(National
ilEwifHrfnenta!
PerforrfianceTrack
U.S. Env;t'- • ' Ttton Agency
i
-------
Location of Performance Track Members
-------
ABLE OF CONTENTS
£-
0V
Executive Summary _ 2
, Why Performance Track? _ _ 3
Building on Experience 3
Program Structure and Criteria 4
The First Year of Progress 7
Performance Track Member Goals
Performance Track Member Achievements
Promoting Continuous Improvement 15
Working with State Partners 19
Performance Track Assistance 2 1
Looking Forward _ 22
O
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report describes the mission and activities of Performance 1 rack, its members'
achievements to date, and the goals for the future of the program.
In the less than three years since it was launched. Performance Track has:
• Grown to include over 300 members, from among the more than
-±00 that have applied:
• Enlisted broad corporate support from such leaders as Johnson & Johnson,
IBM, 3M, International Paper, Lockheed Martin, and Rockwell Collins;
• Engaged 19 trade, professional, and environmental organizations in the
Performance Track Network;
• Improved environmental management systems at member facilities
through site visits;
• Advanced environmental performance measurement;
• Created a learning community of members, government, associations,
and prospective members;
• Strengthened links among federal and state performance-based
excellence programs; and
• Developed proposals for regulatory and policy changes that allow for better
environmental and business performance.
Commitment to continuous environmental improvement is a core value of
Performance Track. In their first year of participation. Performance Track members
have gone beyond legal requirements to reduce:
• Energy use by 1.1 million mmBtus
• Water use by 4^5 million gallons
• Hazardous materials use by 908 tons
• Emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) by 329 tons
• Emissions of air toxics by 57 tons
• Emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOX) by 152 tons
• Discharges to water of biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), chemical oxygen
demand (COD), and total suspended solids (TSS) by 1,327 tons
• Toxic discharges to water by 5.5nb3 tons
• Solid waste by 150,000 tons
• Hazardous waste by 692 tons
Members also increased their use of reused and recycled materials by 10.823 tons
and preserved or restored 2.698 acres of habitat.
EPA will continue to build Performance Track by increasing the environmental and the
business value of the program, increasing membership, and expanding program ownership
among Agency programs, states, corporations, and trade and environmental groups.
-------
WHY PERFORMANCE TRACK?
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's National Environmental Performance
Track (Performance Track) program recognizes and rewards facilities that consistently
exceed regulator}- requirements, work closely with their communities, and excel in pro-
tecting the environment and public health.
Performance Track is based on the premise that government should complement
existing programs with new tools and strategies that not only protect people and the
environment, but also capture opportunities for reducing costs and spurring tech-
nological innovation. The program's mission is to improve environmental performance,
transform relationships, and encourage innovation. Performance Track encourages
performance improvements by supporting environmental goals that go beyond compli-
ance, offering recommendations during site visits, and providing opportunities for the
sharing of information among members. The program transforms the relationship
between regulators and regulated facilities to make them more collaborative, cooperative,
and focused on results. Innovation is encouraged through peer networking, regulatory
changes, and the program's focus on fostering a culture of continuous improvement.
Launched in June 2000. the program has more than 300 members in 41 states and
Puerto Rico, representing virtually every manufacturing sector as well as facilities in the
public sector. All U.S. facilities, large and small, public and private, may apply to
Performance Track. Participants must meet a set of criteria to be accepted into the pro-
gram. Once accepted, members receive a range of benefits and incentives to motivate
and enable them to make further improvements.
EPA is pleased to present this first progress report, which describes the mission and
activities of Performance Track, its members' achievements to date, and the goals for the
future of the program.
Building on Experience
Performance Track builds on lessons that EPA has learned from
state environmental leadership programs and from its own efforts, such
as the Common Sense Initiative, die Environmental Leadership
Program, and EPA Region 1's Star Track program. Through these early
initiatives, EPA learned the importance of keeping program design sim-
ple, keeping transaction costs low. and delivering measurable results.
EPA's initial proposal to develop Performance Track was pub-
lished in its July 1999 report. Aiming for Excellence. The Agency
consulted extensively with stakeholders and state environmental
agencies to develop and refine the proposal. The program was
launched officially on June 26, 2000 EPA accepted 228 facilities as
Charter Members during its first round of applications, welcoming
them at a ceremony in Washington, DC. on December 13, 2000.
" Performance
Track gives
us recognition for
the good work
we are doing
and encourages
employees
to do more."
Evet L. Vera
Baxter Healthcare/
Aibonito, P.R.
Size of
Performance Track
Facilities
-------
Distribution of
Performance
Track Members
Across Sectors
Pharmaceuticals
Other
Manufacturing
-JO/
Transportation
Equipment
5%
Energy,
Utilities,
Sanitary
Services
6%
In early 2001, incoming Administrator Christie Whitman reaffirmed support for the
Performance Track program. "Performance Track is an important public/private partnership
that encourages environmental excellence, involves communities in environmental protec-
tion, and focuses on measurable results," she said in a letter to new members. Since then.
Administrator Whitman has welcomed new members to Performance Track personally.
By the end of February 2003, Performance Track had held five rounds of appli-
cations, receiving 421 applications and accepting 3-O. The program currently has
members.
Program Structure and Criteria
The structure of Performance Track consists of a core staff in
EPA's Office of Policy. Economics, and Innovation and regional
Performance Track Coordinators in each of the Agency's 10
regional offices. EPA staff work with state environmental agencies
to review applications to the program, conduct site visits at mem-
ber facilities, promote Performance Track and similar state per-
formance-based programs, and develop program policy.
Performance Track accepts applications twice each year:
from February 1 to April 30 and from August 1 to October 31
The Performance Track application can be found at
http://www.epa.gov/perforniancetrack/apps/app.htm.
The application was designed to be as clear and user-friendly as possible while gath-
ering enough information to demonstrate that an applicant meets Performance Track's
criteria in four key areas:
1. Establishing and maintaining a comprehensive environmental
management system (EMS):
2. Going beyond legal requirements as evidence of its commitment
to continuous environmental improvement;
3. Informing and seeking input from its local community about the
facility's environmental performance; and
4. Ivlaintaining a record of sustained compliance with
environmental requirements.
In meeting the second criterion, applicants commit to four quantitative goals for
improving their environmental performance. Small facilities commit to two goals.
Facilities choose these goals from among the categories listed in Table A. such as water
use, hazardous waste, or nitrogen oxide emissions.
Facilities are accepted into Performance Thick for a three-year period, after which they
can renew their membership by committing to four new goals (or two. for small facilities).
Public
Facilities
Wholesale, 7%
Retail,
Shipping
4%
Other
Non-manufacturing
8%
-------
TABLE A: Categories and Aspects of Performance Track Member Goals
Category
Energy Use
Water Use
Materials Use
Air Emissions
(Including Motor Vehicles)
Aspect
Total Energy Use
Total Water Use
Total Materials Use
Hazardous Materials Use
Recycled/Reused Materials Use
Emissions of Greenhouse Gases
Emissions of Ozone-Depleting Gases
Emissions of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)
Emissions of Nitrogen Oxides (NOX)
Emissions of Sulfur Dioxide
Emissions of Particulate Matter
Emissions of Carbon Monoxide
Emissions of Toxics
Waste
Total Solid Waste
Hazardous Waste
Habitat Preservation/Restoration
Removal
Remediation
Habitat Impacts
Discharges to Water
Accidental Releases
Product Performance
Discharges to Water: Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD)
Discharges to Water: Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD)
Discharges of Toxics to Water
Discharges of Total Suspended Solids to Water
Discharges of Pathogens to Water
Discharges of Nutrients to Water
Sediment from Runoff
Release History
Vulnerability and Potential for Releases
Expected Lifetime Energy Use of Product
Expected Waste (to Air, Water, Land) of Product
Packaging Materials Used in Product
Waste to Air, Water, Land from Disposal or
Recovery of Product
Other Noise
Odor
-------
Each year, members submit an annual performance report documenting progress
toward meeting their goals and major activities undertaken as part of their EMS. This
report is due on April 1 for the preceding calendar year. Results from the first set of
annual performance reports are presented on pages 9-14.
EPA designed Performance Track's admission process to be simple and low in cost
to both the Agency and facilities. Because the process does not include a site visit before
each facility is selected into the program, EPA Performance Track staff and state officials
visit a portion of Performance Track member facilities each year. A site visit provides EPA
with the opportunity to verify the information presented in a facility's application, par-
ticularly the quality of its EMS, and progress toward its performance goals. EPA provides
an assessment of the facility's programs and progress relative to other facilities in the
Performance Track program and may suggest opportunities for improvements or part-
nerships with other firms and sources of technical expertise. The site visit also helps EPA
and states to establish a relationship with the facility's key environmental staff and top
management. These relationships then can facilitate an ongoing dialogue between EPA
and facilities on ways to improve Performance Track and its benefits.
Through December 2002, EPA had conducted site visits at 79 Performance Track
facilities. Sixty-eight percent of the site visits have shown that the member facility fully
met all program criteria, often in exemplary ways. The facility was implementing an
effective EMS, making progress toward its performance goals, reaching out to its com-
munity, and complying with legal requirements. Thirty-two percent of the site visits
revealed areas for improvement. Some of these facilities continued to meet basic pro-
gram criteria but were advised to strengthen their EMS, revise their performance goals,
or improve their public outreach programs. However, 22 of these facilities had more sig-
nificant issues and fell short of meeting program criteria. EPA asked these facilities to
withdraw from the program, and they are no longer members of Performance Track.
A total of-il facilities have left the program since its inception. Facilities may be
removed from Performance Track at their own request, for failing to continue to meet
the program entry criteria, or for failing to submit a complete annual performance
report. The most common reasons for leaving were: EMS deficiencies found during site
visits (22 facilities), facility closure or reorganization (6 facilities), and failure to submit
an annual performance report (5 facilities). Eight facilities have left the program for
other reasons. In all cases, EPA encourages facilities to reapply to Performance Track
when they are able to meet the program criteria.
-------
THE FIRST YEAR OF PROGRESS
Performance Track members commit to attain performance goals within three years.
Facilities commit to at least four environmental goals (two for small facilities), which they
select from the categories and aspects shown in Table A on page 5. Each facility chooses its
goals based on its individual environmental impacts. For example, paper mills use large
amounts of water, so many of the paper mills in Performance Track have committed to
reducing water discharges. Facilities that use large amounts of solvent often commit to
reducing their use of hazardous solvents or to reducing solvent emissions.
Performance Track Member Goals
Table B (see page 8) presents the goals .set by Performance Track members that
were accepted through 2002. By fulfilling these goals. Performance Track members
collectively will within three years:
Reduce their emissions of volatile organic compounds
by 460 tons, equivalent to the effect of taking nearly
30,000 cars off the road;
Reduce their annual energy consumption by
2.3 million mmBtus, equivalent to the energy used by
approximately 22,200 households in a year;
Reduce their generation of solid waste by 202,655 tons,
equivalent to the amount generated by some 257,069
Americans each year;
Reduce their water consumption by 2.5 billion gallons,
enough to fill 2,500 Olympic-size swimming pools, and
Increase preserved or restored habitat by 3,600 acres,
an area equivalent to that of 3,267 football fields.
Performance Track Member Achievements
Performance Track facilities improved their environmental performance significantly
during their first year in the program. All improvements reported to the program
exceeded those required by law. Some of these achievements were in areas such as air
pollution, water pollution, and solid waste, which have been the focus of environ-
mental regulations and industry efforts for many years. Other achievements reduced
impacts in areas that are recent or emerging environmental priorities and are essentially
unregulated, such as materials use. water use. energy use, and habitat preservation.
This report presents the results from the first annual reports submitted by member
-------
TABLE B: Performance Track Members' Goals Accepted through 2002
Number of Members
With Goals
Projected Reduction
In Year 3 of Membership
Energy Consumption
Water Consumption
Materials Use
Total Materials Use
Hazardous Materials Use
Recycled/reused Materials Use
Air Emissions
Greenhouse Gases
Volatile Organic Compounds
Air Toxics
Nitrogen Oxides
Paniculate Matter
Sulfur Dioxide
Ozone-depleting Compounds
Carbon Monoxide
Other
110
117
:
:
.
:
1
1
2.3 million mmBtus1
2.5 billion gallons2
31,200 tons3
6,700 tons4
140,000 tons (increase)5
14,870 tons6
460 tons7
160 tons8
2,600 tons
19 tons9
8,200 tons
9 tons
1 ton
Solid Waste Generation
179
202,655 tons10
Hazardous Waste Generation
5,599 tons"
Habitat Preservation and Restoration
3,600 acres (increase)12
Discharges to Water
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD),
Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD),
Total Suspended Solids (TSS)
Toxics
26.3 million pounds13
39.8 million pounds
Product Packaging Materials Use
1,300 tons14
1 Represents commitments from only 97 members due 8 Represents
to missing or nonstandard data 9 Represents
2 Represents commitments from 63 member 10Represents
3 Represents commitments from 33 member '] Represents
& Represents commitments from 31 member 12Represents
5 Represents commitments from 29 member. 13Represents
6 Represents commitments from 53 member-. uRepresents
^ Represents commitments from 42 members !")
ommitments from 19 members <")
ommitments from 3 members (")
ommitments from 94 members ("i
ommitments from 90 members (")
ommitments from 17 members (")
ommitments from 18 members {").
ommitments from 11 members ("i
-------
facilities, representing their first year of progress toward their three-year goals. The
reports covered performance during the 2001 calendar year. Only members admitted by
the end of 2001, a total of 247 facilities, were required to report. EPA received reports
from 227 facilities; the remaining 20 facilities have left the program.
EPA received data on progress on 22 types of environmental impacts. Aggregate
performance improved in the following areas:
• Air emissions (volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide,
sulfur oxides, air toxics, particulate matter, ozone-depleting chemicals);
• Discharges to water (suspended solids, biochemical oxygen demand, chemical
oxygen demand, toxics);
• Hazardous and nonhazardous waste;
• Consumption of energy, water, hazardous materials, recycled/reused materials,
and packaging materials; and
• Habitat preservation and restoration.
Aggregate performance declined in two areas, greenhouse gas emissions and total
materials use. The data suggest that the increases in materials use and greenhouse gas
emissions are due largely to increases in production at many member facilities.
Performance data on accidental releases could not be aggregated because of the variety
of measurements used.
The graphs in this section may understate the aggregate achievements of
Performance Track members. They do not include some results reported in nonstandard
terms that could not be converted to common measures. For example, one member
more than halved the amount of materials used in its product packaging, but was
unable to convert its measurement units from cubic feet to a standard weight-based
measure. EPA worked closely with many members to standardize their reporting so that
their achievements could be included in this report, but not all data could be standard-
ized before the report went to print. The graphs starting on page 11 show how many
facilities contributed to the results shown.
In addition to aggregate data, this section also presents achievements of individual
Performance Track facilities that have reduced their environmental impacts per unit of pro-
duction. A facility that reduces its environmental impact per unit of production is becoming
more "eco-effkient." For example, member facility BMW Manufacturing of Greer, South
Carolina, increased its production of vehicles by 13" percent between 1999 and 2001 while
its energy use increased by only 20 percent. The energy use per vehicle was reduced by
approximately 50 percent, representing a substantial improvement in eco-efficiency.
Performance Track members showed eco-efficiency improvement in 72 percent of the
impacts included in their 2001 reports. In 6T percent of the cases, they showed absolute
-------
reductions in impacts. Note that a facility with increasing production could increase its
eco-efficiency while also increasing its environmental impact.
Each facility's Annual Performance Report is available at the Performance Track Web site
http://www.epa.gov/performancetrack/particip/mdex.htm. The following pages present
Performance Track members' progress during 2001 by type of environmental impact. The
aggregate goals used here only include commitments from those facilities admitted to the
program in 2001. These goals differ from the aggregate goals presented on page 7, which
also include commitments from facilities admitted in 2002.
Energy Use
Members reported an overall 6 percent decline in energy consumption during
their first year, putting them two-thirds of the way toward their three-year goal.
Wafer Use
Members reported a 5 percent decline in water use, putting them one-third
of the way toward their three-year goal.
Materials Use
Members reported a 5 percent increase in materials use. This is due in large part to pro-
duction increases at many facilities. Members reported an 11 percent decrease in the use of
hazardous materials, and an 81 percent increase in the use of recycled or reused materials.
Air Emissions
Members reported decreases in all air emissions except for greenhouse gases, which
increased. This is due in large part to production increases at many facilities. In addition
to the results shown here, three members reduced their emissions of paniculate matter
by 5 percent, one member reduced its emissions of sulfur dioxide by 28 percent, four
members reduced emissions of ozone-depleting compounds by 33 percent, and one
member reduced carbon monoxide emissions by 6"? percent.
Solid Waste
Members reported an 11 percent reduction in the generation of solid waste, exceed-
ing their three-year goal in their first year. In addition to the results shown here, three
members reduced their use of packaging materials in the first year by 53 percent.
Hazardous Waste
Members reduced their generation of hazardous waste by 8 percent, putting them
20 percent of the way toward their three-year goal.
10
-------
Habitat Preservation and Restoration
Members preserved or restored an additional 2,698 acres of habitat in their first
year, putting them 90 percent of the way toward their three-year goal.
Discharges to Water
Members reported decreases in discharges to water, as measured by reductions in
biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), chemical oxygen demand (COD), total suspended
solids (TSS), and toxics.
First-Year Reductions
In Energy Use*
First-Year Reductions
In Water Use*
-18.1
Goal for
Third Year
(9% Reduction
From Baseline)
Members reduced
energy use by 1.1
million mmBtus.
Baseline Year 1
•Based on data received from 73 members
-8.8
Goal for
Third Year
(15% Reduction
from Baseline)
Members reduced
their water
consumption
by 475 million
gallons.
Baseline Year 1
* Based on data received from 53 members
FEATU RE D FAC I LITY
Baxter Caribe
Baxter Caribe, an inhalation
anesthetics facility with 206
employees in Guayama,
Puerto Rico, is one of Baxter
Healthcare's 250 facilities
worldwide. In its first year as
a member of Performance
Track, the facility cut its use
of solvents to reduce its haz-
ardous waste per pound of
product by 33 percent. In
doing so, the facility sur-
passed its already ambitious
goal to reduce hazardous
waste by 30 percent per
pound of product over three
years. Baxter Caribe also
reported progress on its
reduction of VOCs, even
though it had made no goals
to reduce those emissions
under Performance Track.
The facility reduced emissions
by closing inefficient opera-
tions and integrating produc-
tion in a modern facility.
First-Year Changes
In Total Materials Use*
S 200
I
I 150
-303
First-Year Reductions
In Hazardous Materials Use*
Third Year
(4% Reduction
From Baseline)
Materials use
increased by
2,200 tons due
mainly to
production
increases at
many facilities.
"5
- 6,309
Goal for
Third Year
(28% Reduction
From Baseline)
Members reduced
their use of
hazardous materials
by 908 tons.
Baseline Year 1
iO members
Baseline Year 1
'Based on dala received from 23 me
i
-------
FEATURED FACILITY
Naval Air
Engineering Station
The Naval Air Engineering
Station, located in Lakehurst,
New Jersey, is one of a grow-
ing number of public-sector
facilities that have been
accepted to Performance
Track. Part of the U.S. Navy's
Naval Air Systems Command,
the facility employs 4,100
people. In its first year of
membership, the station
exceeded two of its four
three-year targets, reducing
water use per employee by
22 percent (its three-year
goal was for a 5 percent
reduction) and NOX emissions
by 36 percent per square
foot of heated space (with a
three-year goal of a 35 per-
cent).The facility also drafted
a master plan outlining areas
where grassland habitat will
be preserved and managed,
and plans to increase its cur-
rent allocation of 1,102 acres
of preserved land to 1,225
acres in 2003.
First-Year Increases in
Recycled/Reused Materials Use*
First-Year Changes
In Greenhouse Gas Emissions*
- 24,789
Goal lor
Third Year
(83% Increase
Over Baseline)
Members
increased their
use of recycled
or reused
materials by
10,823 tons.
Baseline Year 1
•Based on data received from 21 memrjers
First-Year Reductions
In VOC Emissions*
--2.591
Goal for
Third Year
113% Reduction
From Baseline)
Members
reduced
emissions of
volatile organic
compounds
by 329 tons.
£ 120
a
8 100
I 60
-156
Goa/for
Third Year
(4% Reduction
From Baseline)
Greenhouse gas
emissions
increased by
7,600 tons
due mainly to
increases in
production at
many facilities.
Baseline Yeai
•Based on data received from 21
First -Year Reductions
In Air Toxics Emissions*
§ 50
Baseline Year 1
•Based on data received from 36 members
-145
Goal for
Third Year
(46% Reduction
From Baseline)
Members
reduced
emissions of air
toxics by 57
Baseline Year 1 tOOS
•Based on data received from 16 members
;
-------
First-Year Reductions
In NOX Emissions*
First-Year Reductions
In Solid Waste*
7,268
-6,399
Goal for
Third Year
(12% Reduction
From Baseline)
Members
reduced NOX
emissions by
152 tons.
- 1.67
Goal for
Third Year
(6% Reduction
From Baseline)
Members
reduced solid
waste by
150,000 tons.
Baseline Year 1
'Based on data received from 8 member,
First-Year Reductions
In Hazardous Waste
Baseline Year 1
"Based on data received from 86 members
First-Year Increases in
Preserved/Restored Habitat*
- 5,814
Goal for
Third Year
(36% Reduction
From Baseline)
Members cut
their generation
of hazardous
waste by 692
tons.
- 16,396
Goal for
Third Year
(23% Increase
Over Baseline)
Members
preserved or
restored 2,698
additional acres
of habitat.
Baseline Year 1
•Based on data received from " •
Baseline
•Based on data received fr
Year I
r^ '
FEATURED FAC ILITY
Lansing Cleaners
One of Performance Track's
smaller member facilities,
Lansing Cleaners of Lansing,
Illinois, employs 130 people.
It specializes in dry-cleaning
and restoring fire-damaged
garments. The company has
reduced its use of per-
chloroethylene, a toxic air
pollutant, by 44 percent per
pound of clothes cleaned
between 1999 and 2001,
and reduced its generation of
hazardous waste by 55 per-
cent per pound of clothes
cleaned. Lansing Cleaners
also replaced two vans in its
fleet with models that run on
compressed natural gas,
reducing NOX emissions by
45 percent.
FEATURED FACILITY
Wacker Siltronic
Wacker Siltronic makes
silicon wafers in Portland,
Oregon, where it employs
approximately 1,500 people.
The facility cut its production
of solid waste by 59 percent
per unit of production, a
reduction of nearly 1.5 mil-
lion pounds, by reusing and
recycling materials such as
pallets, scrap wood, sludge,
plastic films, and plastic
drums. The plant also
reduced its emissions of
volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) by 13 percent per
unit of production by reduc-
ing the use of VOC-based
wax in a polishing process.
13
-------
FEATURED FACILITIES
Rockwell Collins
With four of its Iowa facilities
enrolled in Performance
Track, the communication
and aviation electronics man-
ufacturer Rockwell Collins is
an example of a company
that has committed to
Performance Track at the cor-
porate level. The four facili-
ties reduced their total waste
by more than 19 percent in
their first year of membership
by adopting a comprehensive
recycling program for paper,
notebooks, metals, plastics,
toner cartridges, and other
materials. Two of the facili-
ties, in Decorah and
Manchester, Iowa, have
reduced their use of toluene,
a toxic chemical used in
industrial spray painting, by 6
percent. The Manchester
facility reduced its generation
of hazardous waste by pur-
chasing a drum compactor,
which saved the facility near-
ly $12,000 in disposal costs.
The company's facility in
Bellevue, Iowa, reduced its
use of soap by 72.5 percent,
far exceeding its goal, and
the Bellevue and Coralville
facilities outperformed their
goals to reduce water use.
First-Year Reductions
In BOD, COD, and TSS*
First-Year Reductions
In Toxic Discharges to Water*
16000
14000
12000
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
17,679
Baseli
Year 1
•Based on data received from 12 members
(BOD=Biocherri!Cal Oxygen Demand.
COO=Chemical Oxygen Demand,
TSS=Tota! Suspended Solids)
-12,321
Goal for
Third Year
(30% Reduction
From Baseline)
Members reduced
discharges to water
— as measured
by biochemical
oxygen demand,
chemical oxygen
demand, and total
suspended solids —
by 1,327 tons.
Baseline Year 1
•Baied on data received fron '
11,302
Goat for
Third Year
(54% Reduction
From Baseline)
Members reduced
toxic discharges to
water by 5,543
tons, an 18 percent
decrease.
-------
PROMOTING CONTINUOUS
IMPROVEMENT
EPA seeks to establish Performance Track as a "gold standard" for environmental
performance — a standard that facilities will strive to attain. To encourage facilities to
aim for this standard, EPA adds value to Performance Track membership through recog-
nition, networking, and regulatory and administrative incentives.
Recognition and Awareness
With today's heightened awareness of environmental concerns, facilities value their
environmental reputations among their regulators, peers, investors, customers, employ-
ees, and local communities. Performance Track provides recognition for facilities, raising
their environmental profile among these key constituents.
Facilities admitted to the program are recognized by the EPA Administrator at the
Performance Track Annual Members Event in Washington, DC. They receive a certificate
from the Administrator and may use the Performance Track logo to boost their public
and employee relations. Many members display the logo on a flag outside their facility,
and some facilities have produced caps, shirts, and other Performance Track logo items
for their employees.
EPA highlights members' participation in Performance Track in letters sent to elect-
ed officials at the local, state, and national levels. Members' achievements also appear in
trade publications read by facilities' peers and customers. To date, articles in 47 trade
publications have featured Performance Track members.
EPA is "branding" Performance Track by marketing the
program at important industry conferences, distributing
media kits and video segments, and holding regional work-
shops. The program was featured on public television's
"Environmental Review Series with Morley Safer."
EPA established the Performance Track Network,
which currently has 19 partners. Partner organizations
endorse the principles of Performance Track, promote the
concept of continuous environmental improvement to
their members, and inform their members about the
opportunities offered by Performance Track. More information
about the Performance Track Network is available at
http://www.epa.gov/performancetrack/partners/trade.htm.
We wanted to be part
of an elite group of
companies being
recognized nationally
for exemplary
environmental
performance."
David Korman
Skanska USA Building, Inc.
A/I/CO/? Bar Mill-Auburn facility
highlights its environmental
achievements.
15
-------
Membership and
Partnership Services
Members of Performance
Track benefit from a number
of services:
• Bimonthly Tele-Seminars
— enable members to
discuss timely issues, tech-
niques for furthering envi-
ronmental performance,
and important regulatory
changes.
• Regional Events —
facilitate networking
among members and
provide a forum to
recognize facilities for
their achievements.
• EPA Roundtables —
with representation by
state and EPA officials,
enable members to meet
with regulators to discuss
Performance Track, related
issues and concerns.
• Annual Member Event
— provides a forum for
recognition, networking,
and workshops.
Creating a Learning Network
The Performance Track program helps members share best practices and lessons
learned, effectively creating a learning network.
Each EPA regional office holds meetings during which members exchange ideas with
each other and with regional administrators and staff. These meetings also generate
feedback and suggestions for improving and expanding the Performance Track program.
Performance Track also holds tele-seminars to feature member facilities' best practices.
For example, International Paper recently presented the business case for participation
in Performance Track, and Baxter International presented the financial and other bene-
fits of pursuing sustainable development
The program is working with the National Environmental Education and Training
Foundation to develop a Leadership Practices Database that will help facilities share
information and learn from one another to improve their environmental performance.
Every two months, EPA e-mails "P-Track News" to members and other stakeholders.
This electronic newsletter contains program updates, member achievements, and infor-
mation on EPA activities of interest to members.
Performance Track members have formed a private, independent membership asso-
ciation, the Performance Track Participants' Association, that provides a forum for mem-
bers, trade associations, and public entities dedicated to improving their environmental
performance. Additional information on the Performance Track Participants' Association
may be found at http://www.ptpaonline.org.
Regulatory and Administrative Incentives
Members clearly value the recognition, networking, and learning benefits of partici-
pating in Performance Track. The program goes further, however, by incorporating
Performance Track into EPA's regulatory programs and policies and by providing incen-
tives for Performance Track members. This enables them to focus on continuous
improvement by reducing some of the routine administrative costs of regulation and
allowing them additional administrative flexibility in certain cases. These benefits allow
the facilities to operate more efficiently and to respond more rapidly to changes in their
business environment. The benefits also enable members to dedicate more of their
efforts to developing best practices and identifying opportunities for innovation. Given
their history of strong compliance, commitment to measurable improvement, and effec-
tiveness in environmental management. Performance Track members have distinguished
themselves from other regulated facilities.
Regulatory changes (described below) benefit government as well as members of
Performance Track. They enable agencies to focus their assistance, inspection, and
16
-------
enforcement resources on other facilities that require closer oversight. These agencies may
exchange certain kinds of routine information (which is necessary for facilities with less
exemplary records and capabilities) for information related to performance and manage-
ment that may offer more value for government, customers, communities, and others.
Low Priority for Routine Inspections
Over the past year EPA has worked to develop and implement incentives that recog-
nize members' commitment to compliance and environmental stewardship. This com-
mitment is demonstrated by certain Performance Truck program elements, including the
implementation of an EMS that requires a commitment to compliance, periodic audits
of the EMS and environmental compliance, and an annual certification of compliance.
In recognition of these and other program elements, facilities in Performance Track are
given a low priority for routine inspections by EPA.
Proposed Performance Track Rule
Reduces Burden of Regulations
EPA also has begun a long-term process of modifying its regulatory programs and
policies as they apply to members. Under the first Performance Track rulemaking, pro-
posed in August 2002, member facilities would be allowed to store hazardous waste on-
site for 180 days or more, rather than the current 90 clays. This benefit could reduce
waste disposal costs at 34-43 member facilities, saving them a total of 860,000 annually.
In addition, members subject to the Clean Air Act's Maximum Available Control
Technology (MACT) requirements could report annually rather than semiannually. Other
provisions of the proposed rule could reduce reporting costs at publicly owned treat-
ment works. The rule will be finalixed during the summer of 2003.
Performance Track Integrated into Other EPA Rules
EPA has proposed to reduce the burden of compliance for all facilities subject to the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). A final rule based on this proposal
will be issued during the summer of 2003 Under this rule. Performance Track members
may see additional reductions in burden beyond those available to other facilities.
Under proposed changes to MACT, all facilities would be able to apply for less-bur-
densome alternative compliance options when they use pollution prevention measures
to reduce their emissions below a threshold level. Members would be given a shorter
review time by the Agency and provided with a designated point of contact to assist
them in the process.
I am impressed with
the tremendous
enthusiasm and
support that
Performance Track
members are
showing for this
program."
EPA Region II Administrator
Jane Kenny
17
-------
Permitting, Reporting, and Recordkeeping
Additional regulatory changes that would apply to Performance Track members will
address permitting, reporting, and recordkeeping. EPA is evaluating mechanisms for
making innovative air permitting options available to members. Pilot studies have
shown that such options reduce costs and increase flexibility for facilities while leading
to reduced emissions over time. Since states generally are the permitting authorities.
EPA is working closely with several states to implement this proposal. Other permitting
initiatives that would reduce processing time and increase regulatory certainty for mem-
bers also are under consideration with several states.
EPA currently is developing a proposal that would eliminate or reduce the frequen-
cy of several categories of routine reporting from Performance Track facilities, as a meas-
ure of the Agency's greater degree of confidence in Performance Track members' man-
agement and performance. These changes are expected to result in significant efficien-
cies for member facilities.
18
-------
WORKING WITH STATE PARTNERS
EPA and state governments are partners in implementing the Performance Track
program and delivering benefits to member facilities. EPA works with the states to
advance the principle that high-performing facilities should be recognized and rewarded
for their accomplishments by enabling them to focus more on environmental progress
than on process.
Recommendations from the states are crucial to EPA's decisions to admit facilities
into Performance Track. State governments implement and enforce many environmen-
tal requirements and frequently have greater knowledge of potential member facilities
than EPA does.
Performance Track complements and builds on the successful environmental per-
formance programs launched by the program's state partners. Some of the state pro-
grams were established prior to Performance Track's inception and served as models for
the national program. The establishment of Performance Track then helped to spur the
development of additional state programs. In Performance Track's initial year, EPA
awarded 21 states a total of 5500,000 to support the development of state performance-
based programs. Although some state programs are rooted in EMSs and others in pollu-
tion prevention, they all support environmental performance that goes beyond compli-
ance. The table on page 20 lists state programs, the years they began, and the number
of members in each program as of February 2003
Both EPA and the states believe they can achieve more by working together than by
pursuing their goals independently. Therefore, representatives of EPA and state agencies
are in frequent contact as they coordinate the development and implementation of their
programs. EPA consults with states on policy issues such as member implementation of
EMSs. States also participate in site visits to Performance Track facilities, as well as in
Performance Track member events at the national and regional levels.
States that wish to maximize the coordination of performance-based incentive pro-
grams with EPA may enter into a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA). EPA has signed
MOAs with five states: Colorado, Massachusetts. Tennessee. Texas, and Virginia, and is
working with several others to develop state-specific agreements. These MOAs provide a
framework for joint recruitment, admissions, and delivery of incentives to program
members. The agreements also affirm the intention of both EPA and the states to com-
municate the measurable environmental results achieved by their programs.
19
-------
State Environmental Performance Programs
Colorado: Environmental Leadership
Program 1999, 21 members
Florida: Partnership for Ecosystem
Protection Program 2000, 10 members
Idaho: GEMStars, 1998, 10 members
Illinois: Regulatory Innovation Pilot
Program 1995, 3 members
Louisiana: Environmental Leadership
Pollution Prevention Program 1995,
90 members
Maine: Smart Tracks for Exceptional
Performers and Upward Performers
(STEP-UP) 2000, 7 members
Massachusetts: Environmental
Stewardship Program 2002,
5 members
Michigan: Clean Corporate Citizen
2000, 52 members
New Mexico: Green Zia Environmental
Excellence Program 1999, 24 members
North Carolina: Environmental
Stewardship Initiative 2002,
26 members
Oregon: Green Permits Program 1997,
3 members
South Carolina: Environmental
Excellence Program 1997,
59 members
Tennessee: Pollution Prevention
Partnership 2000, 51 members
Texas: Clean Texas Leaders 1999,
216 members
Utah: Clean Utah expected in 2003,
no members yet
Vermont: Business Environmental
Partnership 1996, 60 members
Virginia: Environmental Excellence
Program 2000, 117 members
West Virginia: Sustainable Business
Program expected in 2003,
no members yet
Wisconsin: Green Tiers expected in
2003, no members yet
20
-------
PERFORMANCE TRACK ASSISTANCE
EPA is in the process of creating an "on-ramp" to Performance Track to help facilities
qualify for membership. Performance Track works with other EPA programs and with
state programs to build capacity- among facilities interested in improving their environ-
mental performance, compliance, and management. Through this assistance, businesses
may, over time, qualify for higher-level tracks in state programs and for membership in
Performance Track.
The Performance Track Assistance Project (PTAP) helps trade associations work
with their members to develop "better than compliance" EMSs that will meet the
criteria of Performance Track as well as reduce facilities' costs and increase competi-
tiveness. These efforts are focused particularly on trade associations that work with
small businesses. As a result of this work, several trade associations have decided to
modify their EMS guidelines so that they meet the Performance Track EMS criteria.
The Performance Track Assistance Project coordinates these efforts with state part-
ners and with EPA's Small Business Office, the Office of Environmental Policy and
Innovation, the Design for the Environment Program, the Sector Strategies Program,
and the Compliance Assistance Office.
EPA's Sector Strategies Program works closely with industry sectors to find solutions
to the particular environmental challenges faced by facilities in each sector. These sector
strategies often involve strengthening facilities' EMSs, compliance records, community
outreach, and continuous improvement efforts — the same qualifications needed for
Performance Track membership. The Sector Strategies Program thus helps to nurture
and identify good candidates for Performance Track.
The new Performance Track Mentoring Program assists facilities as they prepare
their Performance Track application. Mentors, who are Performance Track members,
help candidate facilities identify appropriate beyond-compliance goals, develop meas-
ures of progress, describe community outreach, and otherwise demonstrate that they
meet Performance Track criteria.
The American Furniture
Manufacturers Association
has developed a program
entitled "Enhancing
Furniture's Environmental
Culture (EFEC)." EPA and
the Association are work-
ing together to harmonize
this program with
Performance Track, so that
EFEC members will meet
Performance Track criteria
for the EMS. This work
will help ensure that
Association facilities in
EFEC are better prepared
to qualify for national
recognition under
Performance Track.
21
-------
LOOKING FORWARD
The National Environmental Performance Track is entering a new stage of growth
and development. During its first two years, the program defined its purpose, basic poli-
cies, and core functions. It built a substantial membership base, name recognition, and
support from federal and state agencies and industry. With this solid foundation in
place, the program now is ready to broaden and deepen its membership, enhance its
value and appeal as a standard of achievement, and expand its efforts to promote inno-
vative performance-based approaches to protecting the environment. In the year ahead.
Performance Track will concentrate on four goals that support its mission.
Goal 1: Increase environmental value
The experience, knowledge, and ingenuity of Performance Track members are a
tremendous resource. F.PA wants to help put that resource to work in a broader context,
with members helping both current and potential members find new ways to improve
environmental performance. I;PA also wants to continue to expand ownership of environ-
mental performance beyond the member facility to its surrounding community.
Accordingly, Performance Track plans to work toward the following goals in the year
ahead:
• Improve the ability to measure performance over time and across facilities;
• Build a learning community that facilitates better environmental performance;
• Encourage innovative approaches and sharing of best practices
among members;
• Improve management systems through site visits and other efforts; and
• Increase performance accountability to communities and others.
Goal 2: Increase business value
EPA recognizes that Performance Track must offer tangible, quantifiable value for its
members. The program is building on its existing benefits and incentives while creating
new ones that will bring additional value to membership in Performance Track. In the
year ahead. Performance Track will work to:
• Implement regulator)' and policy changes that reduce costs and
enhance flexibility:
• Promote dialogue among government, business, and communities;
• Continue to increase the "brand value" of the program; and
• Strengthen networks and opportunities for sharing information.
22
-------
Goal 3: Increase program membership
Growth in membership adds environmental value as new members commit to
improve their environmental performance. Growth also adds business value by increas-
ing opportunities for the sharing of information and solutions among members. Finally,
growth reinforces the institutionalization of Performance Track, building recognition for
the program and demonstrating its long term value. During the coming year,
Performance Track aims to:
• Maintain at least a 25 percent annual growth rate in applications:
• Work collaboratively with states and EPA programs to build capacity
for new members;
• Engage environmental leaders in the government and nonprofit sectors; and
• Increase opportunities for corporate commitments to the program over time.
Goal 4: Expand ownership of the program
Performance Track needs the support and endorsement of a variety of stakeholders,
including trade and environmental groups, state agencies, other EPA program offices,
and corporate officials. EPA will pursue activities with each of these stakeholders to
expand ownership of Performance Track. In the year ahead, Performance Track will:
• Engage nongovernmental organizations that stress partnerships with business;
• Strengthen and expand the Performance Track Network; and
• Continue to build linkages with state excellence and leadership programs.
23
-------
NOTES
24
-------
------- |