United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Pollution Prevention
Washington, DC 20460
June 1990
<&EPA Pollution
Prevention
News
Editor's Corner
Environmental Labeling: An Overview
Bruce Weddle, Acting Director
Municiple Solid Waste Program
EPA Office of Solid Waste
Over the last year, interest in environmental
marketing — the use of environmental benefits
to sell products and services—has mushroomed.
At the same time, concerns have grown over the
potential for confusing and misleading termi-
nology and claims. A variety of efforts are
underway to address these issues.
There are two related but distinct aspects to
environmental marketing. The first aspect in-
volves standards or criteria for the use of certain
terms, such as "recycled," on product labels.
The second and broader aspect is the labeling
and promotion of products as environmentally
"friendly" or preferable.
Several states are making efforts to address
the first issue of terminology. For example,
Rhode Island, New York, Connecticut, and New
Hampshire have passed legislation that will
regulate the use of a recycling logo. The regula-
continued on page 8
Forum
The Green Revolution: An Opportunity Too
Important to Waste
Hubert H. Humphrey, III
Minnesota Attorney General
Earth Day brought one message home:
Americans are profoundly concerned with this
nation's mounting environmental problems. As
individuals, we are more willing to do some-
thing about them. We have started separating
our garbage for recycling and reducing our
individual waste. We have started thinking about
how the products we buy affect the environment.
Industry has been quick to cash in on this
change in public attitudes by introducing prod-
ucts claiming to be "environmentally friendly."
Unfortunately, some marketers are unfairly
taking advantage of unwary consumers. Some
environmental claims on products arc confus-
ing and vague—consumers can't tell from read-
ing the labels just how these products are better
for the environment. Some claims are simply
trivial, offering no environmental benefit of any
consequence. And some claims are downright
misleading and fraudulent.
The mounting confusion surrounding envi-
ronmental claimsisof great concern to both state
and federal officials. Companies should be
encouraged to develop products that are better
for the environment and to relay that informa-
tion to consumers. But if industry continues to
make misleading claims, consumers will be-
come hopelessly confused and give up on figur-
ing out which products are truly better for the
environment.
As Minnesota Attorney General, I am work-
ing with the Attorneys General of California,
Massachusetts, Missouri, New York, Texas,
Washington, and Wisconsin in investigating en-
con tinued on page 2
Printed on Recycled Paper
Environmental
Marketing
• Forum
• Project
In the States:
•	Oregon
•	New York

-------
Pollution Prevention News - 2
June 1990
Forum on Environmental Marketing (Cont'd)
Green Seal: Mobilizing
Environmental
Consumers
Norman L. Dean
Executive Director, Green Seal
Consumers increasingly are facing a bliz-
zard of claims that one or another product is
environmentally superior. One product
states that it is "environmentally friendly."
Another claims that it is "recycled." A third
asserts that it is "biodegradable." But are
they? How is the consumer to know for sure?
A recent poll by the Gallup organization
for Ad Age magazine found that 90% of
women and 70% of men would be willing to
pay more for products or packaging made
environmentally safer. Yet few know which
products demonstrably are better for the en-
vironment.
To assist consumers who want to make
purchasing decisions based on the environ-
mental impacts of products, the leaders of
several of the nation's major environmental
and consumer organizations have formed a
new non-profit organization to label prod-
ucts that are truly environmentally accept-
able. Led by Earth Day 1990 Chair Denis
Hayes, Green Seal will offer an unbiased
Green Revolution
from page 1
vironmental marketing claims. The eight-
state task force is approaching environmental
marketing in two ways. First, as public
officials charged with enforcing our state
laws prohibiting consumer fraud and de-
ceptive advertising, we are investigating
claims that may violate those state laws. At
the same time, we are bringing together the
forces that ignited the "green revolution" in
the first place: consumer interest in using
purchasing power to help protect the envi-
ronment and the ability of business to con-
vey information about the products they
produce.
As a first step in that process, the eight-
state task force hosted an unprecedented
national public forum on March 14 and 15 in
St. Paul, Minnesota, focusing on the promo-
tion of products as "environmentally
friendly." Joined by key officials of the
analysis of consumer products' environ-
mental impacts.
Starting this summer, Green Seal will
begin to establish environmental standards
for major categories of consumer products.
Suppliers of products—including manufac-
turers, retailers, and importers — who meet
or exceed those standards will be eligible to
license the use of the Green Seal on their
products and in their advertising. Consum-
ers will be able to buy those products with
the confidence that they have been found en-
vironmentally preferable to alternative prod-
ucts by an independent group of scientists
and other experts.
The Green Seal program will be conducted
to achieve three specific objectives: technical
accuracy, public credibility, and openness.
•	Technical Accuracy. A primary objective
of the Green Seal program will be to bring the
best available technical skills and methods to
bear on the task of assessing the environ-
mental impacts of consumer products
through their entire life cycle. To ensure
first-rate technical work, Green Seal will
convene a diverse, high powered and bal-
anced group of scientists and other experts to
supervise this environmental impact assess-
ment and standard setting process.
•	Public Credibility. In order to assure unbi-
Federal Trade Commission and a represen-
tative of the EPA's Office of Pollution Pre-
vention, we invited businesses, environ-
mental groups, and consumer groups to
provide insight into trends in environmental
marketing, the potential for exploitation of
consumers in the making of environmental
claims, and ways to keep the "green revolu-
tion" on course.
The forum exposed disagreementson sev-
eral issues such as the role and marketing of
degradable plastics. Far more important,
though, was the wide degree of consensus
amongbusinesses and environmental groups
alike. Significantly, almost every organiza-
tion testifying at the public forum urged the
development of standards, guidelines, or
definitions for business — standards for
environmental claims that consumers can
understand.
The standardization of environmental
marketing claims will be a complex and dif-
ficult process. For standards or guidelines to |
ased decisions and therebyinspireconsumer
and business trust in Green Seal, the organi-
zation will conduct its operations under a
strict Code of Ethics. This code will, among
other things, prohibit anyone with a direct
financial interest in firms that might benefit
from the Green Seal from participating in the
decision making process.
• Openness. To ensure that its decisions are
fully informed, Green Seal will conduct its
decision making process in the open and
invite the participation of industry, govern-
ment agencies, consumers, and environ-
mental organizations. Proposed environ-
mental criteria for categories of consumer
products will be published for public com-
ment, and public hearings and meetings will
be held on important issues affecting the
labeling program.
By furnishing advice to consumers on
environmentally acceptable products, Green
Seal has the potential to bring about sweep-
ing changes in consumer purchasing habits
and, through such changes, dramatic im-
provements in the quality of the environ-
ment. Green Seal invites industry, consum-
ers, and environmentalists to join in this
important new venture.
For more information write: Green Seal,
1733 Connecticut Ave. NW, Wash., D.C. 20009.
be effective, they must be based on a thor-
ough understanding of the scientific and
technical issues underlying existing and
emerging products as well as changes in
municipal waste management. Ultimately,
despite the best efforts of public officials,
businesses, and environmental groups, it
may prove impossible to develop compre-
hensive standards for environmental claims.
A major and possibly fatal hurdle will be
developing standards that are flexible
enough to respond to desirable innovations
in products as well as waste management.
Despite all the potential roadblocks, this
is one task we must pursue. The states and
the federal government received a clear
mandate at the Public Forum to develop
uniform national guidelines for environ-
mental marketing. To succeed in this task,
the states and the federal government must
work in partnership. The promise of the
Green Revolution is an opportunity we can-
not afford to waste.

-------
June 1990
3 - Pollution Prevention News
Environmental Marketing Projects
The Green Cross
Program
On April 13th, four retail and supermar-
ket chains serving the western United States
announced a comprehensive "Green Cross"
program for dealing with environmental
product claims. Participating chains are
ABCO Market, Inc. (75 supermarkets in
Arizona); Fred Meyer, Inc. (125 stores in
seven western states); Raley's (58 stores in
northern California and northern Nevada);
and Ralphs (143 stores in southern Califor-
nia).
Under the Green Cross program, pro-
ducts containing "the maximum practical,
state-of-the-art level of recycled content" will
receive the Green Cross Recycling Seal of
Approval. Manufacturers' claims will be
certified by a third party, the non-profit Green
Cross Certification Company, a division of
Scientific Certification Systems, Inc.
The first recycling seal will be awarded
this month to the kraft paper grocery bag,
made with 38-40% recycled content using a
state-of-the-art triple layer manufacturing
process which preserves the strength of the
that consumers will receive either too much
or too little information. The CPCR project
will provide a technically feasible and scien-
tifically sound method for analyzing the
lifecycle impacts of a variety of products.
With this type of method, labeling or other
consumer awareness programs will have a
solid foundation for providing useful and
consistent information to consumers.
Draft Labeling Report
Available
EPA's Pollution Prevention Division
has developed a draft report entitled
"Environmental Labeling in the United
States: Background Research, Issues and
Recommendations." The report sum-
marizes the environmental labeling
experiences of other countries and de-
scribes a possible structure and function
for a voluntary program in the United
States. The draft report was prepared
for EPA but has not been endorsed by
the Agency. For a copy of the draft re-
port, contact Lena Hann at 202-245-4164.
bag. The Green Cross definition of recy- torateproductsondifferentfactorsinenvi-
cling includes consumer and industrial
waste, but excludes industrial scrap;
Green Cross has also reached
agreement with the paper 1
company to remove envi-
ronmental claims from
their grocery bags re-
lating to biodegrada-
bility, recyclability,
and the non-toxicity of the
ink used.
According to Star
Rhodes, President of Green Cross,
most claims of manufacturers of 100%
recycled content are likely to drop to
about 30% when evaluated under Green
Cross's stringent certification standards.
Nevertheless, there is considerable interest
in the program — in the last 30 days, Green
Cross has been contacted by 100 manufac-
turers. Green Cross expects to concentrate
its initial recycling certification efforts on
paper goods such as napkins and paper
towels.
On a larger scale, Green Cross and the
participating stores are developing an Envi-
ronmental Performance Ranking program

ronmental performance. Product rank-
ings will help spur manufacturers to
0 upgrade their environmental
* - actices and will be used by
the retail store buyers in
choosing products to
y- stock.
/ Eventually, some
products are expected
to qualify for the Green
Tross Environmental Seal of
iroval, although Rhodes
does not expect any major prod-
ucts to receive this seal for some time.
The Environmental Seal of Approval
will be awarded based on a product's total
environmental impact. Criteria for the seal
include at least 50% sustainable or recycled
materials content in the product and its pack-
aging; a solid waste disposal plan that dem-
onstrates zero environmental burden; and
zero tolerance (no detected residues) for
cancer-causing chemicals and reproductive
toxins in all effluents and emissions associ-
ated with the product and packaging.
For more information, contact Linda
Brown at Green Cross, 800-829-1416.
Consumer Product
Comparative Risk
Tim Mohin
EPA Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards
Most of the products that we as consum-
ers buy are the culmination of complex manu-
facturing, transport, distribution, and mar-
keting systems that have a variety of effects
on the environment and natural resources.
The concept of grass roots action to protect
the environment through the power of the
marketplace is powerful and exciting.
However, unfortunately, at present neither
consumers, producers, nor retailers have a
consistent, reliable method for assessing the
total impacts of a product on the environ-
ment throughout its lifecycle. In order to
fully evaluate the true comprehensive envi-
ronmental consequences of a consumer prod -
uct, it is necessary to examine all of the
phases of the lifecycle of the product from
raw materials to final disposal.
One of the projects funded by EPA's 2%
pollution prevention awards competition is
based on the concept of lifecycle analysis of
consumer products. The Consumer Product
Comparative Risk (CPCR) project will be
conducted as a joint effort of EPA's Office of
Air Quality Planning and Standards, Office
of Solid Waste, and Office of Research and
Development. The goal of the project is to
develop a methodology with which to evalu-
ate the environmental and public health con-
sequences of consumer products throughout
their lifecycles and to develop a mechanism
to provide this information to consumers.
The work plan for the project includes
five main tasks: (1) selection of a peer-re-
view group; (2) developing a method for
analyzing lifecycle impacts; (3) selecting
products for initial evaluation using the
method; (4) conducting the analysis and re-
fining the method; and (5) developing a com-
munications strategy. The project is sched-
uled to begin in early July 1990and is funded
through October of 1992.
With all of the interest in the area of envi-
ronmentally friendly products there is a risk

-------
Pollution Prevention News - 4	June 1990
In the States: Oregon
Implementing Oregon's
New Planning Law
Fred Hansen
Director, Oregon Department of
Environmental Quality
With the recent passage of the landmark
Toxics Use Reduction and Hazardous Waste
Reduction Act, Oregon became one of the
first states in the nation to mandate pollution
prevention planning through toxics use
reduction.*
The statute requires companies to de-
velop and implement reduction plans, and
to report annually onprogress toward achiev-
ing reduction goals. This approach—affect-
ing virtually all businesses in Oregon which
use toxic chemicals or generate hazardous
waste — will address chemical use from
purchase to disposal.
An introductory policy statement for the
Act encourages reduction in the use of toxic
substances and generation of hazardous
waste whenever "technically and economi-
cally practicable" without shifting risks from
one part of a process, environmental media,
or product, to another. It also gives priority
to toxics use reduction techniques over
hazardous waste reduction techniques in the
planning process, focusing on in-plant
changes that reduce toxic chemical use and
eliminate hazardous waste generation.
At this time, the Department of Environ-
mental Quality (DEQ) is estimating that
roughly 1,000 businesses will come under
the jurisdiction of the new Act. These busi-
nesses include '"large users" who report
toxic chemical releases under section 313 of
the federal Emergency Planning and Com-
munity Right-to-Know Act, and regulated
generators of hazardous waste under the
federal Resource Conservation and Recov-
ery Act. The first plans are due September 1,
1991, from large users and fully regulated
generators of hazardous waste, and Septem-
ber 1,1992, from small quantity generators.
* Bills in Massachusetts and Oregon were both
signed into law on July24,1989. The Massachu-
setts toxics use reduction program was discussed
in the February 1990 Pollution Prevention
News. Washington and California have also
enacted laws requiring hazardous waste genera-
tors to prepare source reduction plans.
Employees at East Side Plating, Inc. use Oregon's
Generator Checklist to evaluate the use of toxic
chemicals. Parts waiting tobe plated are in background.
Photo: Light Graphics
Planning Process
The planning process outlined in the law
requires companies to examine their chemi-
cal usage, production processes, and waste
generation and find opportunities for use
and waste reduction. The planning efforts,
at a minimum, would focus on those toxic
substances and hazardous waste streams for
which performance goals must be set, al-
though the plan could cover a broader range
of chemicals and wastes if a company chose
to do a full assessment.
Drawing on available technical literature
or assistance from DEQ or other industry ex-
perts, a company must identify opportuni-
ties for use and waste reduction. The analy-
sis must distinguish between toxics use
reduction and waste reduction methods and
demonstrate that the former were given pri-
ority wherever technically and economically
practicable. A company must then develop
a schedule for implementation, setting meas-
urable performance goals for certain chemi-
cals used and waste-streams generated. For
now, decisions about actual performance
goals are left to individual companies.
After developing an original plan, com-
panies are next required to send annual
reports to DEQ. Plans and progress reports
are not considered public records and will be
kept at the facility. Instead, DEQ employees
are allowed to request and review this infor-
mation to monitor each business's progress
in implementing the law. If the plans or
progress reports are found inadequate ac-
cording to the planning guidelines and the
business fails to correct the deficiencies, then
the results of the DEQ review will be made
public and the Department can order the
company to develop a plan. This threat of
negative publicity, coupled with the eco-
nomic benefits of reduction planning, pro-
vides strong incentives for a business to
comply with the law.
Technical Assistance
The legislature expanded DEO^ existing
waste reduction technical assistance program
to help businesses develop and implement
reduction plans. Other functions will also be
expanded, including information exchange,
technical workshops, and development of a
public recognition program for businesses
that are successful in their use and waste re-
duction efforts.
Another key component of the program
deals with conditionally exempt generators
of hazardous waste. These types of busi-
nesses — drycleaners, vehicle repair shops,
print shops, commercial painters, and the
like — are often overlooked. Although they
are not required to develop plans, the De-
partment is explicitly directed to provide
technical assistance to them in their use and
waste reduction efforts.
To alleviate business concerns about
having the technical assistance program
within the state regulatory agency, businesses
that participate in the on-site technical assis-
tance program are indemnified from inspec-
tion or other enforcement actions for viola-
tions found by the state, unless there is rea-
sonable cause to believe that a clear and
imminent danger exists to the public health,
safety or the environment.
Funding for expanded technical assistance
will primarily come from two sources: exist-
ing general fund revenues and a new haz-
ardous substance user fee. The fiscal year
1989-91 biennium budget for the program is
$675,000, which will fund seven staff posi-
tions over two years and provide additional
funds for technical training.
Over the past few years, a number of com-
panies have implemented effective and com-
prehensive toxics use and hazardous waste
reduction programs. With the help of the
Oregon toxics use reduction law, our next
challenge is to get all companies to do so.
For more information on Oregon's pro-
gram, contact Marianne Fitzgerald at 503-
229-6352.
Excerpted and updated from "Pollution Pre-
vention Planning," The Environmental Forum
©1989. Reprinted with permission.

-------
5 - Pollution Prevention News
Success Story: Air Emissions Cut 93%
in IBM Manufacturing Process — Endicott, NY
Before: IBM's Systems Technology Division used the solvents methylene chloride
and methyl chloroform in manufacturing a high-volume circuit panel for disk
storage units and controllers for IBM's high-end computers. The organic solvents
were a costly part of the process.
After: IBM substituted water-based sodium carbonateand sodium hydroxide forthe
organic solvents. At the same time, the company improved the maintenance of pol-
lution control systems components, such as flanges, valves, pump seals and connec-
tors, and instituted conservation measures such as turning off idle equipment.
Benefits:
•	93% reduction in solvent emissions	• Liquid chemical wastes reduced
•	Waste treatment byproducts reduced • O&M costs reduced
•	Need for air emission abatement equipment
and distillation/recycling equipment reduced
Source: Success Story Fact Sheet, NYSDEC, April 1990
New York's Many
Roads to Source
Reduction
Leslie Stephenson
Bureau of Pollution Prevention,
NYSDEC
Guided by the principle that hazardous
waste isbest reduced at its source, New York
State is pursuing a wide range of approaches
in regulatory and assistance programs.
According to Tom Jorling, Commissioner of
the New York Department of Environ mental
Conservation (DEC), "we intend to develop
waste reduction regulations that are the most
stringent of any in the country to safeguard
the health of our residents and prevent the
mistakes of the past from happening again."
A state law enacted in 1987 establishes a
hierarchy among preferred waste manage-
ment techniques, with source reduction
ranking at the top. In pursuing source reduc-
tion, DEC has implemented the following:
•	Waste Reduction Impact Statements.
Hazardous waste generators that own
and operate facilities subject to state per-
mitting must submit Waste Reduction
Impact Statements. The statements dis-
close: amounts and types of waste gener-
ated; sources of waste; feasible waste
reduction techniques, including any
implemented since 1984; and schedule
for future implementation.
Such statements are required only for
RCRA hazardous waste at present, but
DEC plans to expand the requirement to
include other waste types.
•	Annual reporting. Manufacturers and
treatment, storage, and disposal facilities
handling hazardous waste must submit
annual reports describing steps taken to
reduce volume and toxicity of wastes.
•	Technical assistance. DEC assists haz-
ardous waste generators in several ways:
— The New York State Waste Reduction
Guidance Manual published by DEC in
1989 provides guidance to generators in
conducting waste reduction audits and
assessing the feasibility of waste reduc-
tion options.
—	DEC's annual hazardous waste con-
ferences are attended by representatives
from industry, government, and educa-
tional institutions.
—	Through DEC's information clearing-
house, staff provide telephone and writ-
ten assistance using a prevention and re-
cycling library. Abstracts from the li-
brary's collection are stored in a com-
puter data base and are accessible by
waste type, industry, process, or waste
reduction type.
—	DEC develops case studies of indus-
tries that have successfully implemented
waste reduction techniques (see box
above).
— Small quantity generator workshops
are conducted for businesses such as
vehicle maintenance facilities, dry clean-
ers, and printers.
Using an EPA Source Reduction and
Recycling Technical Assistance Grant, DEC
plans to conduct additional workshops for
specific industrial groups or waste streams.
Participants will include representatives of
continued on page 6
Innovative Research
The New York State Center for Hazardous Waste Management is currently sup-
porting the following research:
•	A demonstration project to utilize a rule-based expert system for minimizing in-
dustrial hazardous waste.
•	Use of metal adsorbing compounds to mitigate heavy metal toxicity in sus-
pended growth systems.
•	Metal ion separations from hazardous waste streams by impregnated ceramic
membranes.
•	Development of oxides of iron as sorbents for the control, separation and recov-
ery of inorganic hazardous waste components.
•	Electrocoagulation for hazardous waste management: fundamental aspects, ap-
plications and economic benefits.

-------
Pollution Prevention News - 6
June 1990
In the States: Mississippi
Mississippi's
State/U ni versity
Partnership
Dr. Caroline K. Hill
Technology Transfer Specialist,
MISSTAP
In a unique partnership, Mississippi's De-
partment of Environmental Quality and
Mississippi State University's Department
of Chemical Engineering and Department of
Home Economics have teamed up to pro-
vide technology transfer and technical assis-
tance to Mississippi industries, businesses,
municipalities, and residents.
The non-regulatory MISSTAP (Missis-
sippi Technical Assistance Program for waste
minimization) was established in late 1988 at
Mississippi State University and offers an
information clearinghouse with services such
as library resources, computer bulletin board,
hotline with the Southeast Regional Resource
Center, and computer searches of databases.
MISST A P publishes a newsletter every other
month and holds conferences, including 1-
day industry-specific conferences offered at
different locations around the state.
Technical assistance projects have been
initiated with 16 companies. One demon-
stration project funded by the Appalachian
industries that have successfully imple-
mented pollution prevention strategies.
EPA's grant will also help DEC educate
its staff in source reduction and recycling
and will aid in expanding the information
clearinghouse.
Additional source reduction efforts in
New York include:
•	DEC's household hazardous waste re-
duction program, which monitors and
evaluates collection events and develops
public information materials.
•	The New York State Center for Hazard-
ous Waste Management, which supports
a research and development program and
conducts outreach to promote technol-
ogy transfer.
Regional Commission and MSU is nearing
completion and is expected to achieve sig-
nificant reductions in hazardous waste at a
metal-finishing company (see box).
In January of this year, another new pro-
gram called MSSWRAP (Mississippi Solid
Waste Reduction Assistance Program) was
initiated. This program concentrates on solid
wastes and will be offering a computerized
waste exchange in the near future, covering
materials such as plastic and rubber, sol-
vents, and oils. The first MSSWRAP news-
letter was mailed out in March and a 3-day
conference is being held in June.
One of the most beneficial "side effects"
of the MISSTAP/MSSWRAP program is the
involvement of students in demonstration
projects, seminars, and conferences. Faculty
and students in the Home Economics De-
partment are incorporating environmental
issues into such courses as housing, textiles,
and consumer economics; a recycling pro-
gram for the campus is currently being
planned. Engineering students in the uni-
versity's Chemical Engineering Department
attend MISSTAP conferences, work on dem-
onstration projects, and are increasingly
focusing on environmental problem s in their
own independent research.
For more information, contact Caroline Hill
at 601-325-8454.
•	The New York State Environmental Fa-
cilities Corporation (EFC), which com-
piles research and development informa-
tion on methods for reducing, recycling
and disposing of hazardous materials,
researches available markets, develops
technical information on methods and
economic means of recycling, and pro-
vides technical assistance.
•	The Northeast Industrial Waste Exchange,
which receives funds from New York
through the EFC. The exchange matches
waste generators with waste users i n ord er
to recycle waste materials back into the
manufacturing process.
For more information on New York's program,
contact Leslie Stephenson at 518-485-8400.

V
MSU student wearing face shield studies
chrome III oxidation.
The demonstration project at Piper
Impact, Inc. in New Albany, MS is
expected to yield technologies and re-
sults that can be applied to other firms
involved with metal finishing opera-
tions. The goal of the project was to
reduce or eliminate the heavy metal
and organic acid hazardous waste
streams generated during the surface
treatment of magnesium parts. The
current factory process uses caustic,
organic acid, chromic acid, water spray
rinses, and constant overflow rinses to
treat and finish the part surfaces, gen-
erating over 7,000 gallons of concen-
trated waste every three weeks and
about 5,200 gallons of water requiring
treatment every hour.
To reduce rinse water, a pilot plant
has been constructed where counter-
current overflow rinse tanks in series
replace the spray and constant over-
flow rinse system. The process is
expected to decrease the rinse water
flow rate by 90%, bringing contami-
nated rinse water flow down to about
516 gallons per hour.
To eliminate the organic acid, two
possible replacements are under in-
vestigation: hydrogen peroxide and a
chromic acid-sulfuric acid mixture.
Finally, replacement of the chromic
acid treatment was studied, but no
substitutes were found. Instead, elec-
trolytic regeneration of the chromic
acid is being pursued as an alterna-
tive. If successful, these approaches
will move the company closer to the
ultimate goal of zero discharges from
hazardous waste processes.
New York's Many Roads
from page 5

-------
June 1990
7 - Pollution Prevention News
Calendar of Events
Title
1990 National Solid Waste
Forum on Integrated Municipal
Waste Management
9th National Recycling Congress
Milestone Conference
28th International Solid
Waste Exposition
Prevention, Management &
Compliance for Hazardous
Wastes (Course)
1st Int'l Symposium on Oil & Gas
Waste Management Practices
EnSol 90: Global Env. Solutions
Conference & Exposition
Waste Minimization Seminar
Annual Regional Solid Waste
Symposia
Haztech International '90
Hazwaste Expo Chicago '90
7th Annual New Jersey
Environmental Exposition
Hazardous Waste Pollution
Prevention Strategies
Enviro Expo
Investment Recovery
Conference
5th National Household
Hazardous Waste Management
Conference
HazMat West '90
1990 Food Industry
Environmental Conference
Pollution Prevention
Strategies
2nd Annual Waste Equipment
& Recycling Conf/Exhibition
Sponsor
Assn. of State & Territorial
Solid Waste Management
Officials
National Recycling
Coalition
Governmental Refuse Collection
& Disposal Assn.
American Institute of
Chemical Engineers
U.S. EPA, others
CA Dept. of Health Services
CA Env. Affairs Agency, U.S.
EPA, Brits 2 Limited
Du Pont Company
Governmental Refuse Collection
& Disposal Assn.
Institute for International
Research
National Association of
Hazardous Waste Generators
Environmental Expo Advisory
Board
Hazardous Waste Treatment
Council
Anchor Resources, Inc.
Investment Recovery
Association
U.S. EPA, CA Dept. of Health
Services, CA Integrated
Waste Management Board
Tower Conference
Management, Inc.
Georgia Tech Research Institute
American Ecology Services
Inc./Geraghty & Miller
Tower Conference
Management, Inc.
Date/Location
July 16-18
Milwaukee, W1
Aug. 20-24
San Diego, CA
Aug. 20-24
Vancouver, BC
Aug. 20-22/San Diego, CA
Nov. 14-16/Chicago, IL
Sept. 10-13
New Orleans, LA
Sept.12-14
Santa Clara, CA
Contact
Kerry Callahan
202-624-5828
Annmarie Pittman
202-639-5080
Patty Magill
800-456-4723
Registrar
212-705-7526
Mike Fitzpatrick
202-475-6783
Rachelle
Scheinbach
206-643-7410
Sept. 18-19/Williamsburg, VA Seminar Group
Oct. 9-10/San Antonio, TX 800-532-7233
Nov. 14-15/Orlando, FL
Oct. 2-4/Virginia Beach, VA
Nov. 6-8/Orlando, FL
Oct. 2-4
Pittsburgh, PA
Oct. 15-18
Rosemont, IL
Oct. 15-17
Edison, NJ
Oct. 25-26
Washington, DC
Oct. 30-31
Beaumont, TX
Oct. 30-Nov. 1
Williamsburg, VA
Nov. 5-7
San Francisco, CA
Nov. 6-8
Long Beach, CA
Nov. 12-14
Atlanta, GA
Nov. 15-16
Arlington, VA
Nov. 28-30
Rosemont, IL
Brad Roberge
800-456-4723
Neal Schwartz
800-468-7644
Robert McCarty
215-683-5098
Linda Siecke
201-782-0062
Jacqueline Scott
202-783-0870
Jimmie Douglas
504-291-9996
Jeff Wherry
216-899-0010
Michele Sevigny
508-470-3044
Brenda West
708-469-3373
Chuck Ross
404-894-3412
Richard Miller
212-371-1620
Bill Harrington
708-469-3373

-------
Pollution Prevention News - 8
June 1990
Editor's Corne
tions define the minimum amount of secon-
dary materials that must be contained in a
product in order to be labeled "recycled"
and the conditions under which a product
may be labeled "recyclable" or "reusable."
In order to work towards regional consis-
tency in definitions, the Coalition of North-
eastern Governors' Council on Source Re-
duction and the Council of State Govern-
ments' Northeast Recycling Council are also
developing definitions for product and pack-
aging attributes.
We are encouraged by these efforts to-
wards achieving consistency. However, EPA
believes that the federal government also
has a role in seeing that accurate and consis-
tent information is provided to consumers
so that they can make informed decisions on
the products they purchase. As a first step,
EPA has published federal procurement
guidelines for certain materials with recycled
content: paper, used oil, building insulation
materials, retread tires, and cement contain-
ing fly-ash.
In addition to the important issue of defi-
nitions and standards, there is the larger
issue of labeling products based on environ-
mental impacts over the life of the product.
EPA believes that "environmental choice"
labeling has the potential to be a powerful
mechanism for increasing consumer aware-
ness of the environmental effects of their
purchases, and for encouraging manufac-
turers to reduce the environmental impacts
associated with their products. EPA is track-
ing environmental choice labeling efforts
r from page 1
getting underway in the United States (see
articles on Green Seal and Green Cross in-
side), and in other countries, including West
Germany, Canada and Japan.
Among the most important issues in any
environmental choice labeling effort is the
method used for evaluating and comparing
environmental impacts across products.
Judgments and tradeoffs among environ-
mental impacts must frequently be made.
For example, is the energy used in the manu-
facture of a product more environmentally
significant than the wastes produced? EPA
is developing a methodology for conduct-
ing the sort of sophisticated product lifecycle
assessments that are needed for a rational,
equitable environmental labeling program
(see article on page 3).
Finally, in considering the appropriate
future federal role in environmental label-
ing programs, EPA is seeking wider discus-
sions of these issues with states, private or-
ganizations, and a number of federal agen-
cies with an active involvement in these
matters, notably the Commerce Department
and the Federal Trade Commission.
Coming Soon...
Coverage of EPA's
International Conference
on Pollution Prevention,
June 10-13, 1990.
Call for Papers —
1991 ACS Symposium
on Pollution Prevention
and Process Analytical
Chemistry
Process analytical chemistry is an
emerging area of interest to all seg-
ments of the chemistry community and
holds great promise for pollution pre-
vention. For a symposium at the na-
tional meetingof the American Chemi-
cal Society (April 14-19,1991, Atlanta,
Georgia), papers and posters are re-
quested on the following areas:
•	Chemical and Biochemical Sensors
•	Robotics
•	Engineering Process Controls
•	Chemometrics
•	State & Regional Programs on
Toxics Use Reduction
•	The Toxics Release Inventory and
Process Analytical Chemistry
•	Process Analytical Chemistry and
Quality Assurance
Short and extended abstracts are re-
quired by September 15,1990. Manus-
cipts will be required at the time of the
meeting; all manuscripts will be peer
reviewed prior to acceptance. Formore
information, contact the Symposium
co-chairs: Joseph J. Breen, EPA Office
of Toxic Substances, at 202-382-3569, or
Michael J. Dellarco, EPA Office of Re-
search & Development at 202-382-5794.
FIRST CLASS MAIL
POSTAGE & FEES PAID
EPA
PERMIT NO. G-35
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300
United States Environmental
Protection Agency (PM-219)
Washington, DC 20460

-------