SectorStrategies
    Performance  Report
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency

-------
            NCEI
                                           ri
                                  NATIONAL CENTER FOR
                                  ENVIRONMENTAL INNOVATION
A Note To Stakeholders:






 expectations of citizens, states, and the regulated community itself.

                            \'s National Center for Environmental Innovation are
  other types o
and service sectors to
                                                   erformance trends on a broad scale.
    Sincerely,
    /^zy Benforado
    Director

-------
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency invites you to learn about its new Sector
Strategies Program through this first Sector Strategies Performance Report. Launched
in 2003, the Sector Strategies Program promotes industry-wide environmental gains
through innovative partnerships with 12 manufacturing and service sectors:
                  Agribusiness
                  Cement
                  Colleges & Universities
                  Construction
                  Forest Products
                  Iron & Steel
Metal Casting
Metal Finishing
Paint & Coatings
Ports
Shipbuilding & Ship Repair
Specialty-Batch Chemicals
Through this collaborative, voluntary partnership, we are working with sector trade
groups and other stakeholders to reduce pollution and conserve resources, and to
measure corresponding performance results through quantitative metrics. During the
first year of the Sector Strategies Program, we looked back on each sector s environmental
progress to date in order to set the stage for further performance enhancements. We also
discussed with our sector partners where additional  opportunities for environmental
performance improvements lie. Key environmental opportunities identified through our
research and discussions form the basis for this report.

The purpose of this report is  multi-fold:

      To profile each sector, highlighting industry statistics and trends, typical processes and
      operations, and trade group partners;

      To describe, and where possible, to measure environmental progress to date, focusing on
      performance trends over the past 10 years; and

      To identify opportunities - both in the near term as well as over the next decade - for
      continued environmental improvement.

We used available emissions and resource data, performance indicators, and/or case
studies to provide a snapshot of environmental progress in each sector. Case studies, in
particular, illustrate the kinds of innovative operational and measurement activities that
might be adopted by the entire sector. In many cases, sector commitments are further
demonstrated through their active membership in relevant public-private partnerships,
such as  the National Environmental Performance Track. Over time, we will update
performance information and measure sector gains. Thus, we see this  report as the
first in a series of sector performance updates within the framework of the Sector
Strategies Program.

-------
Sector Strategies  Program
                                               Sectors At-a-Glance+
                                               Contribution of Partner Sectors to U. S. Manufacturing Totals
                                               Gross Domestic Product:
                                               Facilities:
                                               Employees:
                                               Environmental Releases & Wastes:
                                               Fuels and Energy Purchases:
22%*

14%*
20%*

21%**
33%*
                                                These figures represent the contribution of only manufacturing partner sectors.
                                               *Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2001'
                                               f*Source: U.S. EPA Toxics Release Inventory2
The Sector Strategies Program promotes
widespread improvement in environmental
performance, with reduced administrative
burden, in 12 sectors. These sectors are
significant for their contributions to the
nation's economy as well as their environmental
and energy footprint.  Participating sectors are
represented by their national associations -
more than 20 in all. Individual companies also
take part, as do EPA programs and regional
offices, other government agencies, and other
stakeholder groups.

The Sector Strategies Program pursues its goals through a knowledge-based approach to
problem-solving. The program maintains EPA staff experts in each participating sector
who understand and can effectively address environmental issues that arise. These sector
liaisons are helping stakeholders develop unique, sector-based strategies to:

      Address and overcome barriers to environmental improvement;

      Promote the use of environmental management systems (EMS); and

      Track progress using performance metrics.

For more information visit the Sector Strategies Program Web site at
www.epa.gov/sectors.  If you are  in one of the participating sectors, contact your trade
or service association to get more information or become involved.

The Sector Strategies Program is part of EPA's National Center for Environmental
Innovation. The Center provides a testing ground for innovative ideas that advance
environmental protection and assists EPA programs and regional offices in adopting
innovative approaches that support improved performance. NCEI also houses the
National Environmental Performance Track,  which recognizes top environmental
performance among participating facilities of all types, sizes, and complexity.
Performance Track participation requires that facilities adopt and implement an EMS,
with commitments to continued improvement in environmental performance, public
outreach, and performance reporting. Trade groups can participate as Performance
Track Network Partners by promoting the program to their membership. For more
information, visit the  programs  Web site at www.epa.gov/performancetrack.

-------
Data  Sources
This report looks back over the last 10 years at
sector-specific environmental trends in order to
identify areas of continued opportunity, such as:

        Conserving water;
        Improving water quality;
        Increasing energy efficiency;
        Managing and minimizing waste; and
        Reducing air emissions.
The multi-year data upon which this report is based
comes from a variety of public and private sector
sources. Industry reporting to some of these data
systems is required by law, while other systems are
populated with information submitted voluntarily by
the sector. Additionally, sector partners often maintain
their own databases to track environmental measures
over time. Using multiple sources in this report allows
the Sector Strategies Program to provide the most
comprehensive picture of each sector's environmental
performance to date.

Toxics  Release Inventory
One of the report's key data sources is EPA's Toxics
Release  Inventory (TRI), a publicly available database
that contains information on toxic chemical releases
and other waste management activities at facilities that
use, process, or manufacture certain chemicals annually
at levels above reporting thresholds. Although not all
facilities are subject to TRI reporting requirements,
aggregate TRI data indicates sector trends in the
management and minimization of waste. Where
applicable and available for a sector, this report
describes and/or arrays graphically annual TRI data
from  1993  through 2001. TRI categories include:

    Releases to air, bodies of water, land, or
    underground injection wells, including on-site
    releases occurring at a facility and off-site
    releases resulting from wastes transferred for
    disposal at another facility;
    Treatment of materials destroyed in
    on- or off-site operations such as biological
    treatment, neutralization, incineration, and
    physical separation;

    Energy recovery from materials that are
    combusted in an energy recovery device like
    a boiler or industrial furnace, not including
    treatment by incineration; and

    Recycling of materials recovered at the
    facility and made available for further use, or
    sent off-site for recycling and subsequently
    returned to the facility for further processing
    or use in commerce.

Other Federal Databases
The report also  draws upon two other federal
environmental databases for more information on
releases to air and water. The first, the National
Emissions Inventory (NEI), contains EPA's estimates
of air emissions based upon inputs from numerous
state and local air agencies, tribes, and industry. NEI
data are in part  modeled, rather than collected. The
second, the Permit Compliance System  (PCS),
contains information on facilities' permitted pollutant
discharges in their wastewater. Only those facilities
that discharge directly to waterbodies are included;
discharges to sewer systems are  not tracked  in PCS.

Normalization of Data
In all cases the report depicts normalized data in  order
to track more accurately real changes in  environmental
performance. As noted in the Glossary, "normalizing"
means adjusting the actual annual release numbers so
they are not distorted by changes in facility and sector
economic conditions. In this report, annual economic
output is measured by production volumes or value of
shipments.

For more details on data sources used in this report,
see Appendix B.

-------
Beneficial reuse: Use or reuse of a material that would
otherwise become a waste.

Byproduct: Material, other than the intended product, that is
generated as a consequence of an industrial process.

Co-product: A substance produced for a commercial
purpose during the manufacture, processing, use, or disposal
of another substance or mixture.

Energy efficiency: Actions to save fuels by better building
design, modification of production processes, better selection
of road vehicles and transport policies, etc.

Energy recovery: Obtaining energy from waste through a
variety of processes, including combustion.

Environment management system (EMS): A
systematic approach to managing all environmental aspects
of an operation. May be certified to ISO 14001, a widely
recognized international standard.

Greenhouse gas (GHG): A collective term for those
gases, including carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, ozone,
hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride,
which contribute to potential climate  change.

Hazardous air pollutant (HAP): A category of  air
pollutants that may present a threat of adverse human  health
effects or adverse environmental effects. Includes asbestos,
beryllium, mercury, benzene, coke oven emissions,
radionuclides, and vinyl chloride.

Hazardous waste: A byproduct of society that can pose
a substantial or potential hazard to human health or the
environment when improperly managed. Possesses at  least
one of four characteristics (ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity,
or toxicity), or is specifically listed as hazardous by EPA.
Nitrogen oxides (NOX): A reddish-brown gas compound
that is a product of combustion and a major contributor to the
formation of smog and acid rain.

Non-hazardous waste: Any solid, semi-solid, liquid, or
contained gaseous materials discarded from industrial,
commercial, mining, or agricultural operations, and from
community activities, that is not defined as "hazardous".

Normalization: A process applied to a data set to compare
the data against some common measure of annual economic
output, such as value of shipments, number of employees, or
units of production.

Particulate matter (PM):  Solid particles or liquid droplets
suspended or carried in the air (e.g., soot, dust, fumes, or mist).
PM2 5:  Particles less than or equal to 2.5 micrometers in
diameter. PM10: Particles less than or equal to 10 micrometers
in diameter.

Stormwater runoff: The portion of precipitation,
snowmelt, or irrigation water that does not infiltrate the
ground or evaporate but instead flows onto adjacent land or
watercourses or is routed into drain/sewer systems.

Sulfur oxides (SOX): A gas compound that is primarily the
product of combustion of fossil fuels and a major contributor to
climate change and acid rain.

\klue of shipments: The net selling values, exclusive of
freight  and taxes, of all products shipped by manufacturers.

\folatile organic compounds (VOC): Any organic
compound that evaporates readily to the atmosphere.
Contributes significantly to smog production and certain health
problems.

-------
Contents
    Agribusiness
    Cement
   1 Colleges & Universities 	9
   'Construction .                                                 ..13
   iForest Products .                                               ..17
    I ran & Steel.                                                 ..23
    Metal Casting	27
    Metal Finishing 	31
   i Paint & Coatings	35
   'Ports
.39
   'Shipbuilding & Ship Repair	43
    Specialty-Batch Chemicals 	49
   'Appendix A: Endnotes 	51
   'Appendix B: Environmental Data Sources	57

-------
                                                           Sector At-a-Glance^

                                                           Number of Facilities:
                                                           Value of Shipments:
                                                           Number of Employees:
                                                                               21,000
                                                                               $480 Billion
                                                                               1.5 Million
                                                           All figures represent food processing segment of sector.
                                                           Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2001'
             EPA's Sector Strategies Program defines
the agribusiness sector broadly to include those business
entities that most significantly affect how food is grown,
processed, and distributed in the U.S. EPA is working
with agribusiness stakeholders because of the  major influence they have on the environmental
practices of all segments of the food industry, from production to consumption. Diversified
agribusiness companies such as Kraft Foods,  Conagra, PepsiCo, Cargill, and Coca-Cola are
some of the largest in the U.S.

Food processing2 is the focal point for the
agribusiness sector, given the predominant role
that processors play in food production. Food
processing companies convert raw fruits,
vegetables, grains,  meats, and dairy products into
finished goods, ready for the grocer or wholesaler
to sell to households, restaurants, or institutional
food services. Food safety is an overarching
objective that affects environmental planning
and decisions in all facilities. Processing facilities
address on-site environmental issues but also
interact with farmers, livestock growers,
distributors, and consumers in ways that can
beneficially affect off-site environmental decisions.
                                                             Food Processing Activity
                                                               by Major Subsectors
                                                               Other
                                                                               Meat
                                                      Animal Food


                                                         Grains


                                                          Bakeries


                                                         Fruits &Vegetables

                                                    Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 20017
                                                                                    Dairy
                                                                              Beverages
Although the food processing industry is
comprised of large agribusiness corporations, there are more than 20,000 food processing
establishments widely distributed throughout the country.3 Two-thirds of all food processing
companies have fewer than 20 employees.4 Like many other industry sectors, the food
industry has experienced consolidation and vertical integration in recent years.

                           The industry produces a diverse array of food products, each
with its own unique production processes and environmental impacts.
,
    S3            The Sector Strategies Programs working relationship with the agribusiness
sector originated with the meat processing segment of the industry, represented by the
American Meat Institute (AMI).5 The National Food Processors Association (NFPA) is
EPA's current partner in the Sector Strategies Program.6

                                             The agribusiness sector is working with
EPA to improve the industry's performance by:

                Improving water quality;
                Managing and minimizing waste;  and
                Improving performance of meat processors.

-------
Improving Water Quality
In the food processing sector, water is an essential
element of plant sanitation. Typical wastewater
pollutants include biodegradable organics, oil and
grease, and suspended solids. Food processors may be
able to recover some of the fats, oils, and greases in
their waste stream and sell them to tenderers, and in
some cases, treated water can be recycled for plant
cleanup  or other processing purposes. Federal data
from approximately 400 food processors indicate a
44% decrease in wastewater  discharges between 1994
and 2002, as plants looked for opportunities to
conserve, recycle, or reuse water.8
Managing and Minimizing Waste
Food processors use and produce a variety of chemicals
in their operations, including nitrate compounds,
ammonia, ethylene glycol, methanol, n-hexane, and
hydrochloric and sulfuric acid. More than 1,000 food
processors report the release and management  of these
and other chemicals through EPAs Toxics Release
Inventory (TRI). While normalized quantities of TRI
releases increased, the normalized quantity of TRI
releases and waste managed by food processing
facilities decreased by 23% between 1993 and 2001.9
Improving Performance of Meat Processors
Ongoing projects with AMI and its member companies
promote the use of environmental management
systems (EMS) and stewardship in the supply chain.

Environmental Management Systems
Together with AMI member companies and the state
of Iowa, the Sector Strategies Program developed a
customized EMS Implementation Guide for meat
processors.10 Using the Guide as a basis, AMI developed
the Master Achiever Pioneer Star (MAPS) Program,
which provides a tiered approach to EMS development
and performance recognition for AMI members.11
Through their EMS:
      Advance Brands reduced the volume of caustic
      chemicals used to treat wastewater by 50%;12 and
      Excel Corporation reduced solid waste volume by
      28% in 2002-2003.13
Stewardship in the Supply Chain
Some of the larger meat processors are working with
their agricultural and livestock suppliers to achieve better
nutrient management.

Case Study: Comprehensive Nutrient
Management Plans (CNMP)
Farmland Foods, Prestage-Stoecker Farms, and 19 of their
suppliers are participating in an Iowa-based, pilot project to
voluntarily implement CNMPs at livestock facilities. So far,
participating farms have improved, nutrient application on
nearly 4,500 acres,  with an anticipated decrease in soil loss
at some farms of more than 30%.14

-------
Sector At-a-Glance
Number of Facilities:
Value of Shipments:
Number of Employees:
Source: U.S. Geological Survey, 2004'
116
$8.3 Billion
18,000
            The cement sector2 comprises 116 plants in
36 states that produce portland cement, which is used as a
binding agent in virtually all concrete. Concrete, in turn,
is used in a wide variety of construction projects and applications, ranging from patios and
driveways, to stucco and mortar, to bridges and high-rise buildings.

Strong construction markets helped boost cement consumption in the 1990s. Between
1993 and 2001, the value of shipments more than doubled.3 At the same time, the cement
industry achieved increased efficiency by automating production and closing small facilities.
As a result, the average cement kiln produces over 60% more cement today than 20 years
ago.4

                          Cement is composed of four elements - calcium, silica,
aluminum, and iron - which are commonly found in limestone, clay and sand. These
raw materials undergo the following stages of processing in making portland cement:

       Crushing at the quarry and then proportioning, blending, and grinding at the facility;

       Preheating before entering the facility's rotary cement kiln - a long, firebrick-lined,
       steel furnace;

       Heating, or pyroprocessing, in the kiln, through which the raw materials become partially
       molten and form  an intermediate product called "clinker"; and

       Cooling the clinker and grinding it with  a small quantity of gypsum to  create portland cement.

                The Portland Cement Association (PCA) has formed  a partnership with
EPA's Sector Strategies Program to improve the environmental performance of the cement
industry. PCA members operate more than 100 facilities and account for more than 95%
of U.S. cement production.5

                                           The cement sector is working with EPA
to improve the industry's performance by:

                Increasing energy efficiency;
                Reducing air emissions;
                Managing and minimizing waste; and
                Promoting environmental management systems.

-------
Increasing Energy Efficiency
Cement manufacturing requires thermochemical
processing of substantial quantities of limestone and
other raw materials in huge kilns at very high and
sustained temperatures. Fueled by coal and petroleum
coke, electricity, wastes, and natural gas, the sector
uses a significant amount of energy in its production
processes — an average of 5 million Btus per ton
of clinker.6

The industry has made progress in reducing the
amount of energy required to produce each ton
of cement. Sector-wide energy usage fell 4% from
1994 to 2000, following a consistent trend of
decreased  energy usage that began in the early 1970s.7
This continued decline is the result of industry's
efforts to modernize plants by replacing older, more
energy-intensive "wet" kilns with newer "dry" kilns.
Wet kilns  blend ground raw materials with an
aqueous slurry that is then fed into a kiln, whereas
dry kilns are fed their raw materials as a blended dry
powder. On average, wet  process
operations use 34% more energy per ton of
production than dry process operations.8
Approximately 80% of U.S. cement capacity
now relies on dry process technology.9
 Case Study: Energy Star Partners
 The cement sector is working with EPA's Energy Star
program to develop tools to measure energy performance
 and to assign ratings to plants  within the industry.
 Currently, 18 of the largest cement manufacturing
 companies are Energy Star partners. As partners, they
 have committed to measuring and benchmarking their
 energy performance, and developing and implementing
plans to improve their performance.10
                  Energy Consumed
                by the Cement Sector
          1994    1995    1996    1997     1998    1999    2000

    Source: PCA's U.S. and Canadian Labor-Energy Input Survey

-------
Cement
Reducing Air Emissions
Cement manufacturers are working to reduce
emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOX), sulfur dioxide
(SO2), particulate matter (PM), and greenhouse gases
(GHG) from their operations.

Nitrogen Oxide Emissions
In cement manufacturing, the combustion of fuels at
high temperatures in the kiln results in the release
of NOX emissions. Between 1996 and 2001, the
normalized quantity of NOX emissions from the
cement sector fell by 3%.u Current NOX emissions
from the sector account for approximately 1% of
total U.S. non-agricultural NOx emissions.12

Sulfur Dioxide Emissions
The combustion of sulfur-bearing compounds in coal,
oil, and petroleum coke, and the processing of pyrite
and sulfate in the raw materials, results in the release
of SO2 emissions from cement operations.

To mitigate these emissions, cement plants typically
install air pollution control technologies called
"scrubbers" to trap such pollutants in their exhaust
gases. In addition, limestone used in the production
process has inherent "self-scrubbing" properties,
allowing the industry to handle high-sulfur fuels.
Between 1996 and 2001, the normalized quantity
of SO2 emissions from the cement sector decreased
by 10%.13

Particulate Matter Emissions
In cement manufacturing, quarrying operations, the
crushing and grinding of raw materials and clinker,
the kiln line, and cement kiln dust result in PM
emissions. Between 1996 and 2001, the normalized
quantity of PMjQ emissions from the cement sector
remained fairly constant, following marked
improvements begun in the early years of Clean Air
Act implementation..14
  Nitrogen Oxide & Sulfur Dioxide Emissions
         from the Cement Sector
 250
 200
 150
e 100
mm
     1996
           1997
                 1998
                      1999
                            2000
                                  2001
*Normalized by clinker production
Sources: U.S. EPA, National Emission Inventory
    U.S. Geological Survey, Minerals Yearbook
                        • Nitrogen Oxide
                        Sulfur Dioxide
       Particulate Matter Emissions
         from the Cement Sector
                                 .
     MINI
      1996    1997    1998    1999

*Normalized by clinker production
 Sources: U.S. EPA, National Emission Inventory
    U.S. Geological Survey, Minerals Yearbook
                        2000    2001

                        • Particulate Matter
                        Particulate Matter1f
2.5
         Carbon Dioxide Emissions
         from the Cement Sector
I 34.8
'E
                                              1993
                                                  1994
                                                      1995  1996
                                                             1997
                                                                     1999  2000
                                                                            2001
                                          *Normalized by cement production
                                          Sources: U.S. DOE, U.S. Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Industrial Processes
                                              U.S Geological Survey, Mineral Commodity Summaries

-------
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Approximately 98% of man-made carbon dioxide
(CO2) emissions come from the combustion of fuel,
for a total of 5-8 million tons in 2002.15 Of this
percentage, about one-third is due to fuel combustion
by motor vehicles, and another third comes from
power plants. The cement sector contributes to 1.3%
of the final third, with CO2 emissions resulting from
the burning of fossil fuels (predominantly coal) during
pyroprocessing,  and from the chemical reactions
(calcination) that convert limestone into clinker.16
In 2002, cement production resulted in more than
43 million metric tons of CO2  emissions.17

In 2003, PCA formalized its commitment to CO2
emissions reductions by joining Climate VISION,
a voluntary program administered by the U.S.
Department of Energy (DOE)  to reduce GHG
intensity (the ratio of emissions to economic output).18
PCA has committed to a 10% reduction in CO2
emissions per ton of product by 2020 (from 1990
levels).
Case Study: Voluntary Reporting
of GHG Emissions
DOE's 1605(b) Voluntary Reporting of Greenhouse
Gases Program:
• Provides a tool for measuring GHG emission
  reductions;
• Collects voluntarily reported data on GHG emissions
  and activities aimed at reducing GHG emissions; and
• Gathers information on commitments to reduce GHG
  emissions  and increase carbon sequestration.19
Two participating Lehigh Cement facilities submitted
reports in 2002 showing a combined emission reduction
of more than 450,000 metric tons ofCO2 equivalent.20
                                                                                                    II
                                                                                                 g m m ป
                                                                                               m m m ป


-------
Cement
Managing and Minimizing Waste
Cement kiln dust (CKD) is the broad term that refers
to particles released from the pyroprocessing line.
CKD includes partially burned raw materials, clinker,
and eroded fragments from the refractory brick lining
of the kilns. Modern plants typically try to recover
CKD, because it can be reused in the manufacturing
process. Recycling CKD serves the environment by:
• Reducing the amount of raw materials needed;
• Reducing energy consumption, since the material
  is already partially processed; and
• Reducing health concerns associated with
  landfilling (e.g., the possible release of heavy metals
  and dust into the air and water).
Currently about two-thirds of the CKD generated is
returned to the kiln  for reuse in the manufacturing
process.21 The amount of CKD recycled continues to
increase as old process lines are replaced or updated.
There are limits to the recycling of CKD in the
manufacturing process, however, because
contaminants (such  as alkalis) can build up in the
CKD and compromise the quality of the clinker.
The CKD that is not recycled is either disposed at a
landfill or sold to other sectors for "beneficial reuse"
applications such as road fill, liming agent for soil, or
stabilizer for sludges and other wastes. Between 1995
and 2002, the normalized quantity of CKD disposed
dropped from 3.1 million metric tons to 2 million
metric tons. During the same time period, beneficial
reuse of CKD varied between 570,000 and 920,000
metric tons.22
        Cement Kiln Dust Disposed in Landfills
                 by the Cement Sector


               No Data
                             No Data
                                                      *Data are not available for 1996-1997 and 1999
                                                      *Normalized by clinker production
                                                       Sources: PCA, Cement Kiln Dust Surveys
                                                            U.S. Geological Survey, Minerals Yearbook

-------
Promoting Environmental
Management Systems
Interest in environmental management systems (EMS)
is increasing in the cement sector. PCA has begun
discussing the development of an EMS program with
its membership. Details of the program are expected
to be announced in mid-2004.

Case Study: EMS at St. Lawrence
Cement Group
In 2000,  St. Lawrence Cement Group created a 5-year
Sustainable Environmental Performance business plan,
which identified key issues, opportunities, and actions to
be integrated into its management framework. As part
of the plan, St. Lawrence committed to:
• Implementing an ISO 14001-certified EMS at all of
  its cement manufacturing and grinding facilities by
  the end of 2004;
• Reducing CO2 emissions per ton of product by 15%
  by 2010 (from 2000 levels); and
• Reducing consumption of virgin raw materials per
  ton of product by 15% by 2007 (from 2000 levels).
St. Lawrence has also implemented a corporate emission
and reporting standard, which allows it to track energy
consumption, air emissions, and CKD recycling across
all of its facilities. The table below highlights the
company's progress to date  in these areas.23
Environmental Improvements at St. Lawrence Cement Group24
Performance Measure
Total cement production (million tons)
Electrical consumption (kwh/ton)
Heat consumption (gigajoules/ton)
C02 emissions (kg/ton)
NOX emissions (kg/ton)
S02 emissions (kg/ton)
CKD previously disposed, then recycled (thousand tons)
2000
3.5
152
3.94
792
2.9
2.3
50
2002
4.1
144
3.48
704
2.1
2.0
24


-------
   Colleges   &   Universities
                                                           Number of Institutions:
                                                           Value of Revenues:
                                                           Number of Employees:
                                                                           260 Billion**
                                                                          2.9 Million***
                                                            'Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2001'
                                                            'Source: National Centerfor Education Statistics, 20032
                                                            Source: National Centerfor Education Statistics, 20013
            The college and university sector4 includes a
wide variety of campuses across the country, from small
community colleges to large research universities. Funding
sources for the sector include tuition, private donations,
government grants, and, for public institutions, state
appropriations. In 2002, higher education institutions educated more than 15 million
students. Enrollment is expected to increase to more than 18 million students by 2013.5
I
                        Classroom education is only one of many activities taking
place on college campuses. Campuses often maintain other types of facilities, including
research laboratories, art studios, utility generation and transmission plants, dormitories,
and water distribution systems. Many large research institutions  also have specialized
facilities, such as medical centers, agricultural centers, nuclear reactors, and high security
biomedical laboratories. Improving environmental performance  on campuses offers a
unique opportunity to raise awareness and instill knowledge about environmental issues
in students.

                Six organizations have formed a partnership with EPA's Sector Strategies
Program to improve the environmental performance of the college and university sector.
These organizations are:

      American Council on Education (ACE);

      APPA: Association of Higher Education Facilities Officers;

      Campus Consortium for Environmental Excellence (C2E2);

      Campus Safety, Health and Environmental Management Association (CSHEMA);

      Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI); and

      National Association of College and University Business Officers (NACUBO).6

                                           In 2003, EPA and the six partner
organizations formed a performance measurement workgroup to select key environmental
performance indicators, determine appropriate methodologies to measure these indicators,
measure these indicators on their campuses, and develop tools to assist other institutions
with the measurement process. The college and university sector is working with EPA to
improve campus performance by:

               Increasing energy efficiency;
               Reducing air emissions;
               Managing and minimizing waste;
               Conserving water; and
               Promoting environmental management systems.

-------
Increasing Energy Efficiency
Energy consumption is one of the largest
environmental impacts of college campuses.
New construction, aging infrastructure, financial
constraints, and increasing energy costs are
motivating institutions to re-evaluate their energy
infrastructure. The U.S. Department of Energy
estimates that at least 25% of the $6 billion colleges
and universities spend annually on energy could be
saved through better energy management.7

In order to reduce the costs and environmental
impacts associated with energy use, colleges and
universities across the country are undertaking a
variety of energy conservation activities.

Case Study: Energy Star Partners
As EPA Energy Star partners, more than 200 colleges
and universities have committed to measure their
energy consumption and develop and implement
plans to improve their energy performance.8
In 2002, one Energy Star partner, Dutchess
Community College (DCC) in Poughkeepsie, NY,
invested in energy efficiency by signing a $2.4 million
performance-based contract that included replacing
a 500-ton electric chiller, an industrial-scale
water-cooling mechanism used to air condition four
buildings on campus, with two  new 300-ton gas-engine
powered chillers. As a result, the college has already
reduced energy use by 13%. Over the next 15years,
DCC expects to save more than 830,000 kilowatt-hours
per year in energy, for a total of $1.2 million savings in
energy costs.9
 Case Study: Energy Efficiency at
 the University of Florida
 The University of Florida (UF) in Gainesville, FL,
 embarked on an energy efficiency campaign in the
 mid-1990s.  With the leadership of the vice-president
for finance and administration,  UF began a two-year,
 $6 million project to improve the scheduling and
 controlling of the campus' energy demands. The project
 resulted in over $2 million net savings.  Over five years,
 UF's total and per capita energy consumption  decreased
 by almost 25%..'"


 Reducing Air Emissions
 Many colleges and universities are committed to
 reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions resulting
 from power plants, electricity use, and fleet vehicles
 on  campus.  For example:

      The presidents of all 56 New Jersey colleges
      and universities have endorsed  a Sustainability
      Greenhouse Gas Action Plan for New Jersey
      that calls for a 3.5% reduction in the state's
      GHG emissions by 2005."

      The University of Florida in Gainesville, FL,
      is pursuing an aggressive goal of becoming
      "carbon-neutral" by the year 2030 through an
      effort to offset campus GHG emissions with
      projects that cut down GHG emissions by an
      equal amount.12


-------
Colleges    &    Universities
Managing and Minimizing Waste
Many colleges and universities are working to reduce
generation and increase recycling of hazardous and solid
wastes on their campuses.

Hazardous Waste Minimization
Colleges and universities produce hazardous waste
in campus laboratories, medical centers, and art studios,
as well as during operations and maintenance of
buildings and vehicles, and construction. Many
campuses are implementing hazardous waste
reduction programs to cost-effectively decrease the
amount of hazardous wastes on campuses while
supporting a mission of research and education.
Measuring reductions of hazardous waste on campuses
poses some unique challenges, because the quantities
and types of chemicals used are constantly changing
in dynamic research environments.
Case Study: Waste Minimization at
the University of Michigan
Over the past decade, research funding at the University
of Michigan (UM) in Ann Arbor, MI, has grown
129%.  Consequently, research laboratory space has
increased by 47%, and waste generation has increased
corres.
In an effort to bring waste volumes and cost under
control, UM launched a formal waste minimization
program in 1995. UM is utilizing many different
tools, including:
• Education (including micro-teaching techniques);
• Protocol review;
• Non-hazardous product substitution;
• Solvent distillation systems;
• Chemical tracking systems; and
• Chemical redistribution programs.

Though overall waste generation continued to increase
through 2002, a decrease began in 2003 as many of
these programs began to take full effect. The table below
displays some of the program's successes. The program
has proven to be cost-effective, saving more than
$200,000 annually in disposal costs and the need to
purchase new chemicals.13










UM's Waste Minimization Initiatives14
Chemical Type
Waste Minimization Method
Acetone, Xylene, Alcohols Distillation
Ethidium Bromide Filtration
Photo Processing Waste Silver Recovery
Annual Reduction
5,500 gallons
100 gallons
800 gallons
Acids, Bases, Solvents Micro-Teaching Techniques 300 gallons
Varied
Varied
Chemical Redistribution 400 bottles
Chemical Tracking/Sharing 210 gallons
Elemental Mercury Equip. Mercury-Free Replacement 2,200 pounds
Varied
Aqueous-Based Substitution
20 gallons

-------
Solid Waste Recycling
Solid wastes from colleges and unversities include
common recyclables, such as cans, glass, cardboard
and office paper; and compostables, such as food
scraps, animal bedding, landscape refuse, and trash.
An increasing number of colleges and universities are
reducing their solid waste volumes through recycling.

Case Study: College and University
Recycling Council
The National Recycling Coalitions College and
University Recycling Council is a network of
campus-based recycling professionals with a mission
to organize and support environmental program leaders
in managing resources, recycling, and waste issues.

The  Council created an on-line benchmarking tool
so that colleges and universities can compare their
performance with other schools and quantify the
aggregate benefits of campus resource management
and recycling programs.  The 100 Council members
are encouraged to share their progress  with the public.
In 2002, 20 schools posted information on-line about
the amount of recyclables,  compostables, and trash
collected on their campuses.15


Conserving Water
Water conservation efforts on campuses often
include simple activities, such as conserving water
at the faucet, reusing landscaping water, and
implementing more efficient methods of heating
and cooling buildings.

Case Study: Water Conservation
at the  University of Colorado
In 2001, the University of Colorado,  in Boulder, CO,
began several water conservation projects, including:
• Installing temperature sensor and control valves
  on two furnaces;
• Replacing water-driven aspirators with vacuum
  pumps in laboratories; and
• Decreasing the  amount of water used for irrigation.
As a result of these and other projects, total annual
water usage decreased by 11% between 2001 and
2002, saving the university approximately $170,000.16
Promoting  Environmental
Management  Systems
Colleges and universities are increasingly utilizing
systematic approaches, such as environmental
management systems EMS, to meet environmental
challenges. Campus-wide EMS can assist colleges and
universities in making measurable progress toward
environmental goals.

Case Study:  Washington State
University's Campus-wide EMS
In 1999, Washington State University (WSU)
in Pullman,  WA, implemented one of the first
campus-wide EMS. Since that time,  WSU has
experienced a number of environmental benefits in
areas such as recycling and energy. Between 2001
and, 2003, WSU experienced, a 56% increase in
recycling. A number of energy conservation projects
have also led to the conservation of 3.6 million
kilowatt-hours of energy per year. Through its EMS,
WSU has also committed to reduce nitrogen oxide
emissions by more than 50% and, sulfur dioxide
emissions by more than 85% by 2005.17 In 2003,
WSU became the first university to be accepted into
EPA's National Environmental Performance Track.18


-------
Construction
                                                       Sector At-a-Glance
                                                       Number of Companies:
                                                       Value of Construction:
                                                       Number of Employees:
                                                       •Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2001'
                                                       "Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2002!

                The construction sector3 comprises general
    and specialty contractors, which are predominantly small
    businesses that can be found across the country. The
    construction sector can be divided into three major     I	
    segments:
          Building construction;
          Heavy and civil engineering construction, including highways, bridges, and other public
          works; and
          Specialty trade contractors, such as plumbing, mechanical, and electrical contractors.
    In the last ten years, employment in the construction sector increased more than
    40%.4 New orders for construction materials and supplies in 2003 totaled
    $420 billion, which is nearly 11% of total U.S. manufacturing orders.5
| 700,000*
 $850 Billion**
| 6.5 Million*
                      Contractors perform a wide variety of activities, from
building roads to golf courses to buildings. While the production processes for the
construction sector vary greatly depending upon the project, the following steps
are often standard across projects:
      Project planning and design;
      Permitting;
      Material selection;
      Demolition and/or excavation;
      Security;
      Construction; and
      Inspections.
               The Associated General Contractors of America (AGC) has formed
a partnership with EPA's Sector Strategies Program to improve the environmental
performance of the construction industry. AGC's 35,000 members represent all segments
of the construction industry except single-family housing.6
                                           The construction sector is working with
EPA to improve the industry's performance by:
               Managing and minimizing waste;
               Encouraging green construction;
               Improving water quality;
               Reducing air emissions; and
               Promoting environmental management systems.
m

-------
Managing and Minimizing Wastes
Construction provides opportunities for recycling
wastes and reusing byproducts.

Construction and Demolition Debris
Construction and demolition (C&D) debris refers
to materials produced in the process of construction,
renovation, and/or demolition of buildings, roads,
and bridges. C&D debris typically includes concrete,
asphalt, wood, gypsum wallboard, paper, glass, rubble,
and roofing materials. Land clearing debris, such as
stumps, rocks, and dirt, may also be included in some
state definitions of debris. In most cases C&D debris
is non-hazardous.

C&D debris is a significant issue in the U.S. because
of the enormous volume generated. In 1996, the
construction, renovation, and demolition of buildings
generated more than 136 million tons of C&D
debris.7 Although 20-30% of C&D debris is recovered
for processing and recycling, the majority (70-80%)
ends up in municipal solid waste landfills
or in special C&D landfills.8

Green construction projects have demonstrated that,
in some instances, 70% or more of C&D debris can
be recycled, with resultant savings in landfill space,
virgin resources, and disposal costs.9 As a result,
EPA and its partners are seeking ways to encourage
recycling of C&D debris. EPA's Resource
Conservation Challenge (RCC) is promoting research
and development of best practices for C&D debris
reduction and recovery.10 In addition, the Sector
Strategies Program, RCC, and AGC are gathering data
on the extent of C&D recycling and strategizing
how best to encourage greater recycling rates.

Beneficial Reuse of Industrial Byproducts
The construction sector is also exploring the potential
for beneficial reuse of its byproducts, as well as those
of other sectors. Examples include hardwood
byproducts, plant trimmings, sewage sludge, steel slag,
and spent non-hazardous foundry sand.

Case Study: Beneficial Reuse by
Kurtz Brothers,  Inc.
An estimated 80%  of spent sand from foundries,
valued at approximately $125 million, is landfilled
each year. Kurtz Brothers, Inc., a contractor in
Independence, OH, diverted more than 150,000
tons of non-hazardous spent foundry sand from landfills
by using it in several recent construction projects for
the Ohio Turnpike  Commission. For example, Kurtz
Brothers utilized nearly 54,000 tons of spent foundry
sand in a terraced,  landscaped embankment near
       • over the Cuyahoga River.11


-------
               struct!
Encouraging Green Construction
In the U.S., residential and commercial buildings
account for:

••••   36% of total energy use;

        65% of electricity consumption;

        30% of greenhouse gas emissions; and

        12% of potable water consumption.12

Buildings built to "green" standards use natural
resources like energy, water, materials, and land much
more efficiently than conventional buildings. As well
as being environmentally preferable, green buildings
can also be cost-efficient. A recent study found that
some investments in green buildings have paid for
themselves  10 times over through reduced operations,
maintenance, and utility costs.13

The Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design
(LEED) Green Building Rating System is a nationally
accepted standard for green buildings. In order to
be LEED   certified, a building project must
demonstrate performance in five areas: sustainable
sites, water efficiency, energy and atmosphere,
materials and resources, and indoor environmental
quality.14 Many federal agencies and private  customers
now require all new construction or major renovations
to meet LEED   requirements.

Green construction practices, such as using  recycled
materials, recycling C&D debris, and preventing
stormwater pollution, are essential  elements in green
building design. EPA and AGC are working together
to make a variety of green construction resources
available to the sector through the Web. The
EPA-sponsored Construction Industry Compliance
Assistance Center provides an overview of green
buildings and will soon include links to state and local
green building programs.15 AGC's Environmental
Services Web page also offers resources, including the
"Green Construction Bible" and a  tutorial about the
LEEDฎ rating system.16
Case Study: Green Construction
of EPA Buildings
EPA recently completed the construction of two green
buildings — the New England Regional Laboratory
(NERL) in Chelmsford, MA, and the National
Computer Center (NCC) in Research Triangle Park, NC.

During the construction of NERL, Erland Construction
Inc., of Burlington, MA, diverted an estimated 200
tons of materials from a landfill, including
approximately 250,000 pounds of fly ash and almost
8,000 yards of blasted ledge, which were processed
on-site and then used in the building, the road's
subgrade, and a retaining wall.17

During planning and construction of NCC, Skanska
USA Building, Inc.:
• Oriented the building to reduce heating and
                    o               o
  cooling loads;
• Designed landscaping to  reduce heat islands;
• Consolidated parking areas to minimize site
  disturbance;
• Utilized building products made from recycled
  content; and
• Shipped many materials  back to their original
  manufacturers or to recycling facilities, rather than
  to a landfill.18


Improving Water Quality
Stormwater runoff from construction activities  can
have a significant  impact  on water quality. EPA
regulations require operators of construction sites
one acre or larger  to obtain authorization to
discharge stormwater under a National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System construction
stormwater permit. Such permits typically include
best management  practices (BMPs) to reduce erosion
and sediment runoff. Examples of BMPs include:

• •••   Installing  silt fencing;

• •••   Providing  vegetative buffers along waterbodies;

        Covering  or seeding all dirt stockpiles; and
                                                           Protecting storm drain inlets to filter out
                                                           trash and debris.

-------
Reducing Air Emissions
Many construction vehicles and equipment, such
as earth moving equipment, generators and
compressors, are powered by diesel engines. Exhaust
from diesel engines contains particulate matter (PM),
nitrogen oxides (NOX), and toxic air pollutants.
Together, construction and mining equipment
account for 46% of total nonroad diesel emissions.19

On a national basis, the strategy for controlling air
pollution from diesel engines involves low-pollution
requirements for new diesel engines and rules
covering the fuel used by these engines. Diesel
engines on existing equipment will not be subject
to the new regulations, yet may remain in operation
for another 25 to 30 years. Therefore, EPA and its
partners are  encouraging firms to retrofit existing
diesel vehicles with pollution controls through the
Voluntary Diesel Retrofit Program. This program
seeks immediate emission reductions by promoting
innovative retrofit technologies, idle reduction,
cleaner fuels, and cleaner engines.20

Case Study: Diesel Retrofit Partnership
To achieve statewide reductions in NOX and PM,
the California Air Resources Board established a $68
million fund to assist contractors in re-powering their
heavy-duty diesel equipment with new engines capable
of meeting more stringent NOX and PM standards.
In 2001, AGC of California teamed up with
California Caterpillar Dealers to organize a seven-year
project called "Re-poweringfor Tomorrow" to utilize
state funds to re-power equipment. Over the course of
the project, participants expect to reduce annual NOx
emissions by  1,200 tons and annual PM emissions
by 90 tons.21
Promoting Environmental
Management Systems
Interest in environmental management systems
(EMS) is increasing rapidly within the construction
sector. To date, three individual construction
companies have been accepted into EPA's National
Environmental Performance Track. In addition,
AGC is a Performance Track Network Partner
committed to  encouraging top environmental
performance through EMS.22

To increase EMS adoption by its members, AGC
is currently developing an EMS Implementation
Guide for the  construction industry. Once the Guide
is complete, the Sector Strategies Program will
partner with AGC to train contractors across the
country in EMS.

Many construction companies see EMS as a
valuable tool for performance improvement.

Case Study:  EMS at Skanska USA Building
In 1998, Skanska  USA Building, Inc., made a
company-wide  commitment to implement an ISO
14001-compliant EMS. Through its EMS, Skanska:
• Increased recycling and reuse of construction
  materials, for a savings of close to $1 million;
• Diverted 980 tons of debris from landfills
  (all from one construction site);
• Minimized soil erosion on all of its construction
  sites; and
• Reduced air emissions through 220,000 automobile
  miles avoided in one year by encouraging employees
  to carpool and ride mass transit.22"

-------
Forest   Products
Sector At-a-Glance
Number of Facilities:
Value of Shipments:
Number of Employees:
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2001'
15,000
$210 Billion
850,000
            The forest products2 sector includes
companies that grow, harvest, or process wood and wood
fiber for use in products. While the industry has
operations in all 50 states, it is concentrated in the southeast and Great Lakes regions of the
country.3

The forest products sector can be divided into two segments: one manufactures pulp,
paper, and paperboard products; and the second produces engineered and traditional wood
products. In recent years, decreases in demand from U.S. customers and increased foreign
competition have negatively impacted the pulp  and paper segment. Losses in the wood
products segment have been minimized by the continued boom in the home building and
improvement sector. Additional factors, such as improved efficiencies of new equipment
and over-capacity in the market, have resulted in the closure of 100 paper mills and 125
wood products facilities and the elimination of more than 127,000 jobs since 1997.4

                        Forest products are manufactured through a variety of processes:

      To produce paper and paperboard products, wood material is digested or cooked down to
      make pulp, then the fibers are separated from impurities, bleached (if necessary), dewatered,
      pressed, and rolled.

      To produce lumber, logs are debarked and cut first into "cants", then cut into specific lengths
      of sawn lumber, dried, and coated with surface protection.

      To produce veneer or plywood, logs are peeled or sliced into thin strips, dried, layered and
      glued to form panels, then pressed into boards.

      To produce reconstituted wood products (such as medium density fiberboard), raw wood is
      shredded or ground, mixed with adhesive, then pressed into boards.

               The American Forest & Paper Association (AF&PA) has formed a
partnership with EPA's  Sector Strategies Program to improve the environmental
performance of the forest products industry. AF&PA's more than 200 members
manufacture more than 88% of the printing and writing paper and 60% of the
structural wood products produced in the U.S.5

                                          The forest products sector is working with
EPA to improve the industry's performance by:

               Increasing energy efficiency;
               Reducing air emissions;
               Managing and minimizing waste;
               Conserving water;
               Improving water quality;
               Encouraging sustainable forestry; and
               Promoting environmental management systems.

-------
Increasing Energy  Efficiency
Given the energy intensive nature of its manufacturing
processes, reducing energy consumption is an
important environmental focus for the forest products
sector. In 1998, the industry consumed more than
3,200 trillion Btus of energy, making it the third
largest industrial consumer of energy among U.S.
manufacturing sectors. Within the sector,  the pulp
and paper segment accounts for 85% of the energy
use, while the wood products segment accounts
for 15%.6

To minimize the environmental impact of its energy
consumption, the forest products sector is investing in
a variety of generation technologies and alternative
fuels, including:

•••• degeneration;

•••• Biomassfuel; and

•••• Black liquor gasification.

degeneration
The  forest products sector has emerged as a leader
in the utilization of cogeneration,  a highly efficient
process that produces electricity and heat from  a
single fuel source. Within the forest products sector,
88% of the electricity generated at pulp and paper
mills and 99% of the electricity generated at wood
products facilities is produced through cogeneration.7
Biomass Fuel
The forest products industry is unique in its ability to
use byproducts generated in the manufacture of pulp,
paper, lumber, and other wood products as a biomass
fuel source. Biomass fuel includes materials such as
"hogged fuel", which comprises logging and wood
processing byproducts, and "spent pulping liquor",
which comprises extracts from the pulping process. In
2000, these renewable energy sources comprised 56%
of energy consumed at pulp and paper mills and 63%
of energy consumed at wood products facilities.8

Black Liquor Gasification
To further reduce its use of fossil fuels, the forest
products industry is partnering with the U.S.
Department of Energy (DOE) to develop an energy
generating process called "black liquor gasification".
Gasification will convert spent pulping liquors and
other biomass into combustible gases that can be
burned efficiently like natural gas.

Although expensive to develop, biomass gasification
technologies have the potential to satisfy the energy
needs of the forest products industry and to generate a
surplus of almost 22 gigawatts of power per year that
could be sent to  the electric power grid. In addition,
black liquor gasification will reduce emissions of air
pollutants, such as nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, and
particulate matter. The first state-of-the-art biomass
gasifier is now being built by Georgia-Pacific in Big
Island, VA.9


-------
 Forest    Products
 Reducing Air Emissions
 The forest products sector is working to reduce
 emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOX), sulfur dioxide
 (SO2), and greenhouse gases (GHG).

 Nitrogen Oxide and Sulfur Dioxide Emissions
 Between 1995 and 2000, emissions of NOX per ton
 of production in the forest products sector decreased
 by 10%, and emissions of SO2 per ton of production
 decreased by 7%-10 The following factors  contributed
 to SO2 reductions: increased use of lower sulfur
 content coal, increased use of flue gas desulfurization
 systems,  and the retirement of chemical recovery
 furnaces  with direct contact evaporators.
  Nitrogen Oxides & Sulfur Dioxide Emissions
           from Pulp  & Paper Mills
          Nitrogen Oxides
                              Sulfur Dioxide
Source: AF&PA's EH&S Verification Program
                                     1995   2000
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
In 2003, AF&PA joined Climate VISION, a
voluntary program administered by DOE to reduce
U.S. greenhouse gas intensity (the ratio of emissions
to economic output).11

In order to reduce GHG emissions, AF&PA
members are undertaking a series of programs,
including carbon sequestration in forests and
products, and the development of technologies to
increase use of renewable biomass fuels. Based on
preliminary calculations, AF&PA expects that these
programs will reduce the sector's greenhouse gas
intensity by 12% by 2012  relative to 2000 levels.12

Other voluntary efforts are also underway to reduce
GHG emissions by forest products companies.

Case Study: Chicago Climate Exchange
Launched in December 2003, the Chicago Climate
Exchange  (CCX) is the world's first multi-national
and multi-sector marketplace for reducing and trading
greenhouse gas emissions. It  represents the first voluntary
commitment by a cross-section of North American
corporations, municipalities, and other institutions
to establish a rules-based market for reducing GHG
                                                emissions.
Four companies in the forest products sector ,
voluntarily joined CCX^ and committed to reducing
their GHG emissions by 4% below the average of their
1998-2001 baseline by 2006. These companies are:
International Paper, MeadWestvaco Corp., StoraEnso
North America, and Temple-Inland, Inc.13
          v./
               ?*^T

-------
  Managing and  Minimizing Waste
  The forest products sector is reducing waste by
  reusing non-hazardous industrial wastes from the
  production process and by promoting recycling
  of paper products so that  mills can use greater
  percentages of recycled fibers.

  Reduction in Environmental Releases
  Forest products facilities use a variety of chemicals
  and report on the release and management of many
  of those materials through EPA's Toxics Release
  Inventory (TRI). Over the past decade, the sector
  has made progress in reducing wastes. Between
  1993 and 2001, normalized TRI releases by forest
  products facilities decreased by 28%.14
                 TRI Releases
         by the Forest Products Sector
   250
   200
=  150
E
   100

   50

    0
       1993   1994   1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001
                          Year
*Normalized by annual value of shipments
 Sources: U.S. EPA, Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)
     U.S. Census Bureau, Annual Survey of Manufactures
Beneficial Reuse of Waste
The majority of the forest products sector's wastes
consist of non-hazardous wastewaters and sludges
from pulp and paper mills. These wastes include
wastewater treatment sludges, lime mud and slaker
grits, boiler and furnace ash, scrubber sludges, and
wood processing residuals. In 2000, more than 40%
of this waste was reused rather than being burned,
lagooned, or sent to a landfill. Waste from wood
products mills includes waste wood particles and
adhesive residues, the majority of which (90%)
is beneficially reused.15

Recycled Paper Products
AF&PA members are making efforts to increase the
recycling of paper products. Their goal is to recover
55% of the paper consumed annually in the U.S. by
2012. AF&PA estimates that 48% of all paper was
recovered for recycling in 2002. For some grades,
such as corrugated boxes and newspapers,
the recovery rate is over 70%.16

One hundred percent of recovered paper is utilized,
and recovered fiber now accounts for more than
one-third of the industry's domestic raw material
supply.17

-------
Forest    Products
Conserving Water
The forest products sector is the third largest
industrial consumer of water among U.S.
manufacturing industries. The pulp and paper
segment of the industry accounts for most of this
water use. Between 1995 and 2000, the volume
of water discharged per ton of production, an
indicator of water used, decreased by 1.6% in
the pulp and paper industry.18


Improving  Water Quality
Due to the large volumes of water used in pulp and
paper processes, virtually all U.S. mills have primary
and secondary wastewater treatment systems to
remove various pollutants from manufacturing
process wastewater. Pulp and paper mills measure
the total volume of water discharged as well as
the quality of the water they discharge to public
wastewater treatment facilities or into receiving
waters.

Key water quality indicators include:

      Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD);

      Total suspended solids (TSS); and

      Adsorbable organic halides (AOX).

BOD and TSS reduce the amount of oxygen
available to fish and other aquatic organisms.
Between 1995 and 2000, BOD discharges remained
steady, and TSS discharges decreased by 15%.
           Wastewater Discharges
           from Pulp & Paper Mills
      Biochemical Oxygen    Total Suspended    Adsorbable Organic
          Demand          Solids          Halides
 Source: AF&PA's EH&S Verification Program                11995  B2000
In compliance with EPA's Pulp and Paper Cluster
Rule, which requires the reduction of toxic
pollutants released to water and air, the industry has
substituted chlorine dioxide for elemental chlorine as
a bleaching agent, virtually eliminating dioxin from
its wastewater. This substitution has also resulted in
a 37% reduction of AOX, which is an indicator of
chlorinated organic substances, between 1995 and
2000.19

-------
Encouraging Sustainable Forestry
America's forests cover 747 million acres or 33%
of the country. Of this acreage, approximately
504 million acres are classified as timberland,
meaning each acre of land is capable of growing 20
cubic feet of commercial wood per year. The majority
of the timberland (58%) is owned by private,
non-industrial owners, while 13% is owned by the
forest products industry.20 The remaining timberland
is publicly owned. Increasingly, timberland is being
managed using sustainable forestry practices.

Case Study:
Sustainable Forestry Initiativeฎ
While there are several sustainable forestry
management programs, the Sustainable Forestry
Initiative   (SFI) program is the most prominent
in North America. More than 90% of industrial
timberland in the U.S. is enrolled in the SFI program.

The goal of the program is to promote sustainable
forestry practices that will allow businesses to meet
market demands  while promoting the protection  of
wildlife, plants, soil,  and air and water quality.
Participants certify their land use and harvesting
practices to a standard comprised of 6 sustainable
forestry principles and 11 operational objectives.
Promoting  Environmental
Management Systems
As of October 2003, 61 forest products facilities
belonging to 12 AF&PA member companies had
adopted environmental management systems (EMS)
certified to the ISO  14001 standard.22 Eighteen of
these facilities  have applied and been accepted  into
EPA's National Environmental Performance Track.23
 Currently, of the more than 169 million acres
 in the SFI program in the U.S. and Canada, almost
 104 million acres have been independently certified as
 meeting SFI program criteria by third-party auditors.
 In addition, participants in the SFI program have
 trained more than 75,000 loggers and foresters in
 sustainable forestry practices since 1995.21

-------
Sector At-a-Glance
Number of Facilities:       95

Value of Shipments:       $51 Billion

Number of Employees:    | 140,000
Source: American Iron & Steel Institute, 2004'
             The iron and steel sector2 manufactures
the steel used in the production of a wide range of
products, ranging from food storage containers, to
defense applications, to ship hulls. In 2003, Indiana mills produced about 20% of
domestic steel, with Ohio, Illinois, Michigan, and Pennsylvania leading the rest of the
many other states in which steel is made.3

Advances in technology,  changes in markets, and global competition have led to
many changes in the iron and steel sector. More than 30 steel companies have declared
bankruptcy since 1998.4  The sectors workforce fell from nearly 170,000 in 1997 to
approximately 140,000 in 2004.5

                          To produce steel, facilities use one of two processes, which
utilize different raw materials and technologies.

      "Integrated" steel mills use a blastfurnace to produce iron from iron ore, coke, and
      fluxing agents. A basic oxygen furnace (BOF) is then used to convert the molten iron,
      along with up to 30% steel scrap, into refined steel.

      "Minimills" use an electric arc furnace (EAF) to melt steel scrap and limited amounts
      of other iron-bearing materials to produce new steel.

The scrap metal used in  steel production originates from sources such as scrapped
automobiles, demolished buildings,  discarded home appliances, and manufacturing
returns. Finishing processes, such as rolling mills, are similar at both types of mills.

                 The American Iron and Steel Institute  (AISI) and the Steel
Manufacturers Association (SMA) have formed a partnership with EPA's Sector
Strategies Program  to improve the environmental performance of the iron and steel
industry. Together AISI and SMA represent the majority of U.S. steel companies.6

                                            The iron and steel sector is working with
EPA to improve the industry's performance by:

                Managing and minimizing waste;
                Reducing air emissions;
                Increasing energy efficiency; and
                Promoting environmental management systems.

-------
Managing and Minimizing Waste
Two-thirds of U.S. steel is now produced from scrap,
making steel America's most recycled material.7 In fact,
all new steel contains at least 25% recycled steel.8
However, steelmaking still presents a variety of
opportunities to remove undesirable materials from
the recycling stream, increase reuse of co-products and
byproducts, and reduce releases to the environment.

Automotive  Scrap Metal Recycling
Obsolete automobiles are an important source of
scrap metal. In 2001, the steel industry consumed
the steel from  14.5 million recycled automobiles,
in turn generating enough steel to produce more
than 15 million new automobiles.9

One pressing problem in the use of scrap from
automobiles is the potential presence of mercury.
Automakers have used mercury in various
applications, but the most prevalent use was in hood
and trunk convenience light switches in domestic
automobiles. Automakers phased out the use of
mercury in convenience switches in 2002, but
millions of older vehicles that will be recycled in
the next few years contain up to a gram of mercury
per car in the switches. Currently, few  automotive
dismantlers remove these switches before the vehicles
are flattened or shredded, so the mercury is carried
into the recycling stream.
EPA, steelmakers, and other stakeholders are working
to limit or prevent potential emissions of mercury
from convenience switches and to reduce the use of
toxic materials in new products. To this end, AISI and
SMA participate in a coalition with dismantlers,
shredder operators, and environmental groups, known
as the Partnership for Mercury Free Vehicles.10 The
partnership is pursuing policy solutions, such as state
legislation, to bring about the recovery of existing
mercury applications and to limit future uses of
mercury in vehicles. EPA is working with these and
other stakeholders, including state agencies, to explore
potential voluntary and regulatory solutions.

Beneficial Reuse of Slag
Through the Sector Strategies Program, steelmakers
and EPA hope to increase the beneficial reuse of
materials generated during steel production. For
example, iron or blast furnace slag, which is formed
at integrated mills when iron ore, fluxing agents,
coke, and other compounds combine, can be reused
for construction and agricultural applications,
such as road building aggregate, cement, or soil
remineralization. In 2003, approximately 19 million
tons of domestic iron and steel slag, valued at
approximately $300 million, were consumed off-site.11


-------
  Environmental Releases
  Iron and steel facilities use a variety of chemicals and
  report on the release and management of many of those
  materials through EPAs Toxics Release Inventory
  (TRI). Between 1993 and 2001, normalized TRI
  releases  by iron and steel facilities increased steadily,
  as new or upgraded air pollution control equipment
  generated additional pollution control residues for
  disposal. Treatment remained the predominant waste
  management method used in the sector, although
  energy recovery increased during this time period.12
                  TRI Releases
            by the Iron & Steel Sector
   250
   150

       1993  1994   1995   1996  1997   1998   1999  2000   2001
                            Year
*Normalized by annual production
 Sources: U.S. EPA.Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)
      U.S. Geological Survey, Mineral Commodity Summaries
                                      Reducing Air Emissions
                                      Steelmaking generates a variety of air emissions,
                                      including both hazardous air pollutant (HAP) and
                                      greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

                                      Hazardous Air Pollutant Emissions
                                      Depending upon their operations, common HAPs
                                      from iron and steel facilities include hydrochloric acid,
                                      manganese compounds, phenol, naphthalene, and
                                      benzene. Between 1993 and 2001, total normalized
                                      releases of HAPs, as reported to TRI, declined by 71%
                                      in the sector.13 Much of this decrease is due to the
                                      installation of pollution control equipment to meet
                                      new air requirements, such as the Clean Air Act's New
                                      Source Performance Standards.

                                      The operation of new or upgraded air pollution
                                      control equipment at steel mills often results in the
                                      generation of additional pollution control residues,
                                      such as EAF dust and filter cakes, whose disposal
                                      must be reported to TRI as a release. Therefore, TRI
                                      releases from the iron and steel sector rose between
                                      1993 and 2001, while TRI-reportable air emissions
                                      declined.14

                                      Depending on economics and other factors, EAF dust
                                      can be processed to recover zinc and other materials.
                                      When zinc prices are low, however, EAF dust is more
                                      likely to be disposed and reported as a TRI release.
;i  300
   ioo
       TRI Releases and Waste Managed
            by the Iron & Steel Sector
         Released
         On/Offsite
Treated    Energy Recovery   Recycled
                   On/Offsite
                               On/Offsite
 *Normalized by annual value of shipments
  Sources: U.S. EPA.Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)
       U.S. Census Bureau, Annual Survey of Manufactures
                                          On/Offsite
                                          11993  2001
                                                    TRI Air Toxics+ Releases
                                                   by the Iron & Steel Sector
                                                                   1993   1994  1995   1996
                                                                                        1997
                                                                                        Year
                                                                                             1998  1999   2000   2001
                                        Includes the Clean Air Act hazardous air pollutants that are reported to TRI
                                        *Normalized by annual production
                                        Sources: U.S. EPA.Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)
                                             U.S. Geological Survey, Mineral Commodity Summaries

-------
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Steelmaking generates GHG emissions both directly
and indirectly.

• •••   Integrated mills produce carbon dioxide
        (C02), a GHG, when transforming coke and
        iron ore into iron.

• •••   Both minimills and integrated mills consume
        significant amounts of electricity, the
        generation of which results in GHG emissions.

In 2003, AISI joined Climate VISION, a voluntary
program administered by the U.S. Department of
Energy (DOE) to reduce U.S.  GHG intensity (the
ratio of emissions to economic output).15 To help
achieve this goal, the industry is researching alternative
means of production at integrated mills that would
not generate CO2, seeking to reduce or capture GHG
emissions from current production methods, and
exploring ways to increase energy efficiency.16
Increasing Energy Efficiency
The iron and steel industry, which relies heavily on
coal and natural gas for fuel, is one of the largest energy
consumers in the manufacturing sector. In 1998, the
industry used approximately 1.6 quadrillion Btus of
energy, representing approximately 7% of all U.S.
manufacturing use and 2% of overall domestic use.17

In a just-completed report to DOE, the industry
reported achieving a 17% reduction in energy intensity
per ton  of steel shipped since 1990. Because of the close
relationship between energy use and GHG emissions,
the industry's aggregate CO2  emissions per ton of steel
shipped were reduced by a comparable amount during
this same period.18

As part  of their Climate VISION commitment, the
industry has commited to increasing its energy
efficiency by 10% by 2012 (from 2002 levels).19
 Case Study: Energy Efficiency at
 North Star Steel
 With help from DOE, North Star Steel conducted
 an assessment of its Wilton, IA, minimill to identify
plant-level opportunities to increase energy efficiency
     in turn, reduce GHG emissions. In 2003-2004,
the minimill completed two projects identified during
the assessment. By installing carbon and oxygen injection
in the EAF, as well as low-NOx burners and Level 2
controls on its billet reheat furnace, the mill saved
more than 58 billion Btus of electricity and natural
gas, for a reduction of more than 4 million pounds of
CO2 equivalents. These and other projects will contribute
to the goal of North Star's parent company, Cargill, Inc.,
to reduce energy use by 10% by the year 2005.2"

Case Study: Landfill Methane
Outreach Program
Jersey Shore Steel, in Jersey Shore, PA, and the Clinton
County Landfill, both members ofEPA's Landfill
Methane Outreach Program, developed a  methane gas
                    O    '      L             O
reclamation project to use landfill emissions for energy
at the rolling mill. Jersey Shore uses gas piped from the
landfill to power its reheat furnace, saving 15% in energy
costs and reducing GHG emissions by 71,000 tons of
CO2 equivalents per year.21


Promoting Environmental
Management Systems
Most of the 20  integrated mills, and more than
one third of the 75 minimills that produce carbon
steel, have implemented environmental management
systems (EMS).22 To date, three iron and steel facilities
have been accepted into EPA's National Environmental
Performance Track. In addition, SMA is a Performance
Track Network  Partner committed to encouraging top
environmental performance through EMS.23 Through
the Sector Strategies Program, EPA and its partners
hope to increase the number of facilities with  EMS.

Case Study: EMS at Nucor Steel
Through  its EMS, Nucor Steel's Auburn, NY, minimill
committed to use scrap tires as a substitute for coal in
Steelmaking, utilizing the tires' carbon, energy, and steel.
Nucor consumed more than 600,000 tires in the first 18
months of the program, avoiding the use of 4,000 tons


-------
Metal    Casting
                                                       Sector At-a-Glance
                                                       Number of Facilities:
                                                       Value of Shipments:
                                                       Number of Employees:
2,800

$28 Billion
210,000
                                                       Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2001'
             The metal casting sector2 encompasses
both foundries and die casting facilities. Metal casters are
primarily small businesses that produce a wide range of
goods, ranging from engine blocks and cylinder heads to jewelry and plumbing fixtures.

Metal casting facilities are located across the country, but most are concentrated in the
Great Lakes states, Alabama, California, and Texas.3

                         The metal casting process involves pouring molten metal
into molds, allowing it to cool, then removing the resultant casting. Die casters and
foundries utilize different casting processes.

       Die casters produce non-ferrous (primarily aluminum) castings under high
       pressure in permanent metal molds.

       Foundries cast both ferrous and non-ferrous metals, using primarily disposable
       molds made of sand, wax, foam, or other materials. Foundries (but not die casters)
       must break apart their molds in order to remove the castings.

All metal castings require some degree of finishing to remove excess metal as well as dirt,
grease, oil, oxides, and rust.

                The North American Die Casting Association (NADCA) and the
American Foundry Society (AFS) have formed a partnership with EPA's Sector Strategies
Program to improve the  environmental performance of the metal casting industry.
NADCA's membership includes corporate and individual members from more than 950
companies from the die casting industry.4 AFS represents nearly 10,000 members of the
die casting and foundry industries.5

                                          The metal casting sector is working with
EPA to improve the industry's performance by:

               Increasing energy efficiency;
               Managing and minimizing waste;
               Conserving water;
               Reducing air emissions; and
               Promoting environmental management systems.

-------
 Increasing Energy Efficiency
 Given the energy-intensive nature of its manufacturing
 processes, reducing energy consumption is an
 important environmental focus for the metal casting
 sector. The most energy-intensive process in metal
 casting is the melting of metal, which  accounts for
 approximately 55% of total energy costs.6 Other
 energy-intensive processes include core making, mold
 making, heat treatment, and post-casting activities.
 Voluntary efforts are underway in the  sector to reduce
 the energy requirements of these key processes.

 Case Study: Industries of the Future
 The U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Industries of
 the Future (IOF) program creates government-industry
partnerships to accelerate technology research,
 development, and deployment in nine energy-intensive
 industries, including metal casting.7

 Industry participation in the program is managed
 by the Cast Metals Coalition (CMC), which was
founded by several trade organizations, including AFS
 and NADCA8 CMC has set measurable goals for 2020,
 including using 20% less energy to produce castings,
        O    O             CX/   L            O '
 compared to the sector's 1998 energy requirements of
 320 trillion Btus.9
Some of the ways that CMC and IOF are moving toward
meeting this goal include:
• Encouraging the development of new technologies like
  the "lost foam" casting process,  which could improve
  energy efficiency by as much as 27%;
• Increasing research on aluminum die casting alloys to
  reduce the weight of automotive castings, for a potential
  energy savings of almost 2 trillion Btus per year; and
• Developing software to optimize furnace controls to
  reduce coke/coal use by as much as 5%, for a potential
  energy savings of 400 million Btus per year per unit
  by the year 2020.10

CMC and IOF have also set industry performance targets
to develop environmental technologies to achieve 100%
pre- and post-consumer recycling; 75% beneficial reuse
of foundry  byproducts,
complete elimination of all waste streams.1

-------
 Metal     Casting
 Managing and Minimizing Waste
 The metal casting sector is working to reduce releases
 to the environment and increase the reuse of industrial
 byproducts like foundry sand.

 Reduction in Environmental Releases
 Metal casters use a variety of chemicals and report
 on the release and management of many of those
 materials through EPA's Toxics Release Inventory
 (TRI). Over the past decade, the sector has made
 progress in reducing wastes. Between 1993 and 2001,
 normalized TRI releases by metal casting facilities
 decreased by 11%. These reductions can be attributed
 to an 18%  decrease in releases from the ferrous
 segment of the industry, which accounts for most of
 the sector's releases. During  this time period, most of
 the sector's waste was managed through recycling.12
                 TRI Releases
         by the  Metal Casting Sector
      1993   1994   1995   1996
                          1997
                          Year
                               1998   1999   2000   2001
* Normalized by annual value of shipments
 Sources: U.S. EPA.Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)
      AFS, Metal Casting Forecast Stipends
      Stratecasts, Inc., Demand & Supply Forecast
       - Ferrous Metal Casting
        Non-Ferrous Metal Casting
      TRI Releases and Waste Managed
          by the Metal Casting Sector
  160
  140
  120
| 100
|
| 60
  40
  20
   0
                  Treated
                 On/Offsite
Energy Recovery   Recycled
  On/Offsite    On/Offsite
 * Normalized by annual value of shipments
 Sources: U.S. EPA,Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)
      AFS, Metal Casting Forecast StTrends
      Stratecasts, Inc., Demand & Supply Forecast
Beneficial Reuse of Foundry Sand
Foundries that use sand molds utilize vibrating grids
and/or conveyors to shake the mold from the casting.
These foundries then reprocess the sand to remove
lumps, metal, impurities, and fine particles. Although
foundries can recondition and reuse sand many
times, the sand eventually loses the desired physical
characteristics and must be sent for reuse elsewhere
or disposed of in a landfill. Markets exist for the
reuse of spent foundry sand, but many states restrict
its use in construction applications such as roadbeds,
even when the sand is non-hazardous.

In 1998, state foundry associations, AFS, and industry
suppliers formed Foundry Industry Recycling Starts
Today (FIRST) to develop options for the recycling
and beneficial reuse of foundry sands.13 One of
FIRST's goals is to quantify reuse rates and set reuse
goals in key states. Currently, only the state of
Wisconsin requires reporting on the use and disposal
of spent foundry sands. Based upon data collected
from both generators and landfills, the Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources estimates that
approximately 68% of the spent foundry sand
generated in that state is beneficially reused.14

To encourage beneficial reuse, EPA released a review
of state practices and regulations regarding foundry
sand in 2002 as a resource for the industry and for
states wishing to share best practices.15

Case Study: Beneficial Reuse by
Resource Recovery Corporation
A Michigan cooperative, Resource Recovery Corporation
(RRC), receives third-party foundry sands from many
foundries, identifies beneficial reuse opportunities, and
then provides a consistent supply of material to end users,
such as a local asphalt company. RRC estimates that in
2002 its activities reused more than 41,000 tons of
recyclable materials (including sand and metals) that
would otherwise have been diverted to landfills. Since
1997, more than 210,000 tons of sand and 3,600 tons
of metal have been reused through RRC.16

-------
 Conserving Water
 In order to conserve water, the metal casting sector
 is exploring technologies for recovering and
 re-circulating the wastewater used to lubricate and
 cool dies during the die casting process.

 Case Study: Re-circulating Wastewater
 at Kennedy Die Casting, Inc.
 Kennedy Die Casting in Worcester, MA, installed a
 wax and water-based lubrication system for its die cast
 machines, replacing one that was solvent-based. The
 new system re-circulates wastewater and reduces water
 discharges. Prior to the changes, Kennedy Die Casting
 used 7 to 8 thousand gallons of water per day. Currently
 Kennedy Die Casting uses 400 gallons per day.17
 Reducing Air Emissions
 The metal casting sector is working to reduce
 emissions of hazardous air pollutants  (HAP),
 including organic air pollutants and metals. The
 organic air pollutants are primarily generated while
 making the core portions of the molds, shaking the
 mold away from  the casting,  and pouring the molten
 metal, while the metals are primarily generated
 during melting, pouring, and finishing processes.

 Between 1993 and 2001, the normalized quantity
 of HAP releases,  as reported to TRI, declined by
 53% in the ferrous segment of the industry and by
 60% in the non-ferrous segment.18
           TRI Air Toxics+Releases
          by the Metal Casting Sector
e  e
o
E

      1993   1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001
                          Year
                                 A  Ferrous Metal Casting
                                 +  Non-Ferrous Metal Casting
 Includes the Clean Air Act hazardous air pollutants that are reported to TRI
 *Normalized by annual value of shipments
  Sources: U.S. EPA, Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)
      AFS, Metal Casting Forecast & Trends
      Stratecasts, Inc., Demand & Supply Forecast
Promoting Environmental
Management Systems
More than 50% of metal casting products are
used by the automotive and transportation indus
tries. Many automotive companies now require
that their direct suppliers maintain environmental
management systems (EMS) that are compliant with
the ISO  14001 standard. To meet these supply chain
demands, trade associations within the metal casting
sector have  taken an active role in encouraging the
development of EMS by members.

Together with AFS, NADCA, the Indiana Cast
Metals Association, and the Indiana Department of
Environmental Management, the Sector Strategies
Program has developed EMS tools for die casters and
foundries, including customized EMS Implementation
Guides and a brochure highlighting  the financial
benefits of EMS.19  In addition, NADCA is a
Performance Track Network Partner committed
to encouraging top environmental performance
through  EMS.20

Many metal casters are finding that EMS can
be an effective tool for performance  improvement.

Case Study: EMS at Chicago White
Metal Casting, Inc.
Chicago  White Metal (CWM) in Bensenville, IL,
implemented an EMS over five years ago. CWM is the
first metal casting facility to be accepted into EPAs
National Environmental Performance  Track.21 Through
its EMS, CWM has:
• Recycled an additional 4,000 pounds of plastic stretch
  film, 5,600 wood pallets, 177,000 pounds of scrap
  steel, 81,000 pounds of office paper,  and 148,000
  pounds of corrugated material;
• Reduced annual solid waste disposal by 75%;
• Reduced natural gas usage by at least 45%.22


-------
Metal    Finishing
Sector At-a-Glance
Number of Facilities:
Value of Shipments:
Number of Employees:
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2001'
3,200
$5.9 Billion
74,000
             The metal finishing sector2 encompasses a
variety of surface finishing and electroplating operations.
Broadly speaking, metal finishing is the process of coating
an object with one or more layers of metal so as to improve its wear and corrosion
resistance, control friction, impart new physical properties or dimensions, and/or alter its
appearance. Applications range from jewelry, to common hardware items and automotive
parts, to communications equipment and aerospace technologies.

Most metal finishing shops are small, independently owned facilities that perform on
a contract basis. Other metal finishing operations are a part of larger manufacturing
facilities. While the industry is geographically diverse, it is concentrated in highly
industrialized areas like California, Texas, and the Great Lakes states.3

Low-cost imports from overseas and other globalization trends have led to changes
in this industry. Recent industry estimates indicate job losses in the range of 25-30%
between 2000 and 2003, with a corresponding reduction in sales of approximately 40%.4

                         Most finished objects undergo three stages of processing:

       Surface preparation and cleaning;

       Surface treatment through plating, organic coating, or other chemical surface finishing; and

       Post-treatment activities, such as rinsing and additional surface treatment

                Four trade associations have formed a partnership with EPA's Sector
Strategies Program to improve the environmental performance of the metal finishing
 ector. These organizations include:

      American Electroplaters and Surface Finishers (AESF);

       Metal Finishing Suppliers'Association (MFSA);

       National Association of Metal Finishers (NAMF); and

       Surface Finishing Industry Council (SFIC).5

Current collaboration with the metal finishing industry builds upon the success of past
partnerships, particularly the Strategic  Goals Program.6

                                          The metal finishing sector is working with
EPA to improve the industry's performance by:

               Managing and minimizing waste;
               Conserving water; and
               Promoting environmental management systems.

-------
 Case Study: Improving Performance
 through the Strategic Goals Program
 Between 1998 and 2002, more than 500 metal
finishers, 20 states, and 80 local regulatory agencies
 (primarily publicly owned treatment works)
participated with EPA in the Strategic Goals Program.
 Participating metal finishers pursued facility-specific
 environmental targets for resource inputs and waste
 outputs, including:
 • 25% reduction in energy use;
 • 50% reduction in water use;
 • 50% reduction in land disposal of
  hazardous sludge;
 • 50% reduction in emissions of metals to
  water; and
 • 90% reduction in organic chemical releases
  reported to EPA's Toxics Release Inventory (TRI).

 Participating state and local regulatory agencies
 supported metal finishers in their pursuit of these
goals through a strategically defined set of actions,
 including state recognition programs, targeted assistance,
 a targeted research and development agenda, and
 regulatory changes to reduce barriers to metals recovery
 and wastewater pretreatment.
An independent third-party, the National Center for
Manufacturing Sciences, tracked the progress of 150
participating metal finishers that consistently reported
their environmental progress. Through 2001,
cumulative improvements for these facilities included:
• 7% reduction  in energy  use;
• 38% reduction in water use;
• 23% reduction in land disposal of
  hazardous sludge;
• 62% reduction in emissions of metals to
  water; and
• 62% reduction in organic chemical releases
  reported to TRI.7

All percentages are normalized by dollar value of sales
to account for changes in production levels.

Based upon the success of the Strategic Goals Program,
EPA and the trade associations are now encouraging
broader use of these five indicators.


-------
 Metal     Finishing
 Managing and Minimizing Waste
 During the metal finishing process, some portion
 of the materials used in production is not totally
 captured on the finished product and can exit the
 process  in wastewater and waste. EPA effluent
 guidelines require metal finishers to treat their
 wastewater to remove or reduce pollutants prior to
 discharge to either a publicly owned treatment works
 or a public waterway. To comply, metal finishers  add
 chemicals to the wastewater to remove metals and
 other constituents. Most metals then settle and are
 dewatered to form sludge. This sludge, known as F006,
 is regulated as a hazardous waste under the Resource
 Conservation and Recovery Act.

 EPAs Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) does not track
 sludge releases, but it does track individual chemicals
 that may be constituents of sludge. Although less than
 20% of the metal finishing sector was subject to TRI
 reporting requirements in 2001, it is still notable that
 from 1993 to 2001, the normalized amount of TRI
 releases  from those shops decreased by 44%. In 2001,
 releases  accounted for only 11 % of the sector's waste,
 while 88% of metal finishing waste was treated or
 recycled.8
                 TRI Releases
          by the Metal Finishing Sector


=
E
      1993  1994  1995   1996
                          1997
                          Year
                                   1999  2000   2001
*Normalized by annual value of shipments
 Sources: U.S. EPA, Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)
     U.S. Census Bureau, Annual Survey of Manufactures
Improved performance was driven by the use
of alternative plating chemistries, as well as by:

•••• Increased recovery of metals from the
      sludge; and

•••• Introduction of rinsing techniques that
      conserve water and reduce the volume
      of sludge generated.

Metals Recovery through Sludge Recycling
EPA and the industry are working together to increase
recovery of metals from metals-bearing sludge. EPA
estimates that 10-20% of plating sludge is sent to
permitted hazardous waste recycling facilities,9 which
use techniques such as ion exchange canisters and
electrowinning to recover economically valuable
metals from the sludge. Metal recovery reduces land
disturbance, resource depletion, energy  consumption,
and other environmental impacts that result from the
mining and processing of virgin metal ore.

Rinsing Techniques to Reduce
Sludge Generation
In many cases, metal finishers have implemented
more effective and efficient rinsing techniques, such
as concurrent flow rinsing, which reduce the need to
treat and dispose of plating baths. These techniques
result in less water use, less chemical use, and less
sludge generation. For example, between 1997 and
2001, Artistic Plating Company in Anaheim, CA,
reduced its sludge volume by 40% by installing flow
restrictors and conductivity sensors.10
         TRI Releases and Waste Managed
            by the Metal Finishing Sector
                                                        120

                                                        120

                                                      fe 100
                                                              Released
                                                              On/Offsite
                     Treated   Energy Recovery   Recycled
                    On/Offsite    On/Offsite    On/Offsite
  *Normalized by annual value of shipments
   Sources: U.S. EPA, Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)
        U.S. Census Bureau, Annual Survey of Manufactures

-------
Conserving Water
Water use and sludge generation go hand-in-hand
for the metal finishing industry. Reducing water use at
metal finishing facilities can reduce sludge generation
and allow wastewater treatment systems to more
successfully treat the wastewater.

Case Study: Reducing Water Use at
East Side Plating
By installing two cooling towers and adding sludge
dryers, East Side Plating in Portland, OR:
• Reduced water use by 64% (between 1997 and 1999);
• Reduced sludge discharge by 67% (between 1997 and
  1999); and
• Reduced permitted copper, nickel,  chrome, and zinc
  discharges by almost 50% (between 1997 and 2002)."


Promoting Environmental
Management Systems
Industry leadership has taken an active role in
encouraging the development of environmental
management  systems (EMS) at member facilities.
To help promote widespread adoption of EMS,
the Sector Strategies Program partnered with the
major metal finishing trade associations to create a
customized EMS Implementation Guide, a brochure
highlighting the financial benefits  of EMS, and an
EMS training program tailored to the sector.12 Since
the start of the Strategic Goals Program in 1998, over
100 metal finishing job shops, all small businesses,
have completed EMS training.13
Many metal finishing customers, including some
automobile manufacturers, are encouraging metal
finishers to adopt EMS. This factor is recognized by
the industry leadership and is one of the drivers
behind their commitment to industry-wide EMS
development. This factor also has led corporate
customers to help drive EMS development by their
metal finisher suppliers, and by job shops themselves
to take the next step to ISO 14001 certification in
order to maintain a competitive edge.
 -fe-
 Case Study: Supply Chain Mentoring
EPA's Regional office in New England (EPA Region 1)
established a novel approach to environmental
stewardship through their Corporate Sponsor Program.
 The program encourages large equipment manufacturers
to offer environmental management or environmental,
health, and safety training to metal finishers and other
companies within their supply chain.14

EPA's National Environmental Performance Track
awarded special recognition to New Hampshire Ball
Bearings, Inc.,  (NHBB) in Peterborough, NH, for its
participation in the program. NHBB mentors suppliers
and offers preferred status to suppliers with EMS.11"

In addition, many metal finishers are finding that
EMS can be an effective tool for performance
improvement.

 Case Study: EMS at SWD, Inc.
SWD, Inc., inAddison, IL, adopted an EMS in 1997
and became the first metal finisher in the U.S. to certify
its EMS to the ISO 14001 standard in 1998. Through
its EMS, SWD:
• Identified the environmental impacts of molybdenum
  and barium as areas for improvement and took steps
  to eliminate both substances from all incoming raw
  materials;
• Reduced sludge by 50% between 1996 and 1998
   by changing its chemical process; and
• Reduced water discharge by 28% between 1996 and
  2000 by reusing water in non-critical rinses.16

 Case Study: EMS at
Imagineering Finishing Technologies
Imagineering Finishing Technologies in South Bend, IN,
implemented an EMS in 1998.  Through its EMS,
Imagineering identified a way to increase the recyclability
of metal-bearing baths by direct  discharging clean rinses
(with appropriate monitoring). Between 2001 and
2003, Imagineering recycled almost 4,500pounds of
metals. Besides alleviating stress on its wastewater
treatment system, this project reduced shipments of
sludge to a landfill by 66% and reduced purchases of
wastewater treatment chemicals  by more than 9,000
pounds within one year.17


-------
Paint   &   Coatings
                                                        Number of Facilities:      1,500
                                                        Value of Shipments:       $20 Billion
                                                        Number of Employees:     51,000
                                                        Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2001'
	[j         The paint and coatings sector2 manufactures
 a variety of products that preserve, protect, and beautify
 the objects to which they are applied. There are four main
 types of paints and coatings:

       Architectural coatings used in homes and buildings, such as interior and exterior paints,
       primers, sealers, and varnishes;

       Industrial coatings that are factory-applied to decorate and protect manufactured goods
       as part of the production process;

       Special purpose coatings, such as aerosol paints, marine paints, high performance
       maintenance coatings, and automotive refinish paints; and

       Allied paint products, including putties, paint and varnish removers, paint thinners,
       pigment dispersions, and paintbrush cleaners.

 The paint and coatings industry has been going through a period of increasing
 consolidation, marked by a large number of mergers, acquisitions, and spin-offs during
 the last decade.

                           Paint and coatings are made of a variety of compounds
 formulated to fulfill the requirements of different applications. Paint and coatings are
 manufactured through the following basic steps, which must be adapted to the
 characteristics of different ingredients:
      Addition of raw materials (resins, dry pigments, water, or solvents, depending on the type
      of paint);

      Mixing/dispersion;

      Filtration; and

      Packaging the paint or coating for sale.
               The National Paint and Coatings Association (NPCA) has formed
a partnership with EPA's Sector Strategies Program to improve the environmental
performance of the paint and coatings industry. NPCA membership includes more
than 350 companies that account for close to 90% of the total dollar volume of
architectural paints and industrial coatings produced in the U.S.3

                                            The paint and coatings sector is working
with EPA to improve the industry's performance by:

               Managing and minimizing waste;
               Reducing air emissions; and
               Promoting environmental management systems.

-------
  Managing and  Minimizing Waste
  The paint and coatings sector is working to reduce
  generation and increase recycling of waste, as well
  as to address the life cycle impact of paint and
  coatings products.

  Reduction in Environmental Releases
  Paint and coatings facilities use a variety of chemicals
  and report on the release and management of many
  of those materials through EPA's Toxics Release
  Inventory (TRI). Over the past decade, the sector has
  made progress in reducing releases of TRI chemicals.
  Between 1993 and 2001, normalized TRI releases by
  paint and coatings facilities decreased by 50%. Most
  of these releases were to air. In 2001, close to 50% of
  the sector's TRI waste was managed through recycling.4
  While current levels of recycling across the sector are
  already substantial, additional opportunities may exist
  for further increases.
Life Cycle Impacts
The paints and coatings sector has reduced or eliminated
a number of harmful constituents, such as lead and
mercury, from most of its products. Opportunities still
exist, however, to reduce life cycle impacts associated
with the manufacture and use of paints and coatings.
For example, environmental benefits could be
achieved by substituting greater amounts of leftover
paint for virgin raw materials in the production of
new paint  and coating products.
                  TRI  Releases
         by the Paint & Coatings Sector

       1993  1994   1995   1996   1997  1998   1999   2000   2001
                            Year
*Normalized by annual value of shipments
 Sources: U.S. EPA, Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)
      U.S. Census Bureau, Annual Survey of Manufactures
        TRI  Releases and Waste Managed
           by the Paint & Coatings Sector
          Released      Treated   Energy Recovery   Recycled
          On/Offsite     On/Offsite     On/Offsite    On/Offsite
  *Normalized by annual value of shipments                  H1993   2001
  Sources: U.S. EPA.Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)
        U.S. Census Bureau, Annual Survey of Manufactures


-------

Reducing Air Emissions
Organic solvents are used as an ingredient in the
production of oil-based paint and coatings because
of their ability to dissolve and disperse other coating
constituents. Organic solvents are also used in smaller
quantities as an ingredient in the production of
water-based paint and coatings, as well as in other
aspects of the manufacturing process.

As organic solvents evaporate, they release emissions
of volatile organic compounds  (VOC) and hazardous
air pollutants (HAP). These releases occur inside
production facilities as well as when paint and coating
products are ultimately applied to building structures,
consumer products, and other surfaces.

Although VOCs and HAPs resulting from the
production and use of paint and  coating products
remain a serious environmental concern, these emissions
have decreased steadily in recent years. EPA estimates
that the normalized quantity of VOC emissions
resulting from the manufacture of paint and coatings
declined by 12% between 1996 and 2001.5 The
normalized quantity of HAP releases,  as  reported toTRI,
declined by 56% between 1993 and 2001.6

Environmental regulations, changing consumer
preferences, and voluntary industry efforts all
contributed to these decreases. As a result of
these factors:
       Environmentally preferable water-based paint
       has increased from approximately 35% to over
       80% of architectural coating sales, over the past
       few decades, taking market share away from
       oil-based paint.7
       Markets for industrial and special purpose
       coatings have undergone transformation as
       customers have demanded, and manufacturers
       have introduced, a wide variety of more
       environmentally benign coating products.
       Improvements have been made in the way that
       paint and coating products are manufactured,
       handled, and applied.
The downward trend in VOC and HAP emissions is
likely to continue due to:
• •••  New regulatory requirements in recent years,
       including national VOC emissions standards
       for coatings, along with a number of Maximum
       Achievable Control Technology (MACT)
       standards for manufacturers and users of
       coatings products;
       New, inherently cleaner products and
       technologies, such as powder coatings,
       radiation-cured coatings, and high solids
       technologies; and
       Improved industrial housekeeping and application
       techniques, as well as advances in the
       manufacturing process.
              TRI Air Toxics+Releases
           by the Paint & Coatings Sector

         1993   1994   1995  1996   1997   1998   1999  2000  2001
                              Year
  Includes the Clean Air Act hazardous air pollutants that a re reported to TRI
  *Normalized by annual value of shipments
  Sources: U.S. EPA, Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)
       U.S. Census Bureau, Annual Survey of Manufactures

-------
Promoting Environmental
Management Systems
The adoption of environmental management systems
(EMS) within the paint and coatings sector is
increasing rapidly. NPCA has incorporated an EMS
component into its Coatings Care   program, which
is a condition of membership. Consequently, in the
next few years all 900 NPCA facilities should be
implementing an EMS.8

In addition, NPCA is a Performance Track Network
Partner committed to encouraging top environmental
performance through EMS. Five individual paint and
coatings facilities have been accepted into EPA's
National Environmental Performance Track.9

Case Study: Coatings Care
NPCA's Coatings Care  program is designed to provide
              O        JO          O       L
a comprehensive system that integrates health,  safety,
and environmental activities within corporate planning
and manufacturing operations. The EMS component
of Coatings Care   fosters continuous improvement in
members' environmental performance and facilitates
ongoing efforts to be sensitive to community and
public concerns.

In addition, the EMS component of Coatings Care
requires each participating facility to develop a
quantitative inventory of emissions and discharges to
all media, as well as the off-site transfer of wastes from
each site. The Coatings Care  guidance suggests that
                   O        O          OO
facilities should identify and tabulate the volume of
eaci
                      ', emission or waste on an
annual basis and prepare a report presenting the
findings of their inventory efforts.10

In 2004, the Sector Strategies Program and NPCA
will jointly explore opportunities for building on
Coatings Care  , as well as utilizing EPA's national
environmental databases and other publicly available
data, to establish a comprehensive performance
measurement program for the paint and coatings sector.

Many paint and coatings companies are finding
that EMS can be an effective tool for performance
improvement.
 Case Study: EMS at Sherwin-Williams
 The Sherwin- Williams Company has implemented an
EMS that not only fosters compliance with regulations
as an integral part of day-to-day operations, but also
charges facilities to minimize adverse safety,
environmental, and health impacts through the use
of integrated management systems and planning.
 The EMS applies to all company locations, including
Sherwin-Williams' manufacturing plants, distribution
service centers and warehouses, automotive branches,
and commercial and retail stores.

 One major component of Sherwin-Williams' EMS
is waste minimization. Each of the company's plants has
established recycling and/or rework programs. These
programs aim to minimize the generation of cleaning
materials and maximize reuse and recycling of cleaning
solvents, recycling of wash water, reworking of
miss-tinted paint into future batches, and recycling
of cardboard, paper, and steel. As an indication of
how successful the EMS has been, in 2002
Sherwin-Williams recycled more than 90 million
pounds of paint, cleaning solvents,  and wash water."



-------
                                                         Sector At-a-Glance
                                                         Number of Port Authorities:
                                                         Value of Shipments:
                                                         Number of Employees:
82*
$5.7 Billion**
58,000**
                                                          •Source: AAPA, 2004'
                                                          •Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2001!
             The public port sector3 consists of port
authorities and agencies located along the coasts and
around the Great Lakes. Typically established by
enactments of state government, ports develop, manage,
and promote the flow of waterborne commerce.

Ports on the coasts and inland waterways provide more than 3,000 berths for deep draft
ships and  transfer cargo and passengers through about 2,000 public and private marine
terminals.4 Deep water ports accommodate more than 95% by weight, and 75% by
value, of all U.S. overseas trade.5

The port sector is facing increased pressure to develop newer, larger, and more efficient
facilities to accommodate increased water trade carried by larger and larger vessels. U.S.
international waterborne freight is forecast to triple by 2020.6 In response to the increase
in trade, ports spent $2.8 billion on capital improvements in 2001-20027 In addition,
cruise ships and other waterborne passenger  services are increasingly using commercial
port facilities.

                      Public ports develop and maintain the shoreside facilities for the
intermodal transfer of cargo between ships, barges, trucks and railroads. Ports also build
and maintain cruise terminals for the cruise passenger industry. While port authorities
directly operate many marine terminals, they also serve as landlords to many tenant
operations. Port authority operations may  also include other entities, such as airports,
bridges, and railroads. Additionally, the U.S. military depends on numerous ports to serve
as bases of operation and to deploy troops and equipment during national  emergencies.

                The American Association of Port Authorities (AAPA) has formed
a partnership with EPA's Sector Strategies  Program to improve the environmental
performance of deep water public ports.8 The intent is to focus on the ports where
there is the greatest opportunity and capacity to make environmental improvements
and then transfer tools and lessons to other ports, private shipping terminals, and
related industries.
to improve performance by:
                                             The port sector is working with EPA
                Reducing air emissions;
                Improving water quality;
                Minimizing impacts of growth; and
                Promoting environmental management systems.

-------
Reducing Air Emissions
Marine vessels, land-based cargo-handling
equipment, trucks, and trains all contribute to
air emissions at ports. Common air pollutants from
this transportation equipment include particulate
matter (PM), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and sulfur
oxides
Port authorities typically only have direct control
over a limited number of these sources, so a
collaborative approach with tenants and others is the
only way to get substantial reductions in emissions
over the long term.

Ports are making progress in reducing air emissions
by increasing the use of cleaner fuels and streamlining
operations. For example:

 • •••  Most major ports have switched, or are
        switching, from diesel fuel to  electric or
        hybrid power for on-dock cranes.

 ••••  The use of on-dock rail and barges, in lieu
        of trucks, has increased.
        Turn-around times for trucks dropping
        off and picking up loads at ports have
        decreased, resulting in a decrease in
        truck idling and emissions from diesel
        engines.
 Case Study: Reducing Air Emissions
 at NY/NJ Port Authority
 The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey
 the Army  Corp of Engineers are in the process of
 deepening critical waterways in the New York/New
Jersey Harbor. Heavy machinery will be used for the
 deepening operations and will increase air emissions
 in the harbor area.
 To offset these emissions, the Port Authority is ex
 ways to reduce emissions associated with other port
 maritime activities. For example:
• The port is retrofitting the diesel engine of one of the
  Staten Island Ferries with a selective catalytic
  reduction system in order to reduce NOX emissions.
  The port is also transitioning the ferry to  ultra-low
  sulfur fuel to reduce SOX and PM emissions. If the
  test is successful, the port will make similar changes
  to all of its ferries, for an expected reduction of
  400  to 800 tons per year ofNOx emissions.
• The port is replacing  the diesel engine used by one
  of the small tugboats in the harbor with a new
  low-emissions diesel engine. If the initial test is
  successful, a larger tug will be re-powered and tested.9

-------

 Improving Water  Quality
 Ports can improve the quality of surrounding waters by
 enhancing stormwater management and exploring new
 technologies to reduce the impact of invasive species.

 Stormwater Management
 Stormwater management is increasingly important in
 improving water quality near port facilities.  Most large
 ports have hundreds of acres of paved waterfront
 property for cargo handling, where stormwater runoff
 may pick up various pollutants before entering
 waterways. Existing state stormwater regulations
 and new Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL)
 requirements, which specify the maximum amount
 of pollutants  that each water body can receive, are
 driving improvements. Voluntary efforts to improve
 stormwater management are also underway at some
 ports.

 Case Study: Stormwater Management
 at the Port of Tampa
 The Port of Tampa, FL,  is in the process of redeveloping
 Port Ybor, a former U.S. Department of Defense
facility. The port has served many industrial roles
 throughout its history, leaving it contaminated with
petroleum products,  solvents, and metals. In partnership
 with federal and state agencies,  the Port of Tampa is
 cleaning up the site to make it suitable for industrial
 applications.  The port installed an advanced
 stormwater system to help reduce the pollutant load into
 Ybor Channel,  which leads to Tampa Bay.  This system
 utilizes collection basins and baffle boxes that are
 capable of removing sediments and other suspended
particles from stormwater so that they will not enter
 Ybor Channel.10

 Invasive Species
 Ships must carry ballast water for stability and ease
 of steering and propulsion. This ballast water often
 originates from ports and other coastal regions, rich
 in marine organisms. Ballast water is typically released
 in a different geographic area than where it was taken
 in,  resulting in the introduction of non-native or
 invasive species to the area. Invasive species may
 cause both economic and environmental detriment
 by crowding out commercially viable species, affecting
 water related activities such as swimming, and
 impacting waterborne transportation.
To minimize the impact of invasive species, ships
typically exchange ballast water in the open ocean
rather than in shallow bay and harbor areas. New
ballast water treatment technologies may help to
further reduce the impact of invasive species. EPA's
Environmental Technology Program is currently
developing protocols to verify the performance of
these new technologies.11


Minimizing  Impacts of Growth
To accommodate increased water trade carried by
larger vessels, many ports must increase their capacity
and dredge deeper channels and harbors. While
port capacity can be increased somewhat through
improvements in technology and operational
efficiency, many ports also  require physical expansion.
Surrounding communities  are increasingly interested
in the positive and negative impacts of port expansion,
so ports must consider how best to minimize and
compensate for wetland or habitat loss, properly
handle sediment from dredging operations, and
address other impacts of port growth.

Case Study: Natural Resource Assessment
at the Port of Portland
The Port of Portland, OR,  has developed a Natural
Resource Assessment and Management Plan (NRAMP),
the first comprehensive environmental data system of its
kind, in an effort to establish a proactive policy for
    '-term environmental
 Through NRAMP, the port has created ecological
 maps of all port-owned properties, which can be used
 to identify the natural resources and wildlife habitats
present in these areas. Having access to this up-to-date
 information will help the port to:
 • Evaluate the potential ecological effects of future
  projects before they begin;
 • Avert projects with a significant negative impact
  to overall environmental quality; and
 • Effectively communicate different management and
  development alternatives with the community.

 The system will also decrease planning costs for future
 development by reducing the amount of data that has
 to be  collected for each new project and helping to
                           ^opment.12

-------
Promoting Environmental
Management Systems
One way ports are proactively addressing their
environmental responsibilities is  through the
development of environmental management systems
(EMS). Although only a few ports currently have
an EMS, many other ports are beginning to develop
EMS in order to show leadership in environmental
protection, reduce costs and improve efficiency,
increase staff involvement and morale, and integrate
other objectives,  such as safety and security, with
environmental activities.

Eleven ports are now participating in an EMS
Assistance Project co-sponsored by the Sector
Strategies Program and AAPA.13 Each of the selected
ports is committed to developing performance
measures and sharing  results with stakeholders and
other interested parties. Upon completion of the
project, each port will be ready to pursue
certification to the ISO 14001 standard.
 Case Study: EMS at the Port of Houston
 The Port of Houston Authority (PHA), which
 manages one of the largest ports in the world, adopted
 an EMS at its Barbours Cut Terminal and Central
 Maintenance facilities in 2002. Later that year PHA
 became the first port in the country to receive ISO
 14001 certification at any of its facilities.

 Through its EMS, PHA identified six performance
 improvement objectives:
 • Reduce NOX emissions;
 • Reduce stormwater impacts;
 • Reduce the generation of solid wastes;
 • Increase recycling efforts;
 • Reduce energy consumption; and
 • Participate in the Texas Natural Resource
  Conservation Commission's Clean Texas Program.

 To date, PHA has reduced NOX emissions by almost
 25% through the purchase of new, cleaner engines and
 the use of a lower emission dieselfuel  called PuriNOx.
 PHA has also been accepted into the Clean Texas
 Program. By 2005, PHA expects to reduce energy
 consumption by 5% by making building modifications
 and re-powering crane engines.14

 Case Study: EMS at the Port of Boston
 In December 2003, the Port of Boston, MA, Conley
 Container Terminal received ISO  14001 certification,
 becoming the second certified U.S. public port facility.
 As part of its EMS, the terminal has set performance
 improvement objectives in eight areas: hazardous waste,
 wastewater, stormwater, construction  waste, resource
 use, air emissions, spills, and noise. Initial targets
 include establishing baselines from which to measure
progress, performing evaluations, and conducting
 outreach efforts. Much effort has been made to help
 employees understand how to minimize their
 environmental impact at the port.15

-------
Shipbuilding   &   Ship    Repair
Sector At-a-Glance
Number of Facilities:
Value of Shipments:
Number of Employees:
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2001'
680
$12 Billion
89,000

            The shipbuilding and ship repair sector2
builds and repairs ships, barges, and other large vessels.
The sector also includes operations that convert or alter
ships as well as facilities that manufacture offshore oil and gas well drilling and
production platforms. Most facilities that build ships also have the ability to repair
ships, although some smaller yards do only repair work. Most shipyards are
concentrated along the coasts, the Ohio and Mississippi Rivers, and the Great Lakes.3

The shipbuilding and ship repair industry has been in decline due to intense global
competition and a decrease in the number of military ship orders. Throughout the
1990s, naval ship procurement averaged only six ships per year, the lowest level since
1932.4 From  1993 to 2001, the industry's workforce decreased by 20%.5

                        New ship construction and ship repair have many industrial
processes in common, including machining and metal working, metal plating and
surface finishing, surface preparation, solvent cleaning, application of paints and
coatings, and welding. In addition to these processes:

      New ship construction often includes parts fabrication and preassembling operations
      that involve cutting, shaping, bending, machining, blasting, and painting.

      Typical maintenance and repair operations include: blasting and repainting, rebuilding
      and installation of machinery, system replacement and overhauls, maintenance and
      installation, structural reconfiguration, and major remodeling of ship  interiors or exteriors.

               The American Shipbuilding Association (ASA) and the Shipbuilders
Council of America (SCA) have formed a partnership with EPA's Sector Strategies
Program to improve the environmental performance of the shipbuilding and ship
repair industry.6

                                        The shipbuilding and ship repair sector
is working with EPA to improve the industry's performance by:

              Managing and minimizing waste;
              Reducing air emissions;
              Improving water quality; and
              Promoting environmental management systems.

-------
 Managing  and Minimizing Waste
 Over the past decade, the shipbuilding and ship
 repair sector has made progress in reducing waste
 generation and increasing reuse and recycling rates.
 Given the diversity of their industrial processes,
 shipbuilding and ship repair facilities use a
 variety of chemicals and report on the release
 and management of many of those materials
 through EPA's Toxics Release Inventory (TRI).
 Between  1993 and 2001, normalized TRI releases
 by shipyards decreased by 43%- In 2001, treatment,
 energy recovery, and recycling accounted for 58%
 of this sector's waste management.7
Improvements in hazardous waste management
at shipyards can be attributed to several practices,
including:
•••• Development of improved coating application
      technologies, such as in-line plural component
      mixers that only mix the amount of coating
      necessary, as it is required, to avoid the waste
      of excess paint;
• ••• Use of paint waste for fuel  blending, rather
      than solidifying it for land disposal;
• ••• Reclamation of spent solvents from spray paint
      equipment; and
• ••• Recycling of spent abrasive for use as an
      aggregate material in the production of
      asphalt and cement "clinker".

                 TRI Releases
   by the Shipbuilding &Ship Repair Sector


E


1

    1
       1993   1994   1995   1996
                           1997
                           Year
                                1998   1999   2000  2001
* Normalized by annual value of shipments
 Sources: U.S. EPA, Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)
      U.S. Census Bureau, Annual Survey of Manufactures
        TRI Releases and Waste Managed
     by the Shipbuilding &Ship Repair Sector


          Released
          On/Offsite
 Treated
On/Offsite
Energy Recovery   Recycled
  On/Offsite     On/Offsite
  * Normalized by annual value of shipments
   Sources: U.S. EPA, Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)
        U.S. Census Bureau, Annual Survey of Manufactures


-------
Shipbuilding    &    Ship    Repair
Reducing Air Emissions
Because most large ships are built of steel, they
must be periodically cleaned and coated in order
to preserve the steel and to provide specific
performance characteristics to the surface. Over the
past decade, the shipbuilding and ship repair sector
has reduced particulate matter (PM) emissions
during surface preparation and volatile organic
compound (VOC) and hazardous air pollutant
(HAP) emissions during the application of paint
and coatings.

Particulate Matter Emissions
Surface preparation is critical to the coating life
cycle, as it provides both the physical and chemical
requirements for long-term coating adhesion. To
prepare surfaces for coating applications, shipyards
predominantly use a dry-abrasive blasting process.
This dry-abrasive blasting is typically performed
outdoors, as the sheer size of a ship makes enclosure
difficult and expensive.

The blasting operation generates PM emissions
derived from both the break-up of the abrasive
material and the removal of the existing coating. Over
the past ten years, shipyards have developed ways to
reduce PM emissions  to the environment, including:

• •••  Temporary containment of blasting operations;

• •••  Material substitutions; and

• •••  Alternative surface preparation technologies.

Early attempts at temporary containment consisted of
hanging curtains from scaffolding, wires, dock-arms,
and other structures around the ship. Generally, these
temporary structures were open at the top and
reduced PM emissions by reducing the wind speed
in the blasting area. This practice has evolved to
include the construction of temporary shrink-wrap
enclosures of entire ships in drydock.

Case Study: Temporary Containment
at Signal International
Signal International, located in MS and TX, has
adapted temporary containment for use on offshore drill
rigs. Their containment efforts have resulted in a 90%
reduction in PM emissions from dry-abrasive blasting
operations.8
Shipyards have also reduced PM emissions through
material substitutions. Most dry abrasives used
outdoors at shipyards are either sand or slags
derived from coal-fired utility boilers (coal slag) or
smelting (copper slag). Some abrasives result in
higher PM emission rates than others. The National
Shipbuilding Research Program sponsored research
to determine the PM emission rates of the various
types of abrasives and to analyze the life cycle costs
of material substitution.9 As a result, many shipyards
are now utilizing different abrasives with lower PM
emission rates.

Case Study: Material Substitution
at Bath Iron  Works
In 1994, Bath Iron Works (BIW) in Bath, ME, began
substituting garnet abrasive for coal slag in their
exterior ship dry-abrasive blasting operations. Garnet
abrasive typically produces only 10% of the PM
emissions of coal slag. Additionally, less abrasive is
required when garnet is substituted for coal slag.
BIW reports that a typical ship that once needed
300 to 500 tons of coal slag for surface preparation
now requires only 200 tons of garnet.10

Alternative surface preparation technologies that
reduce or eliminate PM emissions are also being
investigated by shipyards. Of the new technologies,
Ultra High Pressure Water Jetting (UHPWJ) has
made  the greatest inroads for surface preparation
of exterior ship surfaces. Water-based surface
preparation methods emit significantly less PM
than dry-abrasive methods. Over the past ten years,
manufacturers of UHPWJ equipment have
significantly improved the performance and
lowered the operating costs of the technology.
Currently, 5-10% of the exterior surfaces of ships in
the U.S. are prepared with UHPWJ technology.11

-------
 Volatile Organic Compound and
 Hazardous Air Pollutant Emissions
 Once the ship's surface is properly prepared, coatings
 can be applied. The type of coating to be applied
 (typically down to the level of a specific brand) is
 specified by the customer (that is, the ship
 owner/operator) rather than the shipyard. These
 coatings may contain chemicals that are released to
 the environment during application.

 When coatings are applied indoors, it is possible to
 utilize pollution control equipment, such as spray
 booths, to control the release of VOCs and HAPs.
 At shipyards, however, most coatings are applied
 outdoors. As a result, VOCs and HAPs may be
 released to the environment.

 Over the last decade, shipyards have worked to
 reduce the VOC and HAP emissions during coating
 application. EPA estimates that the normalized
 quantity of VOC emissions from shipyards declined
 by 36% between  1996 and 2001.12 The normalized
 quantity of HAP releases, as reported to TPJ, declined
 by 58% between  1993 and 2001.B
Much of the decline in both VOC and HAP
emissions is due to the reformulation of marine
coatings. Coatings manufacturers, working in
cooperation with shipyards, have reformulated many
marine coatings to reduce their VOC and HAP
content, while maintaining or improving the
performance characteristics required by customers.
While more viscous and difficult to apply, these
low-VOC, high solids content coatings have become
the industry standard due to their excellent
performance characteristics.
    Volatile Organic Compound Emissions
  from the Shipbuilding & Ship Repair Sector
        1996
               1997
                      1998
                              1999     2000
                                            2001
                          Year
+Data for 2000 are not available for this sector
*Normalized by annual value of shipments
 Sources: U.S. EPA, National Emission Inventory
      U.S. Census Bureau, Annual Survey of Manufactures
              TRI AirToxics+ Releases
      by the Shipbuilding & Ship Repair Sector
         1993   1994   1995   1996  1997  1998   1999   2000   2001
                              Year
   Includes the Clean Air Act hazardous air pollutants that a re reported to TRI
   *Normalized by annual value of shipments
   Sources: U.S. EPA, Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)
        U.S. Census Bureau, Annual Survey of Manufactures


-------
Shipbuilding    &    Ship   Repair
Improving Water Quality
Pollutants generated by shipyards can be released
into the environment via stormwater.

Case Study: Stormwater
Best Management Practices
In 2002, Gulf Coast shipyards, along with
representatives from EPA and state environmental
agencies, formed a workgroup to improve shipyard
management of stormwater. The workgroup developed
a set of practical, cost-effective best management
practices (BMP) aimed at reducing pollutant loadings
in stormwater. In addition, the BMPs are intended to
assist the shipyards in achieving other benefits,
such as increased productivity, reduced materials usage
and cost, reduced waste generation, reduced risk and
liability, improved product quality, and increased
customer satisfaction.
In 2004, participating shipyards will test BMP
templates for six core shipyard processes that are
believed to be major contributors to stormwater
pollutant loadings:
• Removal of hull biofoulants;
• Out-of-doors abrasive blasting;
• Abrasive materials management;
• Out-of-doors spray painting;
• Metal grinding; and
              , and cutting.
Once the BMPs are verified, workgroup participants
will encourage additional shipyards to use the BMPs
to reduce stormwater pollutant loadings from their

                                        Ur-

-------
Promoting  Environmental
Management Systems
The adoption of environmental management systems
(EMS) is increasing rapidly in the shipbuilding and
ship repair industry. In December 2000, National
Steel and Shipbuilding Company (NASSCO)
became the first shipyard to implement an EMS and
certify it to the ISO 14001 standard. During the
subsequent three years there have been at least four
new certifications (Bath Iron Works, Coast Guard
Shipyard,  Electric Boat Corporation, and Northrop
Grumman Newport News), and three additional
shipyards are ready to declare a functioning EMS
(Bender Shipbuilding & Repair Company, FirstWave
Marine, and Southwest Marine).

To encourage widespread adoption of EMS in the
shipbuilding and ship repair sector, the Sector
Strategies Program, ASA, and SCA have developed
EMS  tools for shipbuilding and ship repair facilities,
including  a customized EMS Implementation Guide
and a brochure highlighting the financial benefits of
EMS.15 ASA and SCA are now taking the lead to
continue EMS promotion through mentoring and
training sessions.

Many shipyards are finding that EMS can be an
effective tool for performance improvement.
Case Study: Improving Performance
through EMS
Reducing waste is a common performance improvement
objective for shipyards with an EMS. Through their
EMS, several shipyards have reduced generation of solid
and hazardous waste. For example:
• Bath Iron Works in Bath, ME, reduced the amount
  of solid waste disposed by 10% between 2001
  2002 by expanding its source recycling program ,
  increasing employee education on the importance of
  recycling waste and reusing material. BIW sustained
  this effort in 2003 and decreased solid waste disposal
  by another 1%.16
• Bender Shipbuilding & Repair Company, in
  Mobile, AL, reduced hazardous waste generation
  by decreasing paint and solvent use and recycling
  sandblasting grit.17
• NASSCO in San Diego, CA, reduced hazardous
  waste and minimized VOC emissions generation by
  increasing its use of plural component paint systems
  that require less paint and solvent. In addition,
  NASSCO reduced the risk of unintentionally
  co-mingling hazardous waste with regular trash by
  color-coding tubs for  waste segregation, conducting
  training, and examining tub contents prior to
  consolidation. NASSCO now ties waste segregation
  scores to housekeeping zones and publishes the scores
  and names of managers responsible for each zone in
  its weekly newsletter.18

-------
Sector At-a-Glance
Number of Facilities:      2,000
Value of Shipments:       $60 Billion
Number of Employees:    | 100,000
Source: SOCMA, 2002'
             The specialty-batch chemical sector2
comprises companies that produce chemicals to meet the
specific needs of the customer on an "as needed" basis.
Specialty-batch chemicals are often not a final product, but rather a key
ingredient in a final product. The following products either use or are specialty-batch
chemicals: flavorings, food additives, cleaning agents, construction materials, dyes and
pigments, pharmaceuticals, and cosmetics.

The states with the most specialty-batch chemical manufacturing facilities are (in
descending order): California, Texas, New Jersey, New York, Illinois, North Carolina,
Georgia, and Louisiana.3 As with other sectors, over the last decade the specialty-batch
chemical sector has been impacted by changes in markets and global competition.

                         Unlike commodity chemicals, which are manufactured
for general use, specialty-batch chemicals are made to meet specific customer needs.
Therefore, the raw materials, processes, operating conditions, equipment configurations,
and end products change on a regular basis.

Most specialty-batch chemicals are made through "batch processing", where discrete
quantities of chemicals are mixed to yield a desired compound. The process is
completed on a relatively small scale and sometimes requires multiple steps. Batch
producers can make hundreds  of different compounds in a single year.

               The Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturers Association
(SOCMA) has formed a partnership with EPA's Sector Strategies Program to improve
the environmental performance of the specialty-batch chemical industry. SOCMA's
300 member companies represent more than 2,000 manufacturing sites and more
than 100,000 employees. More than 75% of SOCMA members have fewer than 500
employees.4

                                          The specialty-batch chemical sector is
working with EPA to improve the industry's performance by:

               Enhancing performance commitments; and
               Managing and minimizing waste.

-------
Enhancing Performance Commitments
Beginning in 2004, SOCMA members will adopt a
modernized management system approach with third
party certification and metrics. This Responsible Care
Management System (RCMS) will build upon the
industry's existing Responsible Care  Program and its
six codes of practice: community awareness and
emergency response, process safety, employee health
and safety, pollution prevention, distribution, and
product stewardship. RCMS is based on  benchmarked
best practices of leading private sector companies,
national regulatory requirements, and other initiatives.5

Performance Metrics
Public reporting of uniform, industry-wide metrics
is a key part of RCMS. Such measures will enable
member companies to identify areas for continuous
improvement and provide a means for the public to
track individual company and industry performance.
RCMS measures  will address performance across a
broad range of issues including economics,
environment, health, safety, security, and products.
Specific  environmental metrics will include:

• •••   Releases to air, land, and water  reported
        to EPA's Toxics Release Inventory (TRI);

••••   Greenhouse gas intensity; and

••••   Energy efficiency.

SOCMA members report TRI releases annually and
will report on greenhouse gas and energy metrics
starting  in 2005-6
Environmental Management Systems
Another key component of RCMS is an environmental
management system (EMS). At present, 73% of
SOCMA's Responsible Care Coordinators report that
they have a quality management system or EMS in
place.7 Fifteen of these facilities have been  accepted into
EPA's National Environmental Performance Track.
In addition, SOCMA is a Performance Track Network
Partner, committed to encouraging top environmental
performance through EMS.8 To encourage EMS
adoption, SOCMA and the Sector Strategies Program
developed a customized EMS Implementation Guide.9

Case Study: EMS at Baker Petrolite
Through their EMS,  Baker Petrolite's plant in Rayne, LA:
• Decreased annual, normalized volatile organic
  compound emissions by over 27% through
  equipment improvements and better monitoring,
  inspections, andpreventative maintenance; and
• Reduced hazardous waste generation by  nearly 15%
  over three years by reusing vat rinsate, scheduling
  blending to reduce the amount of rinsate needed, and
  closely monitoring inventory.10


Managing and Minimizing Waste
Due to similarities in industrial classifications, it is
difficult to isolate the environmental impact of the
specialty-batch chemical sector from that of the overall
chemical industry. Between 1993 and 2001, normalized
TRI releases by the entire chemical sector decreased by
65%. During this same time period, most of the sector's
waste was recycled or treated rather than released. For
example, in 2001, 41% of the chemical sector's TRI
releases and waste managed was recycled, and 37%
was treated.11

-------
INTRODUCTION
1  U.S. Census Bureau. Statistics for Industry Groups and Industries: 2001,
  Annual Survey of Manufacturers, for gross domestic product, and fuels
  and energy purchases - available at:
  http://www.census.gov/prod/2003pubs/mO 1 as-1 .pdf.
  U.S. Census Bureau. County Business Patterns: 2001, for the number
  of facilities and number of employess - available at:
  http://www.census.gov/epcd/cbp/view/cbpview.html.
2  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2003. Toxics Release Inventory
  Public Data Release: 2001. Data freeze:  March 7, 2003
AGRIBUSINESS
1  U.S. Census Bureau. 2001. County Business Patterns. For the number
  of employees and number of establishments. Available at:
  http://www.census.gov/epcd/cbp/view/cbpview.html. U.S. Census
  Bureau. 2001. Statistics for Industry Groups and Industries, Annual
  Survey of Manufactures. For value of shipments. Available at
  http://www.census.gov/prod/2003pubs/mO 1 as-1 .pdf.
2  Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes used to define the
  economic activities of the industries or business establishments in this
  sector: 2011, 2013, 2015, 2021- 2024, 2026, 2032 - 2035, 2037, 2038,
  2041, 2043 - 2048, 2051 - 2053, 2064, 2066 - 2068, 2079, 2082, 2086,
  2087, 2091, 2092, 2095, 2096, 2098, and 2099. Corresponding North
  American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes: 311320,
  311330,311340,311520,311822,311823,311911,311919,311920,
  311930, 311941,311942, 311991,311999, 312111,312112,  and
  312120.
3  U.S. Census Bureau. 2001. County Business Patterns. Available at:
  http://www.census.gov/epcd/cbp/view/cbpview.html.
4  U.S. Census Bureau. 2001. County Business Patterns. Manufacturing
  Establishments by Employment She, derived from:
  http://censtats.census.gov/cgi-bin/cbpnaic/cbpcomp.pl.
5  American Meat Institute. See http://meatami.com.
6  National Food Processors Association. See http://www.nfpa-food.org/.
7  U.S. Census Bureau. 2001. Statistics for Industry Groups and Industries,
  Annual Survey of Manufactures. For value of shipments. Available at
  http://www.census.gov/prod/2003pubs/mO 1 as-1 .pdf.
8  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Permit Compliance System
  (PCS), IDEA refresh as of December 12, 2003.
9  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2003. Toxics Release Inventory
  (TRI) Public Data Release: 2001. Data freeze: March 7, 2003.
10 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Sector Strategies Program,
  Environmental Management System (EMS) Implementation  Guide
  for the Meat Processing Industry. Available at:
  http://www.epa.gov/ sectors/ agribusiness/ agri_ems.html#ems.
11 AMI Master Achiever Pioneer Star Program (MAPS). See
  http://www.meatami.com/Content/NavigationMenu/
  Labor_Environment/Environmental_MAPS_Program/
  Environmental_MAPS_Program.htm.
12 Leaverton, Sue. Advance Brands. 2003. Conversation with  sector
  point-of contact, September 15, 2003.
13 Frotz, Dave. Excel Corporation. 2003. Conversation with sector
  point-of contact, September 15, 2003.
14 Western Iowa Livestock External Stewardship Pilot Project  (WILESPP).
  2004. Laying the Groundwork for a Future of Effective Nutrient
  Management, DRAFT - FINAL REPORT.
CEMENT
1  van Oss, Hendrik G. 2004. U.S Geological Survey, Mineral
  Commodity Summaries, p. 42.
2  Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code used to define the
  economic activities  of the industries or business establishments in
 this sector: 3241, and the corresponding North American
 Industry Classification System (NAICS) code: 327310.
 van Oss, Hendrik G. 1997 and 2002. U.S Geological Survey,
 Cement Yearbook. Available at http://minerals.usgs.gov/
 minerals/pubs/commodity/cement/.
 Portland Cement Association. U.S. and Canadian Portland
 Cement Industry: Plant Information Summary Survey, p. 2-3.
 Carter, Tom, Portland Cement Association. May 2004. Interview.
 Portland Cement Association. U.S. and Canadian Labor-Energy Input
 Survey, p. 2.
 Ibid., p. 2 and 7.
 Ibid.
 Portland Cement Association. U.S. and Canadian Portland Cement
 Industry: Plant Information Summary Survey, p. 3.
1 Energy Star web site at http://www.energystar.gov,and click on "Energy
 Star Industry Partners" for complete list.
1 NEI Emission Trends Data and Estimation Procedures, Criteria Pollutant
 Data, Average Annual Emissions, All Criteria Pollutants Years Including
 1970 - 2001, Updated August 2003. Available at
 http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/trends/.
 Note: State and local emissions inventories are submitted to EPA once
 every three years (e.g., 1996 and 1999) for most of the point sources
 contained in NEI. EPA estimated emissions for any jurisdiction that did
 not submit an emissions inventory. Similarly,  emissions for the years in
 between submissions were estimated by EPA.  These estimates may not
 reflect changes in the industry, such as pollution prevention or
 compliance efforts. The 2002 inventory is scheduled for release in 2005.
1 van Oss, Hendrik G. and Amy C. Padovani. 2003. "Cement
 Manufacture and the Environment - Part II:  Environmental Challenges
 and Opportunities." Journal of Industrial Ecology. Volume 7, Number 1,
 page 101.
' NEI Emission Trends Data and Estimation Procedures, Criteria Pollutant
 Data, Average Annual Emissions, All Criteria Pollutants Years Including
 1970 - 2001, Updated August 2003. Available at
 http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/trends/.
1 Ibid.
' Energy Information  Administration, Department of Energy. U.S.
 Anthropogenic Carbon Dioxide Emissions, 1990-2002. Accessed from
 EIA web site: http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/1605/ggrpt/carbon.html in
 May 2004.  See also van Oss and Padovani, page 104.
' van Oss, Hendrik G. and Padovani.
' Energy Information  Administration, Department of Energy.
' Climate VISION, Program Mission. Available at
 http://www.climatevision.gov/mission.html. The specific cement sector
 commitment is found at http://www.climatevision.gov/sectors/cement/.
 Accessed May 2004.
1 U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration. 2002.
 Voluntary Reporting of Greenhouse Gases Program: Available at:
 http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/1605/frntvrgg.html. Accessed May, 2004.
1 U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration. 2002.
 Voluntary Reporting of Greenhouse Gases. Available at
 http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/1605/TableB2_2002.html. Accessed May,
 2004, Table B2.
1 van Oss and Padovani. page 97.
! Portland Cement Association, Cement Kiln Dust Surveys,
 memo: May 2004.
' St. Lawrence Cement Group. 2003. Sustainable Development Report.
 Page 4. Available at
 http://www.holcim.com/Upload/CA/Publications/
 SD%20Report_ENG.pdf.
1 Ibid.

-------
COLLEGES & UNIVERSITIES
1  U.S. Census Bureau. County Business Patterns: 2001, for the number
  of establishments, available at: http://www.census.gov/epcd/cbp/view/
  cbpview.html.
2  National Center for Education Statistics. Enrollment in Postsecondary
  Institutions, Fall 2003 and Financial Statistics, Fiscal Year 2003,
  December 2003, for value of shipments.
3  National Center for Education Statistics. Enrollment in Postsecondary
  Institutions, Fall 2001 and Financial Statistics, Fiscal Year 2001,
  December 2003, for the number of employees, available at
  http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2004/2004l55.pdf.
4  Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes used to define the
  economic activities of the industries or business establishments in this
  sector: 8221 and 8222. Corresponding North American Industry
  Classification System (NAICS) codes: 611210 and 611310.
5  National Center for Education Statistics. Digest of Education Statistics:
  2002. Chapter 3. Accessed January 5, 2004. Available at:
  http://nces.ed.gov/.
6  Partnerships: The American Council on Education (ACE) is the nation's
  coordinating higher education association. Its approximately 1,800
  members include accredited, degree-granting colleges and universities
  from all sectors of higher education and other education and education-
  related organizations. Additional information available at: www.ace.org.
  The Association of Higher Education Facilities Officers (APPA) is an
  international association dedicated to maintaining, protecting, and
  promoting the quality of educational facilities. The nearly 4,500
  individuals who comprise APPA are facilities professionals from public
  and private,  two-year and four-year, colleges and universities. Additional
  information is available at: www.appa.org.
  The Campus, Safety, Health and Environmental Management
  Association (CSHEMA), a division of the National Safety Council, is
  dedicated to assisting its membership in advancing safety, health and
  environmental quality in institutions of higher education. Additional
  information is available at: www.cshema.org.
  The Campus Consortium for Environmental Excellence (C2E2) is a
  college and university member supported not-for-profit organization.
  The mission of the C2E2 is to support the continued improvement of
  environmental performance in higher education. Additional information
  is available at: www.c2e2.org.
  The Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI) is a medical research
  organization whose principal mission is the conduct of biomedical
  research. Approximately 320 Hughes investigators lead medical research
  laboratories at 68 of the nation's leading research centers and universities.
  Additional information is available at: www.hhmi.org.
  The National Association of College and University Business Officers
  (NACUBO) is  a nonprofit professional organization representing chief
  administrative and financial officers at more than 2,100 colleges and
  universities across the country. Additional information is available at:
  www.nacubo.org.
7  Rebuild America. Colleges & Universities Program Brief, October 2003.
  For additional information, please visit: www.rebuild.gov.
8  Dave Newport, University of Florida. Electronic communications
  with EPA sector point-of-contact, January 23, 2004.
9  For more information about EPAs Energy Star Program, please visit
  www. e nergystar. gov.
10 For more information about Dutchess Community College, please visit
  http://www.sunydutchess.edu.
11 For more information on the New Jersey Institute of Technology's
  Sustain ability Greenhouse Gas Initiative, please visit http://www.njit.edu/.
12 Dave Newport, University of Florida. Electronic communications with
  EPA sector point-of-contact, January 23, 2004.
13 Terrance Alexander, University of Michigan. Electronic communications
  with EPA Sector Strategies Division, January 27, 2004. Additional
  information is available at: http://www.p2000.umich.edu/.
14 Ibid.
15 For more information on the College and University Recycling Council
  (CURC) benchmarking tool, please visit:
  http://www.nrc-ecycle.org/councils/CURC/projects.html.
16 Dave Wergin, University of Colorado Boulder. Electronic
  communications with EPA Sector point-of-contact, January 22, 2004.
17 Dwight Hagihara, Washington State University. Electronic
  communications with EPA Sector point-of-contact, January 27, 2004.
18 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's National Environmental
  Performance Track Program, available at:
  http://www.epa.gov/performancetrack.


CONSTRUCTION
1  U.S. Census Bureau.  County Business Patterns: 2001, for the number
  of employees and number of establishments - available at:
  http://www.census.gov/epcd/cbp/view/cbpview.html. U.S. Census
  Bureau. Statistics for Industry Groups and Industries: 2001, Annual
  Survey of Manufactures, for value of shipments — available at
  http://www.census.gov/prod/2003pubs/mO 1 as-1 .pdf.
2  U.S. Census Bureau.  Industry Economic Accounts, 2002 — available at:
  http://www.bea.gov/bea/dn2.htm.
3  Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes used to define the
  economic activities of the industries or business establishments in this
  sector: all of 15, 16 and 17. Corresponding North American Industry
  Classification System (NAICS) codes: 233110, 233210, 233220,
  233310, 233320, 234110, 234120, 234910, 234920, 234930, 234990,
  235110, 235210, 235310, 235410, 235420, 235430, 235510, 235520,
  235610, 235710, 235810, 235910, 235920 - 235950, and 235990.
4  U.S. Census Bureau.  County Business Patterns: 2001, available at:
  http://www.census.gov/epcd/cbp/view/cbpview.html.
5  U.S. Census Bureau.  "Manufacturers' Shipments, Inventories, and
  Orders: December 2003," — available at
  www.census.gov/indicator/www/m3/prel/pdf/dec.pdf.
&  The Associated General Contractors of America website:
  http://www.agc.org/index. ww;jsessionid=aqfYQ96JU414.
7  U.S. EPA. Characterization of Building-Related Construction and
  Demolition Debris in the United States, June 1998.
  Report #EPA530-R-98-010. Prepared for U.S. EPA by Franklin
  Associates, Prairie Village, KS.
8  Ibid.
'  Ibid.
10 EPAs Resource Conservation Challenge website:
  http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/osw/conserve/.
11 Associated General Contractors. "Recycling Foundry Sand in Highway
  Construction", CONSTRUCTOR Magazine, January 2003.
12 U.S. Green Building  Council, "Why Build Green", available at:
  www.usgbc.org/aboutus/whybuildgreen.asp.
13 Study Shows Green Building Investments Yield High Returns, available
  at GreenBiz.com, Oct. 20, 2003.
14 Leadership  in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) website:
  http://www.usgbc.org/leed/leed_main.asp.
15 Construction Industry Compliance Assistance Center, available at:
  http://www.cicacenter.org/.
16 AGC's environmental services web page, available at:
  http://www.agc.org/page.ww? section=Environmental&name=About+
  Environmental.

-------
CONSTRUCTION (continued)
17 Associated General Contractors. "Constructing a Green Building for
  EPA", CONSTRUCTOR Magazine, February 2003.
18 Associated General Contractors. "EMS in Action on Construction
  Projects", CONSTRUCTOR Magazine, November 2002.
19 Katayama, Roy and Craig Harvey, EPA Office of Transportation and Air
  Quality. Discussion with Sector point-of-contact about draft table of
  Emission Totals by SCC and Pollutant; model run, January 12, 2004.
20 Voluntary Diesel Retrofit Program is available at:
  http://www.epa.gov/otaq/retrofit/.
21 Hakel, John, Executive Director, AGC of California. Discussion with
  EPA sector point-of-contact, Feb. 2004.
22 Performance Track Network Partners, available at:
  http://www.epa.gov/performancetrack/particip/trade.htm
23 Hector E. Valdez and Abdol R Chini. "ISO  14000 Standards and the
  US Construction Industry", Environmental Practice, Vol. 4, No. 4, Dec.
  2002, pp. 210-219.


FOREST PRODUCTS
1  U.S. Census Bureau. County Business Patterns: 2001, for the number of
  employees and number of establishments - available at: http://
  www.census.gov/epcd/cbp/view/cbpview.html. U.S. Census Bureau.
  Statistics for Industry Groups and Industries: 2001, Annual Survey of
  Manufactures, for value of shipments — available at
  http://www.census.gov/prod/2003pubs/mO 1 as-1 .pdf.
2  Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes used to define the
  economic activities of the industries or business establishments in this
  sector: 2421, 2426, 2429, 2431, 2435, 2436, 2439, 2491, 2493, 2611,
  2621, 2652, 2653, 2655 - 2657, and 2671 -  2679. Corresponding North
  American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes: 321113
  321114, 321211 - 321214, 321219, 321912, 321918, 322110, 322121,
  322122,322130,322211 -322215,322221 -322224,322226,
  322231  - 322233, 322291, and 322299.
3  U.S. Census Bureau. County Business Patterns: 2001, for the number of
  employees - available at: http://www.census.gov/epcd/cbp/view/cbpview.html.
4  Compiled market trend data from American  Forest & Paper Association,
  electronic communication to sector point-of-contact, January 16, 2004.
5  American Forest & Paper Association Membership Department Data,
  electronic communication to sector point-of-contact, May 2004.
&  U.S. Department of Energy Industrial Technologies Program. Forest
  Products Annual Report Fiscal Year 2003, 2003, available at:
  http://www.oit.doe.gov/pdfs/100903_news.pdf.
7  American Forest & Paper Association. Environmental Health and Safety
  Verification Program Year 2000 Report. 2002, available at:
  http://www.afandpa.org/Content/NavigationMenu/
  Environment_and_Recycling/Environment,_Health_and_Safety/
  Reports/EHSFullRepo rtFinal.pdf.
8  Ibid.
9  American Forest & Paper Association research and development data,
  available at: http://www.afandpa.org/Template.cfm?Section=Policy_Issues
  &template=/TaggedPage/TaggedPageDisplay.cfm&TPLID=6&Original
  ID=2&InterestCategoryID=291&ExpList=2,286.
10 American Forest & Paper Association. Environmental Health and Safety
  Verification Program Year 2000 Report, 2002, available at:
  http://www.afandpa.org/Content/NavigationMenu/Environment_and_
  Recycling/Environment,_Health_and_Safety/Reports/
  EHSFullReportFinal.pdf.
11 Climate VISION (Voluntary Innovative  Sector Initiatives: Opportunities
  Now),  available at: http://www.climatevision.gov/.
12 Ibid.
 ' Chicago Climate Exchange, available at: http://
  www.chicagoclimateexchange.com.
 ' U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)
  Public Data Release: 2001, data freeze: March 7, 2003.
 ' American Forest & Paper Association. Environmental Health and Safety
  Verification Program Year 2000 Report, 2002, available at:
  http://www.afandpa.org/Content/NavigationMenu/ Environment_
  and_Recycling/Environment,_Health_and_Safety/Reports/
  EHSFullReportFinal.pdf
 ' American Forest & Paper Association recycling data, available at:
  www.afandpa.org.
 ' American Forest & Paper Association. 2003 Fiber Consumption Survey
  Report.
 ! Department of Energy Center for Waste Reduction Technologies. Water
  Use in Industries for the Future, July 2003, available at:
  http://www.oit.doe.gov/pdfs/100903_news.pdf.
 1 American Forest & Paper Association. Environmental Health and Safety
  Verification Program Year 2000 Report, 2002, available at:
  http://www.afandpa.org/Content/NavigationMenu/Environment_
  and_Recycling/Environment,_Health_and_Safety/Re ports/
  EHSFullReportFinal.pdf.
 1 American Forest & Paper Association. Forest & Paper Industry at a
  Glance, 2001,  available (hardcopy) from the American Forest and Paper
  Association.
 1 Sustainable Forestry Initiative data, available at: http://www.aboutsfi.org.
 1 ISO 14001 Registered Company Directory North America, Volume 4,
  Number 2: 2003; published by QSU Publishing Company.
 ' EPA Performance Track Program 2004, available at:
  http://www.epa.gov/performancetrack/.
1  MacDonald, Robert, Director of Statistics, American Iron & Steel
  Institute (AISI). 2004. E-mail communication with sector
  point-of-contact, May 2004.
2  Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code used to define the economic
  activities of the industries or business establishments in this sector: 3312,
  and the corresponding North American Industry Classification System
  (NAICS) code: 331 111.
3  U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Mineral Commodity Summary. 2004.
  Iron and Steel. See http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/
  iron_&_steel. For production statistics, USGS cites American Iron &
  Steel Institute (AISI). 2003 production and employment data from
  electronic communication from Robert MacDonald, Director of
  Statistics, AISI, to Tom Tyler, US EPA. May 4, 2004.
4  USGS. Mineral Commodity Summaries.  1999-2004. USGS cites US
  Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).
5  USGS. Mineral Commodity Summaries.  1999-2004. USGS cites US
  Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). 2003 employment number of 127,000
  was reported by BLS and confirmed by AISI, above.
6  American Iron & Steel Institute (AISI). See http://www.steel.org/. Steel
  Manufacturers Association,  See http://www.steelnet.org/.
7  U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Industrial Technologies
  (OIT). "Industry Profile." Accessed May 24, 2004.  See
  www.oit.doe.gov/steel/profile.shtml. See also DOE OIT. 200. Energy and
  Environmental Profile of the U.S. Iron and Steel Industry, DOE/EE-0229.
  Page 14. Available at same internet address. See also AISI Public Policy:
  Environment: Recycling. Accessed May 24, 2004.
  See www.steel.org/policy/environment/recycling.asp. Information
  confirmed in telephone voice message from Bill Heenan, Steel Recycling
  Institute, to Tom Tyler, US EPA, May 20, 2004.
8  U.S. EPA Waste Wise information about steel recycling at
  www.epa.gov/epaoswer/non-hw/reduce/wstewise/wrr/factoid.htm.

-------
9  Steel Recycling Institute, press release, May 5, 2003. See
  www.recycle-steel.org/2002Rates.pdf, and
  www.recycle-steel.org/cars/index.html.
10 Members are the Automotive Recyclers Association, the Clean Car
  Campaign, the Clean Production Network, Great Lakes United, the
  Ecology Center, Environmental Defense, the Institute of Scrap Recycling
  Industries, Inc., the Mercury Policy Project, the Steel Manufacturers
  Association, and the Steel Recycling Institute (affiliated with AISI).
  See www.cleancarcampaign.org/partnership.shtml.
11 USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries. 2004. Iron and Steel Slag.
  Seehttp://minerals. usgs.gov/mineral s/pubs/commodity/iron_&_steel_
  slag/festslmcs04.pdf.
12 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2003. Toxics Release Inventory
  (TRI) Public Data Release: 2001, data freeze: March 7, 2003.
13 Ibid.
14 Ibid.
15 For additional information, please visit: www.climatevision.gov.
16 January 8, 2004 Meeting with Jim Schultz, AISI, Bill Heenan, SRI, and
  sector point-of contact.
17 DOE OIT. 2001. Steel Industry Profile (above). Table: DOE OIT, Steel
  - Industry of the Future. DOE/GO-102001-1159, page 2. See
  www.oit.doe.gov/steel/pdfs/steel_brochure.pdf.
18 AISI, press  release, May 3, 2004.
  Seewww.steel.org/news/pr/2004/pr040503.asp.
19 For additional information about Climate VISION, please
  see: http://www.climatevision.gov/index.html.
20 Department of Energy. 2003. An Assessment of Energy, Waste, and
  Productivity Improvements for North Star Steel Iowa, Subcontract No.
  4000013389.
  See www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/factsheets/north_star_steel.pdf.
  Electronic correspondence from Chris Avent and John Skelley North Star
  Steel, to Tom Tyler, US EPA, April 2004.
21 "Jersey Shore Powers Reheat Furnace with Landfill Gas." Iron Age -
  New Steel. August 2001.
  See www.newsteel.com/articles/2001/August/NSXO 108f3.htm.
22 Estimate based upon information from trade associations,  literature
  searches, web searches, and information provided by listing services and
  on company websites.
23 For more information on each Performance Track Partner  and their
  commitments and achievements, see www.epa.gov/performancetrack/
  particip/index.htm.


METAL  CASTING
1  U.S. Census Bureau. 2001. County Business Pattern. For the number of
  employees and number of establishments. See
  http://www.census.gov/epcd/cbp/view/cbpview.html.
  U.S. Census Bureau. 2001. Statistics for Industry Groups and Industries,
  Annual Survey of Manufactures. For value of shipments. See
  http://www.census.gov/prod/2003pubs/mO 1 as-1 .pdf.
2  Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes used to define the
  economic activities of the industries or business establishments in  this
  sector: 3321, 3322, 3324, 3325, 3363 - 3366, and 3369. Corresponding
  North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes:
  331511 -331513, 331521,331522, 331524, 331525, and 331528.
3  American Foundry Society. 2002. 2003 Metal Casting Forecast
  and Trends.
4  The North  American Die Casting Association (NADCA). See
  http://www.diecasting.org/.
5  American Foundry Society (AFS). See http://www.afsinc.org/.
& U.S. Department of Energy, Industrial Technologies Program. Metal
  Casting Industry Research and Development Portfolio. See
  http://www.oit.doe.gov/metalcast/profile.shtml.
7 U.S. Department of Energy, Industrial Technologies Program. See
  http://www.eere.energy.gov/industry/technologies/industries.html.
8 Cast Metal Coalition of the American Foundrymen's Society, North
  American Die Casting Association, and Steel Founders' Society of
  America. 1998. Metalcasting Industry Technology Roadmap. See
  http://www.oit.doe.gov/metalcast/pdfs/roadmap.pdf.
9 Ibid.
10 Ibid.
" Ibid.
12 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2003. 2001 TRI Public Data
  Release, data freeze: March 7, 2003. Includes facilities listing SIC Code
  332 and 336 as their primary activity on their Form R,
13 Foundry Industry Recycling Starts Today (FIRST). See
  htttp://www.foundryrecycling.org/aboutfirst.html.
14 Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Bureau of Waste
  Management. 2002. Beneficial Use of Industrial Byproducts, 2000 Usage
  Summary. See http://www.dnr.wi.gov/org/aw/wm/publications/
  beneficial/ beneficialuse2000report.pdf.
15 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Sector Strategies  Division. 2002.
  Beneficial Reuse of Foundry Sand: A Review of State Practices and
  Regulations.
16 Lenahan, Michael, President, Resource Recovery Corporation. 2004.
  Conversation with and email from the EPA sector point-of-contact,
  February 4, 2004.
17 Kennedy, Paul, Vice President, Kennedy Die Castings, Inc. 2004.
  Conversation with EPA sector point-of-contact, February 17, 2004.
18 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2003. 2001 TRI Public Data
  Release, data freeze: March 7, 2003. Includes facilities listing SIC Codes
  332 and 336 as their primary activity on their Form R for regulated
  HAPs.
19 Environmental Management Systems: Systematically Improving your
  Performance.  See http://www.epa.gov/sectors/metalcasting/metcast_pdf/
  metcast_bizcase.pdf.
20 Performance Track Network Partner list is available at:
  http://www.epa.gov/performancetrack/particip/trade.htm.
21 Performance Track Annual Performance Report for Chicago White Metal
  Casting, Inc, Year 2, 2002. See https://yosemite.epa.gov/opei/ptrack.nsf/
  vAPRViewPrintView/BAF7C6D98AE345E285256DB8004FFDAA.
22 Treiber, Eric, Vice President, Chicago White Metal Casting, Inc. 2004.
  Conversation with sector point-of contact, February 9, 2004.
METAL FINISHING
1  U.S. Census Bureau. 2001. County Business Patterns. For the number of
  employees and number of establishments. See
  http://www.census.gov/epcd/cbp/view/cbpview.html. U.S. Census
  Bureau. 2001. Statistics for Industry Groups and Industries, Annual
  Survey of Manufactures. For value of shipments.
  See http://www.census.gov/prod/2003pubs/mO 1 as-1 .pdf.
2  Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code used to define the economic
  activities of the industries or business establishments in this sector: 3471,
  and the corresponding North American Industry Classification System
  (NAICS) code: 332813.
3  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1995. Profile of the Fabricated
  Metal Products Industry. Pages 6-7.
4  Surface Finishing Market Research Board, Metal Finishing Industry
  Market Survey Report #8. 2004, Contact: Bill Rosenberg, Columbia
  Chemical Corporation, 3097 Interstate Parkway, Brunswick, OH 44212,
  330-225-3200. See http://www.columbiachemical.com.

-------
METAL FINISHING (continued)
5  Partnerships: The American Electroplaters and Surface Finishers Society,
  Inc. (AESF), http://www.aesf.Org/.Metal Finishing Suppliers' Association
  (MFSA) http://www.mfsa.Org/.National Association of Metal Finishers
  (NAMF) http://www.namf.Org/.Surface Finishing Industry Council
  (SFIC).
&  Strategic Goals Program (SGP). See http://www.strategicgoals.org. For a
  description of SGP goals, see http://www.strategicgoals.org/coregoals.cfm.
7  Ibid. To view progress on pollution reduction,
  see http://www.strategicgoals.org/reports2/.
8  U.S. Environmetnal Protection Agency. 2001. TRI Public Data Release,
  freeze date: March 7, 2003. Includes facilities that  report primary SIC
  code 3471 on their Form R*
9  Borst, Paul A. 1997. U.S. EPA, Office of Solid Waste, Recycling of
  Wastewater Treatment Sludges from Electroplating Operations, F006.
10 California Environmental Protection Agency. 2003. Cal/EPA
  Environmental Management System Project. Appendk B: Artistic Plating
  Company. See http://www.calepa.ca.gov/EMS/Publications/2003/
  LegReport/.
11 Edginton, Ross. 2004. Personal interview, 30 March 2004. Contact
  information: East Side Plating, Inc., 8400 SE 26th Place, Portland, OR
  97202, 503-654-3774,  ross@eastsideplating.com or
  see: http://www.eastsideplating.com.
12 Promoting Environmental  Management Systems. See
  http://www.epa. gov/sectors/metalfinishing/metfin_ems.html#bizcase.
13 Richter, Christian. 2004. Phone conversation, May 25, 2004.
  Washington representative  for National Association of Metal Finishers
  (NAMF) and sector point-of-contact.
14 For more about Region  1 (New England) Corporate Sponsor Program,
  see http://www.epa.gov/region l/pr/2001 /aug/010824.html.
15 National Environmental Performance Track Program. See
  http://www.epa.gov/performancetrack/index.htm. For more information
  about the 2002 Performance Track Annual Performance Report for New
  Hampshire Ball Bearings, Inc., see https://yosemite.epa.gov/opei/
  ptrack.nsf/vAPRViewPrintView/
  5B510B9B608F432685256D3B006E57EE.
16 Delawder, Tim. 2004. Personal interview with sector point-of-contact,
  March 15, 2004. Contact information: SWD, Inc., 910 Stiles Avenue,
  Addison, IL 60101-4913, 630-543-3003, tim@swdinc.com or
  http://www.swdinc.com.
17 Imagineering Finishing Technologies.
  See http://www.strategicgoals.org/sul4.cfm.
PAINT & COATINGS
1  U.S. Census Bureau. 2001. County Business Patterns. For the number of
  employees and number of establishments. See
  http://www.census.gov/epcd/cbp/view/cbpview.html. U.S. Census
  Bureau. 2001. Statistics for Industry Groups and Industries Annual
  Survey of Manufactures. For value of shipments. See
  http://www.census.gov/prod/2003pubs/mO 1 as-1 .pdf.
2  Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code used to define the economic
  activities of the industries or business establishments in this sector: 2851,
  and the corresponding North American Industry Classification System
  (NAICS) code: 325510.
3  Darling, David, National Paint and Coatings Association. 2004.
  Electronic communication to EPA sector point-of-contact, May 26,
  2004.
4  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2003. Toxics Release Inventory
  (TRI) Public Data Release, data freeze: March 7, 2003.
5  U.S. EPA, National Emission Inventory (NEI), Emission Factor and
  Inventory Group, OAQPS, data received: April 2004.
  Note: State and local emissions inventories are submitted to EPA once
  every three years (e.g.,  1996 and 1999) for most of the point sources
  contained in NEI. EPA estimated emissions for any jurisdiction that did
  not submit an emissions inventory. Similarly, emissions for the years in
  between submissions were estimated by EPA. These estimates may not
  reflect changes in the industry, such as pollution prevention or
  compliance efforts. The 2002 inventory is scheduled for release in 2005.
& U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2003. Toxics Release Inventory
  (TRI) Public Data Release, data freeze: March 7, 2003.
7 Product Stewardship Institute. 2004.  Paint Product Stewardship: A
  Background Report  for the National Dialogue on Paint Product
  Stewardship. University of Massachusetts: Cowell, MA.
8 National Paint and Coatings Association. 2001.  Coatings Care:
  Manufacturing Management Implementation Guide — Environmental
  Management (Pollution Prevention / Waste Management) Washington,
  DC. Also see Coatings Careฎ: Providing for a Cleaner, Safer, Coatings
  Industry at http://www.paint.org/cc/index.cfm.
9 National Environmental Performance Track Network Partner list is
  available  at: http://www.epa.gov/performancetrack/particip/trade.htm.
10 National Paint and Coatings Association. 2001.  Coatings Care:
  Manufacturing Management Implementation Guide — Environmental
  Management (Pollution Prevention / Waste Management), Washington,
  DC. Also see: Coatings Careฎ: Providing for a Cleaner, Safer, Coatings
  Industry at: http://www.paint.org/cc/index.cfm.
11 Darling, David, National Paint and Coatings Association. 2004.
  Electronic communication to EPA sector point-of-contact,
  February 6, 2004.
PORTS
1  Chase, Tom, Director of Environmental Affairs, American Association of
  Port Authorities. 2004. Personal interview, January 2004.
2  U.S. Census Bureau. 2001. County Business Patterns. For the number of
  employees and number of establishments . See
  http://www.census.gov/epcd/cbp/view/cbpview.html. U.S. Census
  Bureau. 1997. Economic Census. For value  of shipments. See
  http://www.census.gov/epcd/cbp/view/cbpview.html.
3  Standard Industrial Classification  (SIC) code used to define the economic
  activities of the industries or business establishments in this sector: 4491,
  and the corresponding North American Industry Classification System
  (NAICS) codes: 48831 and 48832.
4  U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Navigation Data Center, Waterborne
  Commerce Statistics Center. 2002. Waterborne Commerce of the United
  States. Accessed January, 2004.
  www.iwr.usace.army.mil/ndc/wcsc/wcsc.htm.
5  American Association of Port Authorities. 2004. U.S. Public Port Facts.
  Accessed May 2004.
  http://www.aapa-ports.org/industryinfo/portfact.htm.
6  U.S. Department of Transportation, Maritime Administration, Office of
  Ports and Domestic Shipping. October 1998. A Report to Congress on
  the Status of the Public Ports of the United  States 1996-1997.
7  Chase, Tom, Director of Environmental Affairs, American Association of
  Port Authorities. 2004. Personal interview, January 2004.
8  American Association of Port Authorities (AAPA).
  See http://www.aapa-ports.org/.
9  Hopson, Coleen, Project Manager, Port Authority of New York and New
  Jersey. 2004. Telephone interview with Abt Associates, Inc., January 28,
  2004.
10 Parsche, Dave, Director of Environmental Affairs, Port of Tampa. 2004.
  Telephone interview with Abt Associates, Inc., January 26, 2004.
11 Environmental Technology Program.
  See http://www.epa.gov/etv/index.html.

-------
PORTS (continued)
12 Port of Portland, Environment. Fall 2003. Natural Resource Assessment
  and Management Program. Accessed January 2004. http://
  www.portofportland.com/SelfPost/A_20031251016551003NRAMPpdf.
13 For additional information on the Sector Strategies Program with AAPA,
  see http://www.epa.gov/sectors/ports/index.html.
14 Fiffick, Laura, Environmental Affairs Manager, Port of Houston
  Authority. 2004. Telephone interview with Abt Associates, Inc., February
  25, 2004. See http://
  www.portofhouston.com/publicrelations/environment.html.
15 Wetherall, Catherine, Chief of Environmental Management, and Jennifer
  Newcombe, Environmental Project Manager, Massport. 2004. Telephone
  interview with Abt Associates, Inc., January 29, 2004. See
  http://www.massport.com/business/envir.html.


SHIPBUILDING & SHIP REPAIR
1  U.S. Census Bureau. 2001. County Business Patterns. For the number of
  employees and number of facilities. Available at:
  http://www.census.gov/epcd/cbp/view/cbpview.html.  U.S. Census
  Bureau. 2001. Statistics for Industry Groups and Industries, Annual
  Survey of Manufactures, for value of shipments, available at:
  http://www.census.gov/prod/2003pubs/mO 1 as-1 .pdf.
2  Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code used to  define the economic
  activities of the industries or business establishments in this sector: 3731,
  and the corresponding North American Industry Classification System
  (NAICS) code: 336611.
3  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1997. Profile of the Shipbuilding
  and Repair Industry. P. 7.
4  "The Report on Survey of U.S. Shipbuilding and Repair Facilities".
  The Maritime Administration, 2003.
5  Ibid.
&  American Shipbuilding Association (ASA). See http://
  www.americanshipbuilding.com. Shipbuilders Council of America
  (SCA). See http://www.shipbuilders.org/.
7  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2003. Toxics Release Inventory
  (TRI) Public Data Release: 2001, data freeze: March  7, 2003.
8  Killeen, Patrick, Manager, Environmental, Health and Safety, Signal
  International. 2004. Telephone interview with Dana Austin, Austin
  Environmental, January 30, 2004.
9  The National Shipbuilding Research Program. See http://www.nsrp.org/.
10 Dickinson, Vince, Environmental Manager,  Bath Iron Works. 2003.
  Telephone interview with Stefanie Shull, ICF Consulting, June 5, 2003.
11 The National Shipbuilding Research Program.
  See http://www.nsrp.org/, document ASE 006000.
12 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Emission Factor & Inventory
  Group. 2004. Received data from Tom McMullen, received April 2004.
  Note: State and local emissions inventories are submitted to EPA once
  every three years (e.g.,  1996 and 1999) for most of the point sources
  contained in NEI. EPA estimated emissions  for any jurisdiction that did
  not submit an emissions inventory. Similarly, emissions for the years in
  between submissions were estimated by EPA. These estimates may not
  reflect changes in the industry, such as pollution prevention or
  compliance efforts. The 2002 inventory is scheduled for release in 2005.
13 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2003. Toxics Release Inventory
  (TRI) Public Data Release: 2001, data freeze: March  7, 2003.
14 Sector Strategies Program, Shipyard Stormwater BMP Project, sector
  point-of-contact Shana Harbour - harbour.shana@epa.gov.
15 Sector Strategies Program EMS Implementation Guide for Shipbuilding
  Facilities. See http://www.epa.gov/sectors/shipbuilding/ship_ems.html#ems.
16 Dickinson, Vince, Environmental Manager, Bath Iron Works. 3003.
  Telephone interview with Stefanie Shull, ICF Consulting, June 5, 2003.
17 Morris, Jackie, Bender Shipbuilding & Repair Co. 2003. Telephone
  interview with Stefanie Shull, ICF Consulting, June 4, 2003.
18 Chee, Mike, Environmental Department Manager, NASSCO. 2002.
  Telephone interview with Will Gibson, ICF Consulting & Dana Austen,
  Austen Environmental, Summer of 2002.
1  Facility, employee and value of shipment numbers from Synthetic
  Organic Chemical Manufacturers Association (SOCMA), 2002, please
  visit web site for additional information:
  http://www.socma.com/about/index.htm
2  Due to overlapping operations, it is difficult to identify specific specialty
  batch facilities from the larger universe within chemical manufacturing -
  SIC 28. The Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code used to define
  the economic activities of the industries or business establishments in SIC
  28 correspond to North American Industry  Classification System
  (NAICS) codes: 325110, 325120, 325131,325132, 325181,325182,
  325188, 325191,325192, 325193, 325199, 325211, 325212, 325221,
  325222, 325311,325312, 325314, 325320, 325411, 325412, 325413,
  325414, 325510,325520, 325611, 325612, 325613, 325620, 325910,
  325920, 325991, 325992, and 325998.
3  Principal Findings: The U.S. Specialty Batch Chemical Industry, Draft
  Report, February, 2000, pg. 4;  available at:
  http://www.epa. gov/sectors/sbchemical/sb_pdf/sbchem_
  PrincipalFindings.pdf
4  Ibid.
5  Responsible Careฎ Management System (RCMS), information available
  at: http://www.socma.com/ResponsibleCare/rcms.htm
6  Responsible Care metrics are available at:
  http://www.socma.com/PDFfiles/responsible_care/Metrics_Table.pdf
7  Melissa Hockstead, SOCMA, Responsible Care, e-mail communication
  with sector point-of-contact on April 29, 2004.
8  Performance Track Network Partner list is available at:
  http://www.epa.gov/performancetrack/particip/trade.htm
9  EMS Implementation Guide for the specialty-batch chemicals is available
  at: http://www.epa.gov/sectors/sbchemical/sb_ems.html
10 Performance Track Annual Performance Report for Baker
  Petrolite - Rayne Blend Plant, Year 2, 2002,  available at:
  https://yosemite.epa.gov/opei/ptrack.nsf/vAPRViewPrintView/
  FC81E1FD39CE946F85256DB4006F0640; also see  Baker Petrolite
  application at: http://
  www.epa.gov/performancetrack/apps/pdfs/A06-0016.pdf
11 2001 TRI Public Data Release (PDR), data  freeze: March 7, 2003,
  and includes facilities that report primary SIC code 28 on their Form R,

-------
DATA SOURCE: Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)

Environmental Impact Indicators: Chemical releases, waste
managed on- and off-site of toxic chemicals.

Period Analyzed for Trends: 1993-2001

Next Data Release: In 2004 for 2002 data

Partner sectors presenting data:
* Agribusiness
* Forest Products
* Iron & Steel
* Metal Casting
* Metal Finishing
* Paint 6- Coatings
* Shipbuilding 6- Ship Repair
* Specialty-Batch Chemicals

Data Source Description: The Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)
was established under the Emergency Planning and Community
Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) of 1986 and expanded by the
Pollution Prevention Act of 1990. Following expansions  of the
reporting requirements in the past ten years, TRI now includes
facilities with 10 or more employees in the manufacturing sectors
(SIC code 20 - 39); federal facilities; metal mines; coal mines;
electrical utilities that combust coal or oil; commercial hazardous
waste treatment facilities; chemical wholesalers; petroleum bulk
terminals and plants; and solvent recovery services who use,
process, or manufacture more than a threshold amount of over
600  toxic chemicals. Facilities must report to TRI if they exceed
the reporting threshold for manufacture or process (>25,000 Ibs),
or for otherwise use (>10,000 Ibs). Reporting thresholds  for
persistent bioaccumulative toxic chemicals (PBTs) are lower. In
2001, 22,359 facilities filed a Form R, reporting a total of 6.2
billion pounds of on-  and off-site releases and 26.7 billion pounds
of releases and on- and off-site waste management to TRI.

Data Source Considerations: Several aspects of TRI influence
the use of these data for EPA's Sector Strategies Program.

   Small businesses not included: TRI excludes smaller facilities,
   those with fewer than 10 employees. However, for any given
   sector, this source does include larger facilities, which can be
   expected to have greater environmental impacts.

i  Toxicity: TRI releases and waste management activities are
   reported in absolute pounds. This does not take into account
   relative toxicity of a chemical. For example, a pound of a
   substance like mercury is more toxic than methanol. A facilities'
   progress in reducing higher toxicity substances does not receive
   credit when trend analyses are presented for cumulative pounds.
   Several EPA tools are available to translate TRI pounds  to
   toxicity-weighted values. This tool may be applied in future
   Reports.
   Data accuracy: Data are reported by individual facilities, making
   TRI the most reliable data source available for chemical releases
   and waste management practices. On the other hand, data
   quality may suffer from changes in personnel, misunderstanding
   of the TRI data elements, or other sources of error. However,
   sources of error are being reduced with dissemination of
   reporting guidance, on-site data quality reviews, enforcement
   actions, improved reporting software, and TRI training courses.

Data Processing Steps:

   TRI data for reporting years  1993-2001 were provided by the
   TRI program (Office of Environmental Information) frozen as
   of March 7, 2003. The frozen data were used to ensure
   reproducibility and to support later revisions of the analysis.
   Documentation of TRI and the program can be found at
   http://www.epa.gov/tri.

   Extracted data elements for this Report  include:
   Hazardous Air Pollutant (HAP) Releases to Air -  stack and
   fugitive emissions of listed HAPs to air as reported in sections
   5.1 and 5.2 of the TRI Form R.

  Releases- emissions to air, discharges to bodies of water, releases
  to land and into underground injection wells. This includes
  releases, spills, and remedial actions occurring at the facility
  (on-site) and off-site releases resulting from wastes transferred
  for disposal to waste management facilities as reported in sections
  8.1 and 8.8 of the TRI Form  R

   Treatment- the quantity of chemicals  destroyed in on- or off-site
  operations such as biological treatment, neutralization,
  incineration, and physical separation as reported in sections
  8.6 and 8.7 of the TRI Form  R

  Energy Recovery - the quantity of the toxic chemicals that was
  combusted in an energy recovery device, such as a boiler or
  industrial furnace. These amounts are reported in sections 8.2
  and 8.3 of the TRI Form R.

  Recycling - the quantity of the toxic chemical that was either
  recovered at the facility and made available for further use, or
  sent off-site for recycling and  subsequently made available for
  use in commerce. These amounts are reported in sections 8.4
  and 8.5 of the TRI Form R.

   Sector assignments were based on the facility's primary 4-digit
   SIC code reported on the Form R each  year.

   Annual sector releases and waste managed totals were
   normalized using the sector's production, shipments, or value
   of shipments,  with 1993 as the baseline year.

•  Units of weight were converted for presentation purposes.

-------
DATA SOURCE: National Emission Inventory (NEI)       Data Processing Steps:
Environmental Impact Indicators: Annual emissions of specific
criteria air pollutants. Specific pollutants analyzed: Sulfur Dioxide;
Nitrogen Oxides; Particulate Matter (<2.5 microns and <10
microns); and Volatile Organic Compounds.

Period Analyzed for Trends: 1996-2001

Next Data Release: In 2005 for years 2002-2004

Partner sectors presenting data:
* Cement
* Paint 6- Coatings
* Shipbuilding 6- Ship Repair

Data Source Description: EPA's Emission Factor and Inventory
Group (EFIG) within the Office of Air and Radiation prepares a
national database of the criteria air pollutant emissions based on
input from numerous state, tribal, and local air pollution control
agencies as well as industry-submitted data. State and local
emissions inventories are submitted to EPA once every three years
for most point sources contained in NEI. Through the 1999 NEI,
EPA estimated emissions for any jurisdiction that did not submit
an emissions inventory. Similarly, prior to  1999 NEI included
emission projections for each intervening year based on year-to-year
changes at the sector level. The emissions estimates maintained in
NEI are in short tons per year.

Data Source Considerations: Several changes to NEI influence
the appropriate use of these data for EPA's Sector Strategies
Program.
            i NEI: EFIG does not recommend comparing NEI
   1996 and later years to years prior to 1996 due to changes in
   their compilation and data filling methods.

   Addition ofPM2.5: In 1997, EPA's Office of Air Quality
   Planning Standards established National Ambient Air Quality
   Standards for particulate matter less than 2.5 micrometers in
   diameter. As a consequence, NEI began to collect PM2.5
   emissions estimates as of the 1999 inventory.

   Improved methodology & regulatory amendments: As a result
   of the Consolidated Emissions Reporting rule, the NEI updates
   for 2002 and beyond are expected to include data uploads from
   all jurisdictions. If so,  EFIG's estimation of missing data
   emissions will not be necessary.
NEI data obtained from EFIG staff (04/01/2004) and
Trendsl970_2001_toCHIEF082803.xls. Documentation
available at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/trends/.

Annual sector emission totals normalized using the sectors'
production or value of shipments with 1996 as the baseline year.

Units of weight were converted for presentation purposes.

Paint and Coatings sector presents data based on 1996 and 2001
emission estimates.

Shipbuilding and Ship Repair sector presents 1996 through
1999 and 2001 emission estimates. 2000 data are currently
being processed by EPA.

Cement sector presents 1999 through 2001 emission estimates.
EPA projected 2000 emissions on inventories received in 1999
for the cement manufacturing sector.

-------
DATA SOURCE: Effluent Data Statistics (EDS)
System derivation of Permit Compliance System (PCS)

Environmental Impact Indicators: Annual direct wastewater
discharges of Clean Water Act (CWA) conventional pollutants.
Specific pollutants analyzed: Biochemical Oxygen Demand
(BOD), Oil and Grease, and Total Suspended Solids (TSS).

Period Analyzed for Trends: 1994-2002

Next Data Release: In first quarter of 2005 for 2004 data

Partner sector presenting data:
* Agribusiness

Data Source Description: Under the Clean Water Act, all facilities
discharging an aqueous waste stream directly into the waters of the
United States are  required to obtain a National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit. Indirect dischargers, facilities
discharging to a central treatment system (often called publicly
owned treatment  works, POTWs), are not typically included in
PCS. PCS tracks permit data for approximately 50,000 active
facilities, 6,500 of which are major dischargers. The PCS program's
Effluent Data Statistics System process starts by extracting the
reported DMR data that have been entered into PCS. These data
are then processed through a software program to add the flow data
to each  record. This allows loadings  to be calculated using flow and
concentration whenever mass loading data have not been reported
for a monitoring period. The effluent data are then converted into
PCS standard units since the data can be reported in various units.
After the data have been converted, they are processed by the EDS
routines to calculate mass load totals.

Data Source Considerations: Limitations to PCS influence the
use of these data for EPA's Sector Strategies Program.

   Universe of reporting facilities: Major facilities with a NPDES
   permit are required to submit monthly discharge monitoring
   reports to EPA or the authorized state or Regional  office
   a facility's classification is based on several parameters, including
   amount of discharge per day, wastewater sources, and population
   affected by discharge). Minor facilities, however, are not required
   to submit these reports, although some states and Regional
   offices enter them anyway. Because inconsistencies in available
   data for minor facilities across states exist the trends analysis was
   limited to pollutant loadings  from major NPDES permitted
   facilities.

Data Processing  Steps:

•  Obtained EDS file  from Office of Compliance's Integrated Data
   for Enforcement Analysis (IDEA) system (12/12/2003 refresh).
   Contact U.S. EPA's PCS program for further information.

•  Units of weight were converted for presentation purposes.
DATA SOURCE: Emissions of Greenhouse Gases in the
United States Report

Environmental Impact Indicators: Annual emissions of carbon
dioxide equivalents.

Period Analyzed for Trends: 1993-2001

Next Data Release: Preliminary 2002 data available.

Partner sector presenting data:
* Cement

Data Source Description: The Department of Energy's (DOE)
Energy Information Administration (EIA) annually compiles and
updates estimates for anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions.
Most greenhouse gases  (GHGs) in the United States, including
carbon dioxide, are emitted as the result of the combustion of
fossil fuels. Global warming potentials (GWPs) are used to
compare the abilities of different greenhouse gases to trap heat in
the atmosphere. GWPs are based on the radiative efficiency
(heat-absorbing ability) of each gas relative to that of carbon
dioxide (CO2), as well as the decay rate of each gas (the amount
removed from the atmosphere over a given number of years)
relative to that of CO2- GHG emissions and energy use are highly
correlated for most industry sectors. As a result, the Report
develops emission estimates primarily from DOE's databases on
energy use, the Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey
(MECS), and the Commercial Business Energy Consumption
Survey (CBECS). A number of industrial sectors, including cement
manufacturing, also emit ignificant quantities of GHGs from
non-fuel combustion processes.  For these sectors, which include
just one of the partner sectors (cement manufacturing), the Report
does include estimates of GHGs associated with non-fuel use.

Data Source Considerations: The methodology and level of data
aggregation used in the Report influence the data available for
EPA's Sector Strategies Program.

•  Availability of sector-level data: GHG emissions are presented by
   general end use categories: residential, commercial, industrial,
   and transportation. GHG emissions are generally not available
   for individual industrial sectors with the exception of cement
   manufacture.

Data Processing Steps:

•  GHG data were retrieved from EIA's Voluntary Reporting
   Program site at http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/1605/1605a.html.

   Annual emission totals were normalized using cement
   production with 1993 as the  baseline year.

-------
DATA SOURCE: U.S. and Canadian Labor-Energy Input
Survey: 2000 Survey (released March 2002), page 7, Portland
Cement Association.

Environmental Impact Indicator: Energy consumed, in million
Btus per equivalent ton.

Partner sector presenting data:
* Cement
DATA SOURCE: Cement Kiln Dust Surveys, memo:
May 2004, Portland Cement Association.
Environmental Impact Indicator: Cement Kiln Dust managed,
in metric tons.
Partner sector presenting data:
* Cement
DATA SOURCE: Environmental Health and Safety
Verification Program \fear 2000 Report: Issued 2002, American
Forest & Paper Association.

Environmental Impact Indicators:

  Nitrogen Oxide and Sulfur Dioxide emissions from pulp and
  paper mills, in pounds per ton of production;

  Wastewater discharges (Biochemical Oxygen Demand, Total
  Suspended Solids, Absorbable Organic Halides) from pulp and
  paper mills, in pounds per ton of production; and

  Percents of Waste managed (beneficially reused and landfilled,
  lagooned, or burned for disposal) by pulp and paper and wood
  products mills.

Partner sector presenting data:
* Forest Products
                                                                       •    mmm

-------
   United States Environmental Protection Agency
National Center for Environmental Innovation (1807T)
               EPA100-R-04-002
                   June 2004

-------