
                       GM began computerizing the sur-
                       vey in 1993 to streamline the data
                       collection and management
                       process. More than 100 GM envi-
                       ronmental engineers across the
 GM  Drives Home Waste

 Prevention  Message
    Here are some of the waste prevention activities
 measured and reported through GM's waste reduction
 0  Eliminating printing of 1.5 million service parts cat-
     alogues a year by converting to a paperless system
     that provides auto parts information to GM dealers
     across the nation on microfiche. This action con-
     serves nearly 2 billion pages of paper annually.
     GM has also found  that microfiche is cheaper to
     update and distribute than the printed catalogs.
 •  Supplying Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) to
     dealers through a computer network that connects
     GM dealers across the country. Instead of updating
     and redistributing the binders whenever product
     changes are made,  dealers now have "up to the
     minute" MSDS information at their fingertips. This
     initiative eliminates  the need for 8,000 printed
     binders and 2.3 million  pages of paper annually.
 0  Increasing the use of reusable/returnable shipping
     and packaging containers and adopting  environ-
     mental guidelines for expendable  packaging sup-
     pliers. Several major GM divisions are even
                   working toward zero-landfill goals
                 -  for  packaging wastes.  GM assem-
                 ~ bly plants, for example,  achieved
                          a 50 percent reduction in
                           packaging wastes between
                           1993 and 1994  through
                           redesigning packaging,
                           using returnable packag-
                           ing, and  recycling.
country now update and return data to headquarters on disk,
saving time and labor for data entry and minimizing data
  The key to  measuring successful waste reduction efforts
for a big company like GM? Simplicity. "We ultimately plan
to utilize a corporatewide computer system to transfer all
survey data electronically to headquarters. This would mean
no paper," Brewer said. "We're constantly seeking more effi-
cient ways to collect and analyze our waste reduction data,
and an important part of that is keeping the survey quick
and simple, no matter how far our waste  reduction program
has evolved."

WasteWiSe Update
 Measuring Waste  Reduction:
       A  Spotlight
             on   Our
               Each company encounters its own
               unique challenges in measuring
               waste reduction. Large organiza-
               tions often struggle to identify and
               quantify a range of waste reduc-
   tion activities spread out over a number of facili-
   ties. Smaller companies sometimes lack
   resources to collect data. Those companies that
   have risen to the challenge, however, will tell
   you that measurement is worth the effort. Many
   WasteWiSe partners use measurement informa-
   tion to keep employees motivated, announce re-
   sults to stockholders and customers, and
   evaluate and improve their efforts.

     The methods used to measure progress are
   as diverse as the companies that make up the
   WasteWiSe roster and range from examining
   purchasing records to using computerized
   tracking tools. Here's a sampling of how some
   WasteWiSe partners are measuring their
Banking on Waste Prevention
        Boston-based State Street Bank & Trust Co. con-
        served the equivalent of 10,000 corrugated boxes
        in 1994 by renting reusable plastic crates for in-
        teroffice relocations and moving. Invoices from
        the crate rental agency indicated that plastic
crates were used for 25,000 trips during the moving process.
To determine how many corrugated boxes would be needed
to make the same number of trips, State Street Bank and its
moving consultants estimated that a single corrugated box
could be used an average of 2.5 times. With this informa-
tion, State Steet Bank made the following calculation to de-
termine the quantity of boxes not consumed by renting
reusable plastic crates:
 Total number of trips
 made by plastic crates

 Average number of trips
 made by a single
 corrugated box

 25,000 trips

 2.5 trips/corrugated box
                                                                       =  Total number of corrugated
                                                                          boxes not used
=  10,000 corrugated
   boxes eliminated
  This is a conservative figure because the volume of a
plastic crate is 30 percent larger than the corrugated boxes
previously used in the moving process.
  State Street Bank also has found a useful home for sal-
vaged building materials. This past year, the company sent
two truckloads, or 70,000 pounds, of reusable materials
from a construction and demolition project to a United
Way agency for reuse in a housing project. State Street cal-
culated the weight of material available for reuse using the
hauler's estimate that each truckload contained 35,000
pounds of material.

Perkin-Elmer Packs Savings  in

Return Program

        The Perkin-Elmer Corporation, a leading manu-
        facturer of analytical, environmental, and life
        science systems, has developed an innovative
        program that enables its customers to return
        packing materials to the company for reuse. As a
result of this program, the company, based in Norwalk,
Connecticut, saved $95,000 and reused 62 tons of corru-
gated and foam packaging material.
  To encourage customers to return product packaging,
Perkin-Elmer offers free return shipping and donates $1 to
environmental and wildlife organizations for each package

                                                                                          WasteWi$e Update
received. While staff members were initially
optimistic, the program has surpassed every-
one's expectations by achieving a 28 percent re-
turn rate since its inception in 1992.
  Measuring cost savings and waste prevention
progress resulting from the program is relative-
ly easy for Perkin-Elmer. Because the company
pays the shipping cost of all packing materials returned, it re-
ceives shipping invoices that identify the number and weight
of packages returned. The company enters the data into a
spreadsheet to calculate the total weight and number of pack-
ages. To calculate cost savings, the  company estimated how
much new packaging it would need to purchase if no pack-
ages were returned. This was done by using the net number
of returned (undamaged) packages to calculate the cost of
buying an equal  amount of new packaging.
    The cost of return shipping             $100,000
    (from invoices)
    The cost of refurbishing some           $1 5,000
    of the corrugated boxes

    Total cost                             $115,000

    Cost to purchase equivalent amount     $210,000
    of new packaging
  Thus, the net savings of the package return program is
  Perkin-Elmer plans to work with its offices overseas to
design uniform packaging so that packaging return can be
implemented worldwide.
                                           Measuring Waste Reduction
  A Spotlight
on Our Partners
                  Cleaning Up with
               Pallet Reuse
            Maytag Corporation, a major manufacturer of
            home appliances, floor care products, and
            vending machines,  has effectively measured
            waste prevention associated with its wood pal-
            let reuse program. Participating Maytag facili-
ties (located in Illinois, Iowa, Missouri, Tennessee, and
Indiana) send worn pallets to vendors that remanufacture
them. Some facilities also send their wood pallets to sister
plants for reuse. Combining the efforts of four facilities,
Maytag reused or sent for remanufacture more than 90,000
pallets in 1994.
   Maytag derived this number from company purchasing
records and reports from the pallet remanufacturer. From
these records, the company estimated that at 45 pounds per
            pallet, it eliminated more than 4 million
            pounds of wood waste. In a similar manner,
            the Maytag-Galesburg Refrigeration
            Products facility, located in Galesburg,
            Illinois, estimated that it recovered more than
            3 million pounds of wood pallets.
               The Maytag-Herrin Laundry Products
facility also measured the amount of waste it prevented by
switching to returnable plastic containers for shipments of
washer timers.
  To calculate the waste prevented, the facility multiplied
the weight of one of the previously used corrugated cartons
[42 pounds] by the number of units delivered from the facili-
ty over a six-month period  [390]. Thus, this change eliminat-
ed more than 16,000 pounds of corrugated material.
           Measuring  Waste

           Generated  by


             The switch to reusable packaging can reduce vast
           amounts of waste. Even reusables,  however, gener-
           ate some waste over time. For example, reusable
           containers  will eventually wear down, at which time
           they must be refurbished (if possible), recycled, or
           discarded.  Containers also can be  damaged and re-
           quire repair or replacement. In most cases,  however,
           the amount of waste from reusable containers is
           negligible in the first year or two of use and, over
           time, is many times smaller than the amount of
           waste from single-use containers.
             But how do you calculate the amount of
           reusables that must ultimately be recycled or dis-
           posed of?  If you know the average  life expectancy
           of the reusable container, waste  generation can be
           amortized for the life of the  container. One simple
           way to make this estimate is to divide an individual
           container's weight by its life expectancy. If a
           reusable container weighs 50 pounds and is ex-
           pected to last 10 years, about 5  pounds of waste
           will be generated per container
           per year. This amount can
           then be subtracted from
           total annual waste
           prevention figures^,
           for the reusable

WasteWi$e Update
Waste Reduction Pays

     In 1994, BankAmerica, headquartered in
     San Francisco, California, conserved
     750,000 pounds of paper and saved
     more than $ 1 million through three
     paper reduction initiatives. How would you measure
such an achievement?
   For starters, the company reviewed warehouse distribution
records to determine the effects of a 1994 paper waste reduc-
tion campaign. As part of this campaign, BankAmerica en-
couraged employees to make double-sided copies, carefully
format documents, and pare down distribution lists. To cal-
culate the difference in paper purchases between  1993 and
1994, the bank examined its own warehouse distribution
records for past paper requests from company departments.
In doing so, the company discovered that photocopy and
computer paper supply requests declined by 13 percent and
18 percent, respectively, from 1993 to  1994 —a total reduc-
tion of 200,000 pounds. At the same time, the number of em-
ployees remained approximately the same.

    The company reduced the amount of paper used an-
 nually by 40,000 reams. At 5 pounds and 500 sheets per
 ream, the corporation saved approximately 200,000
 pounds, or 20 million sheets, of paper.
   Secondly, the bank discovered that by eliminating compa-
ny procedure manuals in branch offices, it conserved 25 mil-
lion sheets of paper in one year. Instead of distributing paper
copies, the company set up a centralized reference library and
a telephone support center to provide procedural  information.
   To measure this effort, the bank compared the total number
of manuals printed in 1993 to the number printed in 1994.
The difference between the two years' totals times the number
of pages per manual equalled  the amount of  paper reduced.
The company determined that limiting  the number of manuals
reduced paper use by approximately 250,000 pounds in 1994.

    Estimated decrease in the pounds of paper used: (25
 million sheets of paper/500 sheets per ream) x 5
 pounds/ream = 250,000 pounds
   BankAmerica also began double-sided printing of the ac-
           count reconciliation section of customer checking
                  account statements. Based on warehouse
                   iistribution records, the branch respon-
                  sible for generating and sending these
                   statements requested approximately
                   300,000 fewer pounds of paper in
                    1994 as a result of this change. This
                    reduction occurred even though the
                   number of accounts remained approxi-
                   mately  the same.
                                             Measuring Waste Reduction:
  A Spotlight
on Our Partners
Estimated decrease in the pounds of paper
used: (30 million sheets of paper/500
sheets per ream) x 5 pounds/ream =
300,000 pounds

The combined paper savings realized through
these three initiatives totals 750,000 pounds.
Easier than you thought, right?
         A Drumroll Please...
              :f you have a standard delivery system established with a
              vendor, your company might find measurement as easy
              as Southern Mills did with its drum take-back pro-
              gram. One of the finishing plants of this textile manu-
              facturer, based in Atlanta, Georgia, established a
         purchasing contract with its dye and chemical vendor. The
         contract requires the vendor to take back empty metal and
         fiber drums for reuse. Prior to the take-back program,
         Southern Mills landfilled the drums.
           Southern Mills receives  a standard shipment of 883 metal
         drums and 334 fiber drums per year to accommodate its pro-
         duction schedule. The same number of drums is now re-
         turned to the vendors. An  empty 55-gallon metal drum
         weighs approximately 40 pounds; a similar fiber drum
         weighs approximately 22 pounds. To determine the amount
         of waste prevented,  Southern Mills performed the following
               883 metal drums
               40 Ibs/drum
               35,320 Ibs of
               metal drums
                   334 fiber drums
                   22 Ibs/drum
                   7,348 Ibs of
                   fiber drums
           By adding these two figures, Southern Mills found that it
         prevented 42,668 pounds of metal and fiber waste in 1994.
             To promote safe packaging reduction, the Institute of
          Packaging Professionals (loPP) has prepared Guidelines
          for Responsible Chemical Packaging Management and
          Guidelines for Disposition of Used Packaging. This guide
          helps companies determine the best strategy for manag-
          ing containers that have been used to store hazardous
          materials. The guide includes sections on:
            •  Residue minimization
            •  Recycling
            •  Reconditioning
            •  Returnable packaging
            •  Consumable chemical packaging
             Each section contains an introduction, a description of
          the strategy,  its pros and cons, and specific examples.
             The  guide is available from loPP for a fee of $25.  To
          order, contact loPP at 703 318-8970.

                                                                                              WasteWi$e Update
Wood-Be Alternatives  to

        Some disposal facilities and haulers
        provide (or require) weight informa-
        tion on recycling collection and waste
        loads. If your company has a waste
        reduction baseline  such as disposal or hauler
records, measuring waste prevention could be just a simple
calculation away.
   Measuring the success of its  1994 wood waste preven-
tion and recycling efforts revealed significant savings for
Ingersoll-Rand Company—an industrial equipment manu-
facturer headquartered in New Jersey. In 1994,  16 of
Ingersoll-Rand's 46 facilities located across the nation ex-
plored waste reduction opportunities for wood,  using landfill
records as a baseline for measuring. To reduce the generation
of wood waste, all but one of these facilities switched to
reusable totes instead  of wood pallets and skids where possi-
ble. The majority of these totes  are collapsible plastic shipping
             containers with built-in handles.
             One of Ingersoll-Rand's facilities, located in
             Shippensburg, Pennsylvania, took a different
              approach and sent 1.2 million pounds of
                wood skids and pallets to a private land-
                 fill—but not for disposal. Rather, the land-
                 fill chipped the wood and sold the chips as
                 landscaping material or used them as road
               cover at the facility. The Shippensburg facili-
                 measured the amount of wood chipped by
             placing the pallets and skids in designated hop-
pers and weighing them prior to chipping.
   Measuring the amount of wood conserved by switching
to reusable totes  required a different approach. With consis-
tent production levels in the 16 facilities for 1993 and  1994,
Ingersoll-Rand assumed that it  would have generated and
disposed of roughly the same amount of wood in both years.
Thus, the  company started with a baseline of 4,718,000
pounds  of wood  landfilled in 1993  by all 16 facilities. The
15 facilities switching to reusable totes landfilled 2,740,000
pounds  of wood  in 1994; the Shippensburg facility chipped
1,200,000 pounds of wood  in 1994. Subtracting the 1994
chipping and landfilling amounts from the 1993 baseline re-
veals that 778,000 pounds of wood waste were prevented by
switching to reusable totes. The table below displays the fig-
ures used in this  calculation.
                                             Measuring Waste Reduction:
                             A Spotlight
                             Our Partners
   4,718,000 Ibs
2,740,000 Ibs
                         .is urg only
1,200,000 Ibs
                              Ingersoll-Rand plans to continue its efforts
                            to conserve wood in 1995. Other facilities are
                            evaluating the use of reusable totes, and facili-
                            ties will reuse and rebuild pallets as much as
                            possible and continue to work with vendors
                            on pallet take-back programs.
Reducing Steel Scrap  Through

Equipment Changes

         ne of the benefits of measurement is being able to
         pinpoint inefficiencies in work practices or produc-
         tion. One company that used its knowledge of
         waste generation rates to make changes in its pro-
         duction process  is Virco Manufacturing of
Conway, Arkansas. Through a measurement tracking system,
Virco discovered that old equipment was generating too
much scrap steel. By investing in new equipment, the  com-
pany not only reduced waste generation but cut costs as well.
  The company's steel scrap tracking system depends on a
small group of employees in the inspection department.
These employees prepare  monthly scrap reports that  are
used to measure production efficiency and to compare the
reports obtained from the scrap recyclers. Basically, this en-
tails tracking the weight of raw materials bought,  the
weight of these same materials in the furniture produced,
and the weight of scrap materials. The weight of the  mate-
rials in the furniture and the weight of the scrap materials
should add up to the weight of the materials purchased. In
this manner, scrap generation is monitored as an indicator
of production efficiency.
  In  1993, Virco's tracking system revealed a steadily  rising
scrap  rate. Old equipment was identified as the culprit, and
Virco decided to invest in new fabrication equipment. Thus,
by tracking its steel scrap generation so precisely, the compa-
ny was able to make an educated choice about improving its
production process.
  Besides saving money over the long term,  the switch has
increased employee safety, saved energy, improved  product
quality, and curtailed steel scrap generation. Comparing the
1993  and  1994 scrap reports, Virco found that it had elimi-
nated more than 680,000 pounds of steel scrap thanks to
the new equipment. This  translates into a savings of approx-
imately $270,000 in material costs alone. These reductions
                       are significant, especially in light of
                       the fact that Virco's production
                       rate increased by more than  10
                       percent in 1994. Virco expects fur-
                       ther reductions in its scrap steel
                       rate in 1995.

WasteWi$e Update
                                            Measuring Waste Reduction:
Slimming Down

Waste  by Reducing

Bulk  Mail
        Sometimes the best way to measure waste preven-
        tion is to go to the source. That's  the approach
        the Northeast Utilities Service Company took
        when it launched a pilot program at its corpo-
        rate center to reduce nonessential and duplicate
pieces of bulk mail. By measuring the amount of incom-
ing mail, Northeast Utilities estimated that between July
1, 1994, and December 31,  1994, the company reduced
the amount of third-class (bulk) mail by 39,000 pounds
and advertising by 3,000 pounds.
   Prior to initiating the program, Northeast Utilities de-
termined that its corporate center received  approximately
3,200 pounds of mail per week. To arrive at this number,
employees at the corporate center mail room weighed
daily mail  deliveries and recorded the results for
a week. While  sorting mail for regular inter-
nal delivery, these employees also re-
moved nonessential mail such as
consumer products catalogs, brochures,
flyers, and pamphlets; mail addressed to
employees who had left the compa-
ny; and duplicate pieces of bulk mail.
They placed this mail in separate
containers for weighing. To the com-
pany's surprise, this nonessential,
duplicate, and  outdated mail con-
stituted 42  percent of all mail re-
ceived. This percentage was
consistent  with measurements
conducted at three other com-
pany facilities.
   To reduce its mail waste,
Northeast Utilities initiated a pro-
gram to remove employee names
from bulk mail lists. The compa-
ny contacted hundreds of trade
associations and product suppliers
directly by phone and letter ask-
ing them to update their mailing
lists. The company also distributed
kits to employees to help them  remove
their names from mailing lists. The kits
included a supply of  preprinted labels to
make it easy for employees to request removal of their
                                                  A Spotlight
                                                  Our Partners
                                                        names. Northeast Utilities estimates that over a six-month
                                                        period, the company requested that more than  15,000 em-
                                                        ployee names be removed from nonessential mailing lists.
                                                           Several months into the mail waste reduction program,
                                                        the company repeated the mail measurement process to
                                                        determine whether progress had been made. The compa-
                                                        ny found that it was receiving an average of 1,500 fewer
                                                        pounds per week of nonessential bulk mail.
                                                           To estimate the amount of nonessential bulk mail re-
                                                        duced in the first six months of the program, the company
                                                        extrapolated the average amount of bulk mail reduced dur-
                                                        ing a week of the program (1,500 pounds). Working from
                                                        this figure, the company estimated that it prevented nearly
                                                        40,000 pounds of nonessential bulk mail waste over a six-
                                                        month (25-week) period. Because the second round of
                                                          measurements took place relatively early on in the pro-
                                                                 gram,  additional reductions may have taken
                                                                      place that are not accounted for. In addi-
                                                                                tion, Northeast Utilities is con-
                                                                                 sidering remeasuring the bulk
                                                                                  mail to determine more accu-
                                                                                 rately the long-term reduc-
                                                                                  tions and account for seasonal
                                                                                      Because of the initial suc-
                                                                                     cess and employee support
                                                                                    of the program, the com-
                                                                                     pany plans to  expand  it to
                                                                                    additional facilities.
                                                                                Northeast Utilities  concluded
                                                                                that the avoided disposal and
                                                                            x  handling costs far outweigh the
                                                                            costs of measuring and program
                                                                                   For companies interested in
                                                                                   reducing the amount of
                                                                             third class or bulk mail received,
                                                                   one good place to start is the Mail Preference
                                                                   Service, Direct Marketing Association, P.O.
                                                                   Box 9008, Farmingdale, NY 11735-9008.
                                                                    Companies can request the Direct
                                                                       Marketing Association to remove names
                                                                          from mailing lists or limit receipt of
                                                                            bulk mail.

                                                                                              WasteWi$e Update
   Many software packages are available
to help companies measure waste reduc-
tion progress. While EPA does not endorse any particular prod-
uct, two software packages are profiled briefly here.
   PackTrack®,developed by Johnson & Johnson, tracks,
measures, and reports on a company's waste reduction activi-
ties. PackTrack® can monitor the waste reduction results
from alterations in thousands of products or packaging mate-
rials simultaneously.  A companion software program called
PackTrack Corporate® has the ability to analyze and summa-
rize the data PackTrack® has created. At Johnson & Johnson
alone, the software has tracked savings of more than 57 mil-
lion pounds of materials worth more than $50 million.
   Accounting Software Application for Pollution
Prevention (ASAPP), developed by Electric Power
Research Institute, allows a company to track both haz-
ardous and nonhazardous waste generation, management,
and reduction activities (e.g., reuse and  recycling), as well as
costs.  For example, by using ASAPP one Baltimore Gas &
Electric facility discovered it could reduce its solid waste by
35 percent and reap  an estimated $17,000 in annual savings.
   For more information, call the WasteWi$e helpline at

\A£iste\A!$e Measures Up:
More Than One  Million
Tons  Reduced in 1994
                      By measuring their waste reduction
                    efforts, WasteWi$e partners were able to
                    report nearly a quarter of a million
                     tons of waste  prevented and close to
                     one million tons of materials collected
                     for recycling in 1994. In total, that's
                     enough material to fill the Houston
                     Astrodome more than five times! In
                      addition, WasteWi$e partners helped
                      create stronger markets for collected
                      recyclables by purchasing 23 different
kinds of products made from recycled materials.
   These impressive results were compiled from the 1994
Annual Reporting Forms submitted by 170 WasteWi$e part-
ners. They demonstrate the power of voluntary actions to re-
duce waste and indicate the enormous potential of individual
companies to prevent waste and recycle.
   EPA congratulates WasteWi$e partners for the leadership
and hard work that is making business waste reduction a suc-
cess. To order the report, or for more  information, call the
WasteWi$e helpline at 1-800-EPA-WISE.

   Here are a few methods that can be used to collect data
for establishing a baseline and tracking progress in reducing
materials and waste.

Hauler records
Strengths: Hauler records can provide accurate data on the
weight or volume of waste collected at your facility, especially
if the hauler provides records of weight as recorded at the
landfill  or only picks up when the company has verified that
the containers are full.
Limitations: Hauler records provide less accurate data if they
simply record the number and volume of containers emptied,
without noting the degree to which each container was full. They
also do not provide information on specific waste components
or reduction activities, nor do they account for materials (e.g.,
shipped products) that are disposed of outside the company.

Purchasing records
Strengths: Company purchasing records can provide data
on amounts of specific materials and products used, giving
an indication of potential waste generated. Reviewing records
can require less time and effort than reviewing specific activi-
ties that generate waste.  Other records that may provide in-
formation are inventory, maintenance, and operating logs, as
well as supply, equipment, and raw materials invoices.
Limitations: If company purchasing is not centralized, the
records may be incomplete or require substantial effort to col-
lect and analyze. Comparisons of purchases from year to
year can be skewed by changes in the number of employees,
level of business, number of products  manufactured, etc.

Employee surveys
Strengths: Surveys can be especially useful for measuring
specific waste prevention activities that involve many partici-
pants or materials that can be reduced through more than
one waste prevention activity (e.g., conservation of paper by
two-sided copying, reusing paper, and other actions).
Limitations: Unless they carefully record their use of a mate-
rial, employees may not always assess their waste reduction
activities accurately.

Waste sort
Strengths: By physically collecting, sorting, and weighing a
representative sample of waste material (often from company
dumpsters), waste sorts can provide quantitative information
about specific types of material generated.
Limitations: Waste sorts can require  significant time and ef-
fort to conduct,  especially to get a representative sample of
waste. They do  not provide information on materials shipped
or mailed out of the facility or on specific waste-generating

WasteWi$e Update
             Measuring the effect of solid waste reduction ef-
             forts can be particularly challenging for large
             companies. Numerous initiatives across many
             facilities can be difficult to track. Departments
             often have different measuring techniques, and
separate divisions of the company sometimes have competing
priorities that make measurement more difficult.
  The Eastman Kodak Company's Kodak Park facility in
Rochester, New York, has risen to the challenge of waste re-
duction measurement. With 20,000 employees in 200 build-
ings spanning 1,900 acres of land, the facility has found that
combining several measurement techniques, taking advantage
of existing data, and keeping employees informed about re-
sults have helped measurement initiatives succeed.
  Many large companies facing the problem of prioritizing
environmental activities might feel that measuring waste pre-
  Taking  Advantage of
  Existing Data
    Large companies often find that gathering waste re-
  duction measurement information can be challenging.
  Kodak's advice? Tap into information that's already
  been collected for other purposes, such as internal
  records and reports to local governments. For example,
  Kodak is required by law to report to Monroe County of-
  ficials how much  solid waste is disposed of, recycled,
  and prevented at the facility. The county then reports the
  data to New York State to help the state as-
  sess the  impact of its solid waste man-
  agement plan.  Because  Kodak had
  already determined how to collect
  quality data from within the com-
  pany and how to avoid  double
  counting and other pitfalls, the com-
  pany didn't have  to start measuring
  from scratch.
  vention is not as high a priority as, say, monitoring regulated
  activities. But Kodak, which spends a lot of resources track-
  ing its progress in other environmental areas, has come to the
  conclusion that it pays to measure solid waste reduction.
  "We measure our solid waste reduction activities to see if
  they work and to see if they can save us money," says George
  Thomas of Kodak's Health, Safety, and Environmental
  Division and coordinator of the company's solid waste mea-
  surement program.

  Measurement Systems
        In 1994, Kodak formed a team of employees to  evaluate
        and monitor the company's solid waste reduction mea-
        surement initiatives. Team participants include  building
        service staff and representatives from various manufac-
        turing operations that generate large amounts of waste.
     The team relies on a variety of measurement techniques to
  gauge the success of individual initiatives as well as facility-
  wide achievements.
             Kodak uses two common measurement techniques
             to gauge the success of individual waste reduction
             initiatives. In doing so, the company is able to
             identify its successes and reassess those initiatives
             with room for improvement.
     The first method takes a project-specific approach to esti-
   mating waste reduction and is based on a series of simple
   calculations. Managers of individual waste reduction projects
   report on a regular basis to the Health, Safety, and
   Environment Department,  supplying a steady stream of cur-
   rent measurement statistics.
     For example, Kodak redesigned its shipping pallets to use
   less wood in each pallet. To measure  waste prevented, Kodak
   consulted purchasing records a year after the redesign to cal-
   culate how much less wood (2 x 4s) was purchased for pallet
   construction in 1994 than 1993. It turned out the company
   purchased 1.1 million fewer board feet for pallet construction
   in 1994, even though a similar number of pallets was used.
   To translate this into pounds, the company multiplied this
   number by five—the number of pounds in one board foot.
   This works out to be a total savings of approximately 5.5
   million pounds.
     Using a second method known as  extrapolation, Kodak
   gauges how much waste could be reduced if individual pilot
   waste reduction projects were implemented on a company-
   wide basis. To do  this, the company calculates the weight of
   the material being reduced by the pilot project on a per per-
   son basis. These weights are then multiplied by the total
   number of employees company-wide.

                                                            WasteWi$e Update
   For example, to assess the recycling potential of commin-
gled paper, transparencies, newspapers, and magazines, the
facility initiated a two-month pilot study involving about
300 people. Collectors weighed the recyclable materials on a
daily basis during the study. The study revealed that the re-
cycling program diverted 2.2  pounds per person per month
(pppm)  of commingled paper, 0.25 pounds pppm of trans-
parencies, and 4.4 pounds pppm of newspapers and maga-
zines. Kodak then multiplied these figures  by the total
number of employees (20,000) to determine the potential
                  amount of material that could be  recy-
                  cled if these actions were implemented
                       throughout the facility.  It turns
                       out the company could divert
                       nearly 137,000 pounds of materi-
                       als if these recycling activities were
                      implemented facilitywide.
          Besides looking at individual initiatives, Kodak uses
          a sophisticated method to measure facilitywide
          waste reduction progress. Kodak began measuring
          overall solid waste reduction in 1994 by adapting
          an existing tool called production indexing. A
team of company specialists developed the tool in 1990 to
track hazardous waste generation and reduction. Kodak has
found that the technique also effectively measures solid waste
reduction. The company now uses this technique to track the
overall percentage of improve-
ment in waste reduction from
year to year.  In 1994, for exam-
ple, the company determined
that it had reduced its solid
waste generation by 11.8 percent
over 1993 levels.
   How does the system work?
First, the  company  determines
the total annual solid waste gen-
eration for each of its  operations
categories (office waste, produc-
tion waste, etc.). These figures are
obtained  in part from the compa-
ny's Solid Waste Information
Management System
(SWIMS)—a computerized data-
base system originally developed
to track hazardous waste. The
database is accessed and updated
continuously over a facilitywide
network by dozens  of employees
who generate or handle most of
Employee Participation:

Crucial to  Measurement
                   Participation of employees
                 is critical to gathering  infor-
                 mation for measurement. "At
                  Kodak, we try to make it as
                   painless as possible  for em-
                    ployees to  participate," ex-
                    plains George Thomas.
                     One way that Kodak has
                     been able to elicit the co-
                      operation of employees
                      is by sharing results.
                       "People are less likely to
                      want to help if they
                      think the information
they gave you just went into a black hole," said
Thomas. "They want to hear what useful  and in-
teresting things have come from the information
they provided. The key to getting cooperation is
creating a dialogue with people."
the company's solid waste. The system tracks type and
amount of waste, how and where it is generated,  and its
method of management.
   To supplement SWIMS information, the company uses a
variety of other sources to compile waste generation figures,
0 Production records.
0 Waste hauling records.
0 Records of recyclables collected.
0 Mandatory waste generation reports to the county's solid
   waste management division.
   Once waste generation figures are determined for each
operations category, they are divided by a common  de-
nominator such as "production levels" or  "dollars spent"  to
arrive at an "indexed"  waste rate for each  category. This al-
lows the company to view its waste generation  in relation
to an operations budget or how much product  was  pro-
duced—a much more  informative number than flat waste
generation figures. Using this method, Kodak knows how
much waste it generates for every roll of film produced or
for every dollar spent on a certain operation. These "in-
dexed" waste rates can then be compared  to waste rates
from previous years to determine the percent of waste re-
duction progress being made.
   Using a production index affords several benefits. First,
fluctuating levels of production are accounted for from year
to year, making indexing a consistent measurement tool
over  time. For example, the company might produce less
waste one year merely  because it is simultaneously produc-
                         ing less product. Indexing ac-
                         counts for such variations.
                            Additionally, the system pro-
                         vides flexibility because waste
                         reduction can  be measured in
                         relation to any kind of unit,
                         such as pounds of product pro-
                         duced or units of energy ex-
                         pended. And because this
                         method uses the previous year
                         as a baseline, it demands that
                         companies keep striving  to re-
                         duce waste. "Even if you make
                         progress in the previous year,
                         you're back to  square one as
                         soon as a new  year rolls
                         around," says Thomas. "You
                         can't sit back and rest on your
                            For more information on
                         Kodak's measurement methods,
                         contact George Thomas of
                         Kodak at 716  722-5264.

WasteWi$e Update
 Polaroid  Reduces Waste Frame
 by Frame
    The Polaroid Company, based in Boston, Massachusetts,
 has designed an efficient system for shipping and receiving
 photographic materials that minimizes waste. For prepack-
 aged products being sent back and forth between the com-
 pany and its suppliers, Polaroid uses reusable corrugated
 shipping "totes." These topless boxes, which are the same
           size as the single-use boxes they replaced, contain
           no recycled materials to ensure maximum
           strength. (Boxes shipped by Polaroid to its cus-
           tomers do have recycled content because they
           will not be reused again and don't have to be as
           durable.) Empty totes are easily folded and com-
           pacted for return trips and are used an average of
           20 times before they are recycled.
              By using reusable totes, the company avoided
           the use of more than 160,000 boxes and con-
           served nearly 100 tons of corrugated in 1994.
           Reusable totes also helped Polaroid's vendors
           keep prices down on the various components
  they send to the plant. Overall, the company saved more
  than $70,000 in 1994 through reusables.
     In addition, the company decided to standardize the size
  of its reusable shipping "skids" (pallets) to accommodate all
  of its shipping needs, including:  incoming boxes packed
  with products; outgoing, folded down empty boxes; and
  outgoing boxes of consumer-ready products. This measure
  conserved more than 4,000 pallets (80 tons of wood) and
  saved Polaroid and its vendors $32,000 in 1994.
                Like  to
                                                WasteWi$e would like to hear about your efforts to measure waste
                                             prevention, whether they apply to specific waste prevention activities
                                             or to your company's overall program. Also, if you have experience
                                             with any tools or software we haven't covered in this issue, contact us
                                             at 1-800-EPA-WISE.
    United States
    Environmental Protection Agency
    Washington, DC  20460

    Official Business
    Penalty for  Private Use