Sector
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency

-------
As
        we celebrate the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's 35* anniversary, we are
strengthening our commitment to accelerating the pace of environmental protection while
maintaining the nation's economic competitiveness.

Collaborative efforts, innovative programs, and information sharing can be effective tools for
today and tomorrow. Through our Sector Strategies Program, EPA works hand-in-hand with
many sectors to reduce their environmental impacts in cost-effective ways and to share
information with the public. By engaging a broad range of stakeholders in the process, we
promote a culture of understanding and environmental stewardship.

As EPA seeks new and better ways to pursue its mission, the measurement of environmental
progress becomes even more important. New policies and programs to provide regulated
entities with flexibility to tackle tough problems in innovative ways demand better methods
to ensure accountability and demonstrate results.

This 2006 Sector Strategies Performance Report compiles the best available information to
document performance trends in participating sectors. It reveals strengths and weaknesses
both in performance and in available data on environmental results. I invite you to read it
carefully and make full use of its contents.

                   I hope that this report prompts a renewed commitment from govern-
                   ment, industry, and other stakeholders to gather, share, and use quality
                   performance data. Such a commitment is an essential foundation for
                   greater collaboration, innovation, and accelerated environmental and
                   economic progress.

                   Sincerely,
                    Stephen L. Johnson
                    Administrator

-------
INTRODUCTION The U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) invites you to learn about the environmental
performance of major U.S. manufacturing and service sectors
in this 2nd edition of the Sector Strategies, Performance Report.
Eleven sectors are profiled in the report:
      Cement
      Colleges & Universities
      Construction
      Forest Products
      Iron & Steel
      Metal Casting
Metal Finishing
Paint & Coatings
Ports
Shipbuilding & Ship Repair
Specialty-Batch Chemicals
These sectors participate in EPAs Sector Strategies Program,
which uses collaborative partnerships to promote widespread
improvement in environmental performance with reduced
administrative burden.1

As with the 1st edition of the Performance Report, issued in
2004, this document has two primary objectives:

• To profile each sector, highlighting economic statistics and trends; and
• To describe, and where possible, to measure environmental progress to
   date, focusing on performance trends over the past 10 years.

New to this edition are two chapters that tie together
information from all of the participating sectors in regard to
the following themes:

   Leadership by Trade Associations describes how participating trade
   associations can serve as valuable catalysts in the effort to improve
   environmental performance among their members.
   Beneficial Reuse of Materials describes how participating sectors are
   turning would be wastes into substitutes for raw materials and/or
   sources of energy.
The 2006 report also introduces the use of toxicity-weighted
data to supplement basic information on emission trends.
The toxicity-weighted data provide insights about the greatest
opportunities for each sector to make progress in reducing
the toxicity of its releases. Detailed information on toxicity
weighting, as well as all of the other data used in the report,
can be found in the Introduction to Sector Profiles chapter.
                            Sectors trategies
THE SECTOR STRATEGIES PROGRAM The sector
Strategies Program develops performance improvement
strategies for major manufacturing and service sectors of the
U.S. economy. In 2005, there were 12 participating sectors
represented by more than 20 national associations.
These sectors are significant for their contributions to the
nation's economy as well as their environmental and energy
footprints. Together, participating sectors represent a combined
$2.1 trillion (19%) contribution to the U.S. gross domestic
product, with more than 780,000 facilities and locations across
the country2 A snapshot of their environmental footprint can
be found in the Sectors At-a-Glance box below3
                             Sectors At-A-Glance
                             The manufacturing sectors profiled in this report represent the following
                             contributions to U.S. manufacturing totals:
                             •  32°/oofTRI releases
                             •  18% of hazardous waste generated
                             •  33% of criteria air pollutant emissions from point sources
                             •  20% of energy consumption
                             Sources: U.S. EPA, U.S. DOE.

-------
Through the Sector Strategies Program, EPA maintains
collaborative working relationships among stakeholders in
business, government, and the public to address challenging
environmental problems. Program staff members are experts on
their sectors, providing policy analysis and facilitating
dialogues to identify cost-effective actions that will reduce
environmental impacts and ease regulatory burden in each
sector.

Each individual sector strategy seeks to reduce major
performance barriers and prompt environmental stewardship
on a broad scale. These strategies may include a range
of actions, from targeted regulatory changes to create
environmental standards that are more performance (that is,
results) oriented to promotion of environmental management
systems or other recognized stewardship tools.

Participating trade associations have made commitments to
proactively pursue environmental stewardship, with help from
collaborative programs like Sector Strategies. This commitment
is reflected in the total expenditure of more than $5 billion
annually on environmental protection by the manufacturing
sectors profiled in the report.4

Participation in the Sector Strategies Program carries with
it a commitment to measure performance results through
quantitative metrics. This report, and  its 2004 predecessor,
track sector-wide performance trends  using the best available
data, including those collected by associations.

For more information on the  Sector Strategies  Program,
please visit www.epa.gov/sectors. The 2004 Sector Strategies
Performance Report is available online at
www.epa.gov/sectors/performance2004.html.
    National Associations  Representing
             Participating Sectors

                    Agribusiness
                  American Meat Institute
            National Food Processors Association
                      Cement
                Portland Cement Association
                Colleges & Universities
               American Council on Education
     APPA: Association of Higher Education Facilities Officers
       Campus Consortium for Environmental Excellence
Campus Safety, Health and Environmental Management Association
              Howard Hughes Medical Institute
  National Association of College and University Business Officers
                    Construction
          Associated General Contractors of America
                   Forest Products
            American Forest & Paper Association
                     Iron & Steel
               American  Iron & Steel Institute
              Steel Manufacturers Association
                    Metal Casting
                 American Foundry Society
           North American Die Casting Association
                   Metal Finishing
      American Electroplaters and Surface Finishers Society
            Metal Finishing Suppliers' Association
            National Association of Metal Finishers
             Surface Finishing Industry Council
                  Paint & Coatings
            National Paint & Coatings Association
                        Ports
           American Association of Port Authorities
              Shipbuilding &Ship Repair
             American Shipbuilding Association
              Shipbuilders Council of America
              Specialty-Batch Chemicals
    Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturers Association

-------
Preface
Table of Contents
Leadership by Trade Associations	1
Beneficial Reuse of Materials	7
Introduction to Sector Profiles  	13
Cement	17
Colleges & Universities	23
Construction	29
Forest Products  	35
Iron & Steel  	43
Metal Casting	49
Metal Finishing  	55
Paint & Coatings	59
Ports 	65
Shipbuilding & Ship Repair	71
Specialty-Batch  Chemicals	77
Appendix A: Endnotes  	81
Appendix B: Data Sources  	95
Appendix C: Glossary  	103
     •
JlTnrrnTfM

-------
INTRODUCTION Since the early 1990s, EPA has collaborated
with businesses and trade associations to establish and meet
shared environmental goals. Beginning with the 33/50 and
Green Lights Programs, which promoted voluntary efforts
to reduce releases and transfers of priority chemicals and
to increase the use of energy-efficient lighting, respectively,
EPA has expanded the depth and breadth of its partnership
programs to more than 40 efforts, including the Sector
Strategies Program.1

EPA designed the Sector Strategies Program to take advantage
of trade associations' leadership positions within their
respective sectors. Active participation in the Sector Strategies
Program now includes 24 trade associations in 12 key sectors,2
representing a combined $2.1 trillion (19%) contribution to the
U.S. gross domestic product, with more than 780,000 facilities
and locations across the country3

THE MISSION OF TRADE ASSOCIATIONS Trade
associations often serve as the voice of their industries before
the government, public, and media. At the same time, trade
associations provide a forum for their industries to share
information and ideas and to work jointly on programs of
benefit to the sector, such as environmental, health, and safety
(EH&S) initiatives. Trade association representatives with deep
knowledge of their respective industries can have valuable
credibility within their sectors and can provide helpful
technical, regulatory, and compliance assistance to their
members and allies.  Through a variety of mechanisms, ranging
from Web sites, electronic newsletters, and print materials to
workshops, meetings, industry events, and awards programs,
trade associations can promote research, education, and other
activities that address the needs and concerns of their
members. Many trade associations also develop, promote, and
distribute sector-specific information to the full array of small,
medium, and large businesses within their industries and to
affiliated groups, such as suppliers, vendors, and consultants.

Through the above mechanisms, trade associations can play
an important role in promoting environmental stewardship.
For example, they can provide critical technical expertise
in identifying and vetting innovative ideas to advance their
sectors' performance, and they can take on leadership
positions to encourage the adoption of these ideas. Many
trade associations promote changes that better prepare
members to meet evolving market conditions, such as
increasing preferences for greener products and production
activities or certification to International Organization for
Standardization (ISO). ISO 14001, for example, is an
internationally accepted specification for environmental
management systems (EMS).4

TRADE ASSOCIATIONS AS ENVIRONMENTAL LEADERS
The 24 trade associations that participate in the Sector
Strategies Program provide examples of four key roles
associations can play in promoting environmental stewardship:

  Setting environmental standards for members;
  Setting "stretch" goals for the sector;
  Providing guidance and technical assistance to members; and
' Measuring environmental progress by the sector.

Setting Environmental Standards for Members A
number of trade associations, including the Synthetic Organic
Chemical Manufacturers Association (SOCMA), National Paint
and Coatings Association (NPCA), and American Forest &
Paper Association (AF&PA) have demonstrated leadership
by setting and promoting specific standards for their members.

-------
In each of these cases, conformance with the standards is
a prerequisite for participating in the trade association. In
addition, the American Meat Institute (AMI) developed a
voluntary EMS program for its members.

ChemStewardsSM - Road to Continuous Improvement In
September 2005, SOCMA launched the ChemStewards
performance improvement program to advance the EH&S
and security profile of its members. All active SOCMA
members participate in the program as a condition of
membership in the association. ChemStewards offers a
three-tiered approach to participation: Fundamentals,
Enhanced Performance, and Excellence. All three tiers
require adherence to a set of core principles, in addition  to
metrics, security, and implementation of an environmental,
health, safety, and security (EHS&S) management system
verified by an independent third party. SOCMA promotes
the program through regular outreach meetings for its
members and its annual EHS&S awards program.3

Coatings Care* - Providing for a Cleaner, Safer Coatings
Industry Coatings Care is a comprehensive program
developed by NPCA to assist its members with integrating
EH&S activities into corporate planning and operations.
Organizations make a commitment to Coatings Care as
part of their membership in NPCA. Coatings Care organizes
EH&S activities into five codes of management practice -
Manufacturing Management, Transportation and Distribution,
Product Stewardship, Community Responsibility, and Security
- and NPCA provides extensive support to its members in
these areas. Coatings  Care integrates EH&S practices that are
consistent with other industry standards, such as those found
in the ISO 14000 series.6 Five individual paint and coatings
facilities have been accepted into EPAs  Performance Track
program based in part on  their Coatings Care EMS systems.7
Sustainable Forestry Initiative9 - Growing Tomorrow's Forests
Today* AF&PA members participate in an EH&S Principles
Program, which requires annual adherence to eight principles
as a condition of membership in the association. An
accompanying EH&S Principles Verification Program
requires members to submit data biennially to AF&PA.8

These programs work in harmony with the Sustainable
Forestry Initiative (SFI) Program,  to which member companies
must also adhere. The SFI Standard, developed by an
independent Sustainable Forestry  Board, establishes a land
stewardship ethic that integrates the reforestation, nurturing,
and harvesting of trees for useful products with the
conservation of soil, air and water resources, wildlife and
fish habitat, and forest aesthetics.9 The SFI Program includes
150 million acres of forestland in North America. By the end
of 2005, 136 million acres had been independently certified
to the SFI Standard.10

In the past year, the SFI Standard was expanded to include
new performance measures and indicators related to
international procurement, old growth forests, invasive
exotic species, imperiled and critically imperiled species,
landscape assessments, wood supply chain monitoring, and
social issues.11

Environmental MAPS Program - EMS for Meat and Poultry
Processing  Companies AMI's Environmental MAPS Program is
a voluntary program providing tools coupled with recognition
to increase EMS development and implementation throughout
the meat and poultry industry12 The program has four
performance tiers - Master, Achiever, Pioneer, and Star.
The EMS component of the program is based in part on
the customized EMS Implementation Guide for the Meat
Processing Industry, developed by AMI in partnership with
the Sector Strategies Program.13

-------
Setting "Stretch" Goals for the Sector In addition to
the programmatic standards and certification requirements
identified above, some trade associations, including AF&PA,
American Iron & Steel Institute (AISI), and Portland Cement
Association (PCA), have set voluntary goals for their sectors
with respect to EMS adoption or other priority voluntary
activities.

Climate VISION - Voluntary Actions to Reduce Greenhouse
Gas  (GHG) Emissions AF&PA, AISI, and PCA are members of
Climate VISION, a voluntary program administered by the U.S.
Department of Energy (DOE) to reduce GHG intensity (the
ratio of emissions to economic outputs).14

  AF&PA expects that its members will reduce the sector's GHG intensity
   by 12% by 2012 (relative to 2000 levels).
1 AISI has committed to achieving a 10% increase in sector-wide
   average energy efficiency by 2012 (from 2002 levels).
  PCA has committed to a 10% reduction in C02 emissions per ton of
   product by 2020 (from 1990 levels).15

Cement Manufacturing Sustainability Program - Concrete
Thinking for a Sustainable World® Through PCA, the U.S.
cement industry set voluntary targets to increase the adoption
of auditable, verifiable EMS in cement plants across the nation.
Specifically, the industry set the following goals for EMS
adoption: at least 40% of U.S. cement plants will adopt EMS
by the end of 2006, 75% by the end of 2010, and 90% by the
end of 2020. PCA also adopted a voluntary target of a 60%
reduction in the amount of cement kiln dust (CKD) disposed
of per ton of production by 2020 (from a 1990 baseline).16

National Metal Finishing Strategic Goals Program Prior to
launching the Sector Strategies Program, EPA worked with
three national metal finishing trade associations and other
stakeholders to develop EMS guidance and facility-level
performance goals under the Strategic Goals Program (SGP).
Between 1998 and 2002 more than 500 metal finishers, 20
states, and 80 local regulatory agencies participated in the SGP
Data from reporting facilities indicate substantial progress
toward goals for water use, energy use, and reduction of
emissions and releases. Results are available on the SGP
Web site.17 SGP activities continue in several EPA regions.

Providing Technical Assistance to Members
A fundamental role of many trade associations is to provide
technical assistance to their members on areas of interest across
their industries. Virtually every sector partner has played a
key role in developing and promoting tools to enhance the
environmental performance of its membership.

EMS Tools - Guidance, Training, and Marketing Outreach
Under the Sector Strategies Program, more than a dozen trade
associations and numerous member companies have provided
insights and inputs to EPA in developing and disseminating
sector-specific EMS guidance and training. By tapping into
the partners' networks, the Sector Strategies Program
maximizes the chances that the entire universe of parties
EPA wants to reach is receiving the materials. The following
EMS Implementation Guides are the  direct result of investments
of time, energy, and expertise on behalf of EPA and the sector
trade associations:

1 Die casting, created in partnership with the North American Die
  Casting Association (NADCA);
1 Shipbuilding  and ship repair, created in partnership with the American
  Shipbuilding Association (ASA) and the Shipbuilders Council of
  America (SCA);
  Meat processing, developed  with AMI  member companies and the
  state of Iowa;

-------
   Foundries, created in partnership with the American Foundry Society
   (AFS) and Indiana Cast Metals Association;
'  Specialty-batch chemical manufacturing, created in partnership with
   SOCMA;
   Metal finishing, created in partnership with the American
   Electroplaters and Surface Finishers Society, Metal Finishing Suppliers'
   Association, and  National Association of Metal Finishers;
   Construction, created by the Associated  General Contractors of
   America (AGC) with assistance from EPA; and
   Electric arc furnace operations, created in partnership with the Steel
   Manufacturers Association (SMA).

Each guide provides detailed, sector-specific information for
facilities interested in implementing an EMS.18 Several of the
guides also incorporate lessons learned and examples drawn
from the experiences of companies that participated in EPA
sector pilots with die casting, foundry, meat processing,
shipbuilding and ship repair, and metal finishing facilities.
Both the associations and EPA have promoted these products
through their Web sites, industry meetings, and other
mechanisms.

Many associations, including AGC, SMA, ASA and SCA, have
teamed with EPA to provide focused  training workshops for
facilities adopting or improving their EMS. Also, with support
from the Sector Strategies Program, ASA and SCA are
exploring ways to combine EMS with "lean production"
principles to help companies improve efficiency, drive down
costs, and increase profit margins.19 This combined EMS/lean
program will enable shipyards to increase their production
efficiency while meeting environmental standards.

Members and partners from six sectors - agribusiness (meat
processing), construction, metal casting, metal finishing, ports,
and shipbuilding and ship repair - also worked jointly with
EPA to develop sector-specific marketing materials that lay out
the "business case" for implementing an EMS, highlighting the
financial and environmental benefits. Each of the guides and
brochures are available on the trade associations' Web sites as
well as on the Sector Strategies Program Web site, further
broadening the reach to target audiences.20

Additionally, the six national organizations representing the
colleges and universities sector21 developed a strategy to deliver
outreach tools,  training resources, and support to promote
EMS development on college and university campuses. In
2005, the organizations sent a letter to college and university
presidents/chancellors to promote the implementation of EMS
and encourage environmental stewardship within their
organizations.22 The letter included a one-page business case,
EMS Fact Sheet for Senior Administrators, which was developed
to raise awareness about the benefits of an EMS and to  share
testimonials from universities that have realized many of these
benefits.23 In addition, a national Web site has been established
to assist colleges and universities with EMS development.24

With Sector Strategies Program funding as seed money, the
American Association of Port Authorities (AAPA) and the
Global Environment and Technology Foundation established
an EMS Assistance Project to help public seaports develop
EMS.23 Nine ports and two federal maritime facilities participated
in the pilot project. Early results indicate improvements in
environmental awareness and communication among
employees and  tenants, documentation and operational
efficiency, integration of environmental considerations into
strategic business plans, emergency response planning, and
root cause analysis. Other improvements include increased
purchases of sustainable energy, reductions in air emissions
through retrofits and replacement of old diesel equipment and
the purchase of low sulfur fuel, and reductions in waste and

-------
water quality impacts.26 In early 2006, AAPA initiated a second
round of the EMS Assistance Project with nine facilities. Some
participating facilities will implement a traditional EMS, while
others will use a systems approach to security management,
integrating or linking the resulting system with their EMS as
appropriate.27

Other Outreach and Assistance AGC, PCA, AISI, SCA, and
ASA are galvanizing support for green initiatives.

For example, AGC is promoting green construction through
its Environmental Solutions Series and Constructor magazine.
AGC also is making a variety of green construction resources
available to the sector through the Web, including AGC's Green
Construction Bible and links to a green products directory,
information on state and local green buildings programs, a
tutorial about the Leadership in Energy and Environmental
Design (LEED®) rating system, and information on recycling
construction and demolition debris.28

PCA is embarking on an industry-wide communications
program to educate peers, customers, and the public on the
benefits of concrete for sustainable development and green
buildings.29 Similarly, the Steel Recycling Institute, a unit of
AISI, advises architects, engineers, designers, and others on
how to build green with steel framing, roofing, and siding
through publications such as Steel Takes LEED™ with Recycled
Content.30

SCA, ASA, and Gulf Coast shipyards, along with representatives
from EPA and state environmental agencies, developed
guidance and training on a series of practical, cost-effective
best management practices aimed at reducing pollutants in
stormwater.31
Partnerships -with Other Voluntary Programs Several trade
associations work side-by-side with EPA to promote other
voluntary efforts, providing education, outreach, and assistance
to their membership networks. For example, AGC, AISI,
NPCA, NADCA, SMA, and SOCMA are all Performance Track
Network Partners, promoting EMS and facility membership in
EPAs Performance Track program.32 Together these network
partners have helped to increase the number of Performance
Track member facilities in their industries from 11 to 56
between 2001 and 2005.33 Other associations, including AGC
and AAPA, are participating in EPAs National Clean Diesel
Campaign through Clean Construction USA, Clean Ports USA,
and other voluntary efforts to reduce diesel emissions across
the country34

Several trade associations in the Sector Strategies Program also
participate in other agencies'  voluntary programs that address
environmental issues. For example, AF&PA, AFS, NADCA,
AISI, and SMA participate in  DOE's Industrial Technologies
Program, which, through its Industries of the Future initiative,
coordinates joint industry-government funding for research
and development to  generate new technologies to boost
productivity and save energy33

Measuring Environmental Progress by Sectors Many
sectors in the Sector Strategies Program are collecting data on
their environmental  performance to establish baselines against
which to measure future improvements and to increase public
awareness of their achievements. Several associations have
tracked performance for more than 30 years, while others are
initiating data collection efforts.

-------
Forest Products' Biennial EH&S Report In 2000, AF&PA
began publishing biennial reports on EH&S program
implementation and environmental performance across its
membership. These reports incorporate earlier information
collected by AF&PA and predecessor organizations going back
to 1975. The reports display trends in areas such as energy use,
air emissions, and water quality. 36

Cement Manufacturings Annual Survey PCA has conducted
an annual survey of members since 1970 to collect data to
measure performance toward reduction targets related to
energy use and labor practices.  Recently, PCA modified its
survey to collect information on industry targets for EMS
implementation, CKD reduction, and CO2 emissions.
Additionally, PCA is collecting data to set baselines for future
environmental improvements in areas such as water use and
air emissions of NOX and SOX. PCA recently reported on these
results and other issues in its inaugural Sustainable
Development Report.37

Specialty-Batch Chemical Data Collection and Reporting
In January 2004, SOCMA began collecting company metrics
data on energy efficiency. This information will be made
available to the public in 2006.  In addition, SOCMA provides
information about its members' releases to air, land, and water
(as reported to EPAs Toxics Release Inventory) on its Web
site.38

Iron & Steel Reporting on Sustainability Indicators Starting
with a 2004 reporting year, AISI members  have agreed to begin
collecting data on energy intensity, which is part of their
Climate VISION commitment, as well as the following four
additional sustainability indicators: GHG emissions, material
efficiency, steel recycling, and EMS implementation.39
Preliminary Survey of Port Authorities In December 2004,
AAPA initiated a survey of its U.S. member ports. The survey
measured interest in environmental issues and identified
indicators for environmental activities that ports are
undertaking, primarily on a voluntary basis.40 The results are
described in more detail in the Ports chapter of this report

Colleges & Universities' Self-Tracking Tool The colleges and
universities sector is taking steps to develop performance
metrics, collect data, and track performance. In 2005, six
national organizations in the sector launched a Web-enabled
Self-Tracking Tool that enables colleges and universities to
collect and analyze data on their campuses' environmental
impacts. The Self-Tracking Tool gathers four years of
retrospective data on four environmental indicators - energy
use, hazardous waste, solid waste/recycling, and water use.
Schools can use the tool to identify and analyze trends in their
data and benchmark their environmental performance against
aggregated data from other schools of similar size and type
(school names are kept confidential).41

CONCLUSION Trade associations can play a vital role in
leading environmental stewardship by setting goals  and
standards, providing assistance, and measuring progress. In
addition, the collaboration between trade associations and
EPA is advancing the concept of environmental stewardship
throughout these sectors. Working together through voluntary
approaches such as the Sector Strategies Program enables
industry and EPA to meet shared environmental goals.
Implementation of improved, and often certified, EH&S and
EMS systems enhances environmental performance, allowing
sectors to show progress  through established metrics. Over
the coming year, the Sector Strategies Program will  continue
to promote environmental leadership in cooperation with its
sector partners, with emphasis on performance measures and
other opportunities to improve environmental performance.

-------
INTRODUCTION Almost everything we do leaves something
behind, from household trash - often referred to as municipal
or "post-consumer" solid waste - to industrial waste. Industrial
waste, which includes both nonhazardous materials and
hazardous waste, is a major component of landfills. In fact,
for every ton of municipal solid waste there are more than 30
tons of industrial waste in the nation's landfills.1 Waste can
be expensive for industry and difficult for states and local
governments to manage, and can impact the health of
communities and ecosystems.

Many industries are finding new ways to use materials that
would otherwise be discarded. Facilities are reusing byproducts
or waste materials in their own operations or sending them
elsewhere for reuse as a fuel or substitute raw material. This
process is known as beneficial reuse - turning would-be waste
into a valuable commodity.

To fulfill the objectives of beneficial reuse, recyclable materials
must perform well, and they must be at least as safe for human
health and the environment as the materials they replace.
Companies can benefit from reuse by minimizing the fees they
pay to dispose of waste, reducing the cost of purchasing virgin
materials, lowering the cost of complying with waste
regulations, and improving their public image.

The concept of beneficial reuse is quite simple; however,
companies must overcome a number of real barriers in order
to keep useful, valuable materials out of landfills. The barriers
include:

   A lack of awareness regarding existing and new end-use opportunities;
  Variation in state and local waste regulations (some of which
   discourage reuse); and
  The cost of investing in and adapting to new processes and operations.
Additionally, the costs of transporting, processing, and using
these materials must be low enough to stimulate market
demand, and projects must yield economic benefits to both
material generators and users. Reuse may require upfront
changes in industry operations, but such investment costs
often can be recovered  over time.

Treating waste materials as  potential resources means changing
our thinking from waste management to materials management.
The shift is underway at EPA. As Tom Dunne, former acting
assistant administrator  for EPAs Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response, observed, "Materials management is  now
the tail on the dog of waste management. In the future, it must
be the dog itself."2 Several EPA programs, such as the Resource
Conservation Challenge and the Sector Strategies Program, are
working collaboratively with industry to facilitate the reuse of
industrial materials where it is safe.3

Sectors participating in the  Sector Strategies Program are
currently engaged in at least three forms of recycling:

   Material reuse within a  facility or sector;
   Use of another sector's byproducts; and
   Use of post-consumer materials.

Where recycling is a well-established practice in a sector, as is
the case with forest products and iron and steel, data on
beneficial reuse are often available. Data are not, however,
readily available for those sectors where material recycling is
only emerging or where small businesses predominate. In these
cases, we have relied on examples to illustrate the potential
for recycling. Over time, as  recycling practices grow and
better data become available, we hope to provide a more
comprehensive picture of the beneficial reuse of materials by
and from the sectors participating in the Sector Strategies
Program.

-------
MATERIAL REUSE WITHIN A FACILITY OR SECTOR
Many of the sectors in the Sector Strategies Program, including
construction, paint and coatings, shipbuilding and ship repair,
colleges and universities, and cement, have found ways to
circulate byproducts back into use within their own (or
similar) operations.

Construction Construction & demolition (C&D) debris
refers to waste materials generated during the process of
construction, renovation, or demolition of buildings, roads,
and bridges. Most C&D debris can be reused or recycled. EPA
estimates that 136 million tons of building-related C&D debris
were generated in the U.S. in 1996, and 20% to 30% of this
material was recycled.4 Although no national trend data are
available, data collected by the Florida Department of
Environment Protection show a  steady rise in recycling of
residential C&D debris  in the state between 1999-2002.3

C&D debris can be reused at the same job site  or sent to
recycling facilities for reuse by other contractors or even
other sectors. For example, during the building of its new
headquarters on the site of an old manufacturing facility in
St. Louis, MO, Alberici Constructors reused 93% of the debris,
including gypsum board, clean lumber, metal, glass, and
cardboard. Alberici built a retaining wall out of salvaged
materials, reused overhead crane rail beams in an existing
warehouse as the support structure for part of a new parking
garage, and deconstructed an old office building on the site in
a way that allowed most of the brick and concrete to be used
as structural fill.6
Paint & Coatings Paint and coatings manufacturers use
solvents both as a formulation ingredient and to clean
equipment. Much of the waste solvents can be recovered
for reuse. According to data from EPAs National Biennial
RCRA Hazardous Waste Report, in 2001 paint and coatings
manufacturers managed more than 37,000 tons of waste
solvents. Of this quantity, 62% was reclaimed and reused as
solvent, and 34% was used as fuel.7

Shipbuilding &> Ship Repair Shipyards across the country
are looking for ways to reuse materials. For a number of years,
shipyards have recovered and reused the blasting grit used to
remove paint. Recently shipyards have begun to look at other
processes that lend themselves to material reuse. For example,
Bath Iron Works in Bath, ME, utilizes a solvent segregation
and distillation process to recover wash solvent for continuous
reuse to clean paint lines, pots and guns, and other waste-
waters. In 2004 the company recovered 38,800 pounds of
solvent.8 Another shipyard, Atlantic Marine in Jacksonville, FL,
has developed a method for onsite reuse of its wastewater.
Nearly 1 million gallons per year of bilge and blasting waste-
water are used to irrigate the facility's grounds after they have
been treated to meet Florida's drinking water standards.9

Colleges &> Universities Colleges & universities are
increasingly recycling organic materials by composting
manure, coal ash, food scraps, and lawn waste. For a large
campus, the volume of recycled material can be equivalent to
that of a small city. For example, Washington State University's
(WSU) Pullman Campus, with 18,690 students, composted
138.7 tons of material between July 2004 and June 2005. WSU
uses a portion of the finished compost on its golf course,
grounds areas, and agricultural land, as well as for animal
bedding. The remainder is sold to local garden stores,
landscapers, and hydroseeders.10

-------
Cement Cement kiln dust (CKD) consists of the particles
released from the pyroprocessing line at cement plants. It
includes partially burned raw materials, clinker, and eroded
fragments from the refractory brick lining of the kilns.
Recycling CKD reduces the amount of raw materials needed
for cement production, and because CKD is already partially
processed, recycling it also reduces energy consumption. The
industry recycles more than 75% of its CKD, nearly 8 million
tons, each year.11 When normalized by annual clinker produc-
tion, the amount of CKD sent to landfills has declined by 49%
since 1995.12 Newer plants (typically dry-kiln operations with
preheater and precalciner technologies) are more effective at
recovering CKD and reusing it in the manufacturing process.

There are limits, however, to recycling CKD in the manufacturing
process, because contaminants can build up in the CKD and
compromise the quality of the clinker. The CKD that is not
recycled is either disposed of at a landfill or sold to other
sectors for beneficial reuse applications, such as road fill,
liming agent for soil, or as stabilizer for sludge and other
wastes.

USE  OF  ANOTHER SECTOR'S BYPRODUCTS Reuse
of materials across sectors opens additional avenues for
reducing costs and conserving resources. Trade associations
and government agencies are collaborating to discover
opportunities for one sector's trash to become another's
treasure.

Industries participating in the Sector Strategies Program
illustrate the potential for a sector to provide materials to
another sector for reuse (e.g., metal casting, iron and steel, and
metal finishing) and to take in materials from another sector
for use as  fuel or substitute raw materials (e.g., cement).
Metal Casting Foundries in the metal casting sector produce
castings from sand molds. This sand can be reused several
times within a facility to make new molds. In time, though,
the sand deteriorates and is no longer useable by the foundry.
Nearly all of this sand (98%) is a nonhazardous byproduct that
could be used for other purposes, yet 9 to 13 million tons are
discarded  in landfills each year. Only one million tons per year
are currently put to productive use.13

As shown in the Beneficial Reuse of Foundry Sand from the
Metal Casting Sector figure, foundry sand can be used almost
anywhere virgin sand is used. Construction contractors use
it for structural fill, backfill, and pipe bedding. The cement
sector uses it as an ingredient in cement. It can be used to
make asphalt, bricks, concrete blocks, and other products.
The agricultural sector is starting to use it in manufactured
soils and for other purposes.

EPA is now working with the metal casting industry and key
states to identify innovative approaches for improving rates of
foundry sand reuse.
            Beneficial Reuse of Foundry Sand
             from the Metal Casting Sector
    Virgin
   Foundry
                 Sand reused
                many times by
                  foundry
                                     Construction Applications
                                     • Embankments
                                     • Road bases
                                     • Structural fills
Manufactured Products
• Asphalt
• Portland cement
• Concrete products

Agricultural Products
• Manufactured soils
• Soil additives
• Compost

-------
Iron &> Steel Iron and steel slags are co-products of iron and
steel manufacturing, produced when slagging agents such as
limestone or dolomite and/or fluxing materials are added to
blast furnaces and steel furnaces to strip impurities from iron
ore, steel scrap, and other raw materials. The molten slag floats
atop the molten crude iron or steel and is tapped from the
furnace separately from the liquid metal. After cooling, the slag
is processed and may then be sold.14

Most iron and steel slags have reuse value. As shown in
the Iron & Steel Slag Beneficially Reused bar chart, slag
consumption has risen in recent years, corresponding to
increases in steel production and scrap consumption overall.
In 2005, about 21 million tons of domestic iron and steel slag,
valued at about $326 million, were consumed.13 Iron or blast
furnace slag accounted for about 60% of the tonnage sold and
was worth about $290 million; about 85% of this value was
granulated slag. Steel slag produced from basic oxygen  and
          Iron & Steel Slag Beneficially Reused
                          Year
  Source: US6S.
electric arc furnaces accounted for the remainder.16 Ferrous
slags are sold for cement kiln feedstock and other uses such
as aggregate for asphalt paving, fill, road base, and concrete.
Ground granulated blast furnace slag, valued at more than $60
per ton, is used as a partial substitute for portland cement and
blended cements. Some iron and steel slags are returned to the
furnaces as ferrous and flux feed.

Steelmakers, iron and steel slag producers, and government
agencies - including transportation departments - are
partnering to identify more and better opportunities for using
these materials.17 One cement manufacturer, Texas Industries,
Inc. (TXI), developed the CemStar™ process for reusing steel
slag in high  quantities. By 2002, two TXI facilities were able
to reuse 340,000 tons of steel slag from Chaparral Steel.18

Metal Finishing Wastewater sludge from metal finishing
operations is a hazardous waste that contains recoverable
concentrations (up to 40%) of  copper, nickel, chromium, tin,
zinc, and other metals.19 Permitted hazardous waste recycling
facilities can use technologies such as ion exchange canisters
to recover economically valuable metals from the wastewater
treatment sludges generated by the metal finishing sector.
These metals can then be returned for use in metal finishing
operations or sold to other industries.

EPA estimates that 76,700 tons of this sludge was generated
in 2003, but only 18% was reclaimed or recovered.20 EPA is
currently exploring options for removing regulatory barriers
to additional metals recovery from this sludge.
                                                                                                                                                                      10

-------
Cement Cement manufacturing uses industrial byproducts
from other sectors both as production ingredients and as fuel.
As shown in the Beneficial Reuse of Materials by the Cement
Sector figure, cement production ingredients may include
foundry sand and steel slag (as presented earlier in this
chapter), as well as coal fly ash and other materials.

Cement manufacturing is energy-intensive, requiring
thermochemical processing of raw materials in huge kilns at
very high and sustained temperatures. A medium-sized  cement
kiln consumes up to 300 million Btus of fuel per hour.21
However, cement manufacturers can use a variety of industrial
byproducts as fuel, including scrap tires, off-specification
oil-based paints, byproducts from  refineries, wood wastes,
aluminum potliners, spent solvents, and used carpets. The
industry's use of these materials as fuel has increased  over the
last decade. For example, in 1998, 30 cement manufacturing
facilities burned approximately 38 million scrap tires  as fuel;  by
2003, 43 facilities burned 53 million tires. The Rubber
Manufacturers Association predicted that 50 out  of 114 cement
facilities would be using scrap tires by 2005.22
              Beneficial Reuse of Materials
                  by the Cement Sector
     Paints & Coatings: Off-spec paint
     Forest Products: Wood wastes
     Scrap tires
     Municipal refuse
     Used oils and solvents
    1 Iron & Steel: Blast furnace slag
    1 Metal Casting: Foundry sand
    1 Water treatment sludges
    1 Fly ash
Fuel
Alternatives
                                               Cement
                                                 Kiln
Raw Material
Alternatives
                              Cement trade associations, EPA, state programs, and other
                              stakeholders are collaborating to find sensible ways for
                              preventing potential kiln fuels from going to waste.

                              USE OF POST-CONSUMER MATERIALS Manufacturing
                              facilities in several Sector Strategies sectors, including forest
                              products, iron and steel, and paint and coatings, can obtain
                              feedstock for their products from materials discarded by
                              consumers.

                              Forest Products Paper manufacturing provides a well-known
                              example  of post-consumer recycling. As shown in the Paper &
                              Paperboard Recycling bar chart, the paper recovery rate reached
                              an all-time high of greater than 50% in 2003, decreasing slightly
                              in 2004.23 For some grades such as corrugated boxes and
                              newspapers the recovery  rate was  over 70%.24 Data available for
                              1994 and 2004 show a 27% increase  in paper and paperboard
                              recovery  -  from 40 million tons to more than 50 million tons.23
                                             Paper & Paperboard Recycling
                                       1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999 2000 2001 2002  2003  2004

                                                           Year
                                                               Source: AF&PA.

-------
Iron &> Steel Iron and steel manufacturers have a rich
history of recycling scrap from used products of all kinds.
All new steel is made using at least some recycled steel, and
the industry's use of post-consumer scrap, rather than just
industrial scrap, continues to climb.26

Recent increases in demand for steel have accelerated steel
recycling. Since 2002, the overall recycling rate for steel has
remained at a 20-year high of almost 71%.27 Obsolete
automobiles are the most recycled consumer product. Each
year, the steel industry recycles more than 14 million tons of
steel from end-of-life vehicles. This is equivalent to nearly
13.5 million new automobiles.28 In 2004, the recycling rate
for automobiles was 102%, indicating that the steel industry
recycled more steel from automobiles than was used in the
domestic production of new  vehicles.29

Between 2003 and 2004,  the use of recycled steel increased by
more than 10% to 76 million tons, which for  1 year was the
most scrap  recycled in the United States in more than 20
years.30 Driven by the high demand for steel and the sector's
increasing efficiency, the iron and steel sector continues to
expand its recycling of industrial scrap, steel from building
demolition, and obsolete  products such as appliances and cars.
Steelmakers are exploring additional opportunities to improve
recycling rates and efficiency, such as product designs that
encourage and enable future dismantling and recycling.31
Paint & Coatings Of all household hazardous wastes, paint
represents the largest cost for local governments to collect and
manage.32 In a draft report, EPA estimates that 9% to 22% of
paint sold could become leftover paint.33

The paint and coatings industry is participating in a national
product stewardship initiative to address the challenges of
reducing and managing leftover paint. One of the goals is
to increase reuse and recycling opportunities. There are
three ways to reuse and recycle leftover paint: exchanges,
consolidation, and reprocessing. Exchanges (or swaps) are
a way to make unused paint available to other consumers.
Consolidation entails combining leftover paints that have
similar characteristics, and then mixing, filtering, and
packaging the product for distribution or sale. In most
cases consolidated paint has at least 95% recycled content.
Reprocessed paint is a completely remanufactured product
that uses leftover paint as a primary ingredient; it generally
contains at least 50% recycled content. In the U.S.,
reprocessing is currently limited to latex paints.34

MOVING FORWARD As demonstrated in this chapter,
environmentally sound beneficial reuse  opportunities are
abundant and often underutilized. These win-win
opportunities for business and the environment represent
one of the paths that EPA encourages for businesses to
become better environmental stewards.  Through the Resource
Conservation Challenge and the Sector  Strategies Program,
EPA will continue to provide a forum for collaboration to
identify potential new uses for industrial byproducts and
innovative approaches to overcome barriers to beneficial reuse.
                                                                                                                                                                      12

-------
OVERVIEW In 2004, the Sector Strategies Program released
its first Performance Report examining key trends influencing
the environmental footprints of twelve sectors and identifying
opportunities for improvements. The multi-year data upon
which the first report was based came from a variety of public
and private sector sources in order to provide the most
comprehensive and accurate picture possible of each sector's
environmental performance.

The report described each sector's performance in a number
of areas, such as:
1 Conserving water;
' Improving water quality;
1 Increasing energy efficiency;
' Managing and minimizing toxics;
  Managing and minimizing waste; and
1 Reducing air emissions.

In the 2006  report, EPA has updated the information on each
sector's performance, providing data from the last decade
(1994-2003) with an emphasis on performance trends since
2000. In addition, EPA continues to expand both the number
of data sources used and the depth of analysis presented. For
example, this report includes a new  discussion of the toxicity
of pollutant releases in each of the sectors.

METHODOLOGY Similar to the 2004 report, the 2006 update
provides current sector-specific information based upon a two-
part methodology:

• Defining each  sector based upon standard classification codes or
  pre-determined facility lists; and
  Collecting data and presenting "normalized" data trends.
Definition of Sectors For this report, sectors are defined
either by standard classification codes, such as the North
American Industry Classification System (NAICS) or the
U.S. Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) system, or by pre-
determined facility lists, such as trade association membership
rosters. The endnotes for each chapter clarify how each sector
was defined when accessing each data source.

Normalization of Data This report makes frequent use of
normalized data when presenting trends over time. As noted
in the Glossary, "normalizing" means adjusting the actual
annual release numbers to account for changes in sector
production or output over the same time period. For example,
if emissions show a steady decline over time, this could be
caused by declining production in the sector, rather than any
real improvement in  environmental performance. Without
accounting for changes in production, the graph would
show a downward trend. After adjusting for the declining
production, the graph would look more flat.

The factor used to normalize data varies across the sectors but
is clearly identified on each chart. Most charts, for example,
use sales dollars, while others use productivity measures, such
as tons of product.

As an example, many of the charts  in this report track progress
from 1994 through 2003. On these charts, EPA adjusted sales
data for inflation using 1994 dollars as the base year, or
similarly adjusted productivity data against the 1994 starting
quantity. The formula for this adjustment is shown below:
Measures for Year'A' x
  1994 Normalized Data (^production/shipment)
Year'A' Normalizing Data (^production/shipment)

-------
KEY DATA SOURCES As noted above, the data upon which
this report is based come from a variety of public and private
sector sources, including EPA's Toxics Release Inventory (TRI)
and National Emissions Inventory (NEI). One enhancement
in the 2006 report is the utilization of EPA's Risk-Screening
Environmental Indicators (RSEI) model, which enables EPA
to take into account the relative toxicity of each chemical
reported as released to the environment in TRI.

In addition, the 2006 report draws upon other federal data,
such as EPA's National Biennial RCRA Hazardous Waste Report
and the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Manufacturing
Energy Consumption Survey (MECS). Industry reporting of
some of these data is required by law, while other data come
from information submitted voluntarily.

Many sectors also collect their own data to track
environmental performance over time. More detailed
information on the federal data sources, as well as descriptions
of these industry data sources, can be found in Appendix B.

The following summaries highlight key points regarding the
primary data sources used throughout the report, including
TRI, National Biennial RCRA Hazardous Waste Report, NEI,
and MECS.

Toxics Release Inventory One of the report's key data
sources is TRI, a publicly available database that contains
information on the release and management of nearly 650
chemicals and chemical categories by facilities that use,
process, or manufacture  these chemicals at annual levels
above reporting thresholds. In TRI terminology, releases
include discharges to air, water, and land (including landfills),
while management includes a variety of techniques, such as
treatment, energy recovery, or recycling.
Although not all sectors and/or facilities are subject to TRI
reporting requirements, aggregate TRI data indicate trends
in the management and minimization of waste by reporting
sectors. Where data are available, this report describes TRI data
for each sector from 1994 through 2003 (the most current data
available at the time of this report's publication).

In addition, this report includes a discussion of the toxicity
of each sector's releases to air and water. Although all TRI
chemicals are hazardous, their toxicity - the inherent ability
of a chemical to cause harm - varies greatly. Using EPA's RSEI
model, EPA can calculate a toxicity-weighted score for each
sector's air and water releases, which reflects both the quantity
and toxicity of the chemicals released.

RSEI results are calculated by multiplying the pounds of air
or water  releases by a toxicity weight specific to the chemical
and media of release. The toxicity weights for chemicals
increase as the toxicological potential to cause chronic human
health  effects increases. The resulting toxicity-weighted results
provide an alternative perspective to the typical pounds-based
results found in other reports.

As shown in the example on the next page, when pounds are
simply summed, Facility As total TRI air releases, being nearly
double that of Facility B, would seem to be of greater concern.
However, when additional information about each released
chemical's toxicity is factored into the equation using the RSEI
model, a different picture emerges. Applying the RSEI model,
Facility B's  releases, when weighted for toxicity, surpass the
similarly weighted releases from Facility A due to the greater
presence of mercury, which is much more toxic than methanol.

Note, however, that toxicity weighting of a chemical is not the
same as identifying the risk potentially posed by a release of
the chemical. "Risk" in that context would rely on additional
information, such as the fate and transport of the  chemical in

-------
    the environment after it is released, the pathway of human
    exposure, and the number of people exposed. These and other
    important details concerning the RSEI model are discussed in
    depth in Appendix B.
      Reported TRI Air  Releases (Ibs.)

Facility A
Facility B
Methanol
40,000
20,000
Mercury
10
40
Total
40,010
20,040
      Toxicity-Weighted  TRI Air Releases



Facility A
Facility B
Methanol
(Ibs.)

40,000
20,000
Toxicity
Weight

0.45
0.45
Toxicity-
Weighted
Result
18,000
9,000
Mercury
(Ibs.)

10
40
Toxicity
Weight

6,000
6,000
Toxicity-
Weighted
Result
60,000
240,000
Total:
Both
Chemicals
78,000
249,000
    As shown in the set of examples below, the TRI data discussion
    in each sector chapter begins with a series of three related
    charts that provide a progressively focused look at the sector's
    TRI releases and waste management activities.
                         The first chart, TRI Waste Management by the Sample Sector, breaks
                         down how the sector managed all of the wastes it reported to TRI in
                         2003. The first, larger pie chart shows percentages for releases
                         (including disposal), treatment, energy recovery, and recycling.
                         A second, smaller, pie chart provides additional details on the "releases"
                         slice of the  large pie chart, showing the percentages released to air,
                         released to  water, and disposed (considered a "release" to land, in TRI
                         terminology).
                         The second  chart, Total TRI Disposal or Other Releases by the Sample
                         Sector, expands on the smaller pie chart by examining trends from
                         1994 to 2003. The top line on the chart tracks total releases (including
                         disposal), while the bottom line details releases only to air and water.
                         Note that these data are always normalized  (in  this example by annual
                         value of shipments).
                         The third chart, TRI Air and Water Releases by the Sample Sector,
                         compares the total pounds of the sector's releases to air and water (the
                          bottom line from the previous chart) to the toxicity-weighted results
                         for those releases. Note that the scale for the pounds line is located on
                         the left side of the chart, while the scale for the toxicity-weighted  line
                         is located on the right side of the chart. These data are always
                         normalized.
         TRI Waste Management
           by the Sample Sector
                           Water Releases
                               3%
                                        Disposal
                                         50%
 Energy     Recycling
Recovery      29°/o
  4%
 Source: U.S. EPA, 2003.
   Total TRI  Disposal or Other Releases
            by the Sample Sector
* Normalized by an
 Sources: U.S. EPA,
1995  1996 1997 1998 1999 2000  2001  2002  2003
            Year
               -*- Disposal or Releases, total
               -•- Air and Water Releases, only
                                                     25

                                                  ^  20
                                                  o
                                                  =  15
                                                  _£,
                                                  |  10

                                                  I   5

                                                      0
                                                TRI Air and Water Releases
                                                   by the Sample Sector
                                                        1994  1995 1996 1997  1998 1999 2000  2001 2002 2003
                                                                         Year
                                                                                                   * Normalized by annual value of shipments.
                                                                                                     Sources: U.S. EPA, U.S. Census Bureau.
                                                                                                                                 Pounds
                                                                                                                                 Toxicity-Weighted Results

-------
To take the analysis one step further, the report also includes a
table entitled Top TRI Chemicals Based on Toxicity-Weighted
Results that identifies the chemicals released to air and water
that accounted for 90% of the sector's total toxicity-weighted
results in 2003. This table identifies the most significant
opportunities for a sector to reduce the toxicity of its releases
through source reduction or chemical substitution.

National Biennial RCRA Hazardous Waste Report
EPA collects information every other year on the generation,
management, and final disposition of hazardous waste from
large quantity generators - that is, facilities that meet
minimum thresholds for reporting, such as those that generate
1,000 kilograms or more of hazardous waste per month, or 1
kilogram or more of acutely hazardous waste per month - and
from facilities that treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste.
Data are reported by facilities in even-numbered years for
hazardous waste activities of the previous year. The
information received is stored in the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act Information System (RCRAInfo) and
compiled in the National Biennial RCRA Hazardous Waste
Report.

Most of the facilities in the sectors presented in this report
do not meet reporting thresholds, and, thus, are not required
to file a biennial report. Therefore, the hazardous waste
generation and  management practices of the reporting facilities
in each sector may not be representative of the sector as a
whole. However, where data are available, this report typically
presents the following figures for 2003:
  Number of reporting facilities;
' Amount of hazardous waste generated;
  Percentage of total hazardous waste generated nationally accounted
  for by the sector;
  Predominant types of hazardous wastes generated;
' Sources of hazardous wastes generated; and
1 Methods used to manage hazardous wastes.

Definitional changes in the data system in 2001 prevent EPA
from including comparisons of hazardous waste data with
earlier years in this report.

National  Emissions Inventory NEI contains EPA's
emission estimates of the six criteria air pollutants - carbon
monoxide,  ammonia, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide,
paniculate  matter, and volatile organic compounds. The
inventory is based upon inputs submitted to EPA once every
three years by numerous state and local air agencies,  tribes,
and industry, as well as data from TRI and other sources. Gaps
in data for the years between submissions are filled with
emissions estimates  modeled using sources such as sector-level
economic data.

Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey  DDEs
statistical agency, the Energy Information Administration,
collects data on the energy consumption of U.S. manufacturers
every four years by mailing questionnaires to a statistically
valid sample of firms. The responses are then extrapolated to
represent the full universe of manufacturers and presented in
MECS. Where data are available, this report presents  the
quantity and types of fuel consumed by each sector.
                                                                                                                                                                      16

-------
                            PROFILE The cement sector4 comprises 114
                            plants in 37 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 ol construction projects and applications.
                            In 2004, California, Texas, Pennsylvania,
                            Michigan, Missouri, and Alabama were the six
                            leading cement-producing states, accounting for
                            approximately one-hall ol U.S. production.3
Sector At-a-Glance
Number of Facilities:
Value of Shipments:
Number of Employees:
1141
$8 billion2
17.5003
17
TRENDS Buoyed by a strong residential
construction market, the U.S. cement industry
has grown in recent years. Higher prices for
other construction materials such as steel and
lumber also contributed to greater reliance on
cement and, therefore, increased the demand
for cement.

1  Between 2003 and 2004, U.S. cement consumption
   increased by nearly 7% to a record  115 million metric
   tons. Forecasters expected a 5% increase in
   consumption in  2005.6
   Most of the U.S. demand for cement in  2004 was met
   by domestic production. Operating at maximum
   capacity, U.S. facilities produced 95 million metric
   tons of cement (including portland and masonry
   cement), an increase of 2% over 2003.7
   To meet increasing demand,  U.S. cement
   manufacturers have announced plans to increase
   production capacity by 15% (nearly 15  million tons)
   by 2010.8

In addition, the effort to rebuild New Orleans
and the Gull Coast area alter Hurricanes Katrina
and Rita, which struck the region in August
and September ol 2005, is expected to increase
demand for cement over the next four to live
years.9
KEY ENVIRONMENTAL OPPORTUNITIES
For the cement sector, the greatest opportunities
for environmental improvement are in increasing
energy efficiency, reducing air emissions, and
managing and minimizing toxics and waste.
The cement sector voluntarily tracks its
environmental performance. In recent years,
the Portland Cement Association (PCA) has
expanded its data collection efforts to obtain
information on environmental indicators such as
air emissions, implementation ol environmental
management systems, and handling ol cement
kiln dust (CKD). PCA reported on these results
and other issues in its inaugural Report on
Sustainable Manufacturing in 2005.10

-------
INCREASING ENERGY EFFICIENCY cement
is composed of four elements - calcium, silica,
aluminum, and iron - which are commonly
found in limestone, clay, and sand. Cement
manufacturing requires the thermochemical
processing (i.e., pyroprocessing) of substantial
quantities of these raw materials in huge kilns at
very high and sustained temperatures to produce
an intermediate product called clinker. Cement
kilns use an average of nearly 5 million Btus per
ton of clinker.11 Clinker is then ground up with a
small quantity of gypsum  to create portland
cement.
As illustrated in the Distribution of Cement Energy
Consumption pie chart, cement manufacturing
processes are fueled by coal and petroleum coke,
electricity, wastes, and natural gas.
            Distribution of Cement
             Energy Consumption
               Coal 60%
      OiM%
  Natural Gas 3%
  Electricity Purchased
        11%
         Petroleum
         Coke 16%
       Electricity Generated
          at Plant <1%
  Source: USGS, 2004.       Liquid Waste 5%
   Tires 3%
Solid Waste 1%
                     In 2004, the industry derived 60% of its energy
                     from coal. Another 16% of the sector's energy
                     was from petroleum coke, 5% from solid and
                     liquid wastes, and the balance from natural gas,
                     fuel oils, and used tires.12
                     As shown in the Energy Consumption bar chart,
                     the cement sector consumed 422 trillion Btus
                     of energy in 2004,13 which represented almost
                     2% of total energy consumption by U.S.
                     manufacturing that year.14 When normalized
                     for production,  the sector's 2004 energy
                     consumption was 7% lower  than in 2001.
                     The following case study illustrates measures
                     taken at one cement plant to save energy and
                     reduce accompanying emissions.
                                  Energy Consumption
                                 by the Cement Sector
                                                                         Year
                      * Normalized by annual clinker production.
                       Source: USGS.
Case Study: California Portland Cement
Company's Energy Management Program The
California Portland Cement Company worked with EPA's
ENERGY STAR program to develop a formal corporate
energy management program and an energy management
team at its Colton, CA, plant. The energy savings measures
identified and implemented at the Colton plant included
improvements in the manufacturing process, equipment
upgrades or replacement, and new policies for equipment
procurement. Through these efforts, the plant has significantly
reduced its energy use and accompanying emissions.
Between 2003 and 2004, the Colton plant reduced its energy
consumption per unit of production by nearly 5%, which
translated into more than $800,000 in savings and the
prevention of nearly 30,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide
(CO 2) emissions.

The California Portland Cement Company's energy
management program is designed to achieve continuing
improvements in energy efficiency through the following
actions:

   Establishing baseline energy use through metering and
   other reporting methods;
   Setting goals based on benchmarking and industry best
   practices;
   Performing audits to identify opportunities for energy
   savings;
   Implementing energy savings measures through capital
   spending, operations and maintenance practices,
   purchasing policies, and inventory controls; and
   Measuring improvements.15

-------
REDUCING Am EMISSIONS cement
manufacturing operations emit criteria air
pollutants and greenhouse gases (GHG).

Criteria Air Pollutant* Three criteria air
pollutants are released to the air during cement
manufacturing: nitrogen oxides (NOX), sulfur
dioxide (SO2), and paniculate matter (PM).

The combustion of fuels at high temperatures
in cement kilns results in the release of NOX
emissions. EPA's National Emissions Inventory
(NEI) estimates that, in 2002, the sector released
214,000 tons of NOX emissions. As shown in
the Nitrogen Oxide and Sulfur Dioxide Emissions
bar chart, between 1996 and 2002 the
normalized quantity of NOX emissions fell by 6%
through the use of various process controls. In
2002, NOX emissions from the cement sector
accounted for approximately 1% of total U.S.
non-agricultural  NOX emissions.16
     Nitrogen Oxide and Sulfur Dioxide
     Emissions from the Cement Sector
       1996
                  1998
+ 2002 data are preliminary.
* Normalized by annual clinker production.
 Sources: U.S. EPA, US6S.
                               Nitrogen Oxide
                               Sulfur Dioxide
SO2 emissions from cement plants result from
the combustion of sulfur-bearing compounds
in coal, oil, and petroleum coke, and from the
processing of pyrite and sulfur in raw materials.
To mitigate these emissions, cement plants
typically install air pollution control technologies
called "scrubbers" to trap such pollutants in their
exhaust gases. In addition, the limestone used to
produce cement has "self-scrubbing" properties,
which enable the industry to handle high-sulfur
fuels. NEI estimates that, in 2002, the sector
released 177,000 tons of SO2 emissions. As
shown in the Nitrogen Oxide and Sulfur Dioxide
Emissions bar chart, between 1996 and 2002 the
normalized quantity of  SO2 emissions decreased
by 9%.17

Quarrying operations, the crushing and grinding
of raw materials and clinker, and the kiln line
all result in PM emissions during cement
manufacturing. Most of the PM in the exhaust
        Particulate Matter Emissions
          from the Cement Sector
 + 2002 data are preliminary.
 * Normalized by annual clinker production.
  Sources: U.S. EPA, US6S.
                                                                                             gases from cement plants is removed by fabric
                                                                                             filters (known as "baghouses") or by electrostatic
                                                                                             precipitation. As described later in this section,
                                                                                             this PM (know as CKD) is often reused in the
                                                                                             cement manufacturing process. NEI estimates
                                                                                             that, in 2002, the sector released 31,000 tons
                                                                                             of PM10 emissions and 13,000 tons of PM25
                                                                                             emissions. As shown in the Particulate Matter
                                                                                             Emissions bar chart, between 1996 and 2002 the
                                                                                             normalized quantity of PM10 emissions from the
                                                                                             cement sector remained fairly constant, following
                                                                                             marked improvements begun in the early years
                                                                                             of implementing the Clean Air Act.18

                                                                                             Greenhouse Gases In the cement sector, CO2
                                                                                             emissions result from the burning of fossil fuels
                                                                                             (predominantly coal) during pyroprocessing and
                                                                                             from the chemical  reactions (calcination) that
                                                                                             convert limestone into clinker.

                                                                                             In 2003,  fuel combustion accounted for about
                                                                                             97% of total CO2 emissions in the U.S. - with
                                                                                             more than 60% of that coming from power
                                                                                             plants and motor vehicles. CO2 emissions from
                                                                                             all industrial processes accounted for about 2.5%
                                                                                             of national CO2 emissions. Within that industrial
                                                                                             percentage, iron and steel production accounted
                                                                                             for about 37%, while cement manufacturing
                                                                                             contributed 29%. Although this sector is the
                                                                                             second largest industrial source of CO2
                                                                                             emissions in the U.S.,  it accounts for less than
                                                                                             1% of total U.S. CO2 emissions.19

-------
In 2003, PCA formalized its commitment to
reduce CO2 emissions from the cement sector by
joining Climate VISION, a voluntary program
administered by DOE. PCA committed to a 10%
reduction in CO2 emissions per ton of product
by 2020 (from a 1990 baseline). The sector
hopes to reach this goal through changes in the
cement manufacturing process and in product
formulation.20 In addition, four cement
companies have joined EPA's Climate Leaders
program, which helps partners to develop
long-term comprehensive climate change
strategies, set corporate-level GHG reduction
goals, and inventory emissions to measure
progress. Partner companies include California
Portland Cement Company, Holcim  (US) Inc.,
St. Lawrence Cement, and LaFarge North
America Inc.21
          TRI Waste Management
            by the Cement Sector
                                 Water Releases
                                       Disposal
                                        22%
                                   Air Releases
                                     78%
  Source: U.S. EPA, 2003.
MANAGING AND MINIMIZING Toxics
Cement manufacturing 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).

In 2003, 102 facilities in the sector reported
450 million pounds of chemicals released
(including disposal) or otherwise managed
through treatment, energy recovery, or recycling.
Of this quantity, 96% was managed through
energy recovery, while 3% was disposed or
released to the environment, as shown in the
TRI Waste Management pie chart. Of those
chemicals disposed or released to the
environment, 22% were disposed and 78%
were released into air or water.
    Total TRI Disposal or Other Releases
            by the Cement Sector
       1994  1995 1996 1997 1998  1999  2000 2001 2002 2003
                      Year
      -*- Disposal or Releases, total  -•- Air and Water Releases, only
 * Normalized by annual clinker production.
  Sources: U.S. EPA, US6S.
As shown in the Total TRI Disposal or Other
Releases line graph, the annual normalized
quantity of chemicals disposed or released by the
cement sector increased by 196% between 1994
and 2003. This increase primarily occurred prior
to 1998, and reported disposal and release
quantities have remained fairly stable since then.
Quantities released to air and water followed
a similar trend.

In 2003, hydrochloric and sulfuric acids
accounted for 51% of the amount released or
disposed, while ammonia, manganese, and zinc
accounted for another 24%. Along with ethylene,
benzene, and lead, these chemicals accounted for
89% of all pounds reported to TRI as disposed or
released by the cement sector.22
         TRI Air and Water Releases
            by the Cement Sector
                                                                                                      1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003   £
                                                                                                                     Year
                                                                                                      • Pounds             _Toxicity-Weighted Results
                                                                                                * Normalized by annual clinker production.
                                                                                                 Sources: U.S. EPA, US6S.

-------
Data from TRI allow comparisons of the total
quantities of a sector's reported chemical releases
across years, as presented earlier in this chapter.
However, this comparison does not take into
account the relative toxicity of each chemical.
Chemicals vary greatly in toxicity, meaning they
differ in how harmful they can be to human
health. To account for differences in toxicities,
each chemical can be weighted by a relative
toxicity weight using EPA's Risk-Screening
Environmental Indicators (RSEI) model.

The TRI Air and Water Releases line graph  on the
previous page presents trends for the sector's air
and water releases in both reported pounds and
toxicity-weighted results. When weighted  for
toxicity, the sector's normalized air and water
releases increased by 218% from 1994 to 2003.
Between 2000 and 2003, toxicity-weighted
results remained fairly steady, despite some
fluctuations. Increases in reported releases of
sulfuric acid, manganese, and lead were the
primary drivers in the overall toxicity-weighted
increase in 2003.
The table below presents a list of the chemicals
released that accounted for 90% of the sector's
total toxicity-weighted releases to air and water
in 2003. More than 99% of the sector's toxicity-
weighted results were attributable to air releases,
while discharges to water accounted for less than
1%. Therefore, reducing air emissions of these
chemicals represents the greatest opportunity
for the sector to make progress in reducing the
toxicity of its releases.

      Top TRI Chemicals  Based on
       Toxicity-Weighted Results
  AIR RELEASES (99%)   WATER RELEASES (<1 %)
    Sulfuric Acid
     Manganese
         Lead
      Chromium
  Hydrochloric Acid
  Lead
Me re u ry
From 2000 to 2003, the normalized air releases
of the chemicals driving the sector's toxicity-
weighted results changed as follows: sulfuric
acid and lead both fluctuated from year-to-year,
manganese releases increased by 65%, and
chromium releases decreased by 72%.
EPA's RSEI model conservatively assumes that
chemicals are released in the form associated
with the highest toxicity weight. With respect to
chromium releases to air and water, therefore,
the model assumes that 100% of these emissions
are hexavalent chromium (the most toxic form,
with significantly higher oral and inhalation
toxicity weights than trivalent chromium).23
Research indicates that the hexavalent form of
chromium does not constitute a majority of total
chromium releases in the sector.24 Thus, RSEI
analyses overestimate the relative harmfulness
of chromium in the sector.

-------
MANAGING AND MINIMIZING WASTE The
cement sector reuses CKD generated during the
cement production process and utilizes waste
products from other industry sectors both as
material inputs and as fuel. The cement sector
also generates hazardous waste.

Cement Kiln Dust CKD consists of the
particles released from the pyroprocessing line
at cement plants. It includes partially burned
raw materials, clinker, and eroded fragments
from the refractory brick lining of the kilns.
Recycling CKD reduces the amount of raw
materials needed for cement production, and
because CKD is already partially processed,
recycling it also reduces energy consumption.
The industry recycles more than 75% of its CKD,
nearly eight million tons, each year.23 When
normalized by annual clinker production, the
amount of CKD sent to landfills has declined
by 49% since 1995, as shown in the Cement
Kiln Dust Disposed in Landfills bar chart.26
Newer plants (typically dry-kiln operations with
pre-heater and pre-calciner technologies)  are
more  effective at recovering CKD and reusing
it in the manufacturing process.

There are limits, however, to recycling CKD
in the manufacturing process, because
contaminants 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 as a stabilizer for sludges and other wastes.
   Cement Kiln Dust Disposed in Landfills
            by the Cement Sector
       1995  1996  1997
                   1998  1999 2000
                      Year
  ND-No
 * Normal
  Source:
Data
zed by annual clinker production.
PCA.
Waste Products as an Energy Source The
cement sector relies primarily on a combination
of coal and petroleum coke for fuel. However,
the sector also uses waste products such as tires
and used motor oil as fuel sources. In a 2001
survey, PCA found that 53 of the 95 member
plants that responded were using some type of
waste fuel, with tire-derived fuel being the most
common waste fuel used. The survey also found
that waste fuels provided almost 8% of the Btus
consumed by the sector in 2001.27
Hazardous Waste EPA hazardous waste data
on large quantity generators, as reported in the
National Biennial RCRA Hazardous Waste Report,
indicate that the waste generated by the cement
sector accounted for less than 1% of the
hazardous waste generated nationally in 2003.

In 2003, 15 cement facilities reported 14,900
tons of hazardous waste generated. Nearly 86%
of this waste was generated from managing
wastes and production or service-related
processes. The waste  management method
most utilized by this sector was onsite energy
recovery for use as fuel.

When reporting hazardous wastes to EPA,
quantities can be reported as a single waste code
(e.g., lead) or as a commingled waste composed
of multiple types of wastes. Quantities of a
specific waste within  the commingled waste are
not reported. In the cement sector, individually
reported wastes accounted for less than 1% of
the wastes reported. With such limited data, no
meaningful conclusions can be drawn about the
most predominant types of waste generated by
the sector.28

-------
PROFILE 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.

Classroom education is only one of many
activities taking place on college campuses.
Campuses often maintain many 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.
Sector At-a-Glance
Number of Institutions:
Revenues:
Number of Employees:
4.1681
$270 billion2
3.2 million3

TRENDS Due mostly to demographic changes,
colleges and universities are projected to serve
more students each year over the next 10 years.
Enrollment in degree-granting institutions is
projected to increase from 16.9 million students
in 2003 to nearly 18.2 million students by 2013.3
This growth in the student population will add
to the level of activity taking place on campuses
and will likely lead to the construction of new
buildings and other support facilities.

KEY ENVIRONMENTAL OPPORTUNITIES
For the college and university sector, the greatest
opportunities for environmental improvement
are in reducing air emissions, managing and
minimizing waste, conserving water, and
improving water quality. In addition, some
colleges and universities are planning and
designing campus expansions that meet green
building standards.
The colleges and universities sector has taken
steps to develop performance metrics, collect
data, and track performance. In 2003, six national
organizations partnered with EPA's Sector
Strategies Program to select key environmental
performance indicators, determine appropriate
methodologies to measure these indicators, and
develop tools to assist institutions with the
measurement process.6

In 2005, the sector partners launched a
Web-enabled Self-Tracking Tool that allows
colleges and universities to collect and analyze
data on their campuses' environmental impacts.7
The Self-Tracking Tool gathers four years of
retrospective data on four environmental
indicators - energy use, hazardous waste, solid
waste/recycling, and water use. Schools can use
the tool to identify and analyze trends in their
data and benchmark their  environmental
performance against aggregated data from other
schools of similar size and type (school names
are kept confidential).

All colleges and universities are invited to input
data and provide suggestions for improving the
tool. To date, more than 100 institutions have
registered to use the database (although far fewer
have actually entered their data).

-------
REDUCING AIR EMISSIONS Many colleges
and universities are committed to reducing air
emissions resulting from fleet vehicles and
energy use on campus. Some campuses have
developed energy conservation projects and
commuting programs to decrease energy needs,
while others have switched their campus fleets
to compressed natural gas or biodiesel, a
cleaner-burning alternative to diesel made from
vegetable oil.

To reduce air emissions from electricity use,
more than 41  institutions are currently
participating in the Green Power Partnership,
a voluntary partnership between EPA and
organizations  that are interested in buying green
power. These  institutions have pledged to
purchase a portion  of their electricity from
providers using environmentally preferable,
renewable energy sources, such as solar, wind,
geothermal, biomass, biogas, and low-impact
hydropower. Together, they account for
purchases of more than 250,000  megawatt hours
of green power annually8 The following case
study highlights another multi-campus initiative
to promote renewable energy.

As part of its performance measurement
initiative, the sector is now beginning to
collect data on its use of both renewable and
non-renewable energy.
Case Study: Pennsylvania Campuses "Getting
to 10% Wind" The Pennsylvania Consortium for
Interdisciplinary Environmental Policy, through which 34
colleges and universities currently purchase wind energy, is
the largest nongovernmental purchaser of wind power in
the country. Moreover, the consortium accounts for nearly
half of the renewable energy purchases by colleges and
universities in the U.S. To encourage member institutions to
purchase even more wind energy, the consortium set a goal
of "Getting to 10% Wind." So far, nine institutions meet 10%
or more of their total energy demand with wind energy
purchases, equal to 92,200 megawatt hours. This translates
to carbon dioxide reductions comparable to planting nearly
7.5 million trees, or not driving 96 million miles.9

-------
MANAGING AND MINIMIZING WASTE
Colleges and universities are using tools such
as target goals and management plans to reduce
the generation of hazardous and solid wastes
and to increase recycling on their campuses.
Target goals vary across campuses, from a 10%
reduction in hazardous waste per laboratory
student to a 50% recycling rate for solid waste.10
In addition to their efforts to minimize wastes,
a number of institutions are developing courses
and degree programs in Green Chemistry.

Hazardous Waste EPA data on large quantity
generators, as reported in the National Biennial
RCRA Hazardous Waste Report, indicate that the
colleges and universities sector accounted for
less than 1% of the hazardous waste generated
nationally in 2003.

In 2003, 257 facilities in the sector generated
9,100 tons of hazardous waste.  Half of this waste
was from laboratory operations. Other sources
of hazardous waste at colleges and universities
include medical centers, art studios, and
operations and maintenance activities (e.g.,
painting). The waste management methods most
utilized by this sector were incineration and fuel
blending. The sector is beginning to collect
information on hazardous waste generation
and permitting as part of its performance
measurement initiative.11
Solid Waste Recycling Solid wastes from
colleges and universities 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. In addition to
the following case study highlights, Seattle
University's waste reduction and recycling
program has achieved a 62% campus-wide
recycling rate;12 the University of Oregon
consistently diverts more than 40% of its waste
stream;13 and the recycling rate at the University
of Massachusetts-Amherst exceeds 50%.14

The colleges and universities sector is also
collecting information on solid waste generation
and recycling as part of its performance
measurement initiative. Through the
Self-Tracking Tool described above, institutions
are gathering retrospective data on numerous
recyclables  (e.g., aluminum, glass, office paper,
and newsprint).
Entering A
   WA5TEWISE4E

-------
Case Study: RecycIeMania RecydeMania is a
10-week, intercollegiate competition between schools from
across the country to raise student awareness of campus
recycling programs.15 Founded in 2001 by Miami University
(Ohio) and Ohio University, EPA WasteWise partners and
rival schools, the number of participating schools has
increased from 2 to 47 in just five years. Over the lastfrve
years, the two founding universities have increased recycling
on their campuses by 61 % and 56%, respectively.

RecycIeMania participants compete in two categories: the
Residential Areas Contest (determined by the weight of
recycled material per residential student), and the Campus-
Wide Competition (determined by the amount of recycled
material relative to the total waste produced on campus).
In 2005, Miami University (Ohio) won the Residential
Areas Contest by  recycling 72 pounds per student, making
it a three-time winner. As shown in the Campus-Wide
Recycling bar chart below, California State University in
San Marcos, CA,  won the Campus-Wide Competition with
a 44% overall recycling rate. In total, participating schools
recycled more than 10.4 million pounds of materials in 2005.16
            Campus-Wide Recycling
        by Top 5 RecycIeMania Schools
        California State   Tufts U
        U, San Marcos
Kalamazoo   Northwest   Washington
 College   Missouri State U  State U
                     College/University
  Source: RecycIeMania, 2005 Results.
                             Green Chemistry As illustrated in the
                             following case study, sector members are
                             developing courses and degree programs in Green
                             Chemistry, which aims to reduce or eliminate the
                             use or generation of hazardous substances in the
                             design, manufacture,  and use of chemical
                             products.

                             Case Study: Green Chemistry at the University
                             of Massachusetts-Boston Dr. John Warner created the
                             first Ph.D. program for Green Chemistry at the University
                             of Massachusetts-Boston.  Researchers and students in the
                             university's Green Chemistry program take their
                             "bioinspiration" by understanding how chemistry works
                             in nature and applying these principles to real-world
                             problems. As a result of its pioneering efforts, UM-Boston
                             has experienced increased enrollment in undergraduate
                             chemistry; received significant research funding in Green
                             Chemistry program areas; found itself flush with highly
                             qualified applicants for the Ph.D. program; and seen active
                             interest by employers in the program's graduates."

-------
em  I
                      CONSERVING WATER with us student
                      residences, athletic facilities, landscaping,
                      research laboratories, and other activities, a
                      typical college or university can use millions
                      of gallons of water each year. With such a
                      large volume of annual usage, even a small
                      improvement in the efficiency of water use can
                      translate into many gallons of water conserved.
                      Water conservation is particularly important for
                      institutions located in arid or drought-stricken
                      regions of the country, as exemplified in the
                      following case study.

                      Water conservation efforts on campuses often
                      include activities such as increasing awareness
                      of wasteful practices, using stormwater for
                      landscaping, and implementing more efficient
                      methods of heating and cooling buildings.
                      The sector is beginning to  collect information
                      on water usage as part of its  performance
                      measurement initiative, gathering retrospective
                      data on potable water and  irrigation and other
                      water usage over the last four years.
Case Study: Conserving Water at Colorado
College Faced with drought or near-drought conditions for
the past several years, Colorado Springs, CO, is one of
many cities along the Front Range of the Rocky Mountains
that has imposed water rationing. Colorado College, a small
liberal arts college in Colorado Springs,  has taken additional
steps to significantly reduce its water consumption. Over the
last few years, Colorado College has:

   Installed low-flow showerheads throughout the entire
   campus;
   Implemented a computer-controlled irrigation system
   that releases only the necessary amount of water dictated
   by weather conditions;
   Installed drip systems to water existing flowerbeds and
   incorporated the principles of xeriscaping (conservation
   of water) in new campus landscaping; and
   Used 100% non-potable water for irrigation - much of
   which would have been released into the Arkansas
   River.18

IMPROVING WATER QUALITY stormwater
discharges from  colleges and universities can
affect the quantity and quality of water that
must be handled downstream. To help reduce
stormwater runoff and pollution, Middlebury
College and the  University of Central Florida
have developed vegetated or turf roofs on
buildings. Other universities, such as the
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill,
have implemented measures such as storm
drain markings,  porous pavements, and stream
cleanups.19 The following case study illustrates
another institution's approach to controlling
stormwater.

Case Study:  Boston University's Stormwater
Controls In 1996, Boston University initiated a unique
project to protect and improve the Charles River, which runs
past its campus. The university undertook this project as
a Supplemental Environmental Project to fulfill the
requirements of an EPA Consent Decree. Partnering with
EPA Region 1, the Charles River Watershed Association, and
a local engineering firm, Boston University studied several
best management practices to remove pollutants from
stormwater and to minimize impacts on the river.

The university built three stormwater control systems at
three large parking lots and tested their pollutant control
efficiency from 2000 through 2002. A grassy swale
surrounding a storm drain with a catch basin was the most
successful technique for reducing stormwater pollutants,
removing more than 50% of the total suspended solids
during storm events. In addition, the practice is inexpensive,
requires little maintenance, and occupies a small footprint,
which is important in an urban setting.20

-------
ENCOURAGING GREEN CONSTRUCTION
To promote the development of sustainable
buildings, the U.S. Green Building Council
developed the Leadership in Energy and
Environmental Design® (LEED) Green
Building Rating System.21 In order to attain
LEED certification, a new building project
must demonstrate performance in five areas:
sustainable sites, water efficiency, energy
and atmosphere, materials and resources, and
indoor environmental quality
Recognizing the environmental benefits of
green buildings, colleges and universities have
become a leading sector in this area, accounting
for approximately 51 of the 342 LEED-certified
new buildings in the U.S., including those
identified in the following case study22 As
colleges, universities, and others continue to
construct green buildings, and new technologies
and practices are proven effective, the overall
costs of green construction are expected to
decline, which should make green buildings
more common in the future.
Case Study: Harvard University's Green Campus
Initiative As part of its Green Campus Initiative, Harvard
University is committed to adopting green building practices.
The campus has completed one LEED-certified building and
is working on four additional projects that are expected to
achieve certification. As a LEED Silver certified building,
Harvard's One Western Avenue Graduate Housing building
accommodates more than 350 residents while demonstrating
impressive environmental achievements. For example, the
project:

•  Purchases renewable energy certificates from landfill gas
   for 100% of its electricity;
)   Restored 59% of the previously developed site to open
   green space;
•  Diverted 90% of the construction waste from the landfill
   through recycling, reuse, or other means; and
•  Used environmentally friendly building materials, half of
   which contained recycled content.
As green building practices continue to evolve, Harvard
strives to ensure that future buildings meet the standards
for certification and provide the maximum return on its
investment. Through its work to date, the university has
learned a number of valuable lessons that contributed to
successful green building projects:

•  Incorporate LEED goals as early as possible in the design
   process;
•  Include building operations staff in the design process to
   ensure that the building will be functional;
   Hire construction professionals with expertise in green
   building design and LEED;
•  Integrate LEED requirements into construction
   specifications and make contractors accountable for
   them;
•  Have an internal staff member oversee LEED design and
   construction to save time and money; and
   Determine and quantify the benefits of LEED to both
   human health and productivity.23

-------
                            PROFILE The construction sector4 comprises
                            general and specialty contractors in the fields of
                            building construction, residential construction,
                            highway construction, heavy industrial
                            construction, and municipal utility construction,
                            as well as special trades such as plumbing,
                            heating, and demolition. Construction is a
                            large, trillion-dollar industry dominated by
                            very small businesses. Of the more than
                            700,000 construction firms nationwide, the vast
                            majority (85%) employ 10 or fewer people.3
Sector At-a-Glance
Number of Companies:
Value of Construction:
Number of Employees:
732.0001
$1 trillion2
6.4 million3
TRENDS In recent years, domestic construction
has continued its steady growth, fueled by new
residential starts, home improvement projects,
and other housing-related activities, as well as
growth in non-residential sectors such as health
care and eduction.6 Residential construction
accounted for 55% of total construction in 2004.7
Between 2003 and 2004:

   The value of total construction put in place increased
   by 11% to more than $1  trillion.
   The annual value of residential construction increased
   by 18% to $570 billion.
   The annual value of non-residential construction grew
   by a more modest 3% to $458 billion. Educational,
   commercial, and highway/street construction
   represented the largest shares of non-residential
   activity.8

The National Association of Home Builders
forecasted just over 2 million residential
construction starts in 2005, an increase of
6% over 2004." Non-residential construction
also was expected to experience modest growth
in 2005.10
KEY ENVIRONMENTAL OPPORTUNITIES
For the growing construction sector, there are
opportunities for environmental improvements
through managing and minimizing waste,
encouraging green construction, improving
water quality, and reducing air emissions.

The Associated General Contractors of America
(AGC) has recognized the need for performance
data and is considering ways to better assess the
sector's environmental performance.  Some
industry surveys have been conducted, and EPA
and AGC are learning from them how to obtain
more comprehensive and higher quality
information. However, the following factors
pose challenges to measuring and improving
environmental performance across the sector:
the large number of construction firms (and the
even larger number of construction sites), the
prevalence of small businesses, and the lack
of centralized data (federal or state) regarding
compliance with environmental requirements.
29

-------
MANAGING AND MINIMIZING WASTE
Construction provides various opportunities for
recycling construction and demolition (C&D)
debris. Additionally, the sector generates some
hazardous waste.

Construction and Demolition Debris
C&D debris refers to waste materials generated
during the process of construction, renovation,
or demolition of buildings, roads, and bridges.
C&D debris often contains bulky, heavy
materials such as the following: concrete, wood,
asphalt, gypsum (the main component of
drywall), metals, bricks, glass, plastics, salvaged
building components (e.g., doors, windows, and
plumbing fixtures), and trees, earth, and rocks
from clearing sites.

Comprehensive data on the amount of C&D
debris being recycled nationally is difficult to
obtain. As noted in the case study below, many
states currently have programs that deal with
C&D debris, and some have even established
model contract specifications regarding C&D
reuse and recycling in renovations or new
construction. However, states that have been
collecting data on this topic use different
methodologies and terminologies, so summation
of this data is difficult.
EPA is currently updating its 1998 report,
Characterization of Building-Related Construction
and Demolition Debris in the United States, which
analyzed the quantity and composition of
building-related C&D debris generated
nationally11 According to the original report,
in 1996 the construction, renovation, and
demolition of buildings generated more than
136 million tons of C&D debris. Although
20-30% of the C&D debris was recycled, the
majority (70-80%) ended up in municipal solid
waste landfills or in special C&D landfills.
In 2004, AGC surveyed its members regarding
their C&D debris generation and recycling
practices. Of the 328 members who completed
the survey, 58% indicated that they recycled
some C&D debris.  Steel and asphalt were the
most commonly recycled materials, reflecting
the inherent value of these materials.12

The construction sector and EPA are working
collaboratively on C&D debris issues through
numerous programs, including the Sector
Strategies Program, Resource Conservation
Challenge, WasteWise Building Challenge,
GreenScapes, Green Buildings Program, and
the Building Deconstruction Consortium.13
                                                                                                                                                                     30

-------
Case Study: Construction and Demolition
Debris in Florida As part of its mandate to evaluate
municipal solid waste under Florida's Solid Waste
Management Act, Florida's Department of Environmental
Protection (DEP) tracks the quantity of C&D debris
produced annually and the amount being recycled. Although
some states count road and bridge debris, commercial
structures, or land clearing debris, Florida tracks only
C&>D debris that is considered municipal solid waste, such
as debris from  residential construction or demolition. Waste
data from landfills is sent to the counties, who add or
subtract from these data based on their knowledge ofsolid
waste in the county and then send annual solid waste reports
to the DEP Beginning in 1999, reporting procedures were
improved to ensure that road and bridge debris was not
included.

As shown in the Construction & Demolition Debris
Generated & Recycled in Florida bar chart, while the total
quantity of debris produced increased between 1999 and
2002, the proportion recycled also increased from 6%
to 23% over that period.1* Along with improved reporting,
a number of/actors may have contributed to this increase
in CD recycling, including: (1) increased tipping fees at
state landfills, (2) the closure of a number ofrC&D landfills,
and (3) the availability of state-sponsored continuing
education for construction contractors on green construction.
One such course, Build Green and Profit, was attended by
about 5,000 contractors in the state.15
     Construction & Demolition  Debris
       Generated &  Recycled  in Florida
                         Year
2001         2002
   Total C&D Debris
 • Recycled
Source: FL DEP.
Hazardous Waste EPA hazardous waste data
on large quantity generators, as reported in the
National Biennial RCRA Hazardous Waste Report,
indicate that the construction sector accounted
for less than 1% of the hazardous waste generated
nationally in 2003.
In 2003, 76 construction sites reported 13,000
tons of hazardous waste generated. When
reporting hazardous wastes to EPA, quantities
can be reported as a single waste code (e.g., lead)
or as a commingled waste composed of multiple
types of wastes. Quantities of a specific waste
within the commingled waste are not reported.
The construction sector reported 49% of its
wastes as individual waste codes. Of the
individually reported wastes, the predominant
hazardous waste types reported by the 76
facilities in 2003 were lead, benzene, and
wastewater treatment sludge.16

-------
ENCOURAGING GREEN CONSTRUCTION
AGC and other stakeholders in the construction
sector have increasingly promoted methods to
reduce the environmental impact of construction
activities. These methods are known collectively
as "green construction." Tracking the sector's
activities in the area of green construction
provides some indication of movement toward
more sustainable construction practices. Progress
can be measured in part by the number of green
buildings constructed and by the number of
construction professionals with training in  green
construction techniques.
The Leadership in Energy and Environmental
Design® (LEED) Green Building Rating System
is a voluntary standard for evaluating high-
performance, sustainable buildings. This rating
system was developed by members of the U.S.
Green Building Council (USGBC), which counts
680 contractor or builder firms among its 6,000
member companies and organizations. In order
to attain LEED certification, a new building
project must demonstrate performance in five
areas: sustainable sites, water efficiency, energy
and atmosphere, materials and resources, and
indoor environmental quality17

As shown in the Cumulative Number of
LEED-Certified Buildings bar chart below, the
number of LEED-certified buildings in the U.S.
is increasing at an accelerating rate. By the end
of 2005, there were 325 LEED-certified
buildings.18
                                                         Cumulative Number of
                                                        LEED-Certified Buildings
Construction professionals can demonstrate
their understanding of green building practices
and principles and their familiarity with LEED
requirements, resources, and processes by
becoming LEED-accredited. Contractors
currently account for 1,387 (nearly 7%) of
the 20,663 LEED-accredited professionals in
the U.S.19

The Green Globes™ design and assessment
system is another commercial building rating
system gaining attention among both
construction and design professionals. In
2005, more than 500 professionals received
training on the Green Globes system, of
which 20% were construction professionals.
                                                                                                                                                                  32

-------
                              The following case study highlights how one
                              construction firm has met LEED certification
                              requirements at its new corporate headquarters.

                              Case Study: Alberici's LEED-Certifled Corporate
                              Headquarters Alberici Constructors, a construction firm
                              based in St. Louis, MO, recently converted a 50-year-old
                              manufacturing facility into the new headquarters for its
                              parent company, Alberici Corporation. Because of the
                              building's siting, design, materials, landscaping, construction
                              methods, and other features, it received LEED Platinum
                              certification, the highest level awarded by the USGBC.
                              In fact, the building scored the highest point total for any
                              LEED-certified building in the world.

                              To create the new headquarters,  Alberici deconstructed and
                              reused parts of a 60,000-square-foot warehouse on the
                              property, diverting more than  90% of the material from
                              landfills. Fifty-seven percent of all material used was
                              manufactured within 500 miles of the site, and 52% of all
                              the raw materials used were extracted locally. Recycled and
                              rapidly renewable materials were used extensively.

                              To reduce lighting and energy  costs,  the building was
                              designed to maximize sun exposure.  Virtually all employees
                              have a direct view to the outdoors from their workstations.
                              The raised floor system used throughout the building allows
                              individual airflow and temperature control through floor
                              vents. Ventilation and low-emitting adhesives, sealants,
                              paints, carpets, and composite wood ensure indoor air
                              quality.
A 65-kilowatt wind turbine will generate 20% of the
building's total energy needs, and a passive solar preheat
system heats the water. The building is 60% more energy
efficient than a conventional building of similar size.

Two retention ponds and native plants on the property
virtually eliminate stormwater runoff and the need for a
permanent irrigation system. A rainwater catchment system
is used for sewage conveyance, which saves an estimated
146,000 gallons of potable water annually. Six acres of
restored prairie and reconstructed wetlands provide wildlife
habitat.20

IMPROVING WATER QUALITY stormwater
runoff from construction and other land-
disturbing activities can significantly impact
water quality. Operators of regulated
construction sites are required to develop and
implement stormwater pollution prevention
plans and obtain National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permits from an
authorized state or from EPA. Stormwater
permits require construction firms to implement
certain management practices, but they do not
require any water-quality monitoring, so no
national data are available to track water quality
improvements from the changes in stormwater
management practices of the construction sector.
Comprehensive, national data on the
construction sector's compliance with
stormwater permit requirements also are
not available. This data gap is due in part to the
large number of construction sites nationwide
compared with the small number of sites that
EPA and state governments inspect  each year.
At this time, the best proxy available is to track
the sector's awareness of stormwater permit
requirements. An indicator of awareness is  the
number of stormwater permits applied for and
issued to  construction site operators in the states
for which EPA is the NPDES permitting
authority. EPA issues Construction General
Permits for five states - Alaska, Idaho,
Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and New
Mexico. Permits applied for and issued in those
states totaled more than 5,300 in 2004. This
number will be tracked in  future reports to
detect trends in permit applications.21
33

-------
REDUCING Am EMISSIONS Most air
emissions from the construction sector come
from non-road mobile sources (e.g., construction
equipment such as excavators, off-highway
trucks, and portable generators) and
construction processes (e.g., grading and
asphalt paving).

Diesel engines power many construction
vehicles and equipment, such as earth-moving
equipment, generators, and compressors.
Currently there are 1.8 million pieces of
diesel-powered construction equipment in
operation in the U.S.22 These engines are a major
source of air pollution, particularly emissions of
nitrogen oxides (NOX) and paniculate matter
(PM). Diesel exhaust also contains sulfur, which
contributes to sulfur oxide (SOX) emissions.

Current EPA data combine construction-related
emissions with other sources, and the portion
of these emissions due to construction activities
alone cannot be determined. According to EPA's
National Emissions Inventory, as a group,
non-road diesel engines (e.g., construction and
agricultural equipment) contributed 17% of NOX
emissions nationally (3.5 million tons per year)
and 31% of NOX emissions from mobile sources
in 2002.  These percentages can be considerably
higher in some urban areas.23

On a national basis, the strategy for controlling
air pollution from diesel engines involves stricter
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
they 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.

AGC is working actively with EPA to ensure
the success of a new federal diesel emissions
reduction program for the construction sector
called Clean Construction USA. This is part of
EPA's National Clean Diesel Campaign to reduce
the pollution emitted from diesel engines
through the implementation of varied control
strategies. In 2005, EPA awarded 9 grants
totaling $945,000 for reducing diesel emissions
from off-road construction equipment.24 As
illustrated in the case study below, several states
have instituted retrofitting programs of their own.

Case Study: Voluntary Diesel Retrofit Programs
in California and Texas Across the nation,
construction companies are participating in voluntary
programs to reduce air emissions from their equipment
fleets. California's Carl Meyer Memorial Air Quality
Standards Program (Carl Meyer Program) and the Texas
Emissions Reduction Plan (TERP) are two programs in
which construction companies are participating.

For the past seven years, California's Carl Moyer Program
has been providing incentive-based funds for the reduction of
NOX and PM emissions from various sources, including
construction equipment. In the first four years of the
program, 106 construction off-road engines were retrofitted
with pollution control equipment or repowered with newer
engines. Combined, these projects have reduced NOX
emissions from construction equipment by 190 tons per year,
at an average cost of $4,400 per ton ofNOx reduced. This
compares favorably with California Air Resources Board
estimates for the 2003 State Implementation Plan, which
averaged about $8,300 per ton ofNOx reduced. PM
emissions from construction equipment have been reduced
by nearly 16 tons per year.25

In 2001, TERP was established to improve air quality by
providing voluntary financial incentives to companies to
offset the incremental cost of reducing NOX emissions.
Construction contractors participating in the program have
improved their fleets by purchasing cleaner equipment,
replacing old diesel engines, retrofitting engines with
emissions reduction technology, and/or using cleaner burning
fuel. As of the December 2004 grant cycle, 45 AGC member
companies in Texas have conducted 64 retrofit projects.
These projects are projected to remove a total of almost
6,000 tons of ozone-producing NOxfrom the air over the life
of the projects.26
                                                                                                                                                                                 34

-------
PROFILE The forest products sector4 includes
companies that grow, harvest, or process wood
and wood fiber for use in products such as paper,
lumber, board products, fuels, and many other
specialty materials. While the industry has
operations in all 50 states, Wisconsin, California,
and Georgia are the nation's top three producers
of forest products.3

The forest products sector can be divided into
two major categories: (1) pulp, paper, and
paperboard products and (2) engineered and
traditional wood products. After decades as a
global leader, the American industry is
increasingly challenged by traditional
competitors (e.g.,  Canada, Scandinavia) as
well as emerging nations (e.g., Brazil, China,
Indonesia). Despite this competition, however,
the U.S. remains the world's leading producer of
pulp and paper products and wood products.6
Sector At-a-Glance
Number of Facilities:
Value of Shipments:
Number of Employees:
14.4001
$215 billion2
765.6003
TRENDS The depreciation of the U.S. dollar
against other major currencies in 2004 enhanced
the competitiveness of U.S. forest products
producers in both domestic and export markets.7
With the exception of newspaper, domestic
consumption of forest products generally
increased from 2003 to 2004. Low interest rates
spurred the residential construction industry,
which led to increased demand and prices for
lumber and other forest products used in
residential construction.

According to a recent long-term analysis of
U.S. forest products markets by the U.S. Forest
Service, per capita consumption of forest
products is expected to remain static, and
population growth will be the primary driver
of increased  consumption of forest products.8
KEY ENVIRONMENTAL OPPORTUNITIES
For the forest products sector, the greatest
opportunities for environmental improvements
are in increasing energy efficiency, reducing
air emissions, managing and minimizing waste
and toxics, conserving water, improving water
quality, and encouraging sustainable forestry.

The forest products sector has tracked its
environmental performance for more than 30
years. Through its Environmental, Health, and
Safety (EHS) Principles Program and Verification
Program, the American Forest & Paper
Association (AF&PA) has published
three biennial reports on EHS program
implementation and environmental performance
of its membership.9 The results of these data
collection efforts are described in more detail
throughout this chapter.

-------
INCREASING ENERGY EFFICIENCY Despite
major advances in energy efficiency and
productivity over the last several decades, the
forest products industry remains one of the most
energy-intensive in the country.10 In 2002, the
forest products sector consumed 2,657 trillion
Btus of energy, which represented nearly 12% of
total energy consumption by U.S. manufacturing
industries that year. As illustrated in the Energy
Consumption  bar chart, when normalized
by annual value of shipments, the sector's 2002
energy consumption was 10% lower than in
1994. Within the sector, the pulp and paper
segment accounted for 86% of the energy used,
while wood products accounted for the
remaining 14%.n

To minimize  the environmental impact of its
energy consumption, the sector is investing in a
variety of generation technologies and alternative
fuels, including co-generation and biomass fuel.
3,500
3,000
2,500
'='2,000
o
'£ 1,500
5 1,000
CO
500
0
Energy Consumption
by the Forest Products Sector





1994 1998 2002
Year
* Normalized by annual value of shipments.
Sources: U.S. DOE, U.S. Census Bureau.
Cogenercttion The forest products sector is
a leader in the utilization of co-generation, a
highly efficient process that produces electricity
and heat from a single fuel source. Within the
sector, more than 65% of the industry's electricity
demand is co-generated onsite, making it the
largest co-generator in the U.S. manufacturing
sector.12

Biomass Fuel Although the forest products
industry ranks third among U.S. industrial
sectors in fossil fuel consumption, it is unique in
the extent to which it uses byproducts generated
in the manufacture of pulp, paper, lumber, and
other wood products as a biomass fuel source.
The forest products industry currently meets
more than half of its energy needs with
renewable fuel sources.

As shown in the Distribution of Forest Products
Energy Consumption pie chart, the sector is
fueled primarily by "other" fuels, composed
                                                        Distribution of Forest Products
                                                              Energy Consumption
                                                             Net Electricity 10%
                                                   Other 55%
                                                                              Residual Fuel Oil 4%
                                                                                Distillate Fuel Oil 1%
                                                                                    Natural Gas
                                                                                       21%
                                                                                 LGP and NGL<1%
                                                                               Coal 9%
                                                   Source: U.S. DOE, 2002.
of byproducts such as pulping/black liquor
(accounting for nearly 60% of "other" fuels)
and wood wastes such as wood chips and bark
(accounting for more than 30% of "other"
fuels).13 The forest products industry is the
largest user of these wood byproduct fuels,
representing 93% of total use by U.S.
manufacturers. The following case study
illustrates sector initiatives to generate more
energy from biomass.

Case Study: Agenda 2020 Technology Alliance
The forest products industry is developing new, more efficient
technologies to generate energy from biomass through the
Agenda 2020  Technology Alliance, an industry-led
partnership with academia and government. Agenda 2020
aims to reinvent the forest products industry through
innovations in materials, processes, and markets. The
partnership has implemented pilot projects under seven
platforms: advancing the forest hiorefinery, nanotechnology
for the forest products industry, breakthrough manufacturing
and technologies, next generation fiber recovery and
utilization, positively impacting the environment, advancing
the wood products revolution, and the technologically
advanced workforce.11

-------
                             As part of Agenda 2020's Advancing the Forest Biorefinery
                             platform, Georgia-Pacific's Big Island, VA, facility has
                             installed a steam reformer, a type of gasification technology.
                             The reformer (see picture on this page) uses heat and
                             pressure to convert spent pulping liquors to a gas, which
                             can then be burned to produce energy to power mill
                             operations and, potentially, generate surplus energy that
                             can be sold to the grid.

                             Compared to existing baseline operations, this  technology
                             will result in a reduction in process emissions of 10,000 tons
                             per year. This technology also has the potential to eliminate
                             the need for power boilers, a significant source of criteria air
                             pollutants from this industry.

                             Over the past year, Georgia-Pacific has made several design
                             improvements, and the reformers are now in continuous
                             operation. Currently 100% of the product gas is converted to
                             process heat. Georgia-Pacific's goal is to demonstrate the
                             ability of the system to operate reliably and achieve designed
                             levels of energy and chemical recovery while maintaining
                             environmental emissions at or below the limits set by the
                             environmental permits.  This steam reformer technology,
                             once refined, offers the possibility of significant reductions
                             of process air emissions from pulp and paper mills located
                             throughout the U.S.15
REDUCING AIR EMISSIONS The forest
products sector tracks releases of two criteria
air pollutants - nitrogen oxides (NOX) and
sulfur dioxide (SO2) - and is developing tools to
calculate releases of greenhouse gases (GHG)
into the air.
                                                     Nitrogen Oxides and Sulfur Dioxide As
                                                     shown in the Air Emissions bar chart, between
                                                     2000 and 2002, emissions of NOX per ton of
                                                     production in the forest products sector
                                                     remained unchanged in both segments of the
                                                     industry (pulp and paper, and wood products),
                                                     while emissions of SO2 per ton of production
                                                     increased by 6%.16 This increase in SO2 may be
                                                     attributed to facilities switching fuels in response
                                                     to the increasing price of natural gas.
                                                                      Air Emissions
                                                                from Pulp & Paper Mills
          I MM,
       Sulfur Dioxide

Source: AF&PA.
1999       2000        2002
     Year
             Nitrogen Oxides
mm

-------
Greenhouse Gases Working with their
international counterparts, the U.S. forest
products industry has developed calculation
tools for estimating greenhouse gas emissions
from pulp and paper mills and wood products
facilities. These calculation tools address the
industry's unique attributes, such as the
neutrality of biomass fuel emissions, and allow
the international industry to collect credible,
transparent data that is comparable around the
world. The methodologies, which are based on
the Greenhouse Gas Protocol created by the
World Resources Institute (WRI) and the World
Business Council for Sustainable Development
(WBCSD), received international peer review
and were subsequently adopted by WRI/WBCSD
as the industry modules for their protocol.17

Additionally, the industry has developed a tool
to assess the amount of carbon dioxide (CO2)
stored in wood and paper products. CO2, the
primary greenhouse gas,  is removed from the
atmosphere by trees, and a portion of the CO2
that trees absorb remains fixed in wood and
paper products throughout their useful lives.
Essentially, harvesting and manufacturing of
forest products transfers CO2 from forests to
products. The new product calculation tool,
which has been accepted by the international
industry, represents the first consensus method
for calculating the amount of CO2 stored in
products. The tool has been submitted to
WRI/WBCSD for peer review18
In 2003, AF&PA joined Climate VISION, a
voluntary program administered by the U.S.
Department of Energy to reduce GHG intensity
(the ratio of emissions to economic outputs).
AF&PA has committed to a 12% decrease in
GHG intensity by  2012 relative to 2000.19

In addition, three forest products companies
have joined EPAs  Climate Leaders program,
which helps partners to develop long-term
comprehensive climate change strategies, set
corporate-level GHG reduction goals, and
inventory emissions to measure progress.
Partner companies include International Paper,
Boise Cascade, and The Collins Companies.20

MANAGING AND MINIMIZING WASTE The
forest products sector generates hazardous waste
and is working to  increase the recovery rate for
post-consumer paper.

Hazardous Waste EPA hazardous waste data
on large quantity generators, as reported in the
National Biennial RCRA Hazardous Waste Report,
indicate that the forest products sector accounted
for less than 1% of the hazardous waste generated
nationally in 2003. In 2003, 189 forest products
facilities reported 54,000 tons of hazardous waste
generated. The majority of this waste (98%) was
from pulp and paper product manufacturing
operations, while 2% was generated from wood
product manufacturing operations. The majority
(78%) of this waste was generated through
secondary processes, such as routine leak
collection and floor sweeping. Destruction and
treatment were the waste management methods
most utilized by this sector.

When reporting hazardous wastes to EPA,
quantities can be reported as a single waste
code (e.g., chromium) or as a commingled waste
composed of multiple types of wastes. Quantities
of a specific waste within the commingled waste
are not reported. The forest products sector
reported more than 82% of its wastes as
individual waste codes. Of the individually
reported wastes, the predominant hazardous
waste types reported in 2003 include corrosive
waste (38,000 tons), ignitable waste (5,400
tons), chromium, and spent non-halogenated
solvents. Additional quantities of these wastes
also were reported as part of commingled
wastes.21

Paper Recycling In 2003, the paper recovery
rate reached an all-time high of greater than
50%. For some grades such as corrugated boxes
and newspapers the recovery rate was more
than 70%. Members of AF&PA  aim to increase
recovery of all paper consumed in the U.S. to
55% by 2012.22

-------
MANAGING AND MINIMIZING Toxics
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).

In 2003, 843 facilities reported 1.4 billion
pounds of chemicals released (including
disposal) or otherwise managed through
treatment, energy recovery, or recycling. Of
this quantity, 88% was managed, while the
remaining 12% was disposed or released to
the environment, as shown in the TRI Waste
Management pie chart. Of those chemicals
disposed or released to the environment,
8% were disposed, while 92% were released
into air and water.
          TRI Waste Management
       by the Forest Products Sector
                        Air Releases 82%
                                  Water Releases
                                      10%
                                   Disposal
                                     8%
                'Recycling
                   6%
            Energy
           Recovery
             12%
  Source: U.S. EPA, 2003.
As shown in the Total TRI Disposal or Other
Releases line graph, the annual normalized
quantity of chemicals disposed or released
by this sector decreased by 27% from 1994 to
2003, with more than one-third of this decline
occurring between 2000 and 2003. Over the
same 10-year period, the sector's normalized
releases to air and water declined by 31%,
with one-quarter of this decline occurring
from 2000 to 2003.

In 2003, the total pounds of TRI chemicals
disposed or released by the sector were
dominated by methanol, which accounted for
49% of total releases and disposal. Ammonia,
manganese, and hydrochloric acid together
accounted for another 22%.23
    Total TRI Disposal or Other Releases
       by the Forest Products Sector
   100

    50
       1994 1995 1996
                  1997  1998
                      Year
     —*— Disposal or Releases, total
 * Normalized by annual value of shipments.
 Sources: U.S. EPA, U.S. Census Bureau.
                                                                           • Air and Water Releases, only
Data from TRI allow comparisons of the total
quantities of a sector's reported chemical releases
across years, as presented below. However, this
comparison does not take into account the
relative toxicity of each chemical. Chemicals
vary greatly in toxicity, meaning they differ in
how harmful they can be to human health.
To account for differences in toxicities, each
chemical can be weighted by a relative toxicity
weight using EPA's Risk-Screening
Environmental Indicators (RSEI) model.

The TRI Air and Water Releases line graph
presents trends for the sector's air and
water releases in both reported pounds and
toxicity-weighted results. When weighted for
toxicity, the sector's normalized air and water
releases decreased by almost 20% from 1994
to 2003, with almost one-quarter of this
occuring between 2000 and 2003.
TRI Air and Water Releases
250
200
»
I 15°
& 100
E
o 50
Q_
0
by the Forest Products Sector
. ^--^_
'• ••^^^



1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
70 *?
E
0
60 IE
15
50 m
40 £
CC.
30 U
- §
Year
— • — Pounds Toxicity-Weighted Results
* Normalized by annual value of shipments.
Sources: U.S. EPA, U.S. Census Bureau.

-------
The table below presents a list of the chemicals
released that accounted for 90% of the sector's
total toxicity-weighted releases to air and water
in 2003. More than 99% of the sector's toxicity-
weighted results were attributable to air releases,
while discharges to water accounted for less than
1%. Therefore, reducing air emissions of these
chemicals represents the greatest opportunity
for the sector to make progress in reducing the
toxicity of its releases.

      Top  TRI Chemicals Based on
       Toxicity-Weighted Results
   AIR RELEASES (99%)    WATER RELEASES (<1%)
        Acrolein
        Manganese
       Sulfuric Acid
       Formaldehyde
      Chlorine Dioxide
       Diisocyanates
         Lead
      Acetaldehyde
Polycyclic Aromatic Compounds
      Manganese
                        The normalized air releases of the chemicals
                        driving the sector's toxicity-weighted results
                        fluctuated as follows: acrolein increased by 30%
                        from 2000 to 2002, but then decreased by 11%
                        from 2002 to 2003; while sulfuric acid decreased
                        by 20% and manganese increased by 51%
                        from 2000 to 2003. The dominant source of
manganese emissions at forest products facilities
is the burning of wood and solid fuels such as
coal.24 In 1997, clarification of TRI reporting
requirements regarding combustion byproducts
resulted in additional facilities reporting
manganese and thus an increase in the amount
reported to TRI.23

-------
CONSERVING WATER The forest products
sector is the third largest industrial consumer
of water among U.S. manufacturers, with the
pulp and paper segment accounting for most
of the water consumption.26 The pulp and
paper industry has significantly reduced water
consumption in past decades and continues to
make progress in this area. Between 2000 and
2002, the pulp and paper industry lowered
the volume of water discharged per ton of
production by 5%, as shown in the Wastewater
Discharges bar chart.27
IMPROVING WATER QUALITY Due to the
large volumes of water used in pulp and paper
processes, wastewater from virtually all U.S.
mills is treated using primary and secondary
treatment, either onsite or at a wastewater
treatment plant, 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). As
shown in the Wastewater Discharges bar chart,
between 2000 and 2002, the discharge rate of
                                                 Wastewater Discharges
                                                from Pulp & Paper Mills
                                              IJJJJ
                                                            Year
                                         Source: AF&PA.
                                                                Volume - thousand gal/ton
                                                                TSS - Ibs/ton
                                                                BOD - Ibs/ton
BOD, a measure of the amount of organic
contaminants present in wastewater, decreased
by 10%. During the same time period, TSS
discharges decreased by 5%, from 4 pounds
per ton to 3.8 pounds per ton.

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.28 This
substitution also has resulted in a 44% reduction
of AOX, which is an indicator of chlorinated
organic substances, between 2000 and 2002,
as shown in the Adsorbable Organic Halide
Releases bar chart.29
                                            Adsorbable Organic Halide Releases
                                                from Pulp & Paper Mills
                                                            Year
                                                                                Source: AF&PA.

-------
The following case study illustrates research
efforts underway to determine the potential
impacts of mill effluent on aquatic communities.

Case Study: Measuring Mill Impacts on Aquatic
Communities In 1998, the National Council for Air and
Stream Improvement, an independent, nonprofit research
institute, embarked on a long-term study of mill receiving
waters to determine the potential impacts of mill effluent on
aquatic communities. The study is designed to determine
whether aquatic communities are stable, healthy, and
diverse by analyzing population and community-lev el
measurements at points both above and below mill discharge
points on a seasonal and yearly basis. All of the research is
carried out under the advisement of experts in aquatic
biology. The study includes the following four U.S. locations,
which represent a spectrum of pulp and paper mill processes,
effluent concentrations, and freshwater ecosystem types:
Codorus  Creek, PA; the McKenzie and Willamette Rivers,
OR; and the Leaf River, MS. Six years into the study,
preliminary results show no downstream increases in algal
growth, minor nutrient contributions, weak or non-detectible
water quality  associations with macroinvertebrates, and fish
community patterns appearing driven by habitat rather than
water quality.30
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,
the majority of which is owned by private,
non-industrial owners; 13% of timberland is
owned by the forest products industry.

Increasingly, timberland is being managed
using sustainable forestry practices. Participation
in the Sustainable Forestry Initiative® (SFI)
program is a condition of membership in
AF&PA. The SFI Standard, developed by an
independent Sustainable Forestry Board,
establishes a land stewardship ethic that
integrates the reforestation, nurturing, and
harvesting of trees for useful products with the
conservation of soil, air and water resources,
wildlife and fish habitat, and forest aesthetics.
By the end of 2005, over 136 million acres
had been independently certified to The SFI
Standard. In the past year The SFI Standard
has been expanded to include new performance
measures and indicators. These indicators
include new provisions related to international
procurement, old growth, invasive exotic species,
imperiled and critically imperiled species,
landscape assessments, wood supply  chain
monitoring, and social issues.31
                                                                                                                                                                                  42

-------
PROFILE The iron and steel sector4
manufactures the steel used in the production
of thousands of manufactured products,
ranging from toasters to automobiles to
defense applications. Steel is also a key material
in infrastructure such as office buildings and
bridges. Construction, automotive, and industrial
equipment account for more than  75% of total
U.S. steel consumption, with construction
representing 22% of total steel shipments.3

The highest geographic concentration of steel
mills is in the Great Lakes region,  including
Indiana, Illinois, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan,
and New York.  Approximately 80% of U.S.
steelmaking capacity is in these states.6

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

   Integrated steel mills use a blast furnace 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.
Sector At-a-Glance
Number of Facilities:
Value of Shipments:
Number of Employees:
871
$43.3 billion2
123.5433
TRENDS Advances in technology, changes in
markets, and global competition have led to
significant restructuring in the iron and steel
sector. Between 2000 and 2003, high levels of
imports and other factors caused many U.S. steel
companies to declare bankruptcy. For example,
more than 30 companies declared  bankruptcy
during 2001 and 2002. As a result, the domestic
steel industry now has fewer companies and
fewer steel mills.7

   From 2000 to 2003, labor productivity in the U.S. iron
   and steel  sector increased by an average of nearly 6%
   per year. Over the same period, the sector's workforce
   declined by nearly 22,000 employees to approximately
   124,000 in 2003.8
   To better compete in the global market, the U.S. steel
   industry is developing new process technologies and
   expanding into new markets. Steel producers
   anticipate increasing their capital spending by 30%
   over the next two years.9
KEY ENVIRONMENTAL OPPORTUNITIES
For the iron and steel sector, the greatest
opportunities for environmental improvements
are increasing energy efficiency, managing and
minimizing waste and toxics, and reducing air
emissions.

The iron and steel sector is working to generate
better data on the sector's environmental
performance. For example, the American Iron
and Steel Institute (AISI) collects data for five
indicators of sustainability: energy intensity,
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions,  material
efficiency, steel recycling, and implementation
of environmental management systems.

-------
INCREASING ENERGY EFFICIENCY
The iron and steel industry is one of the most
energy-intensive industries in the U.S.10 As
shown in the Energy Consumption bar chart,
in 2002, the iron and steel sector consumed
1,308 trillion Btus of energy, accounting for
almost 6% of total U.S. manufacturing energy
consumption. When normalized for production,
this represents a 21% decrease over the
eight-year period from 1994 to 2002. As
shown in the Distribution of Iron & Steel Energy
Consumption pie chart, the iron and steel sector
is primarily fueled by coal (31%), natural gas
(26%), coke (20%), and net electricity (12%).n

The energy intensity of producing steel via the
two types of steelmaking technology differs.
In a 1994 study, the U.S. Energy Information
Administration estimated the average intensity
of producing semi-finished steel at integrated
mills using EOF steelmaking to be about 20
million Btus/ton, versus about 8 million Btus/ton
2,000
1,600
%r
.1 1,200
^ 80°
3
£
400
0
* Normaliz
Sources:
Energy Consumption
by the Iron & Steel Sector

1994 1998 2002
Year
ed by annual production.
U.S. DOE, US6S.
for EAF steel producers.12 When making steel
with scrap rather than virgin materials (iron ore,
coal, and limestone), steelmakers save
natural resources and reduce annual energy
consumption by an amount that would power
18 million households for one year.13

The iron and steel sector is continuing to search
for new ways of improving the energy efficiency
of its operations. In 2003, AISI joined Climate
VISION, a voluntary  program administered
by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to
reduce GHG intensity (the ratio of emissions
to economic outputs). Because of the  close
relationship between energy use and GHG
emissions, the steel industry has set energy
targets and is actively funding  research of energy-
efficient technologies to  help achieve this goal.14

As part of its Climate VISION  commitment, AISI
has committed to improving its members' energy
efficiency by 10% by  2012 (from 2002 levels).13
                                                           Distribution of Iron & Steel
                                                               Energy Consumption
                                                      Shipments of Energy
                                                       Sources Produced
                                                          Onsite 9%
                                                        Other 1%
                                                      Coke 20°/o	
                       Net Electricity 12%
                              Residual Fuel Oil <1°/o
                                 Distillate Fuel Oil
                                       1%
                                                                                      Natural Gas
                                                                                        26%
                                                                          Coal 31%
                                                    Source: U.S. DOE, 2002.
Between 2002 and 2003, the industry reduced
its energy intensity per ton of steel shipped by
approximately 7%. The industry's aggregate
carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions per ton of steel
shipped were reduced by a comparable
percentage during this same period.16

The following case study illustrates efforts by
the sector to improve the energy efficiency of
automobiles, an end user of steel products.

Case Study: Improved Fuel Economy Through
Steel  Innovation An  international consortium of steel
companies recently completed a series of research projects
to help automakers improve the energy efficiency of
automobiles by reducing their weight. Reducing vehicle
weight is one way to improve fuel economy, but it is very
challenging to do so while maintaining vehicle safety and
affordability (as was done in this study).

This research effort involved 35 steel manufacturers
representing 22 countries. More than $60 million was
dedicated over nine years to developing new types of
advanced high-strength steel (AHSS)for vehicle applications.
The research culminated in prototype vehicles that
incorporated innovations in the use of steel for auto bodies,
closures, and suspensions. The mid-size design achieved
combined city-highway gas mileage of over 50 miles per
gallon  while meeting or exceeding crash safety requirements
and affordability criteria.

The consortium has communicated its findings globally
and has assisted automakers in replicating these innovative
applications in their own vehicles. These innovative steel
applications can now be found in nearly every vehicle  on
the road today..17

-------
          . ,
MANAGING AND MINIMIZING WASTE AH
new steel is made using at least some recycled
steel, allowing steel to remain America's most
recycled material.18 At the same time, the sector
generates hazardous waste.

Steel Recycling  The Steel Recycling Institute
announced a recycling rate for steel of 71% in
2004, with total tons of steel recycled increasing
by more than 7 million tons from 2003. In
addition, the composition of the steel recycled in
2004 contained almost 35% more post-consumer
scrap than  in 1980.19 To achieve this recycling
rate, the steel industry has become an efficient
user of raw materials and has increased its
demand for post-consumer scrap. The industry
is now one of the largest consumers of recycled
materials in the world.20 Even with this success,
however, steelmaking continues to present a
variety of opportunities to further improve the
recycling stream, increase reuse of co-products
and byproducts, and reduce releases to the
environment.

Obsolete automobiles are the most recycled
consumer product. Each year, the steel industry
recycles more than 14 million tons of steel from
end-of-life vehicles. This is equivalent to nearly
13.5 million new automobiles.21 In 2003, the
recycling rate for automobiles was 103%,
indicating that the steel industry recycled more
steel from automobiles than was used in the
domestic production of new vehicles.22
The following case study highlights efforts to
reduce mercury emissions resulting from
automotive recycling.

Case Study: Reducing Mercury in the Recycling
Stream One pressing problem in the use of scrap from
vehicles is the presence of mercury. Automakers use mercury
in various applications. Until recently, the most prevalent use
was in hood and trunk convenience light switches and
anti-lock braking systems (ABS) in domestic automobiles.

In 2003, automakers phased out the use of mercury-
containing switches in new vehicles. However, few
automotive dismantlers currently remove these switches
from the retired vehicles they receive before the vehicles are
flattened or shredded, so  mercury is being carried into the
recycling stream.23

To address this problem, several states have passed laws
or created voluntary programs prompting the recovery
of mercury switches from end-of-life vehicles. EPA,
steelmakers, automakers, recyclers, states, and other
stakeholders are now trying to address the problem
nationally in order to recover mercury switches and
reduce associated emissions from steelmaking in the
short-term and to reduce the use of toxic materials in
new products in the future.24

Hazardous Waste EPA hazardous waste data
on large quantity generators, as reported in the
National Biennial RCRA Hazardous Waste Report,
indicate the iron and steel sector accounted for
4% of the hazardous waste generated nationally
in 2003.
In 2003, 79 facilities in the iron and steel sector
reported 1.3 million tons of hazardous waste
generated. More than 83% of this waste consisted
of residuals from air pollution control devices.
The waste management method most utilized
by this sector was deepwell or underground
injection, although one facility accounted for
the majority of the waste reported as managed
by this method. Other common methods
included metals recovery, landfill  or surface
impoundment, and stabilization or  chemical
fixation.

When reporting hazardous wastes to EPA,
quantities can be reported as a single waste code
(e.g., spent pickle liquor) or as a commingled
waste composed of multiple wastes. Quantities of
a specific waste within the commingled waste are
not reported. The iron and steel sector reported
more than half of its wastes as individual waste
codes. Of the individually reported  wastes, the
predominant hazardous waste types reported in
2003 included emission control dust or sludge
(629,100 tons), spent pickle liquor  (72,800
tons), cadmium, and chromium. Additional
quantities of these wastes were also reported
as part of commingled wastes.23

MANAGING  AND MINIMIZING  Toxics  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).
45

-------
In 2003, 82 facilities in the iron and steel sector
reported 636 million pounds of chemicals
released (including disposal) or otherwise
managed through treatment, energy recovery,
or recycling. Of this quantity, 62% was managed,
while the remaining 38% was disposed or
released to the environment, as shown in the
TRI Waste Management pie chart. Of those
chemicals disposed or released to the
environment, 96% were disposed and 4% were
released into air and water.

As shown in the Total TRI Disposal or Other
Releases line graph, the annual normalized
quantity of chemicals disposed or released to
the environment by the iron and steel sector
increased by 171% from 1994 to 2003, with
one-third of this increase occurring from 2000
to 2003. Over the same 10-year period, the
sector's  normalized releases to air and water
declined by 42% and remained fairly steady
between 2000 and 2003.
          TRI Waste Management
         by the Iron & Steel Sector
  Energy Recovery Treatment
                 4%
                                     Disposal
                                      96%
   Recycling
     49%
                         Water Releases  Air Releases
                             2%        2%
These contrasting trends occurred during a
period of time in which numerous steel mills
installed or upgraded air pollution control
equipment, which often results in the generation
of additional pollution control residues, such as
EAF dust and filter cakes.  The disposal of the
toxic chemicals in these residues must be
reported to TRI.26 Although many pollution
control dusts can be  recycled, economic factors
can make disposal more likely. For example, zinc
prices reached record lows in the  mid-1990s and
in 2002, making the  recycling of EAF dust less
economical.27

In 2003, metals accounted for the majority of the
total pounds of chemicals  disposed or released
by the sector. Zinc accounted for  72%, and
manganese accounted for another 16%. Along
with lead and chromium, these metals accounted
for 93% of all pounds reported to  TRI as
disposed or released  by the iron and steel
sector.28
    Total TRI Disposal or Other Releases
          by the Iron & Steel Sector
  £  200
 _o
 ^  150

 -a  100
  E
 £  50

     0
       1994  1995  1996  1997  1998 1999 2000 2001  2002  2003
                       Year
      —*- Disposal or Releases, total  -•- Air and Water Releases, only
 * Normalized by annual production.
  Sources: U.S. EPA, US6S.
Data from TRI allow comparisons of the total
quantities of a sector's reported chemical releases
across years, as presented below. However, this
comparison does not take into account the
relative toxicity of each chemical. Chemicals vary
greatly in toxicity, meaning they differ in how
harmful they can be to human health. To
account for differences in toxicities, each
chemical can be weighted by a relative toxicity
weight using EPA's Risk-Screening
Environmental Indicators (RSEI) model.

The TRI Air and Water Releases line graph
presents trends for the sector's air and water
releases in both reported pounds and
toxicity-weighted results. When weighted for
toxicity, the sector's normalized air and water
releases show a 69% decline from 1994 to  2003.
         TRI Air and Water  Releases
          by the Iron  & Steel Sector
       1994  1995 1996  1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
                       Year
                                                                                                  * Normal
                                                                                                   Sources
         -Pounds
      zed by annual production.
       U.S. EPA, US6S.
                                                                                                                             Toxicity-Weighted Results

-------
•  >i
                  The table below presents a list of the chemicals
                  released that accounted for 90% of the sector's
                  total toxicity-weighted releases to air and water
                  in 2003. More than 99% of these results were
                  attributable to air releases, while discharges to
                  water accounted for less than 1%. Therefore,
                  reducing air emissions of these chemicals
                  represents the greatest opportunity for the sector
                  to make progress in reducing the toxicity of its
                  releases.

                        Top TRI Chemicals Based  on
                         Toxicity-Weighted Results
                    AIR RELEASES (99%)    WATER RELEASES (<1%)
Manganese
Chromium
Lead

Lead
Copper
Chromium
Source: U.S. EPA
                  Manganese, chromium, and lead releases to air,
                  the primary contributors to the sector's toxicity-
                  weighted results, have remained steady in recent
                  years. Manganese is inherent in the iron and
                  steel production process and is one of the
                  chemicals that drives  the toxicity-weighted
                  results.
EPA's RSEI model conservatively assumes that
chemicals are released in the form associated
with the highest toxicity weight. With respect to
chromium releases to air and water, therefore,
the model assumes that 100% of these emissions
are hexavalent chromium (the most toxic form,
with significantly higher oral and inhalation
toxicity weights than trivalent chromium).29
Research indicates that the hexavalent form of
chromium does not constitute a majority of total
chromium releases from this sector.30 Thus, RSEI
analyses overestimate the  relative harmfulness of
chromium in the sector.
REDUCING Am EMISSIONS steeimakmg
generates a variety of air emissions, including air
toxics and GHG. While emissions of air toxics
during the manufacturing process are largely
captured in the TRI air releases discussed above,
this section takes a closer look at both of these
chemical categories.

-------
Air Toxics Air toxics, also called hazardous
air pollutants, are a subset of the TRI chemicals
presented above. The Clean Air Act designates
188 chemicals (182 of which are included in
TRI) that can cause serious health and
environmental effects as air toxics.

In 2003, 75 facilities in the sector reported air
toxics releases of 2.1 million pounds. As shown
in the TRI Air Toxics Releases line graph,
normalized air toxics releases decreased by 70%
from 1994 to 2003. Since 2000, normalized air
toxics releases have remained fairly steady31
Toxicity-weighted results for air toxics releases
declined by 69% over the 10-year period.32
           TRI Air Toxics Releases
          by the Iron & Steel Sector
       1994  1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
                       Year
      —•—Pounds
 * Normalized by annual production.
   Sources: U.S. EPA, US6S.
—— Toxicity-Weighted Results
Greenhouse Gases Steelmaking generates
GHG emissions both directly and indirectly. For
example, integrated mills produce CO2 when
transforming coke and iron ore into iron.
Additionally, both minimills and integrated mills
consume significant amounts of electricity, the
generation of which often results in GHG
emissions. Between 1994 and 2003, the sector's
aggregate GHG emissions fell by more than
25%.33

In 2003, AISI joined Climate VISION, a
voluntary program administered by DOE to
reduce GHG intensity34 Between 2002 and 2003,
the industry reduced its energy intensity per ton
of steel shipped by approximately 7%. 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 percentage during this period.33

In addition, one steel manufacturer (U.S. Steel
Corporation) has joined EPA's  Climate Leaders
program, which helps partners to develop
long-term comprehensive climate change
strategies, set corporate-level GHG  reduction
goals, and inventory emissions to measure
progress.36 Internationally, the industry has
established the CO2 Breakthrough Program to
fund the development of new steelmaking
technologies that do not emit CO2.  The program
also includes research and development into
technologies that capture and sequester CO2.37

-------
                             PROFILE The metal casting sector4 includes
                             both foundries and die casting facilities. Cast
                             metal products are found in virtually every
                             sector of the U.S. economy, with major end-use
                             markets including transportation, construction,
                             agricultural equipment, and military weapons
                             systems. The sector is  dominated by small
                             businesses, with 80% of metal casting facilities
                             employing fewer than 100  people.3 The majority
                             of metal casting facilities are concentrated in the
                             Midwest, Southeast, and California.

                             Both foundries and die casters melt metal ingot
                             and/or scrap metal and then pour or inject it into
                             molds to produce castings. However, foundries
                             pour by gravity or inject (under low pressure
                             or vacuum) ferrous or nonferrous metals into
                             molds made of metal or refractory materials
                             (e.g., sand, ceramics),  while die casters inject
                             only nonferrous metals under high pressure into
                             metal molds. Unlike the permanent molds used
                             by die casters, foundries must break apart their
                             molds in order to remove the castings.
Sector At-a-Glance
Number of Facilities:
Value of Shipments:
Number of Employees:
2.3361
$33 billion2
220.0003
TRENDS Despite increased foreign competition,
the metal casting industry expects modest
growth to continue.

   Sales of metal castings are expected to grow 14%
   over the next three years from $33 billion in 2005 to
   $37.7 billion in 2008.
   Light metals are expected to continue replacing iron
   and steel castings in  transportation  applications.
   Forecasters expect both imports and exports of metal
   casting products to increase in 2006. Imports are
   expected to total 3.2 million tons in 2006, which
   equates to 20.5% of  U.S. demand. Exports for 2006
   are expected to total 1.4 million tons.6
                                                 KEY ENVIRONMENTAL OPPORTUNITIES
                                                 For the metal casting sector, the greatest
                                                 opportunities for environmental improvements
                                                 are in increasing energy efficiency, managing and
                                                 minimizing toxics and waste, reducing air
                                                 emissions, and conserving water.
49

-------
INCREASING ENERGY EFFICIENCY The
metal casting industry is one of the most
energy-intensive industries in the U.S., so
reducing energy consumption is an important
economic and environmental focus for the
sector.7 In 2002, the metal casting sector
consumed 165 trillion Btus of energy, as shown
in the Energy Consumption bar chart. When
normalized for production, the sector's energy
consumption in that year was 45% lower than
in 1994. As shown in the Distribution of Metal
Casting pie chart, the sector is primarily fueled
by natural gas, which accounts for 46% of energy
consumption, and net electricity, which accounts
for 33% of the sector's energy use.8
            Energy Consumption
         by the Metal Casting Sector
                     Year
 * Normalized by annual production.
  Sources: U.S. DOE, AFS.
Most of the energy use in the metal casting
sector (approximately 55% of total energy costs)
can be attributed to the melting of metals, but
moldmaking and coremaking also utilize
significant amounts of energy9 Opportunities
to improve energy efficiency include updating
old gas-fired equipment and substituting water
for lubricant to cool heated die surfaces.10

The U.S. Department of Energy's Industrial
Technologies Program works to boost the
productivity and competitiveness of U.S.
industry through improvements in energy
       Distribution of Metal Casting
            Energy Consumption
                                                           Coke 17%
                                                                         Other 1%
                                                      Coal 1%
                                                  LPG and N6L
                                                      1%
                                                                                    Net Electricity
                                                                                        33%
                                                                                  Residual Fuel Oil
                                                                               Distillate Fuel Oil
                                                                                    1%
                                                   Source: U.S. DOE, 2002.
and environmental performance. The program
has identified best practices for melting and
other efficiency improvement opportunities
in the metal casting industry that could, if
universally implemented, result in tacit energy
savings of 102 trillion Btus (a 22% reduction),
as well as a reduction in carbon dioxide (CO2)
emissions of 6.5 million tons per year (also a
22% reduction). Tacit energy refers to the energy
required  to produce and deliver the form of
energy used by the facility, rather than just  the
amount of energy delivered to the site.  Specific
energy reduction techniques identified include:

   Replacing heel melting furnaces used for iron
   induction with modern batch melters, which would
   improve tacit energy efficiency for this process by
   more than 32%;
   Improving casting yield by 5% in all metal casting
   industries except ductile iron pipe, for an overall tacit
   energy  savings of 22.7 trillion Btus per year; and
   Applying existing air/natural gas mixing methods to
   reduce  ladle heating  energy by 10°/o-30°/o.11

-------
                            MANAGING AND MINIMIZING Toxics Metal
                            casting 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).

                            In 2003, 681 metal casting facilities reported
                            177 million pounds of chemicals released
                            (including disposal) or otherwise managed
                            through treatment, energy recovery, or recycling.
                            Of this quantity, 71% was managed, while the
                            remaining 29% was disposed or released to
                            the environment, as shown in the TRI Waste
                            Management pie chart. Of those chemicals
                            disposed or released to the environment,  92%
                            were disposed and 8% were released into  air
                            and water.

                            In 2003, ferrous operations accounted for 94%
                            by weight of the sector's releases and disposal,
                            while nonferrous operations, including die
51
                                      TRI Waste  Management
                                     by the Metal Casting Sector
                               Energy Recovery
                                       '
                                                                 Disposal
                                                                  92%
                               Recycling
                                 67%
                              Source: U.S. EPA, 2003.
                                                      Water Releases Air Releases
                                                          <1%        8%
casters, accounted for the remaining 6%. Metals
accounted for most of the quantity of TRI
chemicals disposed or released by the sector.
For example, manganese and zinc accounted
for 63% by weight of total releases and disposal;
chromium, lead, and copper accounted for
another 23%.

As shown in the Total TRI Disposal or Other
Releases line graph, the annual normalized
quantity of chemicals disposed or released by
the metal casting sector fluctuated but showed
little overall change during the 1994 to 2003
time period. Much of the increase seen in 2003
was due to increases in the quantities of
manganese and chromium disposed by fewer
than five ferrous metal casting facilities. In
contrast, over the same 10-year time period,
normalized releases to air and water decreased
by 54%, with almost half of this decrease
occurring from 2000 to 2003.12
    Total TRI Disposal or Other Releases
         by the Metal Casting Sector

                                                                                  -•-All Metal Casting
                                                                             * Normalized by annual production.
                                                                               Sources: U.S. EPA, AFS.
                       1998 1999 2000 2001  2002  2003
                       Year
                      -•- Ferrous Metal Casting, only
                      -*- Non-Ferrous Metal Casting, only
Data from TRI allow comparisons of the total
quantities of a sector's reported chemical releases
across years, as presented below. However, this
comparison does not take into account the
relative toxicity of each chemical. Chemicals
vary greatly in toxicity, meaning they differ in
how harmful they can be to human health. To
account for differences in toxicities, each
chemical can be weighted by a relative toxicity
weight using EPA's Risk-Screening
Environmental Indicators (RSEI) model.

The TRI Air and Water Releases line graph
presents trends for the entire sector's air and
water releases in both reported pounds and
toxicity-weighted results. When weighted for
toxicity, the sector's normalized releases to air
and water declined by 41% between 1994 and
2003, with more than half of this decline
occurring between 2000 and 2003.13
         TRI Air and Water Releases
         by the Metal Casting Sector
     0
       1994 1995 1996 1997  1998 1999  2000 2001  2002 2003
                       Year
      —•—Pounds           —•—Toxicity-Weighted Results
    rmalized by annual production.
    urces: U.S. EPA, AFS.

-------
The table below presents a list of the chemicals
released that accounted for 90% of the sector's
total toxicity-weighted releases to air and water
in 2003. Ferrous operations drove the metal
casting sector's toxicity-weighted results and
accounted for 90% of the results in 2003. More
than 99% of the sector's toxicity-weighted results
were attributable to air releases, while discharges
to water accounted for less than 1%. Therefore,
reducing air emissions of these chemicals
represents the greatest opportunity for the sector
to make progress in reducing the toxicity of its
releases.

      Top TRI Chemicals Based  on
       Toxicity-Weighted Results
   AIR RELEASES (99%)    WATER RELEASES (<1%)
Manganese
Chromium
Nickel
Lead
Diisocya nates
Lead
Copper


Source:




U.S. EPA
Manganese and chromium releases, the primary
contributors to the sector's toxicity-weighted
results for air releases, decreased by 28% and
35%, respectively, between 2000 and 2003.

EPA's RSEI model conservatively assumes that
chemicals are released in the form associated
with the highest toxicity weight. With respect
to chromium releases to air and water, therefore,
the model assumes that 100% of these emissions
are hexavalent chromium (the most toxic form,
with significantly higher oral and inhalation
toxicity weights than trivalent chromium).
However, the hexavalent form of chromium
may not constitute a majority of total chromium
releases in this sector. Thus, RSEI analyses
may overestimate the relative harmfulness of
chromium.14

REDUCING AIR EMISSIONS The metal casting
sector releases both air toxics and criteria air
pollutants. While emissions of air toxics during
the manufacturing process are largely captured in
the TRI air releases discussed above, this section
takes a closer look at both of these chemical
categories.

Air Toxics Air toxics, also called hazardous air
pollutants, are a subset of the TRI chemicals
presented above. The Clean Air Act designates
188 chemicals (182 of which are included in
TRI) that can cause serious health and
environmental effects as air toxics. Common
air toxics from metal casting operations include
organic air pollutants and metals. 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. Metals are primarily generated during the
melting, pouring, and finishing  processes.
In 2003, 511 ferrous and nonferrous casting
operations reported air toxics releases of 2.9
million pounds. As shown in the TRI Air Toxics
Releases line graph, normalized air toxics releases
decreased by 58% from 1994 to 2003, with more
than one-third of this reduction occurring
between 2000 and 2003. Air toxics releases from
the sector were primarily (94%) from ferrous
operations.13 Toxicity-weighted results for air
toxics releases showed a 44% decline over the
10-year period.16
           TRI Air Toxics Releases
         by the Metal Casting Sector
                                         45 |
                                         40 =
                                         35 "

                                         30 1
                                         25 &
                                         20 |j
                                           .c
                                         15 .51
                                           'it
                                         10 g

                                         5 k
                                         o 1
 ' Normali
  Sources
 1994 1995 1996 1997  1998 1999 2000 2001  2002 2003   £
                 Year
 -•—Pounds             •  Toxicity-Weighted Results
ized by annual production.
 U.S. EPA, AFS.

-------
Criteria Air Pollutants EPA s National
Emissions Inventory estimates that, in 2001,
the metal casting sector released 6,879 tons
of nitrogen oxides (NOX), 33,779  tons of
paniculate matter (PM10), 29,815  tons of fine
paniculate matter (PM25), 5,064 tons of sulfur
dioxide (SO2), and 22,868 tons of volatile
organic compound (VOC) emissions.

As shown in the Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions
bar chart, between 1996 and 2001 normalized
emissions of each of these pollutants increased.
The largest changes were in PM10, PM25, and
VOC emissions which increased by 55%, 97%,
and 32%, respectively17
       Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions
       from the Metal Casting Sector
 * Normalized by annual production.
  Sources: U.S. EPA, AFS.
MANAGING AND MINIMIZING WASTE
The metal casting sector generates hazardous
waste and is working to increase the reuse of
industrial byproducts such as scrap  metal and
foundry sand.

Hazardous Waste EPA hazardous waste data
on large quantity generators, as reported in the
National Biennial RCRA Hazardous Waste Report,
indicate that the metal casting sector accounted
for less than 1% of the hazardous waste
generated nationally in 2003.

In 2003,  138 metal casting facilities  reported
48,700 tons of hazardous waste generated.
Almost 70% of this waste was generated from
dip, flush, or spray rinsing and air pollution
control devices. The waste management methods
most utilized by this sector were chemical
reduction and stabilization or chemical fixation.

When reporting hazardous wastes to EPA,
quantities can be reported as a single waste code
(e.g., chromium) or as a commingled waste
composed of multiple types of wastes. Quantities
of a specific waste within the commingled waste
are not reported. The metal casting sector
reported more than 70% of its  wastes as
individual waste codes. Of the individually
reported wastes, the predominant hazardous
waste types reported in 2003 included
chromium, lead, cadmium, and corrosive waste.18
Scrap Metal &> Foundry Sand The metal
casting industry is one of the largest recyclers in
North America, using scrap metal as 85% of its
feedstock for ferrous casting.19 The industry
diverts roughly 15 million to 20 million tons of
scrap metal from disposal at U.S. landfills each
year.20

Also, metal casters use almost  100 million tons
of foundry sand annually, of which 10 million
tons are available for reuse applications. Virtually
all of this sand is a nonhazardous byproduct that
could be used for other purposes, yet only about
500,000 tons of the available sand is currently
reused. Increased sand reuse represents a prime
opportunity for the metal casting sector to save
money and improve the environment.21 EPA is
working with industry and states to identify
innovative approaches to improve rates of
coundry sand reuse.

-------
CONSERVING WATER water is used for a
variety of purposes in metal casting, including
direct contact and non-contact cooling. To
conserve water, the metal casting sector is
exploring technologies for recovering and
recirculating the wastewater used to lubricate
and cool dies during the die casting process.
Potential water conservation measures include
reusing non-contact cooling water in other plant
operations, installing cooling towers, and
recovering surface treatment chemicals. The
following case study illustrates one company's
success in conserving water.
Case Study: ThyssenKrupp Waupaca's Closed-
Loop Water Recycling System ThyssenKrupp
Waupaca's Plant 5 facility in Tell City, IN, installed a
closed-loop water recycling system, replacing a system that
discharged water after a single use. The system recirculates
water used to cool process equipment, such as the molten
iron handling equipment. The new system uses cooling
towers, heat exchangers, pumps, tanks, and piping to cool
and recirculate the water. Prior to the system installation,
the Tell City facility was using 58 million gallons of
municipal water per month. With the closed-loop system,
the facility uses 18 million gallons of water per month,
resulting in significant reductions in the facility's wastewater
discharges, as well as its strain on the city water supply.22
                                                                                                                                                                                      54

-------
PROFILE The metal finishing sector4 encompasses
a variety of surface finishing and electroplating
operations that coat an object with one or more
layers of metal to improve its resistance to wear
and corrosion, alter its appearance, control
friction, or impart new physical properties or
dimensions. Applications range from common
hardware items and automotive parts to
sophisticated communications equipment and
aerospace technologies.

Most metal finishing shops are small,
independently owned facilities that perform
on a contract basis. Nearly 90% of the roughly
3,000 U.S. metal finishing establishments in
existence in 2003 had fewer than 50 employees.3
Other metal finishing operations are part of
larger manufacturing facilities.
Sector At-a-Glance
Number of Facilities:
Value of Shipments:
Number of Employees:
2.9461
$5.8 billion2
58,9623
TRENDS The 2001 economic recession and
the accompanying decline in manufacturing
activity hurt the U.S. metal finishing sector.
The globalization of manufacturing that has
occurred since that time has kept the sector
from recovering to the levels of output and
employment it experienced in the 1990s.

   Since 2000, the number of metal finishing
   establishments in the U.S. has fallen by 11% to
   around 3,000. Over the same time period, the number
   of employees in the metal finishing sector declined by
   21% to just under 59.000.6
 '  After declining for two years, the value of shipments
   by U.S. metal finishing firms increased to $5.8 billion
   in 2003, an increase of nearly 6% from 2002.7
                                                KEY ENVIRONMENTAL OPPORTUNITIES
                                                For the metal finishing sector, the greatest
                                                opportunities for environmental improvement
                                                are in managing and minimizing toxics and
                                                waste, reducing air emissions, and conserving
                                                water.

-------
MANAGING AND MINIMIZING Toxics
Metal finishing 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).

In 2003, 632 facilities in the metal finishing
sector reported 95 million pounds of chemicals
released (including disposal) or otherwise
managed through treatment, energy recovery, or
recycling. Of this quantity, 90% was managed,
while the remaining 10% was disposed or
released to the environment, as shown in the
TRI Waste Management pie chart. Of those
chemicals disposed or released to the
environment, 72% were disposed and 28%
were released into air or water.
             As shown in the Total TRI Disposal or Other
             Releases line graph, the annual normalized
             quantity of chemicals disposed or released to
             the environment by the metal finishing sector
             decreased by 20% between 1994 and 2003,
             despite an increase in 2002. Over the same
             10-year period, the sector's normalized
             releases to air and water declined by 58%,
             with one-quarter of this decline occurring
             between 2000 and 2003. Total pounds of
             chemicals disposed or released by the sector
             in 2003 were dominated by metals, with zinc,
             chromium, and nickel accounting for 59% of
             the total. Nitrate compounds and nitric acid
             accounted for another 16%.8
Data from TRI allow comparisons of the total
quantities of a sector's reported chemical releases
across years, as presented below. However, this
comparison does not take into account the
relative toxicity of each chemical. Chemicals
vary greatly in toxicity, meaning they differ in
how harmful they can be to human health.
To account for differences in toxicities, each
chemical can be weighted by a relative
toxicity weight using EPA's Risk-Screening
Environmental Indicators (RSEI) model.

The TRI Air and Water Releases  line graph
presents trends for the sector's air and water
releases in both reported pounds and toxicity-
weighted results. When weighted for toxicity, the
metal finishing sector's normalized air and water
releases decreased by 47% from 1994 to 2003.
          TRI Waste Management
        by the Metal Finishing Sector
  Energy Recovery < 1 %

                Treatment 26%
Disposal 72%
     Recycling
       64%
  Source: U.S. EPA, 2003.
                                     Air Releases
                          Water Releases    20%
                              8%
                 Total TRI Disposal or Other Releases
                     by the Metal Finishing Sector
                                                           1995 1996 1997
                                    1998
                                    Year
                  —A— Disposal or Releases, total
              * Normalized by annual value of shipments.
               Sources: U.S. EPA, U.S. Census Bureau.
                                                                           1999  2000  2001  2002 2003
                                                                             Air and Water Releases, only
         TRI Air and Water Releases
        by the Metal Finishing Sector
                                                                                                                                           2.0
                                                                                                                                           1.0'E

                                                                                                                                           0.5 i.
      1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003   £
                       Year
      —•—Pounds            —•—Toxicity-Weighted Results
   rmalized by annual value of shipments.
   urces: U.S. EPA, U.S. Census Bureau.

-------
The table below presents a list of the chemicals
released that accounted for 90% of the sector's
total toxicity-weighted releases to air and water
in 2003. More than 99% of the sector's toxicity-
weighted results were attributable to air releases,
while discharges to water accounted for less than
1%. Therefore, reducing air emissions of these
chemicals represents the greatest opportunity
for the sector to make progress in reducing the
toxicity of its releases.

      Top TRI Chemicals  Based on
       Toxicity-Weighted Results
  AIR RELEASES (99%)   WATER RELEASES (<1 %)
        Nickel
      Chromium
   LLead
  Copper
Chromium
Both air and water toxicity-weighted results
were dominated by metals. From 2000 to 2003,
the sector's normalized nickel releases to air
increased by 9%, while normalized chromium
releases to air have been generally declining,
with a 28% decrease over this time period.
EPA's RSEI model conservatively assumes that
chemicals are released in the form associated
with the highest toxicity weight. With respect
to chromium releases to air and water, therefore,
the model assumes that 100% of these emissions
are  hexavalent chromium (the most toxic form,
with significantly higher oral and inhalation
toxicity weights than trivalent chromium).
However, the hexavalent form of chromium
may not constitute a majority of total chromium
releases by this sector. Thus, RSEI analyses
may overestimate the relative harmfulness of
chromium.9

REDUCING AIR EMISSIONS The metal
finishing sector releases a variety of air toxics.
While emissions of air toxics during the
manufacturing process are largely captured in
the TRI air releases discussed above, this section
takes a closer look at this chemical category.

Air toxics, also called hazardous air pollutants,
are  a subset of the TRI chemicals presented
above. The Clean Air Act designates 188
chemicals (182 of which are included in  TRI)
that can cause serious health and environmental
effects as air toxics.
                                                                   In 2003, 259 facilities in the sector reported
                                                                   air toxics releases of 1.4 million pounds. As
                                                                   shown in the TRI Air Toxics Releases line graph,
                                                                   normalized air toxics releases decreased by 73%
                                                                   from 1994 to 2003, with almost one-quarter of
                                                                   this  decline occurring between 2000 and 2003.10
                                                                   Toxicity-weighted results for air toxics releases
                                                                   decreased by 32% over the 10-year period.11
                                                                             TRI Air Toxics Releases
                                                                          by the Metal Finishing Sector
                                                                         1994 1995 1996  1997 1998 1999 2000 2001  2002 2003
                                                                                         Year
                                                                        —•—Pounds
                                                                    * Normalized by annual value of shipments.
                                                                     Sources: U.S. EPA, U.S. Census Bureau.
-Toxicity-Weighted
                                                                  MANAGING AND MINIMIZING WASTE The
                                                                  metal finishing sector generates hazardous waste
                                                                  and is working to increase the recovery of metals
                                                                  from wastewater sludge.
                                                                                               Hazardous Waste EPA hazardous waste data
                                                                                               on large quantity generators, as reported in the
                                                                                               National Biennial RCRA Hazardous Waste Report,
                                                                                               indicate that the metal finishing sector accounted
                                                                                               for 2% of the hazardous waste generated
                                                                                               nationally in 2003.

-------
In 2003, 703 metal finishing facilities reported
582,000 tons of hazardous waste generated.
However, facility data on the physical and
chemical characteristics of the reported waste
indicate that 331,000 tons of the reported
amount were wastewater rather than hazardous
waste.12 When focusing on the sector's hazardous
waste, most was reported as generated from
plating and phosphating processes. The
management methods most utilized by this
sector for hazardous waste were cyanide
destruction and other chemical  precipitation.

When reporting hazardous wastes to EPA,
quantities can be reported as a single waste code
(e.g.,  lead) or as a commingled waste composed
of multiple types of wastes. Quantities of a
specific waste within the commingled waste are
not reported. The metal finishing sector reported
59% of its wastes as individual waste codes. The
waste of greatest interest to this sector is the
metals-bearing sludge remaining after wastewater
treatment processes. Of the individually reported
wastes, 49,800 tons of this sludge was generated
in 2003. Additional quantities of this waste also
were reported as part of commingled wastes.13

Metals Recovery Through Sludge
Recycling 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
wastewater treatment plant 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 in the RCRA classification system, is
regulated as a hazardous waste.

EPA and the industry are working together to
increase recovery of metals from metals-bearing
sludge. Permitted hazardous waste recycling
facilities can use techniques such as ion
exchange canisters to recover economically
valuable metals from the wastewater treatment
sludges generated by the  metal finishing sector.
Metal recovery reduces land disturbance,
resource depletion, energy consumption, and
other environmental impacts that result from
the mining and processing of virgin metal ore.
In 2003, nearly 7,000 tons of the plating sludges
reported by the sector using the single waste
code F006 were reclaimed or recovered,  leaving
approximately 40,000 tons that were managed
through other means such as land disposal.
Note that the neither the amount nor fate of
the F006 sludge reported as part of commingled
wastes could be determined.14 EPA is currently
exploring options to remove regulatory barriers
to additional metals recovery from  this sludge.
IMPROVING WATER QUALITY Electroplating
involves the use of large volumes of water in
plating baths, with the subsequent generation
of wastewater. The industry has long promoted
the use of best management practices in the
pretreatment of wastewater prior to discharge.
EPAs recently issued Pretreatment Streamlining
Rule has provided additional flexibility for
metal finishers to work cooperatively with their
wastewater treatment plants to enhance onsite
facility cleanup of wastewater effluent.13 In
addition, the industry and EPAs Office of
Research and Development have a longstanding
partnership to promote the use of more effective
pretreatment technologies by metal finishing job
shops. As illustrated in the following case study,
onsite pretreatment of metal finishing wastewater
not only results in cleaner effluent leaving the
plant but also promotes water  conservation by
enabling water reuse in the electroplating process.

Case Study: Efficient Wastewater Management
at America's Best Quality Coatings Corporation
America's Best Quality Coatings Corporation (ABQC) plant
in Milwaukee, WI, is one of the largest metal finishing
facilities in North America. The company recently installed
a state-of-the-art wastewater treatment system capable of
treating 500 gallons of effluent per minute and monitoring
the resulting treatment efficiency on a real-time basis. In
addition to efficient wastewater management, ABQC has
reduced its water discharges by 20% in the past year by
updating the cooling system in its plating baths so that,
rather than flowing continuously, the water flow now shuts
off when the desired temperature is reached.16

-------
                              PROFILE The paint and coatings sector4
                              manufactures a variety of products that preserve,
                              protect, and beautify the objects to which they
                              are applied. There are four main types of paint
                              and coatings products:

                                Architectural coatings used in homes and buildings,
                                such as interior and  exterior paints, primers, sealers,
                                and varnishes;
                                Industrial coatings that are factory-applied  to
                                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 paint brush cleaners.
Sector At-a-Glance
Number of Facilities:
Value of Shipments:
Number of Employees:
1.3711
$20.3 billion2
47,2793
TRENDS The paint and coatings manufacturing
industry has been going through a period of
consolidation, marked by a large number of
mergers, acquisitions, and spin-offs during the
last decade. Although hundreds of small- and
medium-sized private firms continue to operate
on local and regional levels, consolidation will
likely continue due to shifting market dynamics.3

•  In 2003, 53% of the gallons of paint and allied
   products sold were architectural coatings, 27%
   were industrial coatings, 10% were special purpose
   coatings and 10% were allied products.6
 '  Shipments of architectural coatings increased nearly
   7% from 2002  to 2003, while shipments of special
   purpose coatings increased 4% and shipments of
   industrial coatings and allied products remained
   essentially flat.7
   Industry analysts forecast that the U.S. paint and
   coatings market will grow nearly 15% from 2004 to
   2008, with  the architectural segment of the sector
   continuing  to comprise the largest share of the
   market.8
KEY ENVIRONMENTAL OPPORTUNITIES
This report focuses primarily on the
environmental footprint of the paint and
coatings manufacturing process. Data on the
impacts of paint application and the disposal
of post-consumer paint also are provided where
possible.
For the paint and coatings manufacturing sector,
the greatest opportunities for environmental
improvements are in managing and minimizing
toxics and waste, reducing air emissions, and
promoting product stewardship.
59

-------
MANAGING AND MINIMIZING Toxics
Paint and coatings manufacturing 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).

In 2003, 481 facilities in the sector reported
130 million pounds of chemicals released
(including disposal)  or otherwise managed
through treatment, energy recovery, or recycling.
Of this quantity, 95% was managed, while the
remaining 5% was disposed or released to the
environment, as shown  in the TRI Waste
Management pie chart. Of those chemicals
disposed or released  to the environment, 23%
were disposed and 77%  were released into air
or water.
          TRI Waste  Management
     by Paint & Coatings Manufacturers
   Energy Recovery
       26%
               Treatment
                 12%
                                 Water Releases
                                        Disposal
                                         23%
      Recycling
        57%
  Source: U.S. EPA, 2003.
As shown in the Total TRI Disposal or Other
Releases line graph, the annual normalized
quantity of chemicals disposed or released to
the environment by the paint and coatings
manufacturing sector decreased by 42% between
1994 and 2003, with almost half of this decline
occurring between 2000 and 2003. Over the
same 10-year period, the sector's normalized
releases to air and water declined by 52%, with
one-third of this decline occurring between 2000
and 2003.

In 2003, the total pounds of chemicals disposed
or released by the sector were dominated by
organics. For example, xylene, toluene, methyl
ethyl ketone, certain glycol ethers, and ethylene
glycol accounted  for 57% of the total releases
and disposal for the sector.9
    Total TRI Disposal or Other Releases
   from Paint & Coatings Manufacturing
       1994  1995  1996  1997  1998
                       Year
      — *- Disposal or Releases, total
 * Normalized by annual value of shipments.
  Sources: U.S. EPA, U.S. Census Bureau.
                                                                           1999  2000  2001 2002 2003
                                                                             Air and Water Releases, only
Data from TRI allow comparisons of the total
quantities of a sector's reported chemical releases
across years, as presented below. However, this
comparison does not take into account the
relative toxicity of each chemical. Chemicals
vary greatly in toxicity, meaning they differ
in how harmful they can be to human health.
To account for differences in toxicities, each
chemical can be weighted by a relative
toxicity weight using EPA's Risk-Screening
Environmental Indicators (RSEI) model.

The TRI Air and Water Releases line graph
presents trends for the sector's air and water
releases in both reported pounds and
toxicity-weighted results. When weighted
for toxicity, the sector's normalized air and
water releases show a 42% decline from 1994
to 2003, despite a marked increase in 2001 that
is explained on the next page.
         TRI Air and Water Releases
   from Paint & Coatings Manufacturing
                                                                                                                                          0.0-5
       1994 1995  1996 1997  1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003    £
                       Year
      —•—Pounds             ^Toxicity-Weighted Results
 * Normalized by annual value of shipments.
  Sources: U.S. EPA, U.S. Census Bureau.


-------
The table below presents a list of the chemicals
released that accounted for 90% of the sector's
total toxicity-weighted releases to air and
water in 2003. More than 99%  of the sector's
toxicity-weighted results were attributable to air
releases, while discharges to water accounted for
less than 1%. Therefore, reducing air emissions
of these chemicals represents the greatest
opportunity for the sector to make progress
in reducing the toxicity of its releases.

      Top TRI Chemicals  Based on
       Toxicity-Weighted Results
  AIR RELEASES (99%)    WATER RELEASES (<1 %)
    Diisocyanates
      Chromium
 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
        Cobalt
 Certain  Glycol  Ethers
        Xylene
 Toluene Diisocyanate
        Nickel
Antimony
  Copper
   Lead
Chromium
In 2003, toxicity-weighted air releases were
dominated by diisocyanates and chromium,
accounting for 74% of the sector's total
toxicity-weighted releases to air. From 2000
to 2003, normalized diisocyanate releases to
air fluctuated considerably, including a marked
increase in 2001, followed by declines in 2002
and 2003. The increase in 2001 resulted from
the first-time reporting of diisocyanates by three
individual facilities. Due to the high toxicity
weight assigned to diisocyanates by the RSEI
model, the increase reported by the three
facilities in 2001 was sufficient to create a spike
in the sector's overall toxicity-weighted results,
as reflected in the TRI Air and Water Releases
line graph. Normalized chromium releases to
air remained fairly steady from 2000 to  2003.

EPA's RSEI model conservatively assumes that
chemicals are released in the form associated
with the highest toxicity weight. With respect
to chromium releases to air and water, therefore,
the model assumes that 100% of these emissions
are hexavalent chromium (the most toxic form,
with significantly higher toxicity weights than
trivalent chromium).10 Research indicates that
the hexavalent form of chromium does  not
constitute a  majority of total chromium releases
from paint and coatings manufacturing
operations.11 Thus, RSEI analyses overestimate
the relative harmfulness of chromium releases
from the sector.
REDUCING AIR EMISSIONS Organic solvents
are used in the production of oil-based paint and
coatings due to their ability to dissolve and
disperse other coating constituents. They also
are used in smaller quantities 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 (VOCs)
and air toxics. These releases occur inside
production facilities as well as when paint and
coatings products are ultimately applied to
building structures, consumer products, and
other surfaces. Although emissions of VOCs and
air toxics during the manufacturing process are
largely captured in the TRI air releases discussed
above, this section  takes a closer look at these
chemical categories.

-------
EPA's National Emissions Inventory estimates
that, in 2002, paint and coatings manufacturers
released 7,000 tons of VOCs. During the same
year, VOC emissions resulting from the use of
paint and coatings products were estimated at
2 million tons. As shown in the Volatile Organic
Compound Emissions bar charts, between 1996
and 2002, the normalized quantity of VOC
emissions resulting from the manufacture of
paint and coatings products remained relatively
stable, while the normalized quantity of VOC
emissions resulting from the use of paint and
coatings products declined by 9%.12Air toxics,
also called hazardous air pollutants (HAPs), are
a subset of the TRI chemicals presented in the
previous section.  The Clean Air Act designates
188 chemicals (182 of which are included in
TRI) that can cause serious health and
environmental effects as air toxics.
   Volatile Organic Compound Emissions
   from Paint & Coatings Manufacturing
 •5 15
 I
 o 10

 c 5
 o

   0
      1996   1997   1998   1999   2000   2001   2002+
 + 2002 data are preliminary.
 * Normalized by annual value of shipments.
  Sources: U.S. EPA, U.S. Census Bureau.
                      Year
In 2003, 420 facilities in the paint and coatings
manufacturing sector reported air toxics releases
of 4.7 million pounds. As shown in the TRI Air
Toxics Releases line graph, normalized air toxics
releases resulting from the manufacture of paint
and coatings decreased by more than half
(53%) between 1994 and 2003, with more than
one-quarter of this reduction occurring between
2000 and 2003.13 Toxicity-weighted results
for air toxics releases declined by 73% over the
10-year period.14

A downward trend in VOC and air toxics
emissions is likely to continue because of new
regulatory requirements, improved industrial
housekeeping, and technological advances
related to solventless and low-VOC/HAP
coatings products, as well as improvements
in the manufacturing process and changing
   Volatile Organic Compound Emissions
     from Paint & Coatings Application
                                             2,000
 -a 1,500
111WJ
  2002 data are preliminary.
 * Normalized by annual value of shipments.
  Sources: U.S. EPA, U.S. Census Bureau.
                                                                 Year
                                                TRI Air Toxics Releases
                                         from Paint & Coatings Manufacturing
                                            1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001  2002 2003
                                                          Year
                                           —•—Pounds
                                       * Normalized by annual value of shipments.
                                        Sources: U.S. EPA, U.S. Census Bureau.
                         -Toxicity-Weighted Results
consumer preferences. These factors already
have contributed to the following developments:

  From 1994 to 2003, environmentally preferable
  water-based paint increased from 76% to 82% of
  architectural coatings sales, further eroding the
  market share of oil-based paint.15
  Markets for industrial and special purpose coatings
  also have undergone transformation as customers
  have demanded, and manufacturers have introduced,
  more environmentally benign coatings products,
  including a wide variety of water-based, high-solids,
  powder, and radiation-cured coatings.

-------
MANAGING AND MINIMIZING HAZARDOUS
WASTE EPA hazardous waste data on large
quantity generators, as reported in the National
Biennial RCRA Hazardous Waste Report, indicate
that the paint and coatings manufacturing sector
accounted for less than 1% of the hazardous
waste generated nationally in 2003.
In 2003, 351 paint and coatings manufacturing
facilities reported 120,900 tons of hazardous
waste generated. Approximately 60% of this
waste was generated from cleaning out process
equipment and from product and byproduct
processing. The waste management methods
most utilized by this sector were fuel blending,
solvents recovery, and onsite energy recovery.
When reporting hazardous wastes to EPA,
quantities can be reported as a single waste code
(e.g., lead) or as a commingled waste composed
of multiple types of wastes. Quantities of a
specific waste within the commingled waste
are not reported. The paint and coatings
manufacturing  sector reported 32% of its wastes
as individual waste codes. Of the  individually
reported wastes, the predominant hazardous
waste types reported by the sector in 2003
were ignitable and corrosive wastes and specific
spent non-halogenated solvents.16
The following two case studies illustrate some of
the pollution prevention initiatives underway
across the sector to minimize waste generation,
promote recycling, and reduce VOC emissions.
Case Study: Collaborative Waste Minimisation
and Recycling Initiative The National Paint and
Coatings Association (NPCA) and EPA recently completed
the first phase in a joint initiative to analyze the sector's
hazardous waste flows and waste management practices.
The goal of this initiative is to identify opportunities for
increased waste minimization and recycling.

Through a review of data from EPA's National Biennial
RCRA Hazardous Waste Report and discussions with NPCA
and industry experts, two types of hazardous waste were
found to warrant special attention based on the quantity of
the wastes generated and their ability to be recycled or
reworked into new product: (1) spent wash solvents used
to clean out process equipment and (2) rejected, out-of-date,
or off-specification products. For the second phase of the
initiative, NPCA and EPA will determine the factors that
preclude or limit the recycling or reclamation of these
wastes, including technical constraints, financial
considerations, operational concerns, and regulatory
restrictions."
Case Study: New Eco-Efficient Products from
BASF The market for automotive refinish coatings in
North America exceeds $2 billion annually for both collision
repairs and commercial vehicle applications. More than
50,000 body shops in North America use these products.
For more than a decade, automotive refinishers and coatings
manufacturers have faced increasing regulation of emissions
ofVOCs. As regulatory thresholds for VOC emissions have
been lowered, manufacturers have reformulated their
reactive coatings to meet lower emissions standards and the
demand for faster film setting without compromising quality.

Through research and development, BASF invented a
new primer system that performs better than the current
conventional urethane technologies.  The new system cures
10 times faster, requires fewer preparation steps, has a lower
application rate, is more durable, controls corrosion better,
and has an unlimited shelf life. BASF's primer contains only
1.7 pounds of VOCs per gallon, in contrast to 3.5 to 4.8
pounds of VOCs per gallon of conventional primers - a
reduction of more than 50%, even before accounting for
the fact that less coating  is required. Moreover, the one-
component nature of the product reduces hazardous waste
and cleaning of equipment, which typically requires solvents.
Applications in repair facilities over the past year have
shown that only one-third as much primer is needed, with
waste reduced from 20% to nearly zero.18

-------
PROMOTING PRODUCT STEWARDSHIP
Product stewardship in the paint and coatings
sector comprises a range of practices, including
developing cleaner products, recycling leftover
paint, and taking adequate measures to inform
consumers about the past use of lead-based
paint.

Leftover paint is a top concern for product
stewardship efforts because of its high volume
in the household hazardous waste stream, high
waste management costs, and the potential for
increased reduction, recovery, reuse, and
recycling. Of all household hazardous wastes,
paint represents the largest cost for local
governments to collect and manage.19 In a draft
report, EPA estimates that 9% to 22% of paint
sold could become leftover paint.20
NPCA and its members are actively participating
in the National Post-Consumer Paint
Management Dialogue, a collaborative
multi-stakeholder effort to reduce the
environmental impacts and cost of managing
leftover latex and oil-based paint.21 The primary
goal of this Paint Product Stewardship Initiative
is to develop an agreement that will result in
reduced paint waste; the efficient collection,
reuse, and recycling of leftover paint; increased
markets for products made from leftover paint;
and a sustainable financing system to  cover any
resulting end-of-life management costs for past
and future products.22  NPCA is  contributing to
the initiative's joint research agenda by funding
projects targeting (1) consumer education,
(2) paint reuse,  (3) a lifecycle cost-benefit
assessment of leftover  paint management
options, and (4) the evaluation  of
environmental, health, and safety regulations for
recycled paint products.
The following case study illustrates another
product stewardship effort underway that
addresses the hazards of lead-based paint.

Case Study: Product Stewardship Effort by
NPCA and Attorneys General In 2004, NPCA and
the State Attorneys General reached an agreement with
Attorneys General from 46 states, plus the District of
Columbia and three territories, which establishes a national
program of consumer paint warnings, point-of-sale
information, and education and training to avoid the
potential exposure to lead-dust hazards. The agreement calls
for a universal product sticker program and permanent
product labeling on paint to alert consumers  that lead dust
exposure may occur during the renovation and remodeling
of buildings that may contain old, lead-hosed paint. The
agreement also requires manufacturers to distribute new
point-of-sale consumer information containing the elements
of a designated EPA brochure. In addition, NPCA devised
and deployed a new national training program, which is
offered without cost to contractors, state and local officials,
and others. This four-year educational and training program
seeks to offer 150 sessions in roughly 50 locations across the
U.S. annually.23

-------
PROFILE The public port sector4 consists of 85
port authorities and agencies located along the
coasts, on estuaries and rivers, and around the
Great Lakes. Port authorities develop and
maintain many of the shore-side facilities for
the intermodal transfer of cargo between ships,
barges, trucks, and railroads. Some ports also
build and maintain cruise terminals for the
passenger cruise industry. In addition, port
authority operations may include other entities,
such as airports, bridges, ferries, and railroads.
While many port authorities directly operate
marine terminals, others instead serve as
landlords to tenant operations, providing the
underlying land and some infrastructure and
water-side access, but leaving operations fully
in the hands of private tenants.

TRENDS In recent years, the U.S. port sector
has been accommodating a steadily increasing
volume of freight carried by larger and larger
vessels.

   In 2003, waterborne imports and exports increased by
   4% to nearly 1.4 billion tons.5  Domestic waterborne
   commerce totaled approximately 700 million tons.6
   Imports and exports of containerized cargo  at U.S.
   ports totaled 21.3 million 20-foot equivalents in
   2003, an increase of 8% from  20027 Container traffic
   at U.S. ports is expected to grow by more than 4%
   annually, resulting in a doubling in traffic volume
   within the next 15 years.8
Sector At-a-Glance
Number of U.S. Ports:
Value of Shipments:
Number of Employees:
851
$718 billion2
57.0003
In addition:

   From 2003 to 2004, the number of cruises leaving
   U.S. ports increased by 10% to more than 4,200. The
   number of cruise passengers increased by 14% to 9
   million in 2004.9
•  In 2002, ports invested nearly $1.7 billion to update
   and modernize their facilities, including $140 million
   for general cargo, about $942 million in investments
   related to containers, and $241 million on
   infrastructure improvements. Between 2003 and
   2007, public ports predict that they will spend $10.4
   billion (a record level).10
KEY ENVIRONMENTAL OPPORTUNITIES
For ports, the greatest opportunities for
environmental improvements are in reducing
air emissions, improving water quality, managing
dredge material, and minimizing the impacts
of growth.

The port sector is working to generate better
data on the sector's environmental performance.
In December 2004, the American Association of
Port Authorities (AAPA) initiated a survey of its
U.S. member ports. The survey measured interest
in environmental issues and identified metrics
for environmental activities that U.S. ports are
undertaking, primarily on a voluntary basis.
Forty-eight (60%) of AAPAs 85 U.S. member
ports responded. The results of the survey are
described in more detail throughout this chapter.

-------
REDUCING Am EMISSIONS Air emissions
from diesel-powered boats, ships, and land-based
equipment are a concern because of the
proximity of many ports to urban areas with
high overall levels of air pollution. As illustrated
in the Locations of U.S. Ports and Areas Exceeding
National Ambient Air Quality Standards figure,
nearly 40 of the country's largest ports are
located in areas that do not meet EPA National
Ambient Air Quality Standards for ozone (8-hour
standard). Fourteen of those ports are located in
areas that also do not meet EPAs fine paniculate
matter (PM25) standards.11

Using emission inventories, ports can quantify
current emissions and develop strategies to
decrease air pollution. This section takes a closer
look at efforts to reduce diesel emissions and
develop emissions inventories at ports.

Diesel  Emissions Marine vessels, tug-and-tow
operations (harborcraft), and land-based
cargo-handling equipment, trucks, and trains all
contribute to air emissions at ports. Common air
pollutants from this transportation equipment,
which is primarily diesel-powered, include
paniculate matter (PM), nitrogen oxides (NOX),
and sulfur  oxides (SOX).

Twelve of the 48 ports that responded to the
AAPA survey indicated that they have emission
control or reduction strategies, and 14 ports
indicated they use low-emission fuel types.
Some ports (notably Los Angeles, CA, Long
Beach, CA, and Seattle, WA) have installed
shore-side power for vessels at berth, which can
dramatically reduce emissions by reducing the
use of the auxiliary diesel engines that ships use
to keep lights, refrigeration, and other equipment
and facilities operating.12

AAPA and its member ports are involved in a
number of cooperative efforts to reduce diesel
air emissions. For example, AAPA is working
with EPA to establish a national diesel emissions
reduction program for ports and related
industries called Clean Ports USA. The program
offers assistance, grants, and incentives to port
authorities to reduce pollution
emitted from diesel engines through
the implementation of a variety of
control strategies.13

A related effort on a regional scale is
the West Coast Collaborative, which
is a partnership among leaders from
government, the private sector, and
environmental groups in six
Western states, Canada, and Mexico
who are committed to reducing
diesel emissions along the Pacific
Coast. The collaborative leverages
funds from a variety of sources to
implement diesel emissions
reduction projects in several
industry sectors, including ports.
Nine of the 28 projects funded
by the collaborative thus far have
   targeted marine vessels and ports. These projects
   have reduced air emissions by:

   ' Increasing the use of ultra-low sulfur diesel, biodiesel,
     and liquefied natural gas;
     Funding the installation of control technologies such
     as diesel oxidation catalysts; and
     Educating truckers and equipment operators about
     strategies to reduce engine idling.14
Locations of U.S. Ports and Areas Exceeding
   National Ambient Air Quality Standards
                                                                                          U.S EPA2«JS, AAPA 230S
                                                                                                                                                                        66

-------
                                 The following case studies illustrate how two
                                 ports have reduced PM and NOX emissions
                                 from diesel equipment through the use of
                                 control technologies, alternative fueled vehicles,
                                 alternative power for ships at dock, and other
                                 "green"  measures.

                                 Case Stw^y: Healthy Harbor Long Beach In 2003,
                                 more than 4.6 million containers and other cargo worth
                                 $95.9 billion moved through the Port of Long Beach, CA.
                                 In order to reduce the impacts of port activity on public
                                 health and the environment, the port implemented a series
                                 of programs known collectively as Healthy Harbor Long
                                 Beach. One of these programs, the Air Quality Improvement
                                 Plan, has  achieved measurable reductions in air pollutant
                                 emissions from port operations, particularly PMfrom diesel
                                 equipment.

                                 A key component of this effort is the Diesel Emission
                                 Reduction Program, which introduced state-of-the-art
                                 emissions  control technologies and alternative fueled
                                 vehicles. The port has installed nearly 600 diesel oxidation
                                 catalysts - a pollution-control device installed in the exhaust
                                 system, much like a muffler, that removes particulates from
                                 exhaust - on all terminal equipment, including utility trucks,
                                 forklifts, and cranes. As exhaust gases pass through the
                                 honeycomb structure of the catalysts, pollutants are oxidized
                                 to water vapor and carbon dioxide. To date, the Diesel
                                 Emission Reduction Program has reduced total annual
                                 emissions from the port by more than 14 tons ofPM and
                                 43 tonso/MV5
Case Study: Port of Los Angeles' Alternative
Maritime Power Program As the busiest port in the
country, the Port of Los Angeles, CA, strives to balance its
operations, growth, and development with its role as an
environmental steward. In October 2001, the port developed
the Alternative Maritime Power (AMP) program to help
meet its goal of "no net increase" in air emissions despite the
port's continued growth. Rather than using onboard
auxiliary diesel engines while at dock, AMP ships "plug in"
to shore-side electrical power, which is less polluting. AMP
ships eliminate an estimated I ton ofNOx and PM
emissions per day while in port compared to ships using
dkselfuel.

In June 2004, the Port of Los Angeles and China Shipping
Container Line opened the China Shipping Terminal, the
first container terminal in the world to use AMP Five other
shipping lines at the Port of Los Angeles have signed
memoranda of understanding to implement AMP at their
terminals in the future. NYK Shipping Line built the first
new vessel to include AMP specifications.
                                                        Additionally, the Los Angeles Harbor Commission selected
                                                        P&>O Nedlloyd Container Line's competitive bid to develop
                                                        the first "green terminal" at the Port of Los Angeles.  The
                                                        agreement requires P&>O Nedlloyd, the tenant, to include
                                                        technology aimed at reducing air pollution in its terminal
                                                        operations. For example, the tenant will incorporate
                                                        shore-side power for vessels, rail access that will reduce the
                                                        number of truck trips, use of low-sulfur or alternative fuel,
                                                        clean yard equipment, and other programs consistent with
                                                        the port's environmental management system.16
67

-------
Emissions Inventories Emissions inventories
enable port authorities, those doing business at
ports, and other interested parties to understand
the air quality impacts of current port operations,
as well as port expansion projects and projected
growth in port activities. An inventory also
provides a baseline from which to create and
implement emissions reduction strategies and
to track performance over time.

Eleven of 48 ports that responded to the AAPA
survey indicated that they have conducted an air
emissions inventory, and 13 others anticipated
conducting an inventory in the coming year.
Ports such as Corpus Christi, TX, and those in
the Greater Puget Sound region  (including the
Ports of Seattle, Tacoma, and Everett, WA) are
proactively conducting emissions inventories
even though they are located in areas that
currently meet national air quality standards.17

Of the ports that have conducted air emissions
inventories, 10 included yard equipment, 10
included marine vessels, 6 included tenant
equipment, and  10 included other sources, such
as port-related truck and rail traffic, auto
emissions from roll-on/roll-off operations (i.e.,
a type of ferry, cargo ship, or barge that carries
wheeled cargo such as automobiles, trailers, or
railway carriages), or an adjacent power plant.18

With AAPAs assistance, EPA recently prepared a
document entitled Current Methodologies and Best
Practices in Preparing Port Emissions Inventories.19
This report is intended to help port authorities
and others who want to prepare a port emissions
inventory.

The following case study highlights one port
authority's success in using its inventory to
quantify emissions reductions following off-road
fleet modernization.

Case Study: Port Authority of New York and
New Jersey's  Emissions Inventory In 2004, the Port
Authority of New York and New jersey conducted an update
of its emissions inventory of the cargo-handling equipment
owned and operated by its five terminal operators. For this
effort, they received AAPA's 2005 Environmental Award.

The goal of the inventory update was to determine whether
air emissions from the off-road fleets in the five terminals
had improved since originally measured in 2002. After the
initial inventory in 2002, terminal operators modernized
their off-road fleet with new machines powered hy EPA-
certified on-mad engines.

Results of the inventory update are very encouraging. Even
though the size of the operators' off-road fleets had increased
hy 19% since 2002, average operating hours had increased
hy 5%, and the  total number of containers had risen hy
25%, overall emissions estimates for key pollutants
decreased significantly. Emissions ofNOx, volatile organic
compounds, carbon monoxide, PMW, and sulfur dioxide (in
tons per year) decreased hy 31%, 32%, 32%, 32%, and 35%,
respectively.20
IMPROVING WATER QUALITY TO improve the
quality of surrounding waters, some ports have
enhanced stormwater management and explored
new technologies to reduce the impact of
invasive species.

Stormwater Stormwater management is
increasingly important in improving water
quality near port facilities. As illustrated in the
case study on the next page,  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. Most stormwater discharges
at ports are considered point sources and require
a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permit. For some ports, the
neighboring municipality holds the NPDES
permit; in other cases, the port or tenant holds
the permit.

Many NPDES permits require preparation of a
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP),
which evaluates potential pollutant sources at
the site and identifies appropriate measures to
prevent or control the discharge of pollutants
via stormwater runoff. Thirty-two of the 48 ports
that responded to the AAPA survey indicated
they have written SWPPPs, and 33 ports noted
that they advise tenants periodically on
stormwater compliance responsibilities.21

.71 iJ!

-------
Case Study: Managing Stormwater at the
Virginia Port Authority An under-wharf detention
basin, believed to be the first of its type in the country, was
completed at the Virginia Port Authority's Norfolk
International Terminals (NIT) at the end of 2004. The
detention basin treats Stormwater runoff from approximately
108 acres of NIT. The basin has  a 30-hour detention time,
which allows nutrients and suspended solids to settle out
before the water is discharged. A series of weirs also has
been installed to handle overflow during a 10-year storm
event. The detention basin will remove 318 pounds of
phosphorous per year, thereby reducing NIT's phosphorous
discharges by 35%. In addition, a series of drop inlet filters
has been installed to remove an additional 55 pounds of
pollutants per year, including metals, oils, and greases.
The total pollutant removal provided by current and
proposed structures at NIT is 1,560 pounds per year. This
is 46% greater than the pollutant removal required by the
Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation for
this facility.22
Invasive Species The spread of invasive
species is another environmental issue of great
concern to the port sector. Ships can inadvertently
contribute to the spread of invasive species
through their use of ballast water. The port
sector is working closely with the U.S. Coast
Guard, the International Maritime Organization,
and other interested groups to promote effective
policies for ballast water management and to
develop new technologies for the treatment of
ballast water.23

MANAGING DREDGE MATERIALS Dredging
of navigation channels, harbor access channels,
and shipping berths is necessary to reach and
maintain the required water depths for vessels,
including the newer, larger freighters that are
now in operation. The U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers removes nearly 300 million cubic
yards of dredged material from navigation
channels each year, and another  100 million
cubic yards are dredged from berths and private
terminals.24
More than 90% of the nation's top 50 ports
involved in foreign waterborne commerce
require regular maintenance dredging.23

Ports are working to minimize the negative
environmental impacts of the disposal of dredged
materials, and increasingly they are finding uses
for the material that actually benefit the
environment. As  part of their dredge material
management plans, 18 of the 48 ports
responding to the AAPA survey had provisions
for beneficial reuse (e.g., wetlands creation),
and 20 ports had provisions for management
of upland disposal areas.26

The Port of Oakland, CA, for example, is using
dredged material to enhance habitat and restore
Bay Area wetlands. The Port of Baltimore, MD,
has used an open, science-based process with
citizen involvement called the Dredged Material
Management Program to  develop its long-term
dredging placement plans and to identify new
deposit sites. This program  is focusing on
beneficial reuse projects such as rebuilding
islands, creating wetlands, or shoring up eroding
coastlines.27

-------
MINIMIZING IMPACTS OF GROWTH TO
accommodate increased trade volume and the
increasing size of freight vessels, many ports
must increase their capacity. Although port
capacity can be increased through improvements
in technology and operational efficiency, many
ports also require physical expansion. When
planning for expansion, ports must consider how
best to minimize and compensate for wetland or
habitat loss and to address other impacts of port
growth on neighboring communities.

Many ports looking to expand have revitalized
nearby abandoned or underutilized brownfield
properties, which may have been contaminated
by previous industrial activity.
Redeveloping these brownfields in or near ports
(called "portfields") can concentrate land-use
development, enhance the local economy, and
provide environmental benefits. Environmental
remediation and habitat restoration are often
integral components of redevelopment efforts at
or near ports.

Three ports have been participating in pilot
projects for two years in the Portfields Initiative,
a federal interagency effort to help revitalize
ports and improve the nation's marine
transportation system while restoring and
protecting coastal resources. Lessons learned
from these pilot projects at the ports of
Bellingham, WA, New Bedford, MA, and Tampa,
FL, will be shared with other ports and port
communities.28
Case Study: Port of Seattle's Phoenix Award In
2004, the Port of Seattle, WA, won EPA's Phoenix Award for
Excellence in Brownfields Redevelopment for its Terminal
18 Redevelopment Project. The port's need to expand
cargo-handling facilities led to a redevelopment project on
Harbor Island, which had heen listed as a Superfund site in
1986. The port worked with EPA and more than 30 existing
private property owners on Harbor Island to shape purchase
agreements that discounted the property sale price by  the
amount of estimated cleanup costs. Among other
improvements, the 90-acre expansion accomplished cleanup
of contaminated soils, reduced runoff and groundwater
impacts, and improved vehicle and rail transportation.29
                                                                                                                                                                           70

-------
PROFILE The shipbuilding and ship repair
sector4 builds and repairs ships, barges, and
other large vessels for military and commercial
clients. 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.
Sector At-a-Glance
Number of Facilities:
Value of Contracts:
Number of Employees:
3461
$16 billion2
92.4003
TRENDS Over the past four years, the
shipbuilding and ship repair industry has
been relatively stable.

 1  Appropriations for construction of new military ships
   showed a modest increase (6%) from 2000 to 2006,
   but declined by 35% over the last year.5
   Between 2000 and 2004, employment within the
   sector fell from 102,000 to 92.400.6
   The U.S. now has less than a  1% share  of the world's
   new construction market for  commercial vessels of
   more than 1,000 gross tons, lagging behind the
   world's shipbuilding leaders such as South Korea,
   Japan, China, Germany, Italy,  and Poland.7

In the fall of 2005, hurricanes hit Gulf Coast
shipyards hard. Time will tell whether these
facilities will fully recover from the damage the
storms inflicted.
                                                 KEY ENVIRONMENTAL OPPORTUNITIES
                                                 For the shipbuilding and ship repair sector,
                                                 the greatest opportunities for environmental
                                                 improvement are in managing and minimizing
                                                 toxics and waste, reducing air emissions, and
                                                 improving water quality.

-------
MANAGING AND MINIMIZING Toxics
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).

In 2003, 41 facilities in the sector reported 10.5
million pounds of chemicals released (including
disposal) or otherwise managed through
treatment, energy recovery, or recycling. Of
this quantity, 80%  was managed, while the
remaining 20% was disposed or released to
the environment, as shown in the  TRI Waste
Management pie chart. Of those chemicals
disposed or released to the environment, 24%
were disposed and 76% were released into air
or water.
           TRI  Waste Management
  by the Shipbuilding & Ship Repair Sector
  Energy Recovery  Treatment
                               Water Releases
                                   2%
                                       Disposal
                                       / 24%
     Recycling
       40%
  Source: U.S. EPA, 2003.
As shown in the Total TRI Disposal or Other
Releases line graph, the annual normalized
quantity of chemicals disposed or released by
this sector decreased by more than half (58%)
from 1994 to 2003, with one-third of this decline
occurring between 2000 and 2003. From 2000 to
2003, there was a similar decline of 37% in the
sector's normalized quantity of chemicals
released to air and water.

In 2003, the chemicals disposed or released
by the sector were dominated by n-butyl
alcohol and xylene, which accounted for 42%
of the total pounds. Zinc, copper, and 1,2,4-
trimethylbenzene accounted for  another 26%
of the sector's total.8

Data from TRI allow comparisons of the total
quantities of a sector's reported chemical releases
across years, as presented below. However, this
    Total TRI Disposal or Other Releases
  by the Shipbuilding & Ship Repair Sector
                                                  =   2
                                                  E
       1994  1995  1996  1997  1998
                       Year
      —6- Disposal or Releases, total
 * Normalized by annual value of shipments.
  Sources: U.S. EPA, U.S. Census Bureau.
                                                                            1999 2000 2001  2002 2003
                                                                              Air and Water Releases, only
comparison does not take into account the
relative toxicity of each chemical. Chemicals
vary greatly in toxicity, meaning they differ in
how harmful they can be to human health.
To account for differences in toxicities, each
chemical can be weighted by a relative
toxicity weight using EPA's Risk-Screening
Environmental Indicators (RSEI) model.

The TRI Air and Water Releases line graph
presents trends for the sector's air and water
releases in both reported pounds and toxicity-
weighted results. When weighted for toxicity,
the sector's normalized air and water releases
show a 73% decline from 1994 to 2003, with
little overall change from 2000 to 2003, despite
an increase in 2001. The spike in 2001 is
attributable to an increase in manganese releases
to air, with one facility accounting for 68% of
those releases.
         TRI Air and Water Releases
  by the Shipbuilding & Ship Repair Sector
                                                                                           3.5J
                                                                                           3.015
                                                                                             a!
                                                                                           2.0cc

                                                                                           1.5?
                                                                                             -C
                                                                                             ai
                                                                                           1.0'53
                                                                                                         1994 1995  1996 1997  1998 1999  2000 2001  2002 2003
                                                                                                                        Year
      —•—Pounds
 * Normalized by annual value of shipments.
  Sources: U.S. EPA, U.S. Census Bureau.
Toxicity-Weighted Results

-------
                            The table below presents a list of the chemicals
                            released that accounted for 90% of the sector's
                            total toxicity-weighted releases to air and water
                            in 2003. More than 99% of the sector's toxicity-
                            weighted  results were attributable to air releases,
                            while discharges to water accounted for less than
                            1%. Therefore, reducing air emissions of these
                            chemicals presents the greatest opportunity for
                            the sector to make progress in reducing the
                            toxicity of its releases.

                                  Top  TRI Chemicals Based on
                                   Toxicity-Weighted Results
                              AIR RELEASES (99%)    WATER RELEASES (<1 %)
Manganese
Chromium
Nickel
Su If u ric Acid
Copper
Lead

Source :



U.S. EPA
                            In 2003, toxicity-weighted results were driven
                            by manganese, nickel, and chromium. In recent
                            years, normalized manganese and chromium
                            releases to air fluctuated but resulted in little
                            overall change between 1999 and 2003. During
                            this time period, nickel releases increased
                            steadily, more than tripling. One facility
                            accounted for 69% of the industry's nickel
                            emissions in 2003.
EPA's RSEI model conservatively assumes that
chemicals are released in the form associated
with the highest toxicity weight. With respect
to chromium releases to air and water, therefore,
the model assumes that 100% of these emissions
are  hexavalent chromium (the most toxic form,
with significantly higher oral and inhalation
toxicity weights than trivalent chromium).9
Research indicates that the hexavalent form of
chromium does not constitute a majority of total
chromium releases by shipyards. Thus, RSEI
analyses overestimate the  relative harmfulness
of chromium in the sector.10
REDUCING Am EMISSIONS Most large ships
are built of steel and must be periodically
cleaned and coated in order to preserve the steel
and provide specific performance characteristics
to the surface. The shipbuilding and ship repair
sector releases paniculate matter (PM), volatile
organic compounds (VOCs), and air toxics
during surface preparation and the application of
paint and coatings. Although emissions of VOCs
and air toxics during  these processes are largely
captured in the TRI air releases discussed above,
this section takes a closer look at PM and these
chemical categories.
73

-------
             Matter Surface preparation is
critical to the coating life cycle, since 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
from both the breakup of the abrasive material
and the removal of the existing coating. Over
the past 10 years, shipyards have developed
several methods 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.

EPA's National Emissions Inventory (NEI)
estimates that, in 2001, the sector released
1,963 tons of PM10and 1,257 tons of PM25.
As shown in the PM & VOC Emissions bar chart,
between 1996 and 2001, normalized PM10 and
PM25 emissions from this sector increased by
approximately 31% and 74%, respectively11
However, these emissions estimates may not
reflect the shipyards' efforts in the last five years
to contain PM emissions from abrasive blasting
by using shrouds, shrink-wrap, and other forms
of containment. In addition, many shipyards
have switched blasting materials from coal slag
and steel shot to garnet, high-pressure water, and
other lower emission technologies. The following
case study highlights one shipyard's success in
reducing PM emissions by adopting an
alternative blasting technology.
          PM & VOC Emissions from
    the Shipbuilding & Ship Repair  Sector
                                      VOC
  * Normalized by annual value of shipments.
  PM - Particulate Matter; VOC -Volatile Organic Compounds
  Sources: U.S. EPA, U.S. Census Bureau.
Cose Study: Ultra-High Pressure Water Blasting
at Atlantic Marine In an effort to reduce its PM
emissions, Atlantic Marine in Jacksonville, FL, has stopped
all open-air abrasive blasting in favor of ultra-high pressure
(VHP) water blasting. This technology uses high-pressure
streams of water, instead of grit, to remove the coatings from
ships. Unlike abrasive blasting, there are no PM emissions
from the water stream, and the flakes of paint are larger
so they do not end up in the air. Over the last six years,
Atlantic Marine has avoided more than 460 tons ofPM
emissions through the adoption of the UHP technology, as
shown in the following table.12

        PM  Emissions Avoided  by
              Atlantic Marine
                                                         YEAR
                           TONS AVOIDED
                                                          1999
                                                          2000
                                                          2001
                                                          2002
                                                          2003
                                                          2004
                                                          Total
                                32.0
                                43.1
                               121.7
                                83.2
                                76.0
                               104.4
                               460.4
fc    J

-------
Volatile Organic Compounds &> Air
Toxics 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
(i.e., 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 air toxics. At shipyards,
however, most coatings are applied outdoors.
As a result, VOCs and air toxics may be released
into the environment.

EPAs NEI estimates that, in 2001, the sector
released 3,333 tons of VOCs. As shown in the
PM & VOC Emissions bar chart on the previous
page, normalized VOC emissions from shipyards
declined by 36% between 1996 and 2001.13

Air toxics, also called hazardous air pollutants,
are a subset of the TRI chemicals presented
above. The Clean Air Act designates 188
chemicals (182 of which are included in TRI)
that can cause serious health and environmental
effects as air toxics. In 2003, 38 facilities in the
sector reported air toxics releases of 730,000
pounds.
As shown in the TPJ Air Toxics Releases line
graph, normalized air toxics releases decreased
by 72% from 1994 to 2003, with more than
one-quarter of this decrease occurring between
2000 and 2003.14 Toxicity-weighted results for air
toxics releases showed a similar decline over the
10-year period.13

Much of the decline in both VOC and air toxics
emissions is due to the reformulation of marine
coatings. Coatings manufacturers, working in
cooperation with shipyards, have reformulated
many coatings to reduce VOC and air toxics
content while maintaining or improving the
performance characteristics required by
customers. Although more viscous and difficult
to apply, these low-VOC, high-solids content
coatings have become the industry standard due
to their excellent performance characteristics
           TRI Air Toxics  Releases
  by the Shipbuilding & Ship Repair Sector
                                           1.0.5>
                                             i
       1994 1995  1996 1997  1998 1999 2000 2001  2002 2003   £
                       Year
      —•—Pounds            —•—Toxicity-Weighted Results
 * Normalized by annual value of shipments.
  Sources: U.S. EPA, U.S. Census Bureau.
The following case study highlights one
shipyard's success in reducing VOC emissions
through product substitution.

Case Study: VOC Emissions Reductions at
Electric Boat In order to lover VOC emissions and
eliminate the need for control equipment, Electric Boat in
Groton, CT, conducted an exhaustive review of more than
10,000 products listed in its inventory system to identify
those materials with VOCs greater than 3.5 pounds per
gallon, developed an electronic catalog system to identify
specific environmental data and replacements for these
materials, and implemented stringent reviews of all new
materials for use in production and maintenance work.
Additionally, Electric Boat initiated an electronic record
system to collect air emissions data associated with boilers
and generators. As a result, Electric Boat has replaced more
than 100 adhesives, glues, fillers, and sealants with products
that do not exceed 3.5 pounds of VOCs per gallon.16

-------
MANAGING AND MINIMIZING WASTE
EPA hazardous waste data on large quantity
generators, as reported in the National Biennial
RCRA Hazardous Waste Report, indicate that the
shipbuilding and ship repair sector accounted for
less than 1% of the hazardous waste generated
nationally in 2003.
In 2003, 63 facilities in the sector reported
12,000 tons of hazardous waste generated. Half
of the sector's waste was generated through
wastewater treatment, and another 21% was
generated from painting and coating processes.
The waste management methods most utilized
by this sector were chemical precipitation, fuel
blending, and landfill or surface impoundment.
When reporting hazardous wastes to EPA,
quantities  can be reported as a single waste code
(e.g., lead) or as a commingled waste composed
of multiple types of wastes.  Quantities of a
specific waste within the commingled waste are
not reported. The shipbuilding and ship repair
sector reported 68% of its wastes as individual
waste codes. Of the individually reported wastes,
the predominant hazardous waste types reported
by the sector in 2003 included corrosive waste
(6,000 tons), lead (1,000 tons), ignitable waste,
and chromium. Additional quantities of these
wastes also were reported as part of commingled
wastes.17
Over the past decade, the shipbuilding and ship
repair sector has made progress in reducing
waste generation and increasing reuse and
recycling rates. 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; and
   Reclamation of spent solvents from spray paint
   equipment.
IMPROVING WATER  QUALITY Releases of
chemicals into water account for a small fraction
of the TRI toxicity-weighted results for this
sector. However, pollutants generated by
shipyards can be released into the environment
through stormwater runoff.
Over the last several years, a group of Gulf
Coast shipyards led an effort with EPA to
develop best management practices for
stormwater.18 Additionally, many  shipyards on
the West Coast capture and  treat stormwater
before discharging it.
Case Study: Eliminating Stormwater Discharges
at Todd Pacific Shipyard Before Todd Pacific Shipyard
Corporation could effectively remediate the contaminated
sediment that had accumulated around its facility over the
past century, the shipyard needed to prevent future releases
of contaminants to the water. Located on Harbor Island in
Seattle, WA, Todd Pacific's various construction, repair, and
maintenance operations take place on a 10.5-acre paved
industrial yard. In the past, rainwater that fell on the
pavement was discharged to surrounding waters via outfalls
and served as a major source of sediment contamination. To
prevent future contamination, the company has implemented
a system that collects the stormwater runoff from the
primary yard pavement and discharges the water into the
sewer so  it can be treated at the Seattle Public Utilities
treatment plant. Key design features  of this system include
the following elements:

•  Industrial  runoff from the paved yard is channeled
   through catch basin sumps for solids removal and then
   passes through a second-stage treatment method for
   additional solids removal as well as oil and grease
   separation.
•  Runoff from roofs and the employee parking lot is
   separated from the industrial runoff and discharged
   through existing outfalls.
   New 450,000-gallon detention tanks are large enough
   to handle runoff from a 10-year storm event.
•  Discharges from the detention tanks to the Seattle Public
   Utilities sewer are metered so as not to exceed the
   capacity of the sanitary system.
This new stormwater control system  at Todd Pacific exceeds
regulatory requirements and eliminates all routine industrial
stormwater discharges to adjacent waters.19

-------
PROFILE The specialty-batch chemical sector4 is
composed of companies that produce chemicals
to meet the specific demands of their customers
on an "as needed" basis. In contrast to the
production of commodity chemicals, in batch
manufacturing the raw materials, processes,
operating conditions, and equipment change
on a regular basis to respond to the needs of
customers. Specialty-batch chemicals are often
not a final product but rather a key ingredient
in a final product. The following products
either are or use specialty-batch chemicals:
Pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, food additives,
flavorings, dyes and pigments, and cleaning
agents.

The specialty-batch chemical sector is dominated
by small  enterprises. More than 89% of the
manufacturers in the Synthetic Organic
Chemical Manufacturers Association (SOCMA)
employ 500 people or less.3
Sector At-a-Glance
Number of Facilities:
Value of Shipments:
Number of Employees:
451 1
$14 billion2
150.0003
TRENDS As with other sectors, over the last
decade specialty-batch chemical manufacturing
has been affected by changes in markets and
global competition. The sector is increasingly
consolidating, particularly in mature markets
that are becoming more commodity-like, such as
water treatment chemicals, lubricants, adhesives,
dyes, and inks.6 The pharmaceutical segment
remains the largest in the sector, although its
share of the sector's sales has decreased
significantly since 2003.

   Although  75% of firms have seen an increase in sales
   from 2004, there is some downward pressure on sales
   from competition in China and India.

   There is some upward influence on sales from the
   development of new technologies to provide unique
   products.  Research and development investment
   remains strong, increasing from 5% to 7% of revenue
   between 2004 and 2005.7
Additionally, while facility security has always
been a priority, it has become an even larger
concern since the attacks of September 11, 2001.
SOCMA and its members have been aggressive
in addressing heightened concerns about the
overall security of the chemical sector. In 2005,
selected chemical plants participated in a pilot
program to rank critical infrastructure based on
their vulnerability to a terrorist attack using the
U.S. Department of Homeland Security's Risk
Analysis and Management for Critical Asset
Protection methodology. Legislation is now
pending on risk-based approaches to site
security.

KEY ENVIRONMENTAL OPPORTUNITIES
For the specialty-batch chemical sector, the
greatest opportunities for environmental
improvement are in managing and minimizing
toxics and waste and in reducing air emissions.

In January 2004, SOCMA began collecting data
from its members on energy efficiency and
releases to air, land, and water reported to EPA's
Toxics Release Inventory (TRI). These metrics
will be available to the public on  SO CM As Web
site in 2006.

-------
MANAGING AND MINIMIZING Toxics
Specialty-batch chemical facilities use a variety
of chemicals and report on the release and
management of many of those materials
through TRI.

In 2003, 313 facilities in the sector reported
2.7 billion pounds of chemicals released
(including disposal) or otherwise managed
through treatment, energy recovery, or recycling.
Of this quantity, 96% was managed, while the
remaining 4% was disposed or released to the
environment, as shown in the TRI Waste
Management pie chart. Of those chemicals
disposed or released to the environment, 65%
were disposed and 35% were released into air
or water.
            As shown in the Total TRI Disposal or Other
            Releases line graph, the annual normalized
            quantity of chemicals released by the
            specialty-batch chemical sector decreased by
            6% from 1994 to 2003, including a continuous
            decline in recent years. During the same
            10-year period, normalized releases to air
            and water decreased by 35%, remaining fairly
            steady from 2000 to 2003.

            In 2003, the releases by the sector were made
            up of many chemicals. Nitrate compounds
            accounted for 20% of the total pounds, while
            ammonia, methanol, ethylene, and acrylonitrile
            accounted for another 32%.8
                                             Data from TRI allow comparisons of the total
                                             quantities of a sector's reported chemical releases
                                             across years, as presented below. However, this
                                             comparison does not take into account the
                                             relative toxicity of each chemical.  Chemicals
                                             vary greatly in toxicity, meaning they differ in
                                             how harmful they can be to human health. To
                                             account for differences in toxicities, each
                                             chemical can be weighted by a relative toxicity
                                             weight using EPA's Risk-Screening
                                             Environmental Indicators (RSEI) model.

                                             The TRI Air and Water Releases line graph
                                             presents trends for the sector's air  and water
                                             releases in both reported pounds and toxicity-
                                             weighted results. When weighted  for toxicity,
                                             the sector's normalized air and water releases
                                             decreased by 33% between 1994 and 2003,
                                             despite an increase in 2003.
          TRI Waste Management
  by the Specialty-Batch  Chemicals Sector
   Energy
  Recovery     Treatment
  \  14%      /39%
                                      Disposal
                                      ,65%
         Recycling
          43%
  Source: U.S. EPA, 2003.
                        Water Releases
                            6%
Air Releases
   29%
                 Total TRI  Disposal  or Other Releases
               by the Specialty-Batch  Chemicals Sector
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
 0
                   1994 1995 1996 1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003
                                   Year
                  —*- Disposal or Releases, total
             * Normalized by annual value of shipments for all of SIC code 28.
               Sources: U.S. EPA, U.S. Census Bureau.
                                                                             • Air and Water Releases, only
                                                      TRI Air and Water Releases
                                               by the Specialty-Batch Chemicals Sector
                                                    1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001  2002 2003
                                                                   Year
                                                                                                          -Pounds
                                                                         Toxicity-Weighted Results
                                                                                                   * Normalized by annual value of shipments for all of SIC code 28.
                                                                                                    Sources: U.S. EPA, U.S Census Bureau.

-------
LO
79

                            The table below presents a list of the chemicals
                            released that accounted for 90% of the sector's
                            total toxicity-weighted releases to air and water
                            in 2003. More than 98% of the sector's toxicity-
                            weighted  results were attributable  to air releases,
                            while discharges to water accounted for less than
                            2%. Therefore, reducing air emissions of these
                            chemicals represents the greatest opportunity for
                            the sector to make progress in reducing the
                            toxicity of its releases.

                                   Top TRI  Chemicals  Based on
                                    Toxicity-Weighted Results
                               AIR RELEASES (98%)    WATER RELEASES (<2%)
                                    Chlorine
                                  Diisocyanates
                                  Sulfuric Acid
                                 Diaminotoluene
                                   Manganese
                                     Nickel
                                Dicyclopentadiene
                                  1,3-Butadiene
                                 Propyleneimine
                              Polycyclic Aromatic-
                                   Compounds
                                     Aniline
                                    Bromine
                                  Naphthalene
                                Hydrochloric Acid
                              Toluene Diisocyanate
   Diaminotoluene
1,2,3-Trichloropropane
 Certain Glycol Ethers
       Copper
        Lead
          Source: U.S.EPA
For air releases, chlorine, diisocyanates, and
sulfuric acid have consistently been the sector's
top-ranked chemicals based on toxicity-weighted
results. These three substances accounted for
68% of the sector's toxicity-weighted results
for air releases in 2003. From 2000 to 2003,
normalized releases to air of chlorine,
diisocyanates, and sulfuric acid increased
by 11%, 9%, and 84% respectively9

REDUCING AIR EMISSIONS The specialty-
batch chemical sector releases both air toxics and
criteria air pollutants. Although emissions of air
toxics during the manufacturing process are
largely captured in the TRI air releases discussed
above, this section takes a closer look at both of
these chemical categories.

Air Toxics Air toxics, also called hazardous air
pollutants, are a subset of the TRI chemicals
presented above. The Clean Air Act designates
188 chemicals (182 of which are included in
TRI) that can  cause serious health and
environmental effects as air toxics.
                                                                        In 2003, 270 facilities in the sector reported air
                                                                        toxics releases of 12 million pounds. As shown
                                                                        in the TRI Air Toxics Releases line graph,
                                                                        normalized air toxics releases decreased by 59%
                                                                        from 1994 to 2003, including continued declines
                                                                        in recent years.10 Toxicity-weighted results for air
                                                                        toxics releases showed a similar decline over the
                                                                        10-year period.11
                                                                                   TRI Air Toxics Releases
                                                                           by the Specialty-Batch Chemicals Sector
                                                                               1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
                                                                                               Year
                                                                              —•—Pounds             • Toxicity-Weighted Results
                                                                         * Normalized by annual value of shipments for all of SIC code 28.
                                                                           Sources: U.S. EPA, U.S. Census Bureau.
Criteria Air Pollutants EPA's National
Emissions Inventory estimates that, in 1999, the
specialty-batch chemical sector released 44,260
tons of sulfur dioxide, 42,399 tons of nitrogen
oxides, 24,201 tons of carbon monoxide, and
22,438 tons of volatile organic compounds.12

-------
MANAGING AND MINIMIZING WASTE
EPA hazardous waste data on large quantity
generators, as reported in the National Biennial
RCRA Hazardous Waste Report, indicate that the
specialty-batch manufacturing sector accounted
for 9% of the hazardous  waste generated
nationally in 2003.

In 2003, 253 specialty-batch chemical facilities
reported 2.6 million tons of hazardous waste
generated, although one facility accounted for
74% of this  total. Approximately 70% of the
waste generated by this sector was from
manufacturing, production, and maintenance
activities. Another 16% of the sector's hazardous
waste consisted of residuals from air pollution
control devices. The one facility noted above
reported that most of its waste was managed by
deepwell or underground injection.  For all other
facilities  in the sector, the predominant waste
management methods were adsorption and
incineration.

When reporting hazardous wastes to EPA,
quantities can be reported as a single waste code
(e.g., chromium) or as a commingled waste
composed of multiple types of wastes. Quantities
of a specific waste within the commingled waste
are not reported.  The specialty-batch chemical
sector reported 11% of its wastes as individual
waste codes. Of the individually reported wastes,
the predominant hazardous waste types reported
by the sector in 2003 included corrosive waste,
benzene, and ignitable and reactive wastes.13
The following case study highlights one
specialty-batch chemical company's success in
finding beneficial reuses for the waste that it
generates.

Case Study: Optima Chemical Group's Pollution
Prevention Initiatives Optima Chemical Group, based
in Georgia, produces a wide variety of specialty organic
chemicals for other manufacturers. When evaluating its
manufacturing processes and investigating alternative
production methods,  the company looks for opportunities to
reduce the generation of waste, thereby preventing pollution.
Optima also looks for beneficial reuses of the waste that it
generates.

In the past year, Optima's most significant pollution
prevention project involved a major production process
that generated approximately 40,000 pounds per week of
a waste stream with a high pH level due to the presence
of sodium hydroxide. After an exhausting study and search,
Optima located a facility that could put the material to use
as a neutralizing agent in its treatment plant. Optima's
proactive efforts effectively reduced the quantity of
hazardous waste it needed to dispose by more than 1 million
pounds per year.14
                                                                                                                                                                               80

-------
                                                                            PREFACE
                                                                            1 For more information on Sector Strategies activities with the agribusiness sector, visit the Sector
                                                                             Strategies website at: http://www.epa.gov/sectors/agribusiness/index.html.

                                                                            2 Sources used to compile total contribution to Gross Domestic Product: U.S. Department of
                                                                             Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis: Industry Economic Accounts, available at:
                                                                             http://www.bea.gov/bea/dn2.htm; Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturers Association
                                                                             (SOCMA), revenue for a p re-determined list of specialty-batch chemical  manufacturers, current
                                                                             as of August 2005; National Center for Educational Statistics financial statistics available at:
                                                                             http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2005/2005177.pdf; U.S. Census Bureau, Construction Spending, Value of
                                                                             Construction Put in Place; available at: http://www.census.gov/const/www/c30index.html; U.S.
                                                                             Census Bureau, 2002 Economic Census, available at: http://www.census.gov/econ/census02.
                                                                             Sources used to compile number of facilities and locations include: U.S. Census Bureau, County
                                                                             Business Patterns, 2003; available at: http://www.census.gov/epcd/cbp/view/cbpview.html;
                                                                             SOCMA, number of establishments for a pre-determined list of specialty-batch chemical
                                                                             manufacturers, current as of August 2005; National Center for Educational Statistics, Digest of
                                                                             Education Statistics, 2003; available at: http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d03/lt3.asp#c3a_4.

                                                                            3 U.S. EPA, Toxics Release Inventory (TRI), 2003 Public Data Release (PDR), data freeze:
                                                                             December 28, 2004, available at: http://www.epa.gov/tri/; U.S. EPA, National Biennial RCRA
                                                                             Hazardous Waste Report, 2003; available  at: http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/data/
                                                                             biennialreport/; U.S. EPA, National Emissions Inventory (NEI) Emission Trends Summaries,
                                                                             Criteria Pollutant Data, 1970-2002 Average Annual Emissions, July 2005, available at:
                                                                             http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/trends/; U.S.  Department of Energy (DOE),  Manufacturing Energy
                                                                             Consumption Survey (MECS), 2002, available at: http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/mecs/mecs2002/
                                                                             da ta02/shell tables, html.

                                                                            4 U.S. Census Bureau,  Pollution Abatement Costs and Expenditures: 1999, Publication
                                                                             #MA200(99), November 2002, available at: http://www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/
                                                                             ma200-99.pdf.

                                                                            LEADERSHIP BY  TRADE ASSOCIATIONS
                                                                            1 For a current listing of EPAs voluntary partnership programs, visit: http://www.epa.gov/partners/.

                                                                            2 A list of sectors and partners is included in the Introduction of this report; also see
                                                                             http://www.epa.gov/sustainableindustry/trades.html for links to partners' Web sites, which
                                                                             describe the mission and membership of each trade association.

                                                                            3 Sources used to compile total contribution to Gross Domestic Product: U.S. Department of
                                                                             Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis: Industry Economic Accounts, available at:
                                                                             http://www.bea.gov/bea/dn2.htm; Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturers Association
                                                                             (SOCMA), revenue and number of establishments per a pre-determined  list of specialty-batch
                                                                             chemical manufacturers, current as of August 2005; National Center for  Educational Statistics
                                                                             financial statistics available at: http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2005/2005177.pdf; U.S. Census Bureau,
                                                                             Construction Spending, Value of Construction Put in Place; available at:  http://www.census.gov/
                                                                             const/www/c30index.html; U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 Economic Census, available at: http://
                                                                             www.census.gov/econ/census02.

                                                                            4 More information on ISO 14001 is available on the U.S. EPA website; please visit:
                                                                             http://www.epa.gov/owm/isol4001/index.htm.

                                                                            5 For more information on ChemStewards3^, visit: http://www.socma.org/chemstewards/.
6  For more information on Coatings Care®, visit: http://www.paint.org/cc/.

7  There are four companies (BASF, DuPont, Valspar, and Akzo Nobel) with five facilities from the
  paint and coatings sector in Performance Track. For more information on Performance Track,
  visit:  http://www.epa.gov/performancetrack/.

8  For more information on AF&PA's EH&S Principles Program and Principles Verification
  Program, visit: http://www.afandpa.org/Content/NavigationMenu/Environment_and_Recycling/
  En vironment,_Health_and_Safety/Environment,_Heal th_and_Safety.htm.

9  For more information on the Sustainable Forestry Initiative®, visit: http://wwwafandpa.org/
  Content/NavigationMenu/Environment_and_Recycling/SFI/SFI.htm

10 American Forest and Paper Association, "Sustainable Forestry Initiative - SFI® Third-Party
  Certification," available at: http://www.afandpa.org/Content/NavigationMenu/
  En vironment_and_Recycling/SFI/Certificati on/Certification, htm.

11 For more information on the Sustainable Forestry Initiative® Program's indicators, visit:
  http://www.afandpa.org/Conten t/NavigationMenu/Environment_and_Recy cling/
  SFI/Measureable_Progress/Measurable_Progress_Da ta_from_10th_Annual_Report.htm.

12 For more information on Environmental MAPS, visit: http://www.meatami.com/Content/
  NavigationMenu/Labor_Environment/Environmental_MAPS_Program/
  Environmen tal_M APS_Program. h tm.

13 U.S. EPA, EMS Implementation Guide for the Meat Processing Industry, September 2003,
  available at: http://www.epa.gov/sectors/agribusiness/ems.html.

14 For more information on Climate VISION, visit: http://www.climatevision.gov/.

15 For more information on industry  commitments under Climate VISION, visit http://
  www.climatevision.gov/initiatives.html.

16 For more information on PCA's Sustainable Development Initiative and  Cement Manufacturing
  Sustainability Program, visit: http://www.cement.org/concretethinking/.

17 For more information on the National Metal Finishing Strategic Goals Program, visit:
  http ://www. str ategicgoals. org/.

18 The EMS guides are available on the Sector Strategies Program web site at:
  http://www.epa.gov/sectors/ems.html.

19 U.S. EPA, Findings and Recommendations on Lean Production and Environmental Management
  Systems in the Shipbuilding and Ship Repair Sector, October 15, 2004, available at:
  http://www.epa.gov/sectors/shipbuil ding/lean EMS_report.pdf.

20 The EMS "business case" brochures are available on the Sector Strategies Program web site at:
  http://www.epa.gov/sectors/ems.html.

21 The six national organizations are:  American Council on Education; Association of Higher
  Education Facilities Officers;  Campus Consortium for Environmental Excellence;  Campus
  Safety, Health & Environmental Management Association; Howard Hughes Medical Institute;
  and National Association of College and University Business Officers.
81

-------
22 To see a sample of the letter sent to presidents or chancellors of colleges and universities, visit
  the web site of the Campus Consortium for Environmental Excellence at: http://www.c2e2.org/
  ems/EMS_Draft.pdf.

23 Campus Consortium for Environmental Excellence, "Fact Sheet for Senior Administrators,"
  available at: http://wwwc2e2.org/ems/Fact_Sheet_l0-6.pdf.

24To see the Web site established by the consortium's EMS work group, visit: http://
  www.campusems.org/.

25 For more assistance on the Port EMS Assistance Project, visit the website of the American
  Association of Port Authorities (AAPA) at: http://www.aapa-ports.org/govrelations/
  issues/env_mgmt.htm.

26 "Initiative to Bring Ports Environmental Success: EMS Program Shows Shared Commitment,"
  AAPA Seaports Magazine, January 2004, pp.28-29, available at: http://www.aapa-ports.org/
  govrelations/issues/EMS Article in AAPA mag 0104.pdf.

27 The application guidelines used for the second round of the Port EMS Assistance Project are
  available on the AAPA website at: http://wwwaapa-ports.org/govrelations/issues/env_mgmt.htm.

28 For more information on AGC and green construction, visit: http://www.agc.org/page.ww?
  secti on=Green+Cons true tion&name=A bout+Green+Construction.

29 For more information on PCAs Sustainable Development initiative, visit: http://www.cement.org/
  concretethinking/.

30 Steel Recycling Institute, American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc., and American Iron and
  Steel Institute, "Steel Takes LEED™ with Recycled Content," available at: http://
  wwwrecycle-steel.org/PDFs/leed/steel_takes_LEED_011405.pdf.

31 Shipbuilders Council of America, "Shipbuilding and Ship Repair Best Management Practices
  (BMPs) for Stormwater," available at: http://www.shipbuilders.org/root.asp?guid=389.

32 For more information on Performance Track, visit: http://www.epa.gov/performancetrack/.

33 To access a list of current Performance Track members, visit: https://yosemite.epa.gov/
  opei/ptrack.nsf//faMembers?readform.

34 To learn more about the National Clean Diesel Campaign, visit the EPA website at:
  http://www.epa.gov/cleandiesel/index.htm.

35 For more information on industry sector participation in the Industrial Technology Program,
  visit: http://www.eere.energy.gov/industry/technologies/industries.html.

36 For links to the AF&PA reports for 1999, 2000, and 2002, visit: http://wwwafandpa.org/
  Content/NavigationMenu/Environment_and_Recycling/Environment,_Health_and_Safety/
  Reports/Environm en t,_H ealth_and_Safety_Reports.htm.

37 For more information on some of the environmental performance measures used by PCA, visit:
  http://www.cement.org/concre tethinking/pdf_files/SP401.PDF

38 To view the Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) emissions of SOCMA members who participate in
  the ChemStewards program, visit: http://reports.socma.org/reports/
  emissionsreductionreport.aspx.
39 The sustainability indicators being measured by members of the American Iron and Steel
  Institute are also being measured on a global scale by the International Iron and Steel Institute
  (IISI). For more information on  IISI's efforts in this area, visit: http://www.worldsteel.org/
  ?action=storypages&id=101.

40 Personal correspondence, Kathleen Bailey, EPA, with Meredith Martino, American Association
  of Port Authorities (AAPA), December 2005, unpublished survey conducted December 2004.

41 The Colleges and Universities Self-Tracking Tool is available online at: http://www.c2e2.org/
  cgi-admin/naviga te. cgi.

BENEFICIAL  REUSE OF MATERIALS
1  U.S. EPAs website reports that the U.S. annually generates 7.6 billion tons of industrial solid
  waste (http://www.epa.gov/industrialwaste/) and that in 2003, the country generated more than
  236 million tons of municipal solid waste (http://www.epa.gov/garbage/facts.htm).

2  Remarks by Tom Dunne, Acting Assistant Administrator, U.S. EPA Office of Solid Waste and
  Emergency Response, Beneficial  Reuse Summit, Kansas City, Missouri, November, 8, 2004,
  available at: http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/osw/conserve/speeches/bene-use.htm.

3  For more information on the Resource Conservation Challenge, visit http://www.epa.gov/
  epaoswer/osw/conserve/index.htm.

4  U.S. EPA, Characterization of Building-Related Construction and Demolition Debris in the
  United States, June  1998, available at: http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/sqg/c&d-rpt.pdf.

5  Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Solid Waste Management in  Florida: 2001-
  2002 Annual Report, available at: http://www.dep.state.fl.us/waste/categories/recycling/
  pages/01.htm.

6  For more information about Alberici Corporation's headquarters building, see the Construction
  section of this report and the website of RegionWise, a non-profit organization promoting
  environmental improvement in the metropolitan St. Louis area, available at: http://www
  regionwise.org/main/showstory asp? categoryid=5&category=People+Safe+and+Healthy&'
  storyid=271.

7  Memorandum from Eric Ruder, Industrial Economics, Inc., to Barry Elman, U.S. EPA Sector
  Strategies Division,  December 2004.

8  Personal correspondence, Shana  Harbour, U.S. EPA, with Vince Dickinson, RE., Bath Iron
  Works, June 2005.

9  Personal correspondence, Shana  Harbour, U.S. EPA, with Wayne S.  Holt, Atlantic Marine, Inc.,
 June 2005.

10 For comprehensive statistics on Washington State University's recycling program, visit
  http://www.wsu.edu/recycle/yearstats.html.

11 Portland Cement Association, "Concrete  Thinking for Sustainable Development: Frequently
  Asked Questions," available at: http://www.cement.org/concretethinking/FAQ.asp.

12 Portland Cement Association, Report on  Sustainable Manufacturing, February  2005, available
  at: http://www.cement.org/smreport05/index.htm. See the chart in Chapter 3, Environmental
  Performance, titled "Cement Kiln Dust Sent to Landfills and CKD Per Unit of Clinker Produced."
                                                                                                                                                                      82

-------
                                                                            13 For more information the potential uses of foundry sand, visit the website of Foundry Industry
                                                                             Recycling Starts Today a non-profit consortium that promotes the recycling and beneficial reuse
                                                                             of foundry industry by-products, available at: http://www.foundryrecycling.org/whatis.html.

                                                                            14 U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Minerals Yearbook 2004, pp. 69.1-69.2, available at: http://
                                                                             minerals, usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/co mm odity/iron_&_s tee I_slag/islagmyb04.pdf.

                                                                            15 USGS, Mineral Commodity Summaries, January 2006, p. 92, available at: http://minerals.
                                                                             usgs. go v/minerals/pubs/commodity/iron_&_steel_slag/feslamcs06.pdf.

                                                                            16 USGS, Mineral Commodity Summaries, p.92.

                                                                            17 For more information on the potential uses of iron and steel slag, visit the website of the
                                                                             National Slag Association at: http://www.nationalslagassoc.org/.

                                                                            18J. Roger Yates, David Perkins, and Ramani Sankaranarayanan, "CemStar Process and Technology
                                                                             for Lowering Greenhouse Gases and Other Emissions while Increasing Cement Production,"
                                                                             presented at the Second International Symposium on Ecomaterials and Ecoprocesses,
                                                                             Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, August 2003, p.5, available at: http://www.hatch.ca/
                                                                             Sustainable_Development/Projects/Copy of CemStar-Process-final4-30-03.pdf.

                                                                            19 For more information on U.S. EPAs efforts to encourage recycling of wastewater sludge from
                                                                             metal finishing operations, visit: http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/gener/f006acum.htm.

                                                                            20 U.S. EPA, National Biennial RCRA Hazardous Waste Report, 2003, available at: http://www
                                                                             epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/data/biennialreport/.

                                                                            21 William D. Gabbard and David Gossman, "Hazardous Waste Fuels and the Cement Kilns: The
                                                                             Incineration Alternative," ASTM Standardization News,  September 1990, available at:
                                                                             http://www.wbcsd.org/web/projects/cement/tf2/HWF-CKS.pdf.

                                                                            22 Rubber Manufacturers Association, U.S. Scrap Tire Markets, 2003 Edition, July 2004, p. 11,
                                                                             available at: https://wwwrma.org/publications/scrap_tires/index.cfm?
                                                                             PublicationID=11302&CFID=5180063&CFTOKEN=56370657.

                                                                            23 Paper Industry Association Council, "Recovered Paper Statistical Highlights," available at:
                                                                             http://stats.paperrecycles.org/

                                                                            24 Paper Industry Association Council, "Recovered Paper Statistical Highlights."

                                                                            25 Paper Industry Association Council, "Recovered Paper Statistical Highlights."

                                                                            26 American Iron and Steel Institute, "Steel Questions and Answers," available at:
                                                                             http://wwwsteel.org/AM/remplate.cfm?Section=Steel_Q_and_A.

                                                                            27 Steel Recycling Institute,  "Steel Recycling Rates," available at: http://www
                                                                             recycle-steel. org/ra tes. h tml.

                                                                            28 Steel Recycling Institute,  "Recycling Scrapped Automobiles," available at: http://www
                                                                             recycle-steel. org/P D Fs/brochures/au to. p df;

                                                                            29 USGS, Mineral Commodity Summaries, p. 91.
83
30 American Iron and Steel Institute, "Steel Recycling Hits 25-Year High in the United States" press
  release dated April 19, 2005, available at: http://wwwsteel.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=News_
  Releases&TEMPLATE=/CM/ContentDisplaycfm&CONTENTID=8606.

31 For more information on how manufacturers can encourage and enable higher rates of recycling
  through product stewardship, visit U.S. EPAs website at: http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/
  non-hw/reduce/epr/index.htm.

32 Product Stewardship Institute, "Paint Product Stewardship Initiative: Background Summary,"
  available at: http://www.productstewardship.us/supportingdocs/PaintMOUBkgrdSummary.doc.

33 Abt Associates, Inc., Quantifying the Disposal of Post-Consumer Paint (draft), prepared for
  Sector Strategies Division, U.S. EPA, September 2004.

34 These recycled-con tent levels reflect U.S. EPAs recommendations to federal agencies that
  purchase latex paints, which can be found at: http://www.epa.gov/cpg/products/paint.htm.

CEMENT
1  U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Mineral Commodities Summaries, January 2005, p.42, available
  at: http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/cement/cemenmcs05.pdf.

2  USGS, Mineral Commodities Summaries, January 2005, p.42.

3  U.S. Census Bureau, County Business Patterns, 2003, available at: http://www.census.gov/epcd/
  cbp/view/us03.txt.

4  Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code used to define the economic activities of the
  industries or business establishments in this sector: 3241; or corresponding North American
  Industry Classification System (NAICS) code: 327310. For several of the analyses presented in
  this report, the sector is defined by a p re-determined list of facilities. See the Cement Charts &
  Tables References for the sector definition used for each data source.

5  USGS, Mineral Commodities Summaries, January 2005, p.42.

6  Portland Cement Association, "FAQ: Record Cement Demand," available at: http://wwwcement.
  org/newsroom/KatrinaQA.asp.

7  USGS, Mineral Commodities Summaries, January 2005, p.42.

8  Portland Cement Association, "FAQ: Record Cement Demand."

9  Portland Cement Association, The  Monitor: Flash Report, September 20, 2005, available at:
  http://www.cement.org/Flash Katrina.pdf.

10 Portland Cement Association, Report on Sustainable Manufacturing, February 2005, available at:
  http://www.cement.org/smreport05/index.htm.

11 Portland Cement Association, U.S.  and Canadian Labor-Energy Input Survey: 2001, May 2004,
  p. 10.

12 USGS, Cement Mineral Yearbook 2004, prepared by Hendrick G. van Oss, available at:
  http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/cement/cemenmyb04.pdf; supplemental 2004
  data from personal correspondence, Carl Koch, U.S. EPA, with Hendrick G. van Oss, USGS,
  February 2006.

-------
13USGS, Cement Mineral Yearbook 2004, and personal correspondence, Carl Koch, U.S. EPA,
 with Hendrick G. van Oss, USGS, February 2006.

14USGS, Cement Mineral Yearbook 2004, and personal correspondence, Carl Koch, U.S. EPA,
 with Hendrick G. van Oss, USGS, February 2006.

15 Portland Cement Association, "Leading Manufacturers Receive Cement Industry Awards" (press
 release), May 9, 2005, available at: http://www.cement.org/newsroom/eeawards20050509.asp.

16 U.S. EPA, National Emissions Inventory (NEI) Emission Trends Summaries, Criteria Pollutant
 Data, 1970-2002 Average Annual Emissions, July 2005, available at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/
 chief/trends/.

17 U.S. EPA, NEI, July 2005.

18 U.S. EPA, NEI, July 2005.

19 U.S. EPA, US Emissions Inventory, Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks:
 1990-2003, April 2005, available at: http://yosemite.epa.gov/oar/globalwarming.nsf/content/
 ResourceCenterPublicationsGHGEmissionsUSEmissionsInventory2005.html; see also: 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, Winter 2003.

20 Portland Cement Association, "Work Plan for U.S. Cement Industry's Climate Change
 Program," available at: http://wwwclimatevision.gov/sectors/cement/pdfs/pca_workplan.pdf.

21 U.S. EPA, Climate Leaders, available at: http://www.epa.gov/climateleaders/partners/index.html

22U.S. EPA, Toxics Release Inventory (TRI), 2003 Public Data Release (PDR), data freeze:
 December 28, 2004, available at: http://www.epa.gov/tri/.

23U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR modeled through EPAs Risk-Screening Environmental Indicators
 (RSEI) model, available at: http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/rsei/.

24Waldemar Klemm, "Hexavalent Chromium in Portland Cement," ASTM, 1994; see also, Perone,
 Moffitt, et al., "The Chromium, Cobalt, and Nickel Contents of American Cement and Their
 Relationship to Cement Dermatitis," American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal, May 1974,
 pp. 301-306.

25 Portland Cement Association, Report on Sustainable Manufacturing, February  2005, Chapter 3:
 Solid Waste  Production.

26 Portland Cement Association, Garth Hawkins, Cement Kiln Dust Surveys, March 7, 2005.

27 Portland Cement Association, May 2004, pp. 8-9.

28 U.S. EPA, National Biennial RCRA Hazardous Waste Report, 2003, available at: http://www
 epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/data/biennialreport/. Note: BR data presented in this report include
 cement facilities as defined by a pre-determined list of U.S.  facilities provided in the 2002 PIS
 Plant Directory.
Cement Charts & Tables References
DISTRIBUTION OF CEMENT ENERGY CONSUMPTION
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Cement Statistics and Information: Minerals Yearbooks 1994 &
2002 - 2004, prepared by Hendrick G. van Oss, available at: http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/
pubs/commodity/cement/ ; and USGS, Cement Statistics and Information: Mineral Commodity
Summaries 1997-2003, available at: http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/cement/
index.html. Note: USGS energy data include cement facilities identified by USGS. Facilities that
only have grinding operations are not included in this chart.

ENERGY CONSUMPTION BY THE CEMENT SECTOR
USGS, Minerals Yearbooks 2002-2004; and USGS, Mineral Commodity Summaries. Note: USGS
energy data include cement facilities identified by USGS. Facilities that only have grinding
operations are not included in this chart.

NITROGEN OXIDE AND SULFUR DIOXIDE EMISSIONS FROM THE CEMENT SECTOR
U.S. EPA, National Emissions Inventory (NEI) Emission Trends Summaries, Criteria Pollutant
Data,  1970-2002 Average Annual Emissions, July 2005, available at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/
trends/; and USGS, Mineral Commodity Summaries and Minerals Yearbooks. Note: NEI data
presented include cement facilities as defined by the SIC code 3241.

PARTICULATE MATTER EMISSIONS FROM THE CEMENT SECTOR
U.S. EPA, NEI, 1970-2002; and USGS, Mineral Commodity Summaries and Minerals Yearbooks.

TRI WASTE MANAGEMENT BY THE CEMENT SECTOR
U.S. EPA, Toxics Release  Inventory (TRI), 2003 Public Data Release (PDR), data freeze: December
28, 2004, available at: http://www.epa.gov/tri/. Note: TRI data presented in this report include
cement facilities as defined by a pre-determined list of U.S. facilities provided in the 2002 PCA
Plant Directory

TOTAL TRI DISPOSAL OR OTHER RELEASES BY THE CEMENT SECTOR
U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR; and, USGS, Mineral Commodity Summaries and Minerals Yearbooks.

TRI AIR AND WATER RELEASES BY THE CEMENT SECTOR
U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR; and, USGS, Mineral Commodity Summaries and Minerals Yearbooks.

TOP TRI CHEMICALS BASED ON TOXICITY-WEIGHTED RESULTS
U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR, modeled through U.S. EPA, Risk-Screening Environmental Indicators
(RSEI) model.

CEMENT KILN DUST DISPOSED IN LANDFILLS BY THE CEMENT SECTOR
Portland Cement Association, Garth Hawkins, Cement Kiln Dust Surveys, March 2005; and,
Portland Cement Association, Report on Sustainable Manufacturing, February 2005, Chapter 3 -
Solid Waste Production.

COLLEGES  & UNIVERSITIES
1  National Center for Education Statistics, Digest of Education Statistics, 2003, available at:
  http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d03/tables/pdf/table247.pdf.

2  National Center for Education Statistics, "Enrollment in Postsecondary Institutions, Fall 2003;
  Graduation Rates 1997  & 2000 Cohorts; and Financial Statistics, Fiscal Year 2003," Tables 5
  and  6, available at: http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2005/2005177.pdf.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              84

-------
                                                                            3 National Center for Education Statistics, "Staff in Postsecondary Institutions, Fall 2003, and
                                                                             Salaries of Full-Time Instructional Faculty, 2003-04, Table 2, available at: http://nces.ed.gov/
                                                                             pubs2005/2005155.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, "Enrollment in Postsecondary Institutions, Fall 2003;
                                                                             Graduation  Rates 1997 & 2000 Cohorts; and Financial Statistics, Fiscal Year 2003," Table 1; and
                                                                             "Projection of Education Statistics to 2013," Table 10, available at: http://nces.ed.gov/programs/
                                                                             projections/ch_2.asp.

                                                                            6 American Council on Education; Association of Higher Education Facilities Officers; Campus
                                                                             Consortium for Environmental Excellence; Campus Safety, Health & Environmental
                                                                             Management Association; Howard Hughes Medical  Institute; and National Association of
                                                                             College and University Business Officers.

                                                                            7 Campus Consortium for Environmental Excellence, http://www.c2e2.org/cgi-admin/navigate.cgi,
                                                                             accessed Februarys, 2006.

                                                                            8 For more information on EPAs Green Power Partnership, please visit: http://www.epa.gov/
                                                                             greenpower/index.htm.

                                                                            9 Pennsylvania Consortium for Interdisciplinary Environmental  Policy, 2004 Notable Programs
                                                                             Report, available at: http://wwwpaconsortium.state.pa.us/2004_Notable_Programs_Report.pdf.

                                                                            10 University of New England, "Hazardous Waste Minimization Program," accessed January 3,
                                                                             2006, available at:  http://www.une.edu/campus/ehs/hazard/. ; National Wildlife Federation,
                                                                             "University of Oregon Recycling Program," p.2, accessed January 3, 2006, available at:
                                                                             http://www.nwf.org/campusEcology/files/UniversityofOR2000%2D2001%5FEdited%2Epdf.

                                                                            11 U.S. EPA, National Biennial RCRA Hazardous Waste Report, 2003, available at: http://www
                                                                             epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/data/biennialreport/. Note: BR data presented in this report include
                                                                             colleges and universities as defined by the NAICS codes 6112 or 6113.

                                                                            12 National Recycling Coalition, "2004 Annual Award Winners," http://www.nrc-recycle.org/
                                                                             congress/sfcongress/annualawards.pdf.

                                                                            13 UC Berkeley Chancellor's Advisory Committee on Sustainability, 2005 Campus Sustainability
                                                                             Assessment, April  2005, p. 70, available at: http://sustainability.berkeley.edu/assessment/
                                                                             pdf/C ACS_UCB_Assessment_6_Purchasing.pdf.

                                                                            14 UC Berkeley Chancellor's Advisory Committee on Sustainability, April, 2005.

                                                                            15 More information about RecycleMania is available at: http://www.recyclemaniacs.org/index.htm.

                                                                            16 Full results of the 2005 competition can be found at the RecycleMania website at: http://www
                                                                             recyclemaniacs.org/results-2005.asp.

                                                                            17 This case study was adapted from the Best Management Practices Catalog that U.S. EPA Region 1
                                                                             developed under its College & University Initiative. The original case study is available at:
                                                                             http://www.epa.gov/region01/assistance/univ/pdfs/bmps/UMassBostonGreenChemistry.pdf.
18 Personal correspondence, Ben Bayer, Abt Associates Inc., withjohn DeLaHunt, Colorado College,
 June 2005.

19 University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, "Sustainability at UNC," available at: http://
  Sustainability unc.edu/index.asp?Type=W

20 This case study was adapted from the Best Management Practices Catalog that U.S. EPA Region 1
  developed under its College & University Initiative. The original case study is available at:
  http://www.epa.gov/region01/assistance/univ/pdfs/bmps/BUStormwater.pdf.

21 For more information on Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED), visit the
  website of the U.S. Green Building Council at: http://wwwusgbc.org/leed/leed_main.asp.

22 U.S. Green Building Council, http://wwwusgbc.org/LEED/Project/project_list.asp?
  CMSPageID=244&, data accessed on February 8, 2006.

23 Personal correspondence, Ben Bayer, Abt Associates Inc., with Leith Sharp, Harvard University,
 June 2005.

Colleges & Universities Charts & Tables References
CAMPUS-WIDE RECYCLING BY TOP 5 RECYCLEMANIA SCHOOLS
RecycleMania, 2005, available at: http://www.recyclemaniacs.org/results-2005.asp.

CONSTRUCTION
1 U.S. Census Bureau, County Business Patterns (CBP), 2003, available at: http://www.census.gov/
  epcd/cbp/view/cbpview h tail.

2  U.S. Census Bureau, Annual Value of Construction Put in Place, available at: http://www
  census.gov/const/www/c30index.html. The total value-in-place for a given period is the sum of
  the value of work done on all projects underway during this period, regardless of when work on
  each individual project was started or when payment was made to the contractors.

3  U.S. Census Bureau, CBP, 2003.

4  Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes used to define the economic activities of the
  industries or business establishments in this sector: 15, 16, and 17; or corresponding  North
  American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code: 233, 234, and 235.

5  U.S. Census Bureau, County Business Patterns (CBP), 2003, available at: http://censtats.census.
  go v/cgi-bin/cbpnaic/c bpdetl.pl.

6  U.S. Census Bureau, Annual Value of Construction Put in Place.

7  U.S. Census Bureau, Annual Value of Construction Put in Place.

8  U.S. Census Bureau, Annual Value of Construction Put in Place.

9  National Association of Home Builders, forecast updated on August 10, 2005, available at:
  http://www.nahb.org/generic.aspx?sectionID=138&genericContentID=631.

"American Institute of Architects, "2006 Projected to Be a Breakout Year for Nonresidential
  Construction," available at: http://www.aia.org/aiarchitect/thisweek05/tw0715/0715
  consensusforecast.htm.
85

-------
11 U.S. EPA, Characterization of Building-Related Construction and Demolition Debris in the
  United States, prepared by Franklin Associates, June 1998, available at: http://www.epa.gov/
  epaoswer/hazwaste/sqg/c&d-r p t. pdf .

12 Associated General Contractors of America, survey conducted May 28-June 26, 2004. Survey
  results are available upon request; write to environment@agc.org.

13 More information on these programs can be found on the following websites: Sector Strategies
  Program, http://www.epa.gov/sectors/program.html; Resource Conservation Challenge,
  http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/osw/conserve/index.htm; Waste Wise Building Challenge,
  http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/non-hw/reduce/wstewise/targeted/challenge/cbuild.htm;
  GreenScapes, http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/non-hw/green/pubs/brochure.htm; Green Buildings,
  http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/greenbuilding/; and the Building Deconstruction  Consortium,
  https://wwwdenix.osd.mil/denix/Public/Library/Sustain/BDC/bdc.html.

14 Florida Department of Environmental Protection, "Recycling: 2002 Solid Waste Annual Report
  Data," available at: http://www.dep.state.fl.us/waste/categories/recycling/.

15 Personal correspondence,  Anita Pahuja, Abt Associates Inc. , with Charles Kibert, Powell Center
  for Construction  and Environment, University of Florida, July 2005.

16 U.S. EPA, National Biennial RCRA Hazardous Waste Report, 2003; available at: http://www
  epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/data/biennialreport/. Note: BR data presented in this report include
  construction facilities as defined by any of the following NAICS codes: 233-235.
in Energy and
17 For more information on the Green Building Rating System, visit the Leadership
  Environmental Design (LEED) website: http://wwwusgbc.org/leed/leed_main.asp.

18 Personal correspondence, Ben Bayer, Abt Associates, with Dara Zycherman, U.S. Green Building
  Council, June 2005. Data presented are for LEED-NC certifications, indicating new construction
  or major renovation projects. Separate LEED certifications are given for Existing Building
  operations (EB) and Commercial Interiors (CI).

"Personal correspondence, Peter Truitt, U.S. EPA, with Peter Templeton, U.S. Green Building
  Council, August 2005.

20 For more information about Alberici Corporation's headquarters building, see the Beneficial
  Reuse section of this report and the website of RegionWise, a non-profit organization promoting
  environmental improvement in the metropolitan St. Louis area, available at: http://www
  regionwise.org/main/showstory.asp? categoryid=5&category=People+Safe+and+Healthy&'
  storyid=271.

21 U.S. EPA, Notice of Intent (NOI) Processing Center, data requested February 2005,
  Anita Pahuja, Abt Associates Inc.

22U.S. EPA, National Clean Diesel Campaign (NCDC), available at: http://www.epa.gov/
  clean diese I/construction, htm.

23 U.S. EPA, National Emissions Inventory Emission Trends Summaries, Criteria Pollutant Data,
  1970-2002 Average Annual Emissions, July 2005, available at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/
  chief/trends/.
24 Construction projects receiving grants under EPAs Voluntary Diesel Retrofit Program include:
  the Dan Ryan Expressway Construction Project in Illinois to put diesel oxidation catalysts on
  equipment, and the Regional Air Quality Council of the Denver Area to install diesel oxidation
  catalysts and closed crankcase filtration systems on non-road vehicles at construction sites. For
  more information, visit: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/retrofit/dieselgrants2004.htm.

25 California Air Resources Board, The Carl Moyer Program Annual Status Report, Sacramento,
  CA, February 2004, Table III-2, available at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/moyer/
  moyer_2004_report. pdf.

26 Leah Wood Pilconis, "Big Success for Industry and Air Quality in Texas," Constructor,
  November 2004.

Construction Charts 6^ Tables References
CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION DEBRIS GENERATED &: RECYCLED IN FLORIDA
Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Recycling - 2002 Solid Waste Annual Report
Data, available at: http://www.dep.state.fl.us/waste/categories/recycling/pages/02_data.htm.

CUMULATIVE NUMBER OF LEED-CERTIFIED BUILDINGS
Personal correspondence, Ben Bayer, Abt Associates Inc., with Dara Zycherman, U.S. Green
Building Council, June 2005. Data presented are for LEED-NC certifications, indicating new
construction or major renovation projects. Separate  LEED certifications are given for Existing
Building operations (EB) and Commercial Interiors (CI).

FOREST PRODUCTS
1  U.S. Census Bureau, County Business Patterns (CBP), 2003, available at: http://www.census.gov/
  epcd/cbp/view/cbp view h tml.

2  U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis: Industry Economic Accounts,
  available at: http://www.bea.gov/bea/dn2.htm.

3  U.S. Census Bureau, CBP, 2003.

4  Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes used to define the economic activities of the
  industries or business establishments in this sector: 242, 2431, 2435, 2436, 2439, 2493, 261,
  262, 265, and 267; or corresponding North American Industry Classification System (NAICS)
  codes: 321113, 3212, 321912, 321918, 3221, 32221, 322221, 322222, 322223, 322224, 322226,
  32223, and 32229. See the Forest Products Charts & Tables References for the sector definition
  used for each data source.

5  U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), "Forest Products Industry Analysis Brief," available at:
  http://www.eia.doe. gov/emeu/mecs/iab/forest_products/.

6  U.S. DOE, Forest Products Industry of the Future: Fiscal Year 2004 Annual Report, February
  2005, page 1, available at: http://www.eere. energy go v/industry/about/pdfs/forest_fy2004.pdf.

7  Price water houseCoopers, Global Forest and Paper Industry Survey, July 2005, pp. 14-15.

8  Richard W Haynes, U.S. Forest Service, An Analysis of the Timber  Situation in the United States
  1952-2050, February 2003, p. 189, available at: http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/gtr560/.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    86

-------
                                                                           9 American Forest & Paper Association, Environment, Health and Safety Reports, available
                                                                             at:http:/Avwwafandpa.org^Content/NavigationMenu/Environment_and_Recy cling/
                                                                             Environment,_Health_and_Safety/Reports/Environment, _Health_and_Safety_Reports.htm.

                                                                           10 U.S. DOE, February 2005, p.i.

                                                                           11 U.S. DOE, Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MEGS), 2002, Tables 1.1 - 1.2,
                                                                             available at: http:7Avww.eia. doe.gov/emeu/mecs/mecs2002/data02/sh ell tables, html.

                                                                           12 U.S. DOE, February 2005, p.2.

                                                                           13 U.S. DOE, MEGS, 2002.

                                                                           14 For more information on the Agenda 2020 Technology Alliance visit: http://wwwagenda
                                                                             2020.org/About/about.htm.

                                                                           15 Personal correspondence, Rhea Hale, U.S. EPA, with Richard A. Moser, Georgia-Pacific
                                                                             Corporation, September 2005.

                                                                           16 American Forest & Paper Association, Environmental Health and Safety Verification Program:
                                                                             Year 2002 Report, May 2004, p. 15-16, available at: http://www.afandpa.org/Content/Navigation
                                                                             Menu/Environment_and_Recycling/Environment,_Health_and_Safety/Reports/
                                                                             2002EHSReport.pdf.

                                                                           17 The calculation tool is based on the work of the Greenhouse Gas Protocol Initiative, a coalition
                                                                             of businesses, non-governmental organizations, governments, and intergovernmental
                                                                             organizations that is designing, disseminating, and promoting the use of globally applicable
                                                                             accounting and reporting standards for GHG emissions.  For more information on the tool, visit:
                                                                             http://wwwghgprotocol.org/templates/GHG5/layout.asp?type=p&'MenuId=OTAx.

                                                                           18 The calculation tool for estimating carbon stored in forest products in-use can be downloaded
                                                                             from the website of the National Council for Air and Stream Improvements; visit: http://www
                                                                             ncasi.org//Support/Downloads/Default.aspx?id=30.

                                                                           19 For more information on the forest products sector's participation in Climate VISION, visit:
                                                                             http://www.climatevision.gov/sectors/forest/index.html.

                                                                           20 For more information on the Climate Leaders partnership, visit: http://www.epa.gov/
                                                                             climateleaders/partners/index.html.

                                                                           21 U.S. EPA, National Biennial  RCRA  Hazardous Waste Report, 2003; available at: http://
                                                                             www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/data/biennialreport/. Note: BR data presented in this report
                                                                             include forest product manufacturing facilities as defined by any of the following NAICS codes:
                                                                             321113; 3212; 321912; 321918; 3221; 32213; 32221; 322221; 322222; 322223; 322224;
                                                                             322226; 32223; or 32229.

                                                                           22 American Forest & Paper Association, "Environment & Recycling - Recycling," available at:
                                                                             http ://wwwafandpa.org/Content/NavigationMenu/Environment_and_Recy cling/Recycling/
                                                                             Recycling.htm.

                                                                           23 U.S. EPA, Toxics Release  Inventory (TRI), 2003 Public Data Release (PDR), data freeze:
                                                                             December 28, 2004, available at: http://www.epa.gov/tri/.
24 U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR modeled through EPAs Risk-Screening Environmental Indicators
  (RSEI) model, available at: http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/rsei/.

25 The dominant sources of manganese at forest products facilities are fuels such as wood and coal.
  When wood and coal are burned, the manganese from these materials is either emitted or
  partitioned to ash and subsequently landfilled. In 1997, TRI reporting requirements regarding
  combustion by-products were clarified. Metal byproducts from the combustion of coal and oil
  are considered "manufactured" and therefore included in the reporting threshold calculation.
  This clarification resulted in new manganese reporting for many facilities and thus an increase
  in the amount reported to TRI. Prior to the 1997 clarification, most mills would not have
  reported these metals to TRI based on the "de minimis" exemption. For additional information
  please see the final FR notice, published May 1,  1997, available on the U.S. EPA website at:
  http://www.epa.gov/tri/frnotices/facilityexpansionfinal.pdf.

26 U.S. DOE, Water Use in Industries for the Future, July 2003, p. 34, available at:
  http ://www oi t. doe. gov/pdfs/100903_news. pdf.

27 American Forest & Paper Association, May 2004, p.  10.

28 40 C.FR. § 430, as amended on April 15 and August 7, 1998. More information on this rule can
  be found on the U.S. EPA website at: http://www.epa.gov/OST/pulppaper/cluster.html.

29 American Forest & Paper Association, May 2004, pp. 11 - 12.

30 National Council for Air and Stream Improvements,  Long-term Receiving Water Studies - A
  2004 Progress Update, November 2004, available at:  http://www.ncasi.org/
  publications/detail.aspx?id=2669.

31 American Forest and Paper Association, "Sustainable Forestry Initiative - SFI Third-Party
  Certification," available at: http://www.afandpa.org/Content/NavigationMenu/
  En vironment_and_Recycling/SFI/Certificati on/Certification, htm.

Forest Products Charts &  Tables References
ENERGY CONSUMPTION BY THE FOREST PRODUCTS SECTOR
U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MFCS), 2002,
available at: http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/mecs/mecs2002/data02/shelltables.html;  and U.S. Census
Bureau, Annual Survey of Manufactures (ASM), 2003 Statistics for Industry Groups and Industries,
available at: http://www.census.gov/mcd/asmhome.html. Note: MFCS data presented include forest
product facilities as defined by NAICS/SIC codes: 321113; 3212; and 322/2421, 2436, and 26.

DISTRIBUTION OF FOREST PRODUCTS ENERGY CONSUMPTION
U.S. DOE, MEGS, 2002.

Ant EMISSIONS FROM PULP & PAPER MILLS
American Forest & Paper Association (AF&PA), Environmental Health and Safety Verification
Program: 2002 Report, May 2004, http://www.afandpa.org/Content/NavigationMenu/Environment
_and_Recycling/Environment,_Health_and_Safety/Reports/2002 EHSReport.pdf.

TRI WASTE MANAGEMENT BY THE FOREST PRODUCTS SECTOR
U.S. EPA, Toxics Release Inventory (TRI), 2003 Public Data Release (PDR), data freeze: December
28, 2004, available at: http://www.epa.gov/tri/. Note:  TRI data presented include forest products
facilities as defined by primary SIC codes: 242, 2431, 2435, 2436, 2439, 2493, 261, 262,  265, and
267.
87

-------
TOTAL TRI DISPOSAL OR OTHER RELEASES BY THE FOREST PRODUCTS SECTOR
U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR; and U.S. Census Bureau, ASM, 2003.

TRI Ant AND WATER RELEASES BY THE FOREST PRODUCTS SECTOR
U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR; and U.S. Census Bureau, ASM, 2003.

TOP TRI CHEMICALS BASED ON TOXICITY-WEIGHTED RESULTS
U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR modeled through EPAs Risk-Screening Environmental Indicators (RSEI)
model, available at: http:7Avww.epa.gov/opptintr/rsei/.

WASTEWATER DISCHARGES  FROM PULP & PAPER MILLS
AF&PA,  2002.

ADSORBABLE ORGANIC HALIDE RELEASES FROM PULP &: PAPER MILLS
AF&PA,  2002.

IRON & STEEL
1  Personal correspondence, Tom Tyler, U.S. EPA, with Robert MacDonald, Director of Statistics,
  American Iron and Steel Institute, May 2004.

2  U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis: Industry Economic Accounts,
  available at: http:7Avww.bea.gov/bea/dn2.htm.

3  U.S. Census Bureau,  County Business Patterns, 2003,  available at: http://www.census.gov/
  epcd/cbp/view/cbpview.html.

4  Standard  Industrial Classification (SIC) code used to define the economic activities of the
  industries or business establishments in this sector: 3312; or corresponding North American
  Industry Classification System (NAICS) code: 331111. For several of the analyses presented in
  this report, the sector is defined by a pre-determined list of facilities. See the Iron & Steel Charts
  & Tables References for the sector definition used for each data source.

5  American Iron and Steel Institute, 2004 Annual Report, p. 25, available at: http://www.steel.org/
  AM/Template.cfm?Section=Shop_AISI&TEMPLATE=/CM/ContentDisplaycfm&CONTENTID
  = 1274.

6  U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Steel Industry of the Future: Fiscal Year 2004 Report,
  February 2005, p.l, available at:  http://www.eere.energy.gov/industry/about/pdfs/
  steel_fy2004.pdf.

7  U.S. DOE, February  2005 p. 3.

8  U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Industry Productivity and Costs Survey,
  2000-2003, NAICS code 3311, available at: http://www.bls.gov/lpc/home.htm; U.S. Census
  Bureau, County Business Patterns, 2000 and 2003, NAICS code 331111.

9  Timothy Considine,  Pennsylvania State University, "The Transformation of the North American
  Steel Industry: Drivers, Prospects, and Vulnerabilities," white paper prepared for the American
  Iron and Steel Institute, April 2005, available at: http://www.stee!.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=
  Home&TEMPLATE=/CM/ContentDisplaycfm&CONTENTFILEID=1452.

10 U.S. DOE, Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey, 2002, Table 1.1, available at:
  http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/mecs/mecs2002/data02/shelltables.html
11 U.S. DOE, Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey, 2002, Table 3.2.

12 U.S. DOE, "Steel Industry Analysis Briefs: Energy Use: Energy Intensity," available at:
  http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/mecs/iab98/steel/intensity.html; Steel Recycling Institute,
  "Recycling Scrapped Automobiles," available at: http://www.recycle-steel.org/PDFs/brochures/
  auto.pdf.

13 Climate VISION, "Work Plan for Climate VISION Implementation with DOE," available at:
  http://wwwclima tevision.gov/sec to rs/s tee 1/pdfs/wor k_plan.pdf.

14 Climate VISION, "Work Plan for Climate VISION Implementation with DOE."

15 American Iron and Steel Institute, "Steel Industry Reaches New Milestone in Energy Efficiency"
  (press release), May  19, 2005, available at: http://www.climatevision.gov/sectors/steel/
  pdfs/news_51805.pdf.

16 For more information on the Ultralight Steel Autobody-Advanced Vehicle Concepts project,
  visit the website of the American Iron and Steel Institute at: http://www.autosteel.org/AM/
  Template.cfm?Section=ULSABl&TEMPLATE=/CM/ContentDisplaycfm&CONTENTID=11425.

17 American Iron and Steel Institute, "Steel Recycling Hits 25-Year High in the United States,"
  press release dated April 19, 2005, available at: http://www.stee!.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=
  News_Releases&TEMPLATE=/CM/ContentDisplaycfm&CONTENTID=8606.

18 American Iron and Steel Institute, April 19, 2005.

19 American Iron and Steel Institute, April 19, 2005.

20 Steel  Recycling Institute, "Recycling Scrapped Automobiles."

21 U.S. Geological Survey, Mineral Commodity Summaries - Iron & Steel Scrap, January 2005,
  p.89, available at: http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/iron_&'_steel_
  scrap/index, h tml#mcs.

22 Alexis Cain, U.S. EPA, Region 5, "Mercury Releases from Steel Recycling and Production:
  Federal Regulations and Programs," presentation at the Mercury Switch Informational Meeting,
  Lansing, MI, June 1, 2005, available at: http://www.deq.state.mi.us/documents/deq-ess-p2-
  mercury-ppt-cain.pdf.

23 Quicksilver Caucus, "Removing Mercury Switches from Vehicles - A Pollution Prevention
  Opportunity for States," August 2005, available at: http://wwwecos.org/files/1666_file_ECOS
  _QC_Mercury_921Final.pdf.

24 U.S. EPA, National Biennial RCRA Hazardous Waste Report, 2003, available at: http://www
  epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/data/biennialreport/. Note: BR data presented in this report include
  iron and steel manufacturing facilities as defined by a pre-determined list of integrated and mini
  mills provided by Tom Tyler, U.S. EPA.

25 U.S. EPA, Toxics Release Inventory (TRI), 2003 Public Data Release (PDR), data freeze:
  December 28, 2004, available at: http://www.epa.gov/tri/.

-------
                                                                           26 U.S. Geological Survey, Mineral Commodity Summaries, January 2005, pp. 188-189, available
                                                                            at: http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/zinc/zinc_mcs05.pdf; Pacifica Resources
                                                                            Ltd., "Zinc Supply Shortfall Set to Eliminate Inventories in 2005," citing metalprices.com,
                                                                            February 19, 2005, p. 7, available at: http://www.pacifica-resources.com/PAX_ZincOverview
                                                                            _2005-02-19b.pdf.

                                                                           27U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR.

                                                                           28 U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR modeled through EPAs Risk-Screening Environmental Indicators
                                                                            (RSEI) model, available at: http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/rsei/.

                                                                           29 U.S. Department of Commerce, Characterization, Recovery and Recycling of Electric Arc
                                                                            Furnace Dusts, Final Report, February 1982; and U.S. EPA, Chromium Screening Study Test
                                                                            Report, September 1985.

                                                                           30U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR.

                                                                           31 U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR, RSEI.

                                                                           32 Climate VISION, "Work Plan for Climate VISION Implementation with DOE."

                                                                           33 American Iron and Steel Institute, "Steel Industry Reaches New Milestone in Energy Efficiency"
                                                                            (press release), May 19, 2005.

                                                                           34 For more information on the Climate Leaders partnership, visit:http://www.epa.gov/
                                                                            climateleaders/partners/index.html.

                                                                           35 American Iron and Steel Institute, "Steelmakers to Launch CO2 Breakthrough Program," press
                                                                            release dated November 19, 2003, available at: http://www.steel.org/AM/remplate.cfm?
                                                                            Section=News_Releases&TEMPLATE=/CM/ContentDisplaycfm&CONTENTID=7482.

                                                                           Iron & Steel Charts & Tables References
                                                                           ENERGY CONSUMPTION BY THE IRON &: STEEL SECTOR
                                                                           U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MFCS), 2002,
                                                                           available at: http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/mecs/mecs2002/data02/shelltables.html; and U.S.
                                                                           Geological Survey (USGS), Iron & Steel Statistics and Information: Mineral Commodity Summaries
                                                                           1997-2003 and Minerals Yearbook 1994, available at: http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/com-
                                                                           modity/iron_&_steel/index.html. Note: MFCS data presented include iron and steel facilities as
                                                                           defined by NAICS/SIC codes 331111/3312.

                                                                           DISTRIBUTION OF IRON & STEEL ENERGY CONSUMPTION
                                                                           U.S. DOE, MEGS, 2002.

                                                                           TRI WASTE MANAGEMENT BY THE IRON &: STEEL SECTOR
                                                                           U.S. EPA, Toxics Release Inventory (TRI), 2003 Public Data Release (PDR), data freeze: December
                                                                           28, 2004, available at: http://www.epa.gov/tri/. Note: TRI data presented in this report include iron
                                                                           and steel  facilities as defined by a pre-determined list of integrated and mini mills provided by Tom
                                                                           Tyler,  U.S. EPA.

                                                                           TOTAL TRI DISPOSAL OR OTHER RELEASES BY THE IRON &: STEEL SECTOR
                                                                           U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR; and USGS, Mineral Commodity Summaries and Minerals Yearbook.
TRI Ant AND WATER RELEASES BY THE IRON & STEEL SECTOR
U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR; and USGS, Mineral Commodity Summaries and Minerals Yearbook.

TOP TRI CHEMICALS BASED ON TOXICITY-WEIGHTED RESULTS
U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR, modeled through U.S. EPA, Risk-Screening Environmental Indicators
(RSEI) model.

TRI Ant Toxics RELEASES BY THE IRON &: STEEL SECTOR
U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR; and RSEI; and USGS, Mineral Commodity Summaries and Minerals
Yearbook. Data presented include the Clean Air Act hazardous air pollutants that are reported to
TRI (182 out of 188 pollutants).

METAL CASTING
1  Personal correspondence, Jeffrey Kohn, U.S. EPA, with Alfred Spada, Editor-in-chief of Modern
  Casting Magazine, February, 2006.

2  Personal correspondence, Jeffrey Kohn, U.S. EPA, with Alfred Spada.

3  Personal correspondence, Jeffrey Kohn, U.S. EPA, with Alfred Spada.

4  Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes used to  define the economic activities of the
  industries or business establishments in this sector: 332 and 336, or corresponding North
  American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code:  3315. See the Metal Casting Products
  Charts & Tables References for the sector definition used for each data source.

5  U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Metal Casting Industry of the Future: Fiscal Year 2004
  Annual Report, p.4, available at: http://www.eere.energy.gov/industry/metalcasting/about.html.

6  Modern Casting, "Casting Sales Forecast to Grow 15% by '08," Vol. 96, No. 1, Jan. 2006, pg. 20,
  available at: http://www.moderncasting.com/.

7  U.S. DOE, Energy  and Environmental Profile of the U.S. Metal Casting Industry, September
  1999, p. 10,  available at: http://www.eere.energy.gov/industry/metalcasting/pdfs/profile.pdf, see
  also:  U.S.  DOE, Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey, 2002, Table 3.2, available at:
  http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/mecs/mecs2002/data02/shelltables.html.

8  U.S. DOE, Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey, 2002, available at: http://www.eia.
  doe.gov/emeu/mecs/mecs2002/data02/shelltables.html.

9  U.S. DOE, Metal Casting Industry of the Future: Fiscal Year 2004 Annual Report, p.5.

10 U.S. DOE, "Metal Casting Project Fact Sheet: Increasing Productivity and Reducing Emissions
  Through Enhanced Control of Die  Casting Lubricants," http://www.eere.doe.gov/industry/
  metalcasting/pdfs/nadca.pdf.

UJ.F Schifo andJ.T  Radia, "Theoretical/Best Practice Energy Use in Metalcasting Operations,"
  prepared for the Industrial Technologies Program, U.S. DOE, May 2004, p.5, available at:
  http://www.eere. energy go v/ind us try/me talcas tin g/pdfs/doebes tpractice_052804.pdf. The
  estimates of energy savings and CO2 reductions are based on forecast production levels for 2003.

12 U.S. EPA, Toxics Release Inventory (TRI), 2003 Public Data Release (PDR), data freeze:
  December 28, 2004, available at: http://www.epa.gov/tri/.
89

-------
13U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR.

14 U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR modeled through EPAs Risk-Screening Environmental Indicators
  (RSEI) model, available at: http:7Avww.epa.gov/opptintr/rsei/.

15U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR.

16U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR, RSEI.

17U.S. EPA, National Emissions Inventory (NEI), Criteria Air Pollutants Inventory for Point
  Sources, 1996 and 1999, available at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/net/index.html.

18 U.S. EPA, National Biennial RCRA Hazardous Waste Report, 2003; available at: http://www
  epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/data/biennialreport/. Note: BR data presented in this report include
  metal casting facilities as defined by the NAICS code 3315.

19 U.S. DOE, Energy and Environmental Profile of the U.S. Metal Casting Industry, September
  1999, p. 10.

20 U.S. DOE, "Metal Casting Industry Profile - Environmental," available at: http://www.eere.
  energy.gov/industry/metalcasting/profile.html.

21 Foundry Industry Recycling Starts Today, "What Is Recycled Foundry Sand (RFS) - Beneficial
  Reuse Overview," available at: http://www.foundryrecycling.org/whatis.html.

22 Personal correspondence, Kate Ricke, Abt Associates Inc., with Jeff Loeffler, ThyssenKrupp
  Waupaca, Inc., October 2005.

Metal Casting Charts & Tables References
ENERGY CONSUMPTION BY THE METAL CASTING SECTOR
U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS), 2002,
available at: http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/mecs/mecs2002/data02/shelltables.html; and American
Foundry Society (AFS), Metal Casting Forecast & Trends; Stratecasts, Inc., Demand  & Supply
Forecast.  Note: MECS data presented include metal casting facilities as defined by NAICS/SIC
codes 3315/3321 and 36.

DISTRIBUTION OF METAL CASTING ENERGY CONSUMPTION
U.S. DOE, MECS, 2002.

TRI WASTE MANAGEMENT BY THE METAL CASTING SECTOR
U.S. EPA, Toxics Release Inventory (TRI), 2003 Public Data Release (PDR), data freeze: December
28, 2004, available at: http://www.epa.gov/tri/. Note: TRI data presented include metal casting
facilities as defined by the primary SIC codes 332 and 336.

TOTAL TRI DISPOSAL OR OTHER RELEASES BY THE METAL CASTING SECTOR
U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR; and AFS.

TRI Ant AND WATER RELEASES BY THE METAL CASTING SECTOR
U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR; and AFS.
TOP TRI CHEMICALS BASED ON TOXICITY-WEIGHTED RESULTS
U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR, modeled through U.S. EPAs Risk-Screening Environmental Indicators
(RSEI) model.

TRI AIR Toxics RELEASES BY THE METAL CASTING SECTOR
U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR; and RSEI; and AFS. Data presented include the Clean Air Act hazardous
air pollutants that are reported to TRI (182 out of 188 pollutants).

CRITERIA AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS BY THE METAL CASTING SECTOR
U.S. EPA, National Emissions Inventory (NEI), Criteria Air Pollutants Inventory for Point Sources,
1996 and 1999, available at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/net/index.html; and AFS.  Note: NEI data
presented include metal casting facilities as defined by the SIC codes 332 and 336.

METAL FINISHING
1  U.S. Census Bureau, County Business Patterns (CBP),  2003, available at: http://www.census.gov/
  epcd/cbp/view/c bpvtew.html.

2  U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis:  Industry Economic Accounts,
  available at: http://www.bea.gov/bea/dn2.htm.

3  U.S. Census Bureau, CBP, 2003.

4  Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code used to define the economic activities of the
  industries or business establishments in this sector: 3471, or corresponding North American
  Industry Classification System (NAICS) code: 332813. See the Metal Finishing Products Charts
  & Tables References for the sector definition used for each data source.

5  U.S. Census Bureau, CBP, 2003.

6  U.S. Census Bureau, CBP, 2000-2003, available at: http://www.census.gov/epcd/
  cbp/view/cbp view h tml.

7  U.S. Census Bureau, Annual Survey of Manufactures, 2003 Statistics for Industry  Groups and
  Industries, available at: http://www.census.gov/mcd/asmhome.html.

8  U.S. EPA, Toxics Release Inventory (TRI), 2003 Public Data  Release (PDR), data freeze:
  December 28, 2004, available at: http://www.epa.gov/tri/.

9  U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR modeled through EPAs Risk-Screening Environmental Indicators
  (RSEI) model, available at: http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/rsei/.

10U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR.

11 U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR, RSEI.

12 U.S. EPA, National Biennial RCRA Hazardous Waste Report, 2003, available at: http://www
  epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/data/biennialreport/.

13 U.S. EPA, National Biennial RCRA Hazardous Waste Report, 2003.

14 U.S. EPA, National Biennial RCRA Hazardous Waste Report, 2003.

15 40 C.FR. § 262, as amended on March 8, 2000. More information on this rule can be found on
  the U.S. EPA website at: http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/gener/f006acum.htm.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               90

-------
                                                                           16 Personal correspondence, David Cooper, Abt Associates Inc., with Matt Kirchner, America's Best
                                                                            Quality Coatings Corporation, August 2005; also see: America's Best Quality Coatings
                                                                            Corporation, available at: http:7Avww.abqc-usa.com/environmental/.

                                                                           Metal Finishing Charts & Tables References
                                                                           TRI WASTE MANAGEMENT BY THE METAL FINISHING SECTOR
                                                                           U.S. EPA, Toxics Release Inventory (TRI), 2003 Public Data Release (PDR), data freeze: December
                                                                           28, 2004, available at: http://www.epa.gov/tri/. Note: TRI data presented include metal finishing
                                                                           facilities as defined by the primary SIC code 3471.

                                                                           TOTAL TRI DISPOSAL OR OTHER RELEASES BY THE METAL FINISHING SECTOR
                                                                           U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR; and U.S. Census Bureau, Annual Survey of Manufactures (ASM), 2003
                                                                           Statistics for Industry Groups and Industries, available at:
                                                                           http://www.census.gov/mcd/asmhome.html.

                                                                           TRI AIR AND WATER RELEASES BY THE METAL FINISHING SECTOR
                                                                           U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR; and U.S. Census Bureau, ASM, 2003.

                                                                           TOP TRI CHEMICALS BASED ON TOXICITY-WEIGHTED RESULTS
                                                                           U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR, modeled through U.S. EPA's Risk-Screening  Environmental Indicators
                                                                           (RSEI) model.

                                                                           TRI AIR Toxics RELEASES BY THE METAL FINISHING SECTOR
                                                                           U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR; and RSEI; and U.S. Census Bureau, ASM, 2003. Data presented include
                                                                           the Clean Air Act hazardous air pollutants that are reported to TRI (182 out of 188 pollutants).

                                                                           PAINT &  COATINGS
                                                                           1 U.S. Census Bureau, County Business Patterns (CBP), 2003, available at: http://censtats.
                                                                            census.gov/cbpnaic/cbpnaic.shtml.

                                                                           2 U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis,  Industry Economic Accounts,
                                                                            available at: http://www.bea.gov/bea/dn2.htm.

                                                                           3 U.S. Census Bureau, CBP, 2003.

                                                                           4 Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code used to define the economic activities of the
                                                                            industries or business establishments in this sector: 2851, or corresponding North American
                                                                            Industry Classification System (NAICS) code: 325510. See  the Paint & Coatings Charts &
                                                                            Tables References for the sector definition used for each data source.

                                                                           5 Euromonitor International, "Paints and Coatings in USA," available at: http://www.euromonitor.
                                                                            com/Paints_and_coatings_in_USA_(mmp), accessed October 17, 2005.

                                                                           6 U.S. Census Bureau, Current Industrial Reports: Paint and Allied Products, 2003, issued
                                                                            November 2004, available at: http://www.census.gOV/industry/l/ma325f03.pdf.

                                                                           7 U.S. Census Bureau, Table 1, November 2004.

                                                                           8 Euromonitor International, "Paints and Coatings in USA".

                                                                           9 U.S. EPA, Toxics Release Inventory (TRI), 2003 Public Data Release (PDR), data freeze:
                                                                            December 28, 2004, available at: http://www.epa.gov/tri/.
10 U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR modeled through EPA's Risk-Screening Environmental Indicators
  (RSEI) model, available at: http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/rsei/.

11 Personal correspondence, Barry Elman, U.S. EPA, with David Darling, Director, Environmental
  Affairs, National Paint & Coatings Association, September 8, 2005. See also, South Coast Air
  Quality Management District, Supplemental Instructions: 2004-2005 Reporting Procedures for
  AB2588 Facilities for Reporting their Quadrennial Air Toxics Emissions Inventory, Table A-2,
 June 2005.

12 U.S. EPA, National Emissions Inventory (NEI), Criteria Air Pollutants Data for Point Sources,
  1996-2001; select data received: April 2004 &June 2005, available at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/
  chief/net/index, html.

13 U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR.

14 U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR, RSEI.

15 Product Stewardship Institute, Paint Product Stewardship: A Background Report for the
  National Dialogue on Paint Product Stewardship, March 2004. For more information on the
  National Dialogue, visit: http://wwwproductstewardship.us/prod_paint_nat_dia.html.

16 U.S. EPA, National Biennial RCRA Hazardous Waste Report, 2003, available at: http://www.epa.
  gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/data/biennialreport/. Note: BR data presented in this report include paint
  and coatings facilities as defined by the NAICS code 32551.

17 Memorandum to Barry Elman, U.S. EPA, from Industrial Economics, Inc., "Hazardous Waste
  Management in the Paint and Coatings Sector," December 29, 2004.

18 U.S. EPA, "Presidential Green Chemistry Challenge: 2005 Alternative Solvents/Reaction
  Conditions Award," available at: http://wwwepa.gov/greenchemistry/ascra05.html. This case
  study is based on a description of BASF's work that the company submitted to EPA's Presidential
  Green Chemistry Challenge Awards program.

19 Product Stewardship Institute, "Paint Product Stewardship Initiative Background Summary,"
  October 29, 2004, available at: http://www.productstewardship.us/supportingdocs/
  PaintM O UBkgrdSummary doc

20 U.S. EPA, "Quantifying the  Disposal of Post-Consumer Paint," draft report prepared for U.S.
  EPA's Sector Strategies Division by Abt Associates Inc., September 2004.

21 NPCA, "NCPA Supports National Post-Consumer Paint Management Dialogue," May 2005,
  available at: http://wwwpaint.org/ind_issue/current/may/issueO l.cfm.

22 Product Stewardship Institute, "Industry-Government Agreement to Reduce the Volume and
  Cost of Managing Leftover Paint," April 11, 2005, available at: http://wwwproductstewardship.
  us/supportingdocs/J ointPressRelease.doc

23 2004 Annual Report Summary, Lead Exposure Warnings and Education and Training Programs
  Agreement between State Attorneys General and the National Paint and Coatings Association,
  Inc. The agreement can be read at: http://wwwpaint.org/ind_info/state_ag_agreement.pdf.
91

-------
Paint & Coatings Charts 6^ Tables References
TRI WASTE MANAGEMENT BY THE PAINT &: COATINGS SECTOR
U.S. EPA, Toxics Release Inventory (TRI), 2003 Public Data Release (PDR), data freeze: December
28, 2004, available at: http://www.epa.gov/tri/. Note: TRI data presented include paint and coatings
facilities as defined by the primary SIC code 2851.

TOTAL TRI DISPOSAL OR OTHER RELEASES BY THE PAINT &: COATINGS SECTOR
U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR; and U.S. Census Bureau, Annual Survey of Manufactures (ASM), 2003
Statistics for Industry Groups and Industries, available at:
http://www.census.gov/mcd/asmhome.html.

TRI Ant AND WATER RELEASES BY THE PAINT & COATINGS SECTOR
U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR; and U.S. Census Bureau, ASM, 2003.

TOP TRI CHEMICALS BASED ON TOXICITY-WEIGHTED RESULTS
U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR, modeled through U.S. EPAs Risk-Screening Environmental Indicators
(RSEI) model.

VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUND EMISSIONS FROM THE PAINT &: COATINGS SECTOR
U.S. EPA, National Emissions Inventory (NEI) Emission Trends Summaries, Criteria Pollutant
Data,  1970-2002 Average Annual Emissions, July 2005, available at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/
chief/trends/; and U.S. Census Bureau, ASM, 2003. Note: NEI data presented include emissions
from paint and coatings manufacturing as defined by the source category "Paint, Varnish, Lacquer,
Enamel Mfg".

VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUND EMISSIONS FROM SURFACE COATINGS APPLICATION
U.S. EPA, NEI Emission Trends Summaries, July 2005; and U.S. Census Bureau, ASM, 2003. Note:
NEI data presented include emissions from paint and coatings application as defined by the source
category "Surface Coatings, Solvent Utilization".

TRI Ant Toxics RELEASES BY THE PAINT &: COATINGS SECTOR
U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR; and RSEI; and U.S. Census Bureau, ASM, 2003. Data presented include
the Clean Air Act hazardous air pollutants that are reported to TRI  (182 out of 188 pollutants).

PORTS
1  The number of port is based on  the number of U.S. members of the American Association of
  Port Authorities (AAPA) as of October 20, 2005. For the full list of AAPAs membership, visit
  http://www.aapa-ports.org/directory/corproster.htm.

2  Bureau of Transportation Statistics, U.S. International Trade and Freight Transportation Trends,
  2003, Table 7, available at: http://www.bts.gov/publications/us_international_trade_and_freight_
  transpor ta tion_trends/2003/h tml/table_07. h tml.

3  U.S. Census Bureau, County Business Patterns, 2003, available at: http://www.census.
  gov/ep cd/cbp/view/cbpview h tml.

4  Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code used to define the economic activities of the
  industries or business establishments in this sector: 4491, or corresponding North American
  Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes: 48831 and 48832.

5  U.S. ACE, "Final Waterborne Commerce Statistics for Calendar Year 2003," p. 1, available at:
  http:/Avww.iwr.usace. army.mil/ndc/wcsc/pdf/final03.pdf.
6  U.S. ACE, "Final Waterborne Commerce Statistics for Calendar Year 2003," p.l.

7  U.S. Maritime Administration, "Total U.S. Container Ports by TEUs and Metric Tons CYs 1998-
  2003," available at: http://wwwmarad.dot.gov/marad_statistics/2005%20STATISTICS/PIERS
  TOTAL US PORTS 1998-2003.xls.

8  Transportation Research Board, The Marine Transportation System and the Federal Role:
  Measuring Performance, Targeting Improvement, 2004, pp. 55-56, available at: http://trb.org/
  publications/sr/sr 279.pdf.

9  The U.S. Maritime Administration provides statistics on passenger cruises at North American
  ports; visit: http://wwwmarad.dot.gov/marad_statistics/Cruise Data 2003 - 2005.xls.

10 U.S. Maritime Administration, United States Port Development Expenditure Report,  November
  2005, available at: http://www.marad.dot.gov/publications/Ports%2006/FY%202003%20
  expenditure%20rpt%20-%20FINAL.pdf.

11 U.S. EPA, General Conformity Determinations for Port Projects, May 4, 2004, available at:
  http://www.pnwis.org/2004 Events/PortAQ/White Paperl.pdf.

12 Personal correspondence, Kathleen Bailey, EPA, with Meredith Martino, American Association
  of Port Authorities (AAPA), December, 2005, unpublished survey conducted December 2004.

13 For more information on Clean Ports USA, visit: http://www.cleanfleetsusa.net/cleanports/
  ports.html.

14 Personal correspondence, David Cooper, Abt Associates Inc., with Michelle Roos, EPA Region 9,
  August 2005.

15 U.S. EPA, "U.S. EPA honors Port of Long Beach for Environmental Efforts" (press release), June
  1, 2005, available at: http://www.epa.gov/newsroom/newsreleases.htm.

16 Clean Ports USA, "Case Study: Port of Los Angeles," available at: http://www.cleanfleetsusa.net/
  cleanports/presentations4osangeles.pdf; Port of Los Angeles, "Alternative Marine Power,"
  available at: http://www.portoflosangeles.org/environment_amp.htm.

17 Personal correspondence, Kathleen Bailey, EPA, with Meredith Martino, AAPA, December 2005.

18 Personal correspondence, Kathleen Bailey, EPA, with Meredith Martino, AAPA, December 2005.

19 U.S. EPA, Best Practices in Preparing Port Emissions Inventories (draft for review), June 2005,
  available at: http://www.epa.gov/sectors/ports/bp_portemissions.pdf.

20 Starcrest Consulting Group, LLC, Port of New York and New Jersey Cargo Handling Equipment
  Emissions Inventory Update, January 2005; see also: AAPA 2005 Environmental Improvement
  Award Winners, available at:  http://www.aapa-ports.org/programs/winners2005enviro.htm.

21 Personal correspondence, Kathleen Bailey, EPA, with Meredith Martino, AAPA, December 2005.

22 Personal correspondence, David Cooper, Abt Associates Inc., with Heather Wood, Virginia Port
  Authority, August 2005.

23 For more information on Port Sector efforts to combat invasive species, visit: http://www
  aapa-ports.org/govrelations/ballast.pdf.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 92

-------
                                                                           24 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, "Navigation: Economic Impact," available at: http://www.
                                                                            corpsresults.us/navigation/default.htm.; AAPA, "U.S. Public Port Facts," available at:
                                                                            http://www.aapa-ports.org/industryinfo/portfact.htm.

                                                                           25 AAPA, "U.S. Public Port Facts."
9  U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR modeled through EPAs Risk-Screening Environmental Indicators
  (RSEI) model, available at: http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/rsei/.

10 Dr. Mohamed Serageldin,, U.S. EPA, Shipbuilding and Ship Repair - Residual Risk, August 9,
  2005.
                                                                           26 Personal correspondence, Kathleen Bailey, EPA, with Meredith Martino, AAPA, December 2005.

                                                                           27 For more information on the Maryland Port Administration's Dredge Material Management
                                                                             Program, please visit: http://wwwmpasafepassage.org/dmmp_files/dmmp.htm.

                                                                           28 For more information on the Portfields initiative, visit: http://brownfields.noaa.gov/htmls/
                                                                             portfi el ds/por tfields.html.

                                                                           29 For more information on Seattle's Terminal 18 redevelopment and cleanup project, please see:
                                                                             http://www.portseatde.org/news/press/2004/09_14_2004_13.shtml

                                                                           Ports Charts & Tables References
                                                                           LOCATIONS OF U.S. PORTS AND AREAS EXCEEDING NATIONAL AMBIENT Ant QUALITY STANDARDS
                                                                           Map created on November 22, 2005, from: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Navigation Data Center,
                                                                           Tonnage for  Selected U.S. Ports, 2002, available at: http://www.iwr.usace.army.mil/ndc/wcsc/port-
                                                                           ton02.htm; U.S. EPA, Green Book Nonattainment Areas for Criteria Pollutants, as of September
                                                                           2005, available at: http://www.epa.gov/oar/oaqps/greenbk/anayhtml; and U.S. Census Bureau,
                                                                           Population Estimates, 2004, available at: http://www.census.gov/popest/datasets.html.

                                                                           SHIPBUILDING & SHIP REPAIR
                                                                           1  Personal correspondence, Shana Harbour, U.S. EPA, with Beth Gearhart, U.S. Maritime
                                                                             Administration, December 2005.

                                                                           2  U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis: Industry Economic Accounts,
                                                                             available at: http://www.bea.gov/bea/dn2.htm.

                                                                           3  U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Current Employment Statistics Survey,
                                                                             Manufacturing Industry NAICS Code used: 336611 (Ship building and repairing), as accessed
                                                                             on February 9, 2006, available at: http://www.bls.gov/data/home.htm.

                                                                           4  Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code used to define the economic activities of the
                                                                             industries or business establishments in this sector: 3731; or corresponding North American
                                                                             Industry Classification System (NAICS) code: 336611. For several of the analyses presented in
                                                                             this report, the sector is defined by a pre-determined list of facilities. See the Shipbuilding
                                                                             Charts & Tables References for the sector definition used for each data source.

                                                                           5  Personal correspondence, Shana Harbour, U.S. EPA, with Frank Losey American Shipbuilding
                                                                             Association, December 2005.

                                                                           6  U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Current Employment Statistics Survey.

                                                                           7  U.S. Maritime Administration, Outlook for the Shipbuilding and Repair Industry, June 1998,
                                                                             available at: http://www.marad.dot.gov/publications/outlook/outlook.htm.

                                                                           8  U.S. EPA, Toxics Release Inventory (TRI), 2003 Public Data Release (PDR), data freeze:
                                                                             December  28, 2004, available at: http://www.epa.gov/tri/.
11 U.S. EPA, National Emissions Inventory (NEI), Criteria Air Pollutants Data for Point Sources,
  1996-2001; select data received: April 2004 &June 2005, available at: http://www.epa.gov/
  ttn/chief/ne t/index. h tml.

12 Personal correspondence, Ben Bayer, Abt Associates Inc., with Wayne Holt, Atlantic Marine,
  Inc., July 2005.

13 U.S. EPA, NEI, 1996-2001.

14 U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR.

15 U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR, RSEI.

16 Personal correspondence, Ben Bayer, Abt Associates Inc., with Donna Elks, Electric Boat, July
  2005.

17 U.S. EPA, National Biennial RCRA Hazardous Waste Report,  2003; available at:
  http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/data/biennialreport/. Note: BR data presented in this
  report include shipbuilding and ship repair facilities as defined by the NAICS code 336611.

18 Shipbuilders Council of America, "Shipbuilding and Ship Repair Best Management Practices
  (BMPs) for Stormwater," available at: http://www.shipbuilders.org/root.asp?guid=389.

19 Kate Snider, et al., "Fundamentally Sound," Civil Engineering, May 2004; Don Gates, et. al.,
  "at Todd Pacific," Pacific Maritime, March 2004.

Shipbuilding & Ship Repair Charts & Tables References
TRI WASTE MANAGEMENT BY THE SHIPBUILDING  &: SHIP REPAIR SECTOR
U.S. EPA, Toxics Release Inventory (TRI), 2003 Public Data Release (PDR), data freeze: December
28, 2004, available at: http://www.epa.gov/tri/. Note:  TRI data presented include shipbuilding and
repairing facilities as defined by the primary  SIC code 3731.

TOTAL TRI DISPOSAL OR OTHER RELEASES BY THE SHIPBUILDING &: SHIP REPAIR SECTOR
U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR; and U.S. Census Bureau, Annual Survey of Manufactures (ASM), 2003
Statistics for Industry Groups and Industries, available at:
http://www.census.gov/mcd/asmhome.html.

TRI Ant AND WATER RELEASES BY THE SHIPBUILDING &: SHIP REPAIR SECTOR
U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR; and U.S. Census Bureau, ASM, 2003.

TOP TRI CHEMICALS BASED ON TOXICITY-WEIGHTED RESULTS
U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR, modeled through  U.S. EPAs Risk-Screening Environmental Indicators
(RSEI) model.
93

-------
PM AND VOC EMISSIONS FROM THE SHIPBUILDING & SHIP REPAIR SECTOR
U.S. EPA, National Emissions Inventory (NEI), Criteria Air Pollutants Data for Point Sources,
1996-2001, received from OAQPS April 2004 and June 2005, available at:
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/net/index.html; and U.S. Census Bureau, ASM, 2003. Note: NEI data
presented include shipbuilding and repair facilities as defined by the SIC codes 3731.

PM EMISSIONS AVOIDED BY ATLANTIC MARINE
Personal correspondence, Ben Bayer, Abt Associates Inc., with Wayne Holt, Atlantic Marine, Inc.,
July 2005.

TRI Ant Toxics RELEASES BY THE SHIPBUILDING & SHIP REPAIR SECTOR
U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR; and RSEI; and U.S. Census Bureau, ASM, 2003. Data presented include
the Clean Air Act hazardous air pollutants that are  reported to TRI (182 out of 188 pollutants).

SPECIALTY-BATCH CHEMICALS
1  Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturers Association (SOCMA), "SOCMA-member
  Specialty-Batch Chemicals Facilities", provided to U.S. EPA, November 2004.

2  Personal correspondence, Bob Benson, U.S. EPA,  with Jeff Gunnulfsen, SOCMA, September
  2005.

3  Personal correspondence, Bob Benson, U.S. EPA,  with Jeff Gunnulfsen, SOCMA, September
  2005.

4  This sector is defined by a pre-determined list of facilities. See the Specialty Batch Chemicals
  Charts  & Tables References for the sector definition used for each data source. The sector is not
  defined by a SIC or NAICS code.

5  Personal correspondence, Shannon Kenny, U.S. EPA, with Jeff Gunnulfsen, SOCMA, January
  2006.

6  Ian Young, et. al. "Specialties' New Lineup," Chemical Week. 1997, cited in U.S. EPAs Principle
  Findings: The U.S. Specialty-Batch Chemicals Sector (draft), February 2000.

7  SOCMA, Third Annual Business Outlook Survey, September 2005.

8  U.S. EPA, Toxics Release Inventory (TRI), 2003 Public Data Release (PDR), data freeze:
  December 28, 2004, available at: http://www.epa.gov/tri/.

9  U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR modeled through EPAs Risk-Screening Environmental Indicators
  (RSEI)  model, available at: http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/rsei/.

10U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR.

11 U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR,  RSEI.

12U.S. EPA, National Emissions Inventory (NEI), Criteria Air Pollutants Inventory for Point
  Sources, 1999, available at: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/net/index.html.

13 U.S. EPA, National Biennial RCRA Hazardous Waste Report, 2003, available at: http://www
  epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/data/biennialreport/. Note: BR data presented in this report include
  specialty-batch chemical facilities as defined by a pre-determined list provided by SOCMA.
14 Personal correspondence, Bob Benson, U.S. EPA, with Jeff Gunnulfsen, SOCMA, November
  2005.

Specialty-Batch Chemicals Charts & Tables References
TRI WASTE MANAGEMENT BY THE SPECIALTY-BATCH CHEMICALS SECTOR
U.S. EPA, Toxics Release Inventory (TRI), 2003 Public Data Release (PDR), data freeze: December
28, 2004, available at: http://www.epa.gov/tri/. Note: TRI data presented in this report include
specialty-batch chemical facilities as defined by a pre-determined list provided by SOCMA.

TOTAL TRI DISPOSAL OR OTHER RELEASES BY THE SPECIALTY-BATCH CHEMICALS SECTOR
U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR; and U.S. Census Bureau, Annual Survey of Manufactures (ASM), 2003
Statistics for Industry Groups and Industries, available at: http://www.census.gov/mcd/asmhome.
html.

TRI AIR AND WATER RELEASES BY THE SPECIALTY-BATCH CHEMICALS SECTOR
U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR; and U.S. Census Bureau, ASM, 2003.

Top TRI CHEMICALS BASED ON TOXICITY-WEIGHTED RESULTS
U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR, modeled through U.S. EPAs Risk-Screening Environmental Indicators
(RSEI) model.

TRI AIR Toxics RELEASES BY THE SPECIALTY-BATCH CHEMICALS SECTOR
U.S. EPA, TRI, 2003 PDR; and RSEI; and U.S. Census Bureau, ASM, 2003. Data presented include
the Clean Air Act hazardous air pollutants that are reported to TRI (182 out of 188 pollutants).
                                                                                                                                                                 94

-------
DATA SOURCES: Economic Census/Annual Survey of Manufactures
(ASM)/Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA)

METRIC USED: Annual information on value of shipments/revenue.

PERIOD ANALYZED: 1994-2003.

NEXT DATA RELEASE: In 2006  for 2004 data.

Sector chapters presenting data:
• Construction
• Forest Products
   Metal  Finishing
• Paint & Coatings
• Ports
• Shipbuilding  & Ship Repair
   Specialty-Batch Chemicals

DATA SOURCE DESCRIPTION: The U.S. Census Bureau's Economic Census
profiles American businesses every five years, in years ending in 2 and 7,
from the  national to the local levels. The Bureau's Annual Survey of
Manufactures provides sample  estimates of statistics for all manufacturing
establishments  with one or more paid employees in each of the four years
between the Economic Census. These data were used for two purposes: (i)
for normalizing environmental data and (ii) for characterizing the "Sector
At-a-Glance" tables.

DATA SOURCE CONSIDERATIONS:  Aspects of the Census influence the use of
these data for EPA's Sector Strategies Program.
   Nonmanufacturing sectors not included. Although the Economic Census includes data on
   all sectors, the ASM for intermittent years is restricted to manufacturing sectors only.
   Revenue data for nonmanufacturing sectors, specifically, colleges & universities,
   construction, and ports are not  included.
   Changes to the ASM. In 2003, the ASM collapsed specific 6-digit North American
   Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes to the 5-digit NAICS level due to budget
   cuts. For 2003 and preceeding years, data for these sectors will be collected and
   presented at the 5-digit NAICS level. Unless further budget cuts occur, the Economic
   Census (conducted every five years) will continue to maintain the 6-digit NAICS detail.
   The collapse to 5-digit codes affects two Sector Strategies  Program sectors:
   forest products and metal finishing. For these sectors, defined at the 6-digit NAICS
   detail, using a 5-digit NAICS code would over-include additional sectors. For 2003
   onward, this data source cannot be used for these  sectors. As an alternative, data
   on revenue and value of shipments can be accessed from the U.S. Department of
   Commerce's Bureau of Economic Analysis.  BEA uses and presents annual data on the
   value of shipments sourced from the Census Bureau. To maintain the 6-digit NAICS level,
   BEA extrapolates these data by applying 6-digit NAICS weights from the most current
   Economic Census year to the 5-digit NAICS data in annual  survey years. BEA will
   continue to do so for preceeding  years.

DATA PROCESSING STEPS:
•  Data and documentation from the U.S. Census Bureau are available at
   www.census.gov/econ/census02 and  www.census.gov/mcd/asmhome.html.

•  Data and documentation from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis are available at
   www.bea.doc.gov.

   For most sectors, value of shipments/revenue was used for  normalizing data. These data
   are extracted from the ASM, Economic Census, and BEA. For the  following manufacturing
   sectors,  production data was used from other sources: cement and iron & steel (U.S.
   Geological Survey) and  metal casting (American Foundry Society). For colleges &
   universities revenue data were used from the National Center for Education Statistics.

   For value of shipments/revenue data, relevant sector assignments were based on 6-digit
   NAICS codes for all sectors but specialty-batch chemicals. This sector was normalized
   using the chemical manufacturing sector's value of shipments.

-------
DATA SOURCE: Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS)

ENVIRONMENTAL METRIC USED: Quadrennial energy consumption by the
manufacturing industry.

PERIOD ANALYZED: 1994, 1998, and 2002.

NEXT DATA RELEASE: 2006 data release schedule to be determined.

Sector chapters presenting data:
   Forest Products
•  Iron & Steel
•  Metal Casting

DATA SOURCE DESCRIPTION: MECS data are maintained by the U.S.
Department of Energy's statistical agency, Energy Information Administration
(EIA). Data are available by manufacturing industry and region and by value
of shipments and employment size category and region (e.g., Northeast
Census region). MECS data are collected quadrennially for a sample size
through mailed questionnaires and then extrapolated to represent the
manufacturing universe. For example, in 2002, a sample size of approximately
15,500 establishments was drawn from a sample frame representing 97% to
98% of the manufacturing payroll.

DATA SOURCE CONSIDERATIONS: Aspects of MECS influence the use of these
data for EPAs Sector Strategies Program.
  Detail of data. MECS energy consumption estimates for the manufacturing industry are
  available for all manufacturing sectors at the 3-digit NAICS code level and select
  manufacturing sectors at the 6-digit NAICS code level. For the Sector Strategies Program
  sectors, 2002 data at the 6-digit level are available for the cement, forest products, iron
  & steel, and metal casting sectors.

  Small businesses are not included. MECS does not include small establishments, including
  those with fewer than 5 employees or those with 5 to 20 employees with certain
  minimum  annual payrolls and shipments

DATA PROCESSING STEPS:
• Data and documentation are available at www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/mecs.

  Sectors are defined based on 3-, 4-, 5-, and/or 6-digit NAICS code combinations.

• Energy consumed for all purposes (first use) was totaled for relevant sectors. Other
  potential available metrics include: energy consumed as a fuel, as a nonfuel  (for purposes
  other than for heat, power, and electricity generation), and offsite-produced fuel
  consumed.
  Energy consumption data presented are normalized based on the sectors' productivity
  (as measured by changes in value of shipments/revenue or production), with 1994 as a
  baseline year.

  Units of measure are maintained in trillion British thermal  units (Btus).
DATA SOURCE: National Biennial RCRA Hazardous Waste Report
(hereafter, National Biennial Report)

ENVIRONMENTAL METRICS USED: Biennial information on hazardous waste
generation, management, and final disposition.

PERIOD ANALYZED: 2001 and 2003.

NEXT DATA RELEASE: 2005 data release schedule to be determined.

Sector chapters presenting data:
m  Cement
•  Colleges & Universities
•  Construction
•  Forest Products
•  Iron & Steel
•  Metal Casting
   Metal Finishing
•  Paint & Coatings
•  Shipbuilding & Ship Repair
   Specialty-Batch Chemicals

DATA SOURCE DESCRIPTION: EPAs Office of Solid Waste (OSW) biennially
collects information on the generation, management, and final disposition
of hazardous waste from large quantity generators (LQGs) and treatment,
storage, and disposal facilities (TSDFs) and compiles a National Biennial
Report. OSW first collected Biennial Reporting (BR) data using a national
standardized form in 1989. The Toxicity Characteristic rule in 1990 added
more waste types and required more stringent analysis of waste constituents.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                   96

-------
97
                                                                 DATA SOURCE CONSIDERATIONS: Setup of the data system and changes to the
                                                                 last three reporting cycles influence the use of these data by EPA's Sector
                                                                 Strategies Program for years prior to 2001.
                                                                 • Smaller generators are not included. Only LQGs (facilities that meet minimum thresholds
                                                                   for reporting, such as those that generate 1,000 kilograms or more of hazardous waste
                                                                   per month or 1  kilogram or more of acutely hazardous waste per month) and TSDFs are
                                                                   required to submit a biennial Hazardous Waste Report; other generators are not.

                                                                 • Changes to the National Biennial Report. In 1997, OSW began to exclude wastewater
                                                                   from its report to improve consistency, accuracy, and reliability of data collected across
                                                                   the program. This change was initiated  in 1997 but fully implemented  during the 1999
                                                                   reporting cycle. Inconsistencies exist in  the inclusion and exclusion of wastewater in the
                                                                   primary generated waste values making it inadvisable to compare 1997 and  1999 data
                                                                   with data collected in earlier and subsequent reporting years.

                                                                 • Improvements implemented during the 2001 reporting cycle. States and  regions were
                                                                   delegated the responsibility for determining inclusion  or exclusion of data from the
                                                                   National Biennial Report. This resolved issues of translating state and regional codes to
                                                                   national codes needed to determine wastewater exclusion. Because  states and regions
                                                                   have a better understanding of the waste reported under the state waste codes, they are
                                                                   able to improve data quality by more accurately identifying wastewater. Additionally,
                                                                   reporting national source codes that determine whether waste is deemed primary or
                                                                   secondary became mandatory. This is expected to improve the population of the primary
                                                                   generated waste variable analyzed. Based on these changes,  it was determined that data
                                                                   from reporting year 2001 onward could be included in the 2006 Sector Strategies
                                                                   Performance Report. Although this change was initiated in 2001, it was fully
                                                                   implemented during the 2003 reporting cycle.

                                                                 DATA PROCESSING STEPS:
                                                                   Data and documentation can be found at
                                                                   www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/data/biennialreport.

                                                                 • For most sectors, data are compiled based on the primary 3-, 4-, 5-, and/or 6-digit
                                                                   NAICS codes reported in the National Biennial Report. For the cement, iron & steel, and
                                                                   specialty-batch chemicals sectors, the sector BR data  are extracted based on  a
                                                                   predetermined list of facilities. The count of the number of facilities reporting hazardous
                                                                   waste data is a total of the number of unique RCRA identification numbers (IDs) with the
                                                                   sectors' NAICS codes. This may overestimate facility counts, as one facility may have
                                                                   multiple RCRA IDs.

                                                                 • Only data flagged for inclusion in the National Biennial Report are included.

                                                                 • Waste associated with source code G61 and management code H141 are excluded
                                                                   from this analysis to avoid double counting of stored wastes. This is consistent with the
                                                                   National Biennial Report methodology.
•  Units of measure are maintained in tons.

DATA SOURCE: National Emissions Inventory (NEI)

ENVIRONMENTAL METRICS USED: Emission estimates of specific criteria air
pollutants (CAP). Pollutants analyzed: sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides,
particulate matter (<2.5 microns and  <10 microns), and volatile organic
compounds.

PERIOD ANALYZED:  1996-2002 (preliminary).

NEXT DATA RELEASE: February 2006  for final 2002.

Sector chapters presenting data:
•  Cement
•  Metal Casting
•  Paint & Coatings
•  Shipbuilding & Ship Repair
•  Specialty-Batch Chemicals

DATA SOURCE DESCRIPTION:  EPA's Emission Factor and Inventory Group
within the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS) prepares
a national database of CAP emissions based on input from numerous state,
tribal, and local air pollution control agencies; industry-submitted data; data
from other EPA databases; as well as emission estimates. 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
and where data were not available through industry  submissions or other
EPA databases. Gaps in data for the years between submissions are filled
with emission estimates modeled using sources such as sector-level economic
data and supplemental emissions information. As a result of the Consolidated
Emissions Reporting rule, NEI updates for 2002 and beyond are expected
to include data uploads from all jurisdictions.

DATA SOURCE CONSIDERATIONS: Several changes to NEI influence the
appropriate use of these data for EPA's Sector Strategies Program.
•  Addition of PM25 In 1997, OAQPS established  National  Ambient Air Quality Standards for
   particulate matter less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter. As a  consequence, NEI  began to
   collect PM25 emissions estimates as of the 1999 inventory.

•  Improved methodology and regulatory amendments. As a result of the Consolidated
   Emissions  Reporting rule, NEI updates for 2002 and beyond are expected to include data
   uploads from all jurisdictions. If so, the need to estimate missing emissions data will be
   reduced.

-------
•  Changesin Trends" Report Methodology for PM. In the 2002 Trends Report, OAQPS
   restructured certain source categories under the PM pollutant codes. Some source
   classification codes (SCCs) previously captured under the "Miscellaneous" category (Tier
   1-14) were moved  to the "Other Industrial Processes" category (Tier 1-7). The change in
   tier structure was made for the years 1990 and 1996 to 2002. Specifically, this increases
   the cement sector's PM emissions estimates as presented in the 2004 Sector Strategies
   Performance Report, which falls within the "Other Industrial Processes" category.

   NEI Hazardous Air Pollutant (HAP) data. NEI also includes hazardous air pollutant (HAP),
   or  air toxics data. Air toxics are identified as 188 chemicals that cause serious health and
   environmental effects, as designated by the Clean Air Act Section 112b. The 2006 Sector
   Strategies Performance Report presents air toxics data from the Toxics Release Inventory
   rather than NEI, primarily because TRI allows for annual trends analyses. Currently, the
   1990 and 1996 NEI databases are not recommended for use due to unusable format or
   data  quality concerns, and the final version of the 2002 data is not available.
   Consequently, NEI air toxics data are only available for 1999 within the timeframe for
   completing this report, limiting the ability to use these data for trends analyses.
   Following the release of the 1990 and 2002 databases, EPA will evaluate the suitability
   of  NEI to perform trends analyses for the next Performance Report.
DATA PROCESSING STEPS:
•  NEI CAP data were  obtained from OAQPS staff (August 2005) and the Clearinghouse
   for Inventories & Emissions Factors (CHIEF); documentation available at
   www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/trends.

   For most sectors, data are compiled based on the facilities' SIC codes as included in  the
   NEI. For the specialty-batch chemicals sector, NEI data are extracted based on a
   predetermined list of facilities.

   Emissions estimates are totaled by criteria air pollutants for sectors.

   The cement and paint & coatings sectors present 1996 through 2002 emissions.
   Estimates for 2002  are preliminary, and 2000 and 2001 emissions are projected based
   on the  1999 inventory.

   The metal casting and shipbuilding &ship repair sectors present 1996 and 2001
   emissions.

   The specialty-batch chemicals sector presents 1999 emissions.

   Data  are normalized based on a sector's productivity (as measured  by changes in value of
   shipments/revenue  or production), with 1996 as the baseline year.

   Units of measure (from  the trends source file) were converted from short tons to tons
   for presentation purposes.

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

ENVIRONMENTAL METRICS USED: Toxic chemical releases (including disposal)
and waste management.

PERIOD ANALYZED: 1994-2003.

NEXT DATA RELEASE: In 2005 for 2004 data.

Sector chapters presenting data:
m Cement
• Forest Products
• Iron & Steel
• Metal Casting
   Metal Finishing
• Paint  & Coatings
• Shipbuilding  & Ship Repair
   Specialty-Batch Chemicals

DATA SOURCE DESCRIPTION: The Toxics Release Inventory was established
under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of
1986 and expanded by the Pollution Prevention Act of 1990. Following
expansions of the reporting requirements in the past 10 years, TRI now
includes facilities with 10 or more employees in the manufacturing sectors
(SIC codes 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 any of the more than 600 toxic chemicals. Facilities
must report to TRI if they exceed the reporting threshold for manufacture
or process (>25,000 pounds) or for other uses (>10,000 pounds) of a
listed chemical. Reporting thresholds for persistent bioaccumulative toxic
chemicals (PBTs) are lower. In 2003, 23,811 facilities, including federal
facilities, reported to EPAs TRI Program. They reported 4.44 billion pounds
of onsite and offsite disposal or other releases and 25.8 billion pounds of
production-related waste managed.
DATA SOURCE CONSIDERATIONS: There are a number of aspects of TRI data that
influence their use for sector-level performance measurement. These issues
include:
•  Small businesses not included. TRI excludes smaller facilities, that is, those with fewer
   than 10 employees. However, larger facilities meeting reporting thresholds are included,
   and these facilities are expected to have greater environmental impacts.

•  Comprises a list of reportable chemicals. Facilities in the TRI-reporting  industry sectors
   must file if they exceed the reporting  thresholds for any of the 600+ chemicals. Use of
   a single list of reportable chemicals is viewed as more suitable for tracking trends over
   time than data sources where the reportable chemicals  may vary across facilities.

   Multimedia coverage. TRI reporting covers releases  and other disposal to all
   environmental media (air, water and land) for the same  time period each year. Such
   umbrella reporting is viewed as more suitable for trends analysis than  compiling  release
   and disposal data from several data systems.

   Annual filing. TRI reports are submitted each year, which is preferable to data systems
   where  information is updated less frequently.

•  Data accuracy. Facility owners/operators are responsible for TRI reporting using their best
   available information. The data facilities submit on releases and waste management
   quantities are calculated using one of the following methods: monitoring or
   measurement; mass balance calculations; emission factors; or engineering estimates.
   In practice, some facilities may conservatively overestimate their releases, e.g., chose to
   use emission factors instead of actual measurements  (to avoid any risk of
   underreporting.) Direct electronic filing of TRI reports  may reduce the potential for data
   processing errors.

•  Changes in best available information. Facilities are required to complete their TRI forms
   using their best available information. Industry representatives have pointed out  that
   estimates of releases might change over time as more information becomes available. For
   example, while conducting measurements required by another regulation, such as
   emissions testing required by a national emission standard for hazardous air pollutants
   (NESHAP), a facility may find a TRI-reportable chemical  in its releases  that it was not
   aware  of previously. As facilities learn of the existence of various  chemicals, they are
   then required  to report those releases to TRI. This situation would result in an increased
   level of reported releases that is not necessarily accompanied by an increase in actual

-------
DATA PROCESSING STEPS:
   Documentation can be found at www.epa.gov/tri.

•  TRI data for reporting years 1994-2003 were provided by the TRI program (Office of
   Environmental Information) frozen as of December 28, 2004. The frozen data are used to
   ensure reproducibility and to support later revisions of the analysis.

•  Extracted data elements for this 2006 Performance  Report include the following data
   elements from all TRI Form Rs submitted by the sectors:
     Disposal or Other Releases includes:
        Section 5.1: Fugitive air emissions
        Section 5.2: Stack air emissions
        Section 5.3: Discharges to water
        Section 5.4: Land and other onsite disposal
        Section 6.1: Discharges to publicly owned treatment works (POTWs), for metals
        and metal compounds  only
        Section 6.2: Transfers to other offsite locations, for disposal codes only.
        The disposal codes are  as follows:
           M10 Storage Only
           M40 Solidification/Stabilization - Metals and Metal Compounds Only
           M41 Solidification/Stabilization - Metals and Metal Compounds Only
           M61 Wastewater Treatment (excluding POTW) - Metals and Metal
           Compounds Only
           M62 Wastewater Treatment (excluding POTW) - Metals and Metal
           Compounds Only
           M63 Surface Impoundment
           M64 Other Landfills
           M65 RCRA Subtitle  C Landfills
           M66 Subtitle C Surface Impoundment
           M67 Other Surface  Impoundment
           M71 Underground Injection
           M72 Offsite Disposal in Landfills
           M73 Land  Treatment
           M79 Other Land Disposal
           M81 Underground Injection to Class I Wells
           M82 Underground Injection to Class II-V Well
           M90 Other Offsite Management
           M91 Transfers to Waste Broker -  Disposal
           M94 Transfers to Waste Broker -  Disposal
           M99 Unknown

        Note that quantities of chemicals sent offsite for energy recovery, recycling, or
        treatment were NOT included in the "disposal" quantity. These excluded quantities
        were any transfers coded as sent offsite for:
        M20 Solvents/Organics Recovery
        M24 Metals Recovery
        M25 Other Reuse or Recovery
        M28 Acid  Regeneration
        M50 Incineration/Thermal Treatment
        M54 Incineration/Insignificant Fuel Value
        M56 Energy Recovery
        M69 Other Waste Treatment
        M90 Other Off-Site Management
        M92 Transfer to Waste Broker - Energy Recovery
        M93 Transfer to Waste Broker - Recycling
        M95 Transfer to Waste Broker - Waste Treatment

  Air Releases includes stack and fugitive emissions as reported in sections 5.1 and 5.2
  of TRI Form R.

  Water Releases includes discharges to water and to POTWs for metals only as reported
  in sections 5.3 and 6.1 (metals only) of TRI  Form R.

  AirToxics includes stack and fugitive emissions  of air toxics, also called hazardous air
  pollutants, as designated by the Clean Air Act Section 112b that are reportable to TRI
  as reported in sections 5.1  and 5.2 of TRI Form  R. The act designates 188 chemicals as
  air toxics, 182 of which are included in TRI. TRI, rather than NEI, was used as the
  source for sector-level air toxics data primarily  because TRI allows for a variety of
  annual trends analyses that were not possible with NEI.

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

  Energy Recovery includes 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 TRI Form R.

  Treatment includes the quantity of chemicals destroyed in onsite or offsite operations
  such as biological treatment, neutralization, incineration, and physical separation as
  reported  in sections 8.6 and 8.7  of TRI Form R.

For  most sectors, data are compiled based on the primary SIC code reported on the TRI
Form R.  For the cement, iron & steel, and specialty-batch chemicals sectors, the sector
TRI  data are extracted based on a predetermined list of facilities. The count  of the
number  of facilities reporting to TRI is a total  of the number of unique TRI IDs in the
sectors' SIC codes. This may overestimate facility counts, as one facility may have
multiple TRI  IDs.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               100

-------
                                                                   TRI releases and disposals were totaled for all chemicals reported by a sector. Absolute
                                                                   pounds are presented for 1994-2003. Absolute pounds of releases to air and water also
                                                                   are presented only for the same 10-year period.

                                                                •  Data are normalized based on the sectors' productivity (as measured by changes in
                                                                   value of shipments/revenue or production), with 1994 as the baseline year.

                                                                   TRI waste managed by management method and ultimate disposition also are presented.
                                                                   Absolute pounds are presented for the most current year of data available.

                                                                •  Units of measure are  maintained in pounds.

                                                                DATA SOURCE: Risk Screening Environmental Indicators (RSEI)

                                                                ENVIRONMENTAL METRICS USED:  Relative toxicity ol air and water releases
                                                                reported to TRI.

                                                                PERIOD ANALYZED: 1994-2003 TRI data.

                                                                NEXT DATA RELEASE: In early 2006 for 2004 data

                                                                Sector chapters presenting data:
                                                                m  Cement
                                                                   Forest Products
                                                                •  Iron & Steel
                                                                •  Metal Casting
                                                                   Metal Finishing
                                                                •  Paint & Coatings
                                                                •  Shipbuilding  & Ship  Repair
                                                                   Specialty-Batch Chemicals
DATA SOURCE DESCRIPTION: Data from TRI allows comparisons of the
quantities of chemicals reported year-to-year. Comparisons of the sum of TRI
release data of two or more chemicals for a given year to the sum of release
data for the same chemicals for different years is a simple and useful way to
assess overall environmental loading of pollutants across years. However,
the relative toxicity of each chemical is not taken into account. For example,
mercury and methanol are both toxic chemicals. However, a pound of
mercury released to air is likely to be more harmful to human health than
a pound of methanol released to air because the toxic effects of mercury are
much more severe and debilitating to humans and can occur at lower levels
of exposure. These chemicals are treated equally when all pounds are
simply summed. A sector's progress in reducing higher toxicity substances,
therefore, is not fully evident when trends are presented by total pounds
alone. To consider toxicity, each chemical can be weighted by a relative
toxicity weight using EPAs Risk-Screening Environmental Indicators model.
The model multiplies the pounds of media-specific releases  (e.g., pounds of
mercury released to air) by a chemical-specific toxicity weight to calculate
a toxicity-weighted result.

DATA SOURCE CONSIDERATIONS: Aspects of RSEI influence the use of these
modeled data for EPAs Sector Strategies  Program.
•  Comparing RSEI results. The numeric RSEI  output depicts the relative toxicity of TRI
   releases for comparative purposes and is meaningful only when compared to other
   values produced by RSEI.

   Excludes certain chemicals. RSEI does not provide toxicity weights for all TRI chemicals,
   although chemicals without toxicity weights account for a very small percentage (<1°/o)
   of total reported pounds released  and transferred. If there is no toxicity weight available
   for the chemical, then the toxicity-weighted result is zero.

•  Acute human or environmental toxicity not addressed. RSEI addresses chronic human
   toxicity (cancer and noncancer effects, e.g., developmental toxicity, reproductive toxicity,
   neurotoxicity, etc.) associated with long-term exposure but does not address concerns for
   either acute human toxicity or environmental toxicity.

   Currently excludes toxicity weights for chemicals disposed. An inhalation toxicity
   weight is used for fugitive and stack air releases. An oral toxicity weight is used for
   direct water releases and for releases of metals to POTWs. Releases to land and other
   disposal are not modeled because necessary data on site-specific conditions are lacking;
   therefore, for screening  purposes, the higher of the inhalation or oral toxicity weight is
   used. As this could overestimate the toxicity-weighted results for disposals, these data
   have been excluded from the toxicity-weighted results presented in this 2006
   Performance Report.
101

-------
•  Assumes highest toxicity weight for chemical form. Metals and metal compounds are
   assumed to be released in the chemical form associated with the highest toxicity weight
   because information on the form is not subject to TRI reporting. The form of a chemical
   compound can affect its bioavailability and, therefore, its toxicity. For example,
   hexavalent chromium has an oral toxicity weight of 170 and an inhalation toxicity
   weight of 86,000; whereas trivalent chromium has an oral and inhalation toxicity  weight
   of 0.33. TRI reports  on "chromium" do not specify the valence, so all reported pounds of
   chromium are more conservatively assigned the toxicity weight of hexavalent chromium.
   In cases where a facility is releasing the chemical in the lower toxicity form, RSEI would
   overestimate toxicity-weighted results.

   Results presented do not include a risk perspective. Although the RSEI model can provide
   a full risk-related perspective for air and water releases, only the toxicity portion of the
   model was used in the analysis for the 2006 Performance  Report. It is important to note
   that risk-related factors  were not considered in the analysis for this report. These factors
   that impact the risk potentially posed by a chemical release are a function of chemical
   toxicity, the fate and transport of the chemical  in the environment after it is released,
   the pathway of human exposure, and the number of people exposed. Readers interested
   in the risk perspective for a facility or sector can use the publicly available RSEI  model  to
   conduct this screening-level risk analysis.

DATA PROCESSING STEPS:
•  RSEI model documentation  is available atwww.epa.gov/opptintr/rsei.

•  For most sectors, data are compiled based on the primary  SIC codes  reported on the TRI
   Form R. For the cement,  iron & steel,  and specialty-batch chemicals sectors, the sector
   TRI data are extracted based on a predetermined list of facilities.

   TRI air and water releases, weighted for toxicity, were totaled for all  chemicals reported
   by a sector. Both absolute pounds and toxicity-weighted results are presented for a
   10-year period.

•  Data are normalized based on the sectors' productivity (as measured by changes in
   value of shipments/revenue or production), with 1994 as the baseline year.

   The chemicals that account for 90°/o  of the sectors' total toxicity-weighted  results for
   air and water releases in 2003 are presented for each sector.
INDUSTRY-SUPPLIED ENVIRONMENTAL DATA

The following data were supplied by industry partners for two sectors.

SECTOR: Cement

DATA SOURCE: Cement kiln dust surveys, March 7, 2005, provided by Garth
Hawkins, Portland Cement Association and Portland Cement Association
Report on Sustainable Manufactures, February 2005, Chapter 3 - Solid
Waste Production.

ENVIRONMENTAL METRIC USED: Cement kiln dust sent to landfills, in metric tons.
SECTOR: Forest Products

DATA SOURCE: American Forest & Paper Association Environmental, Health,
and Safety Verification Program, Year 2002 Report: Issued 2004.

ENVIRONMENTAL METRICS USED:
   Sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide air emissions from pulp and paper mills,
   in pounds per ton of production.

•  Wastewater discharges (volume, biochemical oxygen demand, and total
   suspended solids) from pulp and paper mills, in pounds per ton of
   production.

•  Adsorbable organic halides from pulp and paper mills,  in kilograms per
   tonne of production.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    102

-------
                                                                              Acid rain:  Air pollution produced when acid chemicals are incorporated into rain, snow, fog, or
                                                                                          mist. The "acid" in acid rain comes from sulfur oxides and nitrogen oxides, products
                                                                                          of burning coal and other fuels and from certain industrial processes. The sulfur
                                                                                          oxides and nitrogen oxides are related to two strong acids: sulfuric acid and nitric
                                                                                          acid. When sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides are released from power plants and
                                                                                          other sources, winds blow them far from their source. If the acid chemicals in the air
                                                                                          are blown into areas where the weather is wet, the acids can fall to Earth in the rain,
                                                                                          snow, fog, or mist. In areas where the weather is dry, the acid chemicals may become
                                                                                          incorporated into dusts or smokes. Acid rain can damage the environment, human
                                                                                          health, and property.
                                                                              Air toxics:
                                                                        Beneficial reuse:

                                                                               Biomass:

                                                                              Byproduct:


                                                                            Combustion:



                                                                             Co-product:


                                                                    Criteria air pollutant:
Air pollutants that cause or may cause cancer or other serious health effects, such
as reproductive effects or birth defects, or adverse environmental and ecological
effects. Examples of toxic air pollutants include benzene, found in gasoline;
perchloroethylene, emitted from some dry cleaning facilities; and methylene
chloride, used as a solvent by a number of industries.

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

All of the living material in a given area; often refers to vegetation.

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

Burning. Many pollutants, such as sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and particulates
(PM10) are combustion products, often products of the burning of fuels such as
coal, oil, gas, and wood.

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

A group of six widespread and common air pollutants regulated by EPA on the basis
of standards set to protect public health or the environment. These six criteria
pollutants are carbon monoxide, lead, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, paniculate matter,
and sulfur dioxide.
                                                                        Energy efficiency:


                                                                         Energy recovery:  Obtaining energy from waste through a variety of processes, including combustion.
Actions to save fuels by better building design, modification of production processes,
better selection of road vehicles and transport policies, etc.
103

-------
     Environmental management system:
                                (EMS)
                       Greenhouse gas:
                                (GHG)
               Hazardous air pollutant:
                                (HAP)
                      Hazardous waste:
                       Industrial waste:
              Large quantity generator:
                                (LQG)
                 Municipal solid waste:
National Ambient Air Quality Standards:
                             (NAAQS)

                         Net electricity:
                      Nitrogen dioxide:
                                (NOJ
A systematic approach to managing all environmental aspects of an operation.
International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 14001 is a widely recognized
international standard for EMS.

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

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.

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.

Process waste associated with manufacturing. This waste usually is not classified
as either municipal solid waste or hazardous waste by federal or state laws.

Generator of 1,000 kilograms per month or more of hazardous waste, or more than
1 kilogram per month of acutely hazardous waste. LQGs must submit a  biennial
hazardous waste report and are subject to other specific regulatory requirements,
including requirements regarding waste accumulation, emergency coordination, etc.

Waste discarded by households, hotels/motels, and commercial, institutional, and
industrial sources. It typically consists of everyday items such as product packaging,
grass clippings, furniture, clothing, bottles, food scraps, newspapers, appliances,
paint, and batteries. It does not include wastewater.

Standards established by EPA under the Clean Air Act that apply to outdoor air
throughout the country. See criteria air pollutant.

Net electricity  is obtained by summing purchases, transfers in, and
generation  from noncombustible renewable resources, minus quantities sold and
transferred out. It does not include electricity inputs from onsite cogeneration or
generation  from combustible fuels because that energy has already been  included as
generating fuel (for example, coal).

A criteria air pollutant and smog-forming chemical formed by the burning of
gasoline, natural gas, coal, oil, etc.
                                                                                                                                                                      104

-------
                                                                  Non-attainment area:
Nitrogen oxides:  A reddish-brown gas compound that is a product of combustion and a major
                 contributor to the formation of smog and acid rain.

                 A geographic area in which the level of a criteria air pollutant is higher than the
                 level allowed by the federal standards. A single geographic area may have acceptable
                 levels of one criteria air pollutant but unacceptable levels of one or more other
                 criteria air pollutants; thus, an area can be both attainment and non-attainment
                 at the same time.

                 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."

                 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.
                                                                  Non-hazardous waste:
                                                                        Normalization:
                                                                                Ozone:  A gas which is a variety of oxygen. The oxygen gas found in the air consists of two
                                                                                        oxygen atoms stuck together; this is molecular oxygen. Ozone consists of three
                                                                                        oxygen atoms stuck together into an ozone molecule. High concentrations of ozone
                                                                                        gas are found in a layer of the atmosphere - the stratosphere - high above the Earth.
                                                                                        Stratospheric ozone shields the Earth against harmful rays from the sun. Smog's
                                                                                        main component is ozone; this ground-level ozone is a product of reactions among
                                                                                        chemicals produced by burning coal, gasoline and other fuels, and chemicals  found
                                                                                        in products including solvents, paints,  hairsprays, etc.
                                                                     Particulate matter:
                                                                                 (PM)


                                                                            Pollutants:
                                                                            (pollution)
                 Solid particles or liquid droplets suspended or carried in the air (e.g., soot, dust,
                 fumes, or mist). PM25: Particles less than or equal to 2.5 micrometers in diameter.
                 PM10: Particles less than or equal to 10 micrometers in diameter.

                 Unwanted chemicals or other materials found in specific environments - air, water,
                 soil - that are the subject of regulatory concern and activities. Pollutants can harm
                 health, the environment, and property.
                                                                                Sludge:  Solid, semisolid, or liquid waste generated from a municipal, commercial, or
                                                                                        industrial wastewater facility.

                                                                           Solid waste:  Nonliquid, nonsoluble materials ranging from municipal garbage to industrial
                                                                                        wastes that contain complex and sometimes hazardous substances. Solid wastes
                                                                                        also include sewage sludge, agricultural refuse, demolition wastes, mining residues,
                                                                                        and liquids and gases in containers.
105

-------
                    Smog:
        Stormwater runoff:
A mixture of pollutants, principally ground-level ozone, produced by chemical
reactions in the air involving smog-forming chemicals. A major portion of
smog-formers come from burning of petroleum-based fuels such as gasoline.
Other smog-formers, volatile organic compounds, are found in products such as
paints and solvents. Smog can harm health, damage the environment, and cause
poor visibility. Major smog occurrences are often linked to heavy motor vehicle
traffic, sunshine, high temperatures and calm winds, or temperature inversion
(weather condition in which warm air is trapped close to the ground instead of
rising). Smog is often worse away from the source of the smog-forming chemicals,
since the chemical reactions that result in smog occur in the sky while the reacting
chemicals are being blown away from their sources by winds.

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 dioxide:  A criteria air pollutant. Sulfur dioxide is a gas produced by burning coal, most
                    (SOJ  notably in power plants. Some industrial processes, such as production of paper and
                           smelting of metals, produce SO2. Sulfur dioxide is closely related to sulfuric acid, a
                           strong acid.  Sulfur dioxide plays an important role in the production of add rain.

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

Twenty-foot equivalent unit:  A measure of containerized cargo equal to one standard 20 ft (length) X 8 ft (width)
                    (TEU)  X 8.5 ft (height) container.

        Toxlcity weighting:  Computation that determines weight given to pollutants to aid in the comparison of
                           the relative risks of toxic pollutants. The higher the number - or toxicity weight -
                           the greater the risk that air and water releases pose to people's long-term health.

       Value of shipments:  The net selling values, exclusive of freight and taxes, of all products shipped by
                           manufacturers.
Volatile organic compound:
                   (VOC)
Any organic compound that evaporates readily to the atmosphere, contributing
significantly to smog production and certain health problems. Volatile organic
chemicals include gasoline, industrial chemicals such as benzene, solvents such as
toluene and xylene, and tetrachloroethylene (perchloroethylene, the principal dry
cleaning solvent). Many volatile organic chemicals are also hazardous air pollutants',
for example, benzene causes cancer.
                                                                                                                                                       106

-------
   United States Environmental  Protection Agency
National Center for Environmental Innovation (1807T)
               EPA 100-R-06-002
                  March 2006

-------