United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Pollution
Prevention and Toxics
Washington, DC 20460
August - September 1994
EPA 742-N-94-004
vvEPA Pollution
Prevention
News
COMMON SENSE INITIATIVE SELECTS SIX
INDUSTRIES FOR COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW
INSIDE
Green Universities	3
Universities arc on the roll with
pollution prevention. A snapshot of
three university efforts.
Facility Planning	4
Special feature on state mandated
facility planning requirements.
Perspectives on the issue are offered
by several analysts.
klimaU Change	9
A status report on a sample of the
44 actions included in the Climate
Change Action Plan to reduce
global warming.
Federal Facilities	10
The Air Force has instituted a
pollution prevention Pharmacy
Program.
Corporate Notes	11
Monsanto recognizes four
winning teams.
Calendar
12
Editorial Staff:
Ruth Heikkinen, Editor
Gilah Langner
Joshua Katz
Free Hand Press, Layout
EPA Administrator Carol Browner has
proposed a major new initiative
which signals a new generation of
environmental protection. The "Common
Sense Initiative" is marked by a commit-
ment to goals, combined with a built-in
flexibility to achieve those goals. EPA will
move away from its focus on specific
problems caused by individual pollutants,
and will approach pollution on an indus-
try-wide basis.
"The successes that are available if we
continue down the path of traditional
regulation are incremental at best,"
Administrator Browner said. "The current
regulatory system is about going from A to
B and B to C. The changes we undertake
are about going from A to Z. I don't think
anyone in this country, whether environ-
mental leader or corporate CEO, believes
incremental steps will achieve the kind of
future we want."
The initiative has three goals. One is to
eliminate problems caused by focusing too
narrowly on a single pollutant or environ-
mental medium. For example, when EPA
rules under the Clean Air Act led to the
installation of smokestack scrubbers, air
quality was improved, but the scrubber
waste contributed to water pollution.
A second goal is to stop the practice of
making policy in response to emergencies.
For example, Superfund was spurred by
the Love Canal disaster, and the Safe
Drinking Water Act was at least partly a
reaction to water contamination in New
Orleans. Administrator Browner noted
that the result of this reactive approach is
that there are 16 major environmental
acts, overseen by 74 congressional com-
"The mrrent regulatory
system is about going
from A to B and B to C.
The ihanges we
undertake are about
going from A to I."
—Carol Browner
EPA Administrator
July 20, 1994
mittees and subcommittees, and thou-
sands of regulations.
The third goal is to try to bridge the gap
separating environmentalists and industry
by holding regular meetings with EPA and
interested parties to discuss differences and
to try to reach
agreement on
major issues.
The Initia-
tive will begin
by focusing on
six industries:
iron and steel,
electronics and
computers,
metal plating
and finishing, automobiles, printing, and
oil refining. These industries were selected
because of their importance to the
economy and their environmental impact.
Together, they are responsible for nearly
15 percent of the Gross Domestic Product
and almost 4 million jobs. In 1992 they
collectively spent over $8.2 billion on
environmental compliance and they
released 345 million pounds of toxic
substances, one-eighth of all TRI reported
emissions. Some of the selected industries
are dominated by large companies and
others by small companies. Administrator
Browner noted that small businesses, the
nation's top job creators, have the most to
gain from the initiative as they are often
hardest hit by regulatory requirements.
For each industry, EPA will assemble a
team composed of EPA officials, industry
leaders, and representatives of national
and grassroots environmental organiza-
CMtimW m 1

-------
2 Pollution Prevention News
August - September 1994
NEWS AND NOTES
PESTICIDE PACKAGING RULE
A joint effort by the Office of Water and
the Pollution Prevention Division (PPD)
has created a rule which highlights
pollution prevention. The Pesticides
Formulating, Packaging, and Repackaging
(PFPR) Rule, part of the Source Reduction
Review Project (SRRP), was proposed on
March 31, 1994, and will be issued in final
form in August 1995. The PFPR Rule
details the pollution prevention practices
that the industry can use to achieve the
goal of zero discharge. Further, the
technical development document provides
an economic analysis demonstrating the
economic benefits of utilizing the pollution
prevention approach to compliance.
Continued on pago 8
RESOURCES FOR SMALL
AND MEDIUM BUSINESSES
The Virginia Military Institute Re-
search Laboratories is offering a publica-
tion, A Pollution Prevention Manual for
Small and Medium Size Businesses, and a
video, Pollution Prevention and the
Virginia Manufacturer — Making a
Difference, produced in cooperation with
the Virginia Department of Environmental
Quality and Virginia Manufacturers, to
help companies establish voluntary
pollution prevention programs or enhance
existing programs.
The video and the manual are $20 each
or $35 for both. For more information, or to
order, contact Ron Erchul at 703-464-7331.
RESOURCES AVAILABLE
Several documents published by EPA's
Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics
are available through PPIC (Tel: 202-260-
1023, Fax: 202-260-0178):
~ A 70-page Compendium lists documents
developed in recent years under the
Pollution Prevention Grant Program for
states. The materials are indexed by state,
subject matter, and type of document.
Continued on pag« S
COMMON SENSE INITIATIVE
Continuod from pago 1
tions, along with members of state environ-
mental commissions, local government,
labor unions and other groups that want to
participate. The teams will examine each
industry using the following principles:
~	Regulation — Each team will review
all relevant regulations for the industry to
identify opportunities to get better envi-
ronmental results at less cost, and seek to
improve new rules through increased
coordination.
~	Pollution Prevention — The teams
will promote pollution prevention as a
standard business practice and a central
ethic of environmental protection.
~	Reporting — Each team will seek to
make it easier to provide, use and publicly
disseminate pollution and environmental
information.
~	Compliance — The teams will work to
create a system that will assist companies
that want to obey and exceed legal re-
quirements while consistently enforcing
the law against those that don't.
~	Permitting — The teams will work to
change permitting so that it works more
efficiently, encourages innovation, and
creates more opportunities for public
participation.
~	Environmental Technology — The
teams will structure regulation so that
industry has the incentive and the flexibil-
ity to develop innovative technologies that
meet and exceed environmental standards
while cutting costs.
Administrator Browner emphasized
that "for the first time ever, every player
with a stake in the outcome will be at
the table — industry, communities,
environmentalists, regulators. And for
the first time ever, every major topic will
be on the table." The industry teams are
expected to develop recommendations
within one year.

-------
3 Pollution Prevention New.s
August - September 1994
GREEN UNIVERSITIES
by Colleen Michuda
With hopes of lasting longer than
the proverbial college trend, a
number of universities have taken
steps to "go green" — making comprehen-
sive changes in the environmental orienta-
tion of their institutions, from academic
offerings to facilities and infrastructure.
The "green university" ethic traces back
to the efforts in 1989 of a group of six
graduate students at UCLA to conduct a
comprehensive environmental audit of
UCLA's operations. In October 1990, 22
university presidents from 13 countries met
at the Tufts European Center in Talloires,
France to discuss the role of universities in
cultivating a sustainable future. The
meeting resulted in a declaration of prin-
ciples and actions; by the end of 1993, 178
university presidents in 38 countries had
signed onto the Talloires Declaration.
Three examples of green universities in
the U.S. are highlighted in this article.
Tufts CLEAN!
The Tufts CLEAN! (Cooperation,
Learning, and Environmental Awareness
Now!) program at Tufts University in
Boston, Massachusetts emerged in April
1990 as a pilot pollution prevention pro-
gram, which later grew into a full-scale
greening of the university. An Environmen-
tal Improvement Committee oversees the
implementation of the university's environ-
mental policies, which were developed
jointly by representatives from the admin-
istration, faculty, staff, and students.
Outreach programs to the university's
campus community include newsletters, and
a Campus Tour, which highlights the
university's progress in resource conserva-
tion and recycling. In addition, the Tufts
Environmental Literacy Institute helps
faculty from various disciplines incorporate
environmental issues into their curricula.
The university has undertaken numerous
initiatives, including installation of energy-
efficient motors and thermopane windows; a
composting program for food and yard
waste; and implementation of the recom-
mendations of a graduate students' project
with respect to hazardous materials and the
disposal of photographic chemical wastes.
Brown is Green
Brown University in Rhode Island
established its BIG (Brown is Green)
program in August 1990 in response to
rising energy costs and weak participation
in recycling. Like Tufts, Brown University
stresses student involvement in the
greening process. For example, one major
study involving student research exam-
ined the university's heating system and
explored options for the replacement of the
outdated boiler system. Students living in
the West House are required to take a
class on "Efficient Use of Natural Re-
sources," which has helped students
achieve a consistent 40 percent reduction
in consumption of gas, electricity, and
water within the house.
Brown has also instituted a number of
greening measures for its facilities. For
example, 750 showers were retrofitted
with low flow heads, and 1500 exit sign
bulbs were replaced with lower-wattage,
longer-lasting bulbs. To promote the
exchange of ideas and environmental
initiatives, Brown set up an electronic
conference called "Green Schools," acces-
sible through Bitnet or Internet.
George Washington Joins Up
Joining the ranks of green universities
with a bang on Earth Day 1994 was
George Washington University in Wash-
ington, D.C. GWU's plan concentrates on
four areas: curriculum, research, infra-
structure, and outreach.
Although the new program is in the
planning stages, GWU has been incorpo-
rating environmental ethics into its
operations for a number of years. About
120 courses with an environmental focus
are currently offered at the university, as
are six environmental degree programs in
both undergraduate and graduate studies.
GWU has also been in the forefront of
environmental research through its Center
for Applied Environmental Technology.
CONTACTS:
Tufts CLEAN:
Sarah Hammond Creighton,
617-628-5000
Brown University:
Kurt Teichert, 401-863-7837
GW University:
Irwin Price, 202-994-0742
°
-------
4 Pollution Prevention News
August - September 1994
FACILITY PLANNING
Beginning in July 1989,
Oregon and Massachusetts
became the first states to
pass facility planning laws
requiring industries to meet
waste reduction goals and
report on their progress.
Since then, facility planning
has spread to 28 states,
engendering much debate
and discussion over its
merits. Do facility planning
requirements stimula te
pollution prevention think-
ing? Or are the requirements
perceived as just another set
of paperwork to be filled out?
What works? What doesn't?
We've asked several observ-
ers of the issue to offer their
opinions and perspectives.
Bob Style is at the Waste
Reduction Institute for
Training and Applications
Research (WRITAR). A final
report on the state planning
requirementproject should
be available by January
1995. For more information,
he can be reached at 612-
379-5995.
PLANNING REQUIREMENTS
ENCOUNTER CHALLENGES OF
IMPLEMENTATION
by Bob Style
As environmental regulatory agencies
attempt to promote pollution
prevention as the primary method
of waste management, they have been
struggling to define their role in the
process. The voluntary nature of pollution
prevention activities makes it difficult for
these agencies to use the "stick" of regula-
tion to encourage prevention. Toxic use
reduction and pollution prevention plan-
ning requirements can be seen as a
reaction to this situation and the desire to
provide some "motivation" for the regu-
lated community to adopt pollution
prevention techniques.
Fifteen states have adopted facility-wide
pollution prevention planning requirements
as an attempt to spur companies into
prevention oriented approaches. Prevention
planning requirements have also found
their way into draft versions of RCRA and
Clean Water Act reauthorization bills
currently being considered by Congress,
as well as a number of state
and locally based initiatives.
WRITAR has been track-
ing state pollution prevention
planning requirements and is
currently in the midst of a
project, in cooperation with
EPA's Pollution Prevention
Division, to characterize the
experience of state agencies and their
interactions with the regulated community
through these planning requirements. We
surveyed agencies in ten states that have
gone through one full cycle in the planning
process (plan development and at least one
progress report). States include AZ, CA,
GA, ME, MN, MS, NY, OR, TN, TX, VT, and
WA. Following is an overview of the
responses received.
For a medium
to large size
-------
5 Pollution Prevention News
August - September 1994
FACILITY PLANNING, CONT'D.
A UNIFORM APPROACH
FOR STATE LAWS
John Scagnelli
The growing trend at the state level
toward the enactment of legislation
requiring companies to reduce their
use of hazardous chemicals in manufac-
turing processes has led to a variety of
approaches and requirements. A uniform
state approach is urgently needed,
particularly for companies with multi-
state facilities.
Complying with different state waste
minimization requirements can prevent
companies from adopting a cost-efficient
and uniform approach to waste reduction,
particularly where reductions are depen-
dent upon capital equipment expendi-
tures and long-range engineering and
planning requirements. Without a uni-
form approach, states are themselves
creating disincentives and obstacles to
pollution prevention.
Certain fundamental elements from
different state approaches can be distilled
to create a uniform model approach. First,
the identification of goals or targets for
hazardous waste generation for all indus-
tries should be pursued but such goals
should be simply that — goals rather than
statutorily or regulatory mandated
targets. Common goals of 25% reduction of
hazardous waste generation by 1995 and
50% reduction by 2000 have been identi-
fied in some states and can serve as useful
guideposts for industry.
Programs for hazardous waste minimi-
zation should require reduction from a
facility-specific baseline. Baselines should
be identified through use of existing
environmental reporting mechanisms.
Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) reports
already required to be submitted to EPA
should serve as the basis for required
waste reduction plans to be submitted
every three years to state environmental
protection agencies, with annual required
progress reports. State agencies should be
directed to review the plans against the
general goals, but the reductions should
not be mandatory for each facility. In-
stead, the state agencies should be
empowered to require each facility
submitting a plan to document its
progress based upon best available waste
reduction technology within its industry.
Deviations from the 25% and 50%
reduction goals could be permitted based
on the available technologies and indus-
try circumstances.
The model uniform approach could
require each state to establish grant
programs to fund waste reduction pro-
grams and to provide technical assistance
in waste minimization, with training
provided by colleges and engineering
schools. Each state could also be required
to establish information clearinghouses to
facilitate the transfer of technology for
hazardous waste reduction.
Fees for hazardous waste disposal on a
per pound basis should be established to
fund the state technical assistance and
clearinghouse programs, and to provide a
further financial incentive for hazardous
waste reduction.
The model uniform state approach
suggested here is but one of several
possible scenarios, but the fundamental
point is clear — a uniform state approach
is critically needed. Serious consideration
should be given to establishing a national
state hazardous waste minimization
congress, with representatives of the
environmental protection agencies of the
fifty states invited to prepare a model
uniform state waste minimization bill.
John M. Scagnelli is a partner and chair-
man of the Environmental Department at
Whitman Breed Abbott & Morgan, New
York, NY and Newark, NJ.

-------
6 Pollution Prevention News
August - September 1994
FACILITY PLANNING, CONT'D.
BUSINESS ROUNDTABLE
BENCHMARKS SUCCESSFUL
FACILITY PLANS
The Business Roundtable, an associa-
tion of business executives,
conducted a "benchmarking" study of
facility level pollution prevention planning
during the course of 1993. The goal was to
determine both the common, as well as the
unique, elements of successful pollution
prevention programs. Six manufacturing
facilities were selected as representing the
"Best-In-Class." Proctor & Gamble's
Mehoopany, PA facility; Intel in Aloha, OR;
Du Pont in La Porte, TX; Monsanto in
Pensacola, FL; 3M in Columbia, MO; and
Martin Marietta in Waterton, CO.
Key findings of the study
~	All facilities had strong management
support and a focal point for the facility-
level pollution prevention program, such
as a Senior Environmental Engineer, the
Director of Environmental Management,
or the Waste Management Team Leader.
~	Successful facilities understood their
corporate and plant cultures and imple-
mented the programs consistent with
those cultures.
~	Facilities were successful when they
were not told how to approach pollution
prevention by corporate environmental
groups or other outside forces. The free-
dom to choose the best pollution preven-
tion method was key to success.
~	Facilities had the ability to report
progress against selected goals or initia-
tives on a monthly or quarterly basis.
~	lb be able to sustain a pollution preven-
tion program, the projects had to be, on
the whole, cost effective. Unlike compli-
ance projects, pollution prevention projects
generally had to compete against capital
improvement projects.
~	No facility relied exclusively on source
reduction techniques to achieve pollution
prevention. All facilities included recycling
and reuse in the efforts and some used the
entire waste management hierarchy.
~	Facilities continued to spend more on
compliance than on pollution prevention,
although they expressed the desire to shift
the balance toward prevention.
~	Each facility measured the success of its
program differently, using a combination
of reduced cost, reduced volume, improved
public image, results against goals, ability
to expand a facility, and other measures.
~	Some facilities normalized waste
volume to production; others did not. Each
facility used a different method for track-
ing wastes/emissions. All facilities used
PC-based systems to track waste streams,
and customized spreadsheet packages to
meet their own needs.
~	Each of the facilities had matured from
focusing on pollution prevention within
current manufacturing processes to
integrating pollution prevention in the
pre-manufacturing decision phases. The
benchmark facilities were working with
raw material suppliers, equipment
suppliers, and customers to prevent
pollution at each step.
For a copy of the Facility Level Pollution
Prevention Benchmarking Study (Novem-
ber 1993), contact the Business
Roundtable, 1615 L Street NW, Suite
1100, Washington, D.C. 20036,
Tel: 202-872-1260.
-------
f Pollution Prevention News
August - September 1994
FACILITY PLANNING, CONT'D.
NEW FACILITY PLANNING
STUDY EXAMINES
INDUSTRY PERCEPTIONS
by Michael James and Susan Gouchoe
Anew study entitled Evaluation of
the Effectiveness of Industry
Pollution Prevention Planning
Requirements & Guidance for Integrating
Pollution Prevention Plans1 was recently
completed by a group of graduate students
at Tufts University. The study — based on
interviews with environmental managers
at 17 manufacturers in the Massachusetts
area — provides insight into the percep-
tions of some industries on the effective-
ness of pollution prevention planning
requirements. The group also prepared a
guidance document to help industry
prepare comprehensive pollution preven-
tion plans that can meet the requirements
^f multiple federal regulatory programs
and many state programs.
The study included a review of the
motivations, effectiveness, and barriers
related to the pollution prevention plan-
ning process from an industry perspective.
The interview results very strongly
suggest that pollution prevention planning
is internally driven and not solely a
response to regulatory requirements. Cost
savings, improved worker health and
safety, and reduced risk of enforcement are
significant motivating factors for pollution
prevention planning. However, according
to the participants, some elements com-
mon to a number of planning require-
ments have been valuable in identifying
pollution prevention opportunities:
financial accounting, materials accounting
and chemical tracking, and process
characterization.
One common theme is that industry
finds it difficult to establish a connection
between the planning activities associated
with any one set of regulatory require-
1 Prepared, by Susan Gouchoe, Michael James,
Kevin Lynch, Marcia Rose, Shawn Usher; July 1994.
ments and the subsequent results of the
implementation phase. Industrial partici-
pants find that with the increased visibil-
ity of wastes and the generation of valid
cost savings, it becomes easier to get
management support for pollution preven-
tion; in some cases pollution prevention
becomes a self-sustaining activity. In
addition to the classic benefits of the
pollution prevention effort, a common
benefit observed by industry was an
improvement in health and safety perfor-
mance among the employees.
Overwhelmingly, industry felt that the
redundancy and the temporal relation-
ships of the planning and reporting
requirements mandated by the many
different regulations restricts the imple-
mentation of pollution prevention projects
during the first half of the year. Environ-
mental managers noted the need to
reduce the duplicative nature of the
planning and reporting requirements,
and simultaneously to coordinate the
timing and data requirements between
the multiple federal requirements and
individual state requirements.
Forecasting a potential industry need
for streamlined planning and reporting
requirements, the students developed a
guidance document showing how a com-
pany might develop one single pollution
prevention plan that would reduce the
redundancy of the many plans currently
required while allowing compliance with
many regulatory programs. Though not
inclusive of the myriad of regulatory-
driven pollution prevention planning
requirements, the guidance is based on
premise that a common thought process
can be used for pollution prevention
planning. These regulatory-driven plan-
ning requirements include such programs
as the Storm Water Pollution Prevention
Plan, SPCC plan, Slug Discharge Control
Plan under the Clean Water Act, and the
Accidental Release Prevention plan under
the Clean Air Act. By preparing each
element as outlined in the guidance,
planners adopt a comprehensive multi-
Continued on p«g« K
°<1
Michael James is with
James Environmental
Management, Inc. in Round
Rock, Texas. For more
information, he can be
reached at 512-244-3631.
Susan Gouchoe is complet-
ing her joint M.S. in Civil &
Environmental Engineering
and Urban & Environmen-
tal Policy at Tufts University
in Medford, Massachusetts.
-------
8 Pollution Prevention News
August - September 1994
PLANNING REQUIREMENTS ENCOUNTER
CHALLENGES OF IMPLEMENTATION
Continued from pug* 4
prevention planning requirements lead to
the discovery and implementation of
pollution prevention projects in industry?
Our initial impression, based on inter-
views and anecdotes, is that they do not. A
key assumption behind the planning
requirements is that through the process
of developing a plan, industry will become
"enlightened" about the usefulness of
pollution prevention. This assumption,
though, is at odds with twenty years of
compliance with environmental regula-
tions where the standard approach taken
by industry is quite the opposite — use a
minimum of effort and target the mini-
mum compliance standards.
In reality, finding the necessary re-
sources and using the information col-
lected are issues both for the companies
involved and the state agencies. P'or a
medium to large size company, a good plan
can cost as high as $60,000. Companies
predisposed toward implementing pollu-
tion prevention measures (often in re-
sponse to other initiatives) have told us
that the planning process drained re-
sources away from implementation
without yielding any new information.
Companies that are not predisposed
toward pollution prevention tend to
minimize the amount of time and effort
spent on planning, treating it as another
instance of regulatory compliance.
On the state agency side, it appears that
most of the resources in this area are
directed towards outreach and assistance
related to the plans. Relatively few funds
are available or devoted to using the plan-
ning documents or to enforcing the plan-
ning requirement. The situation will only
get worse as planning requirements are
extended to a larger number of generators.
All of this may change as the pollution
prevention field develops further. For the
moment the challenge remains to find ways
of turning planning requirements into a
useful process of discovery and change.
PESTICIDE PACKAGING RULE
Continued from pago 2
This rule is one of the first to provide
detailed pollution prevention information.
Even before issuance of the final rule, PPD
and the Office of Water will create an
implementation manual directed to
industry and will hold regional workshops
to teach compliance.
For more information, contact Holly
El wood at 202-260-4362.
RESOURCES AVAILABLE
Continued from pago 2
~	Reducing Lead Hazards When Remod-
eling Your Home (EPA 747-R-94-002, April
1994) offers practical advice on work
practices and safety precautions.
~	EPA Pollution Prevention Accomplish-
ments: 1993 (EPA 100-R-04-002, Spring
1994) shows how pollution prevention
policies have been incorporated into
different EPA programs.
~	To find out who's involved in EPA's
wide-ranging Management Accounting
and Capital Budgeting for Environmental
Costs Project, consult the Environmental
Accounting Resource Listing, recently
revised and expanded to include internal
and external sources of information, or
Directory of EPA's Environmental Network
for Managerial Accounting and Capital
Budgeting, with more than 500 network
member listings.
NEW FACILITY PLANNING STUDY
Confinutd from pago 7
media planning approach to analyze more
efficiently their facility's operations and
activities. The document promotes the
concept that the facility planning process
can be integrated with other business
decisions, and will ultimately lead to a
self-sustaining process.
For a copy of the report, contact the
Civil and Environmental Engineering
Department at Tufts University,
617-627-3211.
°<1
-------
9 Pollution Prevention News
August - September 1994
CLIMATE CHANGE
CLIMATE CHANGE
ACTION PLAN
The Climate Change Action Plan
released in October 1993 included
44 separate actions as part of a
sustained effort to combat climate
change. An April 1994 Program Update
outlines objectives, approach, current
status, upcoming milestones, and con-
tacts for each action. Listed below is a
sampling of actions and progress:
#1: Coordinate DOE's Rebuild
America and EPA's Energy Star
Building programs to expand markets for
energy-efficient technologies in commer-
cial and multifamily buildings. EPA has
signed agreements with 9 Showcase
Building Partners which will demonstrate
energy savings of 40 percent or more;
another 20 partners are being recruited.
l)OE will issue a competitive solicitation
FY 1995 to provide financial assistance
in support of innovative programs.
#3: Establish State Revolving Fund for
Public Buildings. DOE will award
grants of up to $1 million to states to
develop an effective program of state
revolving funds to finance energy effi-
ciency investments in state and local
buildings. The program will begin, if
funding is appropriated, in January 1995.
#13: Establish Golden Carrot Pro-
grams for Industrial Air Compressors,
Pumps, Fans and Drives, and Other
Industrial Process Technology. Using
the Golden Carrot approach that success-
fully produced an energy-efficient refrig-
erator, this program also establishes
partnerships among industrial end-users,
original equipment manufacturers,
utilities, distributors, and state energy
agencies to promote delivery of state-of-
the-art efficient technologies to the
marketplace. The new Golden Carrot
program for electric motors is expected to
be launched in the summer of 1995.
#17: Improve Efficiency of Fertilizer
Nitrogen Use through the voluntary
adoption of improved practices by farmers
and ranchers. In addition, USDA scien-
tists will develop new practices for opti-
mum rate, timing, and placement of
nitrogen fertilizer. They will also develop
tillage, cropping, and water management
systems that minimize nitrogen losses,
maintain residues, reduce on-farm energy
use, utilize improved crop varieties, and
reduce soil erosion.
#22: Develop Fuel Economy Labels for
Tires. Consumers often purchase replace-
ment tires that have 20 percent more
rolling resistance than original tires. Tires
with higher rolling resistance yield lower
fuel economy; a 20 percent change in
rolling resistance would lower fuel
economy 4 percent. With labeling, consum-
ers might make different choices, and
companies will have an incentive to
improve the rolling resistance of their
aftermarket tires.
#35: Launch Coalbed Methane Out-
reach Program. Through the program,
EPA will work with the coal industry to
identify methane recovery projects at 15 to
25 underground coal mines, which will
reduce annual methane emissions by 2.2
million metric tons by 2000. The program
was officially launched at a meeting on
April 11, 1994 with EPA and over 100
industry representatives at the North
American Coalbed Methane Forum.
#42: Launch Partnership with Alumi-
num Producers to Reduce Emissions
from Manufacturing Processes. The
goal is to achieve annual reductions in
emissions of perfluorocarbons (PFC) CF4
and C2F6 equivalent to 1.8 million metric
tons of carbon by 2000. Beginning this
summer, EPA will work with aluminum
companies to identify reduction potential
on a plant by plant basis.

-------
10 Pollution Prevention News
August - September 1994
FEDERAL FACILITIES
AIR FORCE PHARMACY
SYSTEM CURES HAZARDOUS
WASTE BLUES
Air Force bases have managed to cut
hazardous material purchasing and
disposal costs, as well as reduce the
overall amount of hazardous materials
they handle, by implementing a Pharmacy
Program. Unlike a traditional supply
system which simply orders and distrib-
utes material, the "Pharmacy" distributes
hazardous materials to the user in the
amount needed.
By utilizing the Pharmacy approach,
the bases are able to keep track of where
the material is used, for what purpose and
in what quantity, thereby making report-
ing requirements easier to fulfill. In
addition, the Pharmacy incorporates an
intensified inventory control system which
reduces the amount of material purchased
to that actually used. Prior to this system,
some bases, for example, had a three to six
year supply of certain hazardous materials
even though the shelf life of the materials
may have been considerably shorter.
There are three main components of the
Pharmacy system. The first is a single
point for product request and authoriza-
tion. Each request or requisition is re-
viewed by a team of experts in the areas of
bioenvironmental engineering, environ-
mental management, and logistics. A
request is authorized only after the panel
determines that it is the most environmen-
tally benign, technically acceptable
substance and is being used in the small-
est possible quantity.
The second element involves distribut-
ing and collecting the hazardous materi-
als. Because the materials are distributed
only as needed, the Pharmacy retains
responsibility for the location and condi-
tion of the hazardous materials. Shelf-life
expiration, compatible storage, documen-
tation, personnel training, and inspection
are all the concern of the Pharmacy,
thereby relieving the users of the burden.
Unused materials can be returned to the
Hazardous Material Pharmacy at Altus Air Fore* Base, Oklahoma.
Pharmacy for redistribution, further
reducing the waste stream.
The third element is the tracking
system which connects the review/
authorization and the distribution/
collection processes. The tracking system
should provide a record of all inventory
transactions, access to the chemical and
physical properties of the inventory,
tracking of containers, Material Safety
Data Sheet (MSDS) information, and the
disposal or consumption data. This
information can be used to analyze usage
patterns, establish ordering require-
ments, provide data for regulatory
reports, and plan emergency responses.
As in any large facility, the Pharmacies
will impact and require the cooperation of
many different people at the bases.
Implementation of a Pharmacy program
requires complete support from the top
down in order to be successful. Once in
place, the pharmacy system can have a
dramatic effect. One of the Air Force
Logistics Centers reduced its hazardous
materials procurement costs from $14
million to $4 million in two years by using
a single point of control and authorization.
For more information, contact Ms.
Elizabeth Davis, Air Force Center for
Environmental Excellence, (202) 536-4220.
(Adapted from an article by Elizabeth
Davis in the Winter 1994 issue of the Air
Force Journal of Logistics.)

-------
11 Pollution Prevention News
August - September 1994
CORPORATE NOTES
MONSANTO REWARDS
ENVIRONMENTAL INITIATIVE
onsanto Corporation has selected
four winners of its third annual
Monsanto Pledge Awards. The
company created the awards in 1991 to
recognize employees' contributions
toward environmental, safety and health
improvements. One hundred employee
teams from around the world applied for
the awards in four categories: operations,
technology, community service, and
marketplace. The company has donated
$100,000 — $25,000 for each winning-
team — to environmental organizations
chosen by the winning teams.
The winning entries
Community Service: A Monsanto team
is managing a Superf'und site in Woburn,
Massachusetts, near Boston. Monsanto,
working with local public officials and
^PA, devised a cleanup strategy which
will return the site to productive use — an
interstate highway exchange and a
regional transportation center will be built
on the site. This project is novel because
the cleanup methods were selected based
on the future intended use of the land. The
new Regional Transportation Center
involves a $30 million investment by state
agencies and will include a 2500 car "park
and ride" for commuters, which will help
the Boston area comply with the Clean Air
Act. The Woburn team selected the
Woburn Redevelopment Authority to
receive its $25,000 grant.
Technology : Teams from several
Monsanto facilities combined to develop a
new process for making 4-aminosiphenyl-
amine, an ingredient that makes rubber
products more durable. The new process
called PPD-2, which has been patented,
reduces raw material needs by 58 percent
and cuts organic and inorganic waste by a
combined total of 95 percent. The new
process eliminates the use of chlorine and
xylenc>. Chlorine had been responsible for
most of the waste. If the PPD-2 process is
used at a full-scale production facility, the
process could save up to 56 million pounds
of chemicals and more than 130 million
gallons of wastewater annually. The
Nature Conservancy chapters in Missouri
and Ohio shared the $25,000 grant.
Operations: An effort involving person-
nel worldwide resulted in a method for
manufacturing the active ingredient in
Roundup herbicide more efficiently,
thereby reducing waste by 2.1 million tons
annually. The new "fast catalyst" not only
saves money — $4 million per year — due
to decreased disposal costs, but it also
generated a one-time savings of $7 million
due to increased efficiency. This team
selected seven groups from around the
world to share its $25,000 prize. The
recipients are: the Neighborhood Greening
Project in St. Louis; the University of
North Carolina Cape Pear River- Project;
Lake Ponchartrain Basin in Louisiana;
VZW Natuurreservaten in Antwerp; and
three conservation projects in Australia.
Marketplace: A Monsanto team in Brazil
developed a new crop rotation pattern that
reduces soil erosion in the Cerrado region.
Soil erosion has been a problem since
soybean farmers settled the region twenty
years ago. With the deterioration of the
soil, the farmers move on, cutting down
more of the rain forest and causing more
erosion. The Monsanto team identified a
rotation system using pearl millet, corn
and sorghum. These crops worked well in
rotation with soybeans, providing effective
ground cover and additional cash crops. By
improving the soil, the rotation system
also has increased the annual yield for
soy beans. The team divided its $25,000
grant among three groups formed by
landowners to learn more about no-till
farming, and an organization that will
study the Tuiuiu mycteria, the third
largest bird in the world.
THE MONSANTO PLEDGE
The Monsanto Pledge is the
company's environmental
commitment. Since 1990,
Monsanto has pledged to:
~	reduce all toxic and
hazardous releases and
emissions, working
toward an ultimate goal
of zero effect;
~	ensure no Monsanto
operation poses any
undue risk to employees
or communities;
~	work to achieve sustain-
able agriculture through
new technology and
practices;
~	ensure groundwater
safety;
~	keep plants open to the
community and involve
the community in plant
operations;
~	manage all corporate real
estate, including plant
sites, to benefit nature;
and
~	search worldwide for
technology to reduce and
eliminate waste from
Monsanto operations,
with top priority being
not making it in the
first place.
-------
12 Pollution I* revention News
August September l!)!M
CALENDAR
TITLE
Fifth Annual Energy
Efficiency Forum
National Roundtable of State
Pollution ['revention Programs
The Kmission Inventory:
Applications and Improvement
Computing in Environmental
Management
Building TRI and Pollution
Prevention Partnerships
Fnvironmental Technology
Fxpo & Conference
Low- and No-VOC Coating
'fechnologies International Conf.
SPONSOR
Johnson Controls,
U.S. Energy Assn
NRSPPP, Minn. OFA
EPA, Air & Waste
Management A.ssn.
Air & Waste Management. Assn.
FPA, NFWMOA
FPA, Assoc. of Energy
Engineers, others
EPA Air and Energy Research
Lab, Research Triangle Inst.
DATE/LOCATION
October 4
Washington, D.C.
November 2-4
Minneapolis MN
November 1 -3
Raleigh, NC
Nov. ;S() - Dec.2
Research Triangle Park, NC
I )ecember 5-8
Boston, MA
December 7-9
Atlanta, (1A
March 1 ,i-15, 1995
Durham, NC
CONTACT
414-271-4819
800-657-3843
412-232-3444
412-2:52-3444
617-666-1431
617-628-9297
404-447-508;!
919-541-5816
LIVING "OFF THE GRID"
Homes across the country featuring energy
conservation and energy independence will be open
to the public on October 15 as part of the second
National Tour of Independent Homes. The tour is
sponsored by the Real Goods Trading Corporation
and gives people the opportunity to tour homes and
see the lifestyle available using renewable energy.
Last year, nearly 10,000 people took part in the tours.
To find out about touring homes in your area or to
volunteer your home for the four, call Karen Hensley
at 1-800-762-7325.
Moving? Please enclosr mailing label!
LABORATORY WASTE MINIMIZATION WORKSHOP
A workshop on laboratory waste minimization will
be held on November- 14, 1994 as part of the Ameri-
can Chemical Society's Southwest Regional Meeting
in Fort Worth, Texas. Topics will Include: 1) Huaard-
ous Waste Minimization in the; Academic Laboratory;
2) Developing and Implementing a Pollution Preven-
tion Program; 3) OS HA Standards and Hazardous
Waste Minimization; and 4) Recycling Orphan
Chemicals. Each topic will be followed by a discussion
session, open to questions from the floor. For further
information on the workshop program, contact
Caroline M. Trupp at (202) 872-4467.
United States Environmental
Protection Agency (MC7409)
Washington, DC 20460
Official Business
Penalty i;.i I'i >¦¦ t fetOO
-------