TRI National Analysis 2013: Disposal or Other Releases
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Disposal or Other Releases
Disposal or other releases of chemicals into the
environment occur through a range of
practices. They may take place at a facility as
an on-site disposal or other release to air,
water, or land; or they may take place at an off-
site location after a facility transfers waste that
contains TRI chemicals for disposal or other
release.
Evaluating disposal and other releases can
help the public identify potential concerns and
gain a better understanding of possible
hazards related to TRI chemicals. This
evaluation can also help identify priorities and
opportunities for government and communities
to work with industry to reduce toxic chemical
disposal or other releases and potential
associated risks.
Trend in total releases
SEPA
In This Chapter
- Land Disposal
-Air Releases
- Water Releases
- Off-Site Disposal or Other Releases
- Releases bv Industry
- Chemicals of Special Concern
- Hazard and Risk of TRI Chemicals
What Is a Release?
In TRI, a "release" of a chemical
generally refers to a chemical that is
emitted to the air, discharged to water,
or placed in some type of land disposal
unit.
Disposal or Other Releases, 2003-2013
25,000
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
On-site Air Releases
i Off-site Disposal or Other Releases •
i On-site Surface Water Discharges
¦Reporting Facilities
2011 2012 2013
¦ On-site Land Disposal
This figure shows that total disposal or other releases of TRI chemicals have decreased in
the long term: they are down 7% from 2003 to 2013. From 2012 to 2013, there was a 15%
increase in total releases due primarily to increases in on-site land disposal by the metal
mining sector. The number of facilities reporting to TRI declined 12% from 2003 to 2013,
although the count has remained steady at about 21,500 facilities since 2011.
1
-------
TRI National Analysis 2013: Disposal or Other Releases
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Many factors can affect trends in total disposal or other releases, including production,
management practices at facilities, the composition of raw materials used at facilities, and
installation of control technologies. The long-term decreases from 2003 to 2013 in releases
have been driven mainly by declining air releases, down 836 million pounds (53%) since
2003. Most of this decline is due to decreases in hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions,
such as hydrochloric acid, at electric utilities. Reasons for the decreases include a shift from
coal to other fuel sources and installation of control technologies at coal-fired power plants.
As air emissions have accounted for a declining share of the total releases (down from 36%
in 2003 to 18% in 2013), the portion of releases that are disposed on land has increased
(up from 48% in 2003 to 67% in 2013).
SEPA
Land Disposal
Trend in land disposal
3,000
2,500
| 2,000
o
Q.
o 1,500
w
c
o
= 1,000
500
On-site Land Disposal, 2003-2013
i Underground Injection
i Landfills
Land Treatment
i Surface Impoundments
i Other Land Disposal
rammi
niiiiilli
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year
Since 2010, large fluctuations in releases have been driven by changes in on-site land
disposal. This figure shows on-site land disposal over time in more detail. From 2003 to
2013, on-site land disposal has increased from 2.42 to 2.75 billion pounds, a 28% increase.
Recent fluctuations are primarily due to changes in waste quantities reported to TRI as
"other land disposal," which can include chemical waste disposed of in waste piles and
spills or leaks. From 2003 to 2013, "other land disposal" increased by 131%, while all other
types of on-site land disposal decreased. Most of the toxic chemical waste reported as other
land disposal is contained in waste rock at metal mines. Metal mines accounted for 518
million of the 525 million pound increase in land disposal from 2012 to 2013. For this
reason, the next figure presents on-site land disposal excluding metal mining.
Metal mining facilities typically handle large volumes of material. In this sector, even a small
change in the chemical composition of the deposit being mined can lead to big changes in
2
-------
4>EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Disposal or Other Releases
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
the amount of toxic chemicals reported nationally. In recent years mines have cited changes
in production of waste rock, changes in the composition of waste rock, and the closure of a
heap leach pad as the primary reasons for the reported variability in land disposal of TRI
chemicals. Changes in waste rock composition can have an especially pronounced effect on
TRI reporting because of a regulatory exemption that applies based on a chemical's
concentration in the rock, regardless of total chemical quantities generated.
Federal and state agencies require that waste rock be placed in engineered structures that
contain contaminants. Federal and state land management agencies also require that waste
rock and tailings piles and heap leach pads be stabilized and re-vegetated to provide for
productive post-mining land use.
For more information on waste management by the mining industry, see the Vletal Mining
section.
On-site Land Disposal excluding Metal Mines, 2003-2013
1,000
900
800
¦3 700
C
o 600
O.
0 500
1 400
i 300
200
100
0
Underground Injection
Landfills
Land Treatment
Surface Impoundments
Other Land Disposal
Ia Other Land Disposal
I I I I I ¦ I I I I
I i i I i I i 181 i
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year
This figure shows that total on-site land disposal for all industries other than metal mining
has decreased from 2003 to 2013 by 12%. Disposal to landfills, which accounts for the
greatest percentage of land disposal, decreased by 14% over this time period.
While releases to land have decreased in other sectors, releases by metal mining drive
overall land disposal trends. See the following section, land disposal bv industry, for more
information.
3
-------
TRI National Analysis 2013: Disposal or Other Releases
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Land disposal by industry
SEPA
On-Site Land Disposal by Industry, 2013
Primary Metals: 4%
Hazardous Waste All Others: 2%
Management: 4%
Chemicals: 9%
Electric Utilities: 10%
Metal Mining: 71%
This figure shows that the metal mining sector accounted for the majority of releases to land
in 2013. Most releases from metal mines are due to chemicals contained in waste rock.
The electric utilities and chemical manufacturing sectors had the next largest releases,
accounting for 10% and 9% of total land disposal respectively. On-site releases to land
increased from 2012 to 2013 in the metal mining and electric utilities sectors, but remained
constant in the chemicals sector.
Air Releases
Trend in air releases
On-site Air Releases, 2003-2013
1,800
1,600
1,400
uo
"O
C
1,200
o
CL
1,000
¦5
C
800
o
=
600
I
400
200
¦ Stack Air Emissions
~ Fugitive Air Emissions
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year
4
-------
4>EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Disposal or Other Releases
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
This figure shows a significant decline in air releases from 2003 to 2013, which has been a
primary driver of the decrease in total releases since 2003. Air releases have decreased by
836 million pounds (53%) since 2003. Most of this decline is due to decreases in HAP
emissions, such as hydrochloric acid, at electric utilities. HAP emissions have decreased as
electric utilities have shifted away from coal to other fuel sources and installed new control
technologies at coal-fired power plants. Air releases of carcinogens have also decreased;
see the Air Releases of Carcinogens figure. Air releases of other chemicals of special
concern, including lead and mercury, have also decreased since 2003 but have increased
since 2012; see the Chemicals of Special Concern section.
Air releases by industry
Air Releases by Industry, 2013
All Others: 13%
Plastics and Rubber: 4%
Primary Metals: 4%
Petroleum: 5%
Food/Beverages/Tobacco:
6%
Electric Utilities: 26%
Chemicals: 23%
Paper: 19%
The three sectors with the greatest releases to air in 2013 are electric uti ities, chemicals,
and paper, as shown in this figure. Together, these three industries accounted for almost
70% of total air releases. Air releases by the electric utilities and chemicals sectors have
increased slightly since 2012 (3% and 5%, respectively), while releases by the paper sector
have decreased slightly (-1%). The chemical with the greatest air releases in 2013 was
ammonia, followed by hydrochloric acid.
5
-------
TRI National Analysis 2013: Disposal or Other Releases
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Water Releases
Trend in surface water discharges
On-site Surface Water Discharges, 2003-2013
mm
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year
Facilities are required to report the total quantity of TRI chemicals they release to receiving
streams or other water bodies. Releases to surface water have decreased by 19 million
pounds (8%) since 2003. Most of this decline is due to a decrease in releases of nitrate
compounds, the TRI chemical most commonly released to water. In 2013, nitrate
compounds accounted for 89% of all surface water discharges. Nitrate compounds are often
formed as part of the wastewater treatment process, such as when nitric acid is neutralized.
Surface water discharges of nitrate compounds decreased by 7% from 2003 to 2013.
Surface water discharges of other TRI chemicals, many of which are more toxic than nitrate
compounds, have been decreasing at a faster rate. Releases to water are discussed further
in the next few figures starting with water releases bv chemical.
SEPA
300
250
= 200
I™
i/i
c
0
= 100
1
50
6
-------
TRI National Analysis 2013: Disposal or Other Releases
wwvv2.epa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-program/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Water releases by chemical
Water Releases by Chemical, 2013
Barium and Barium
Manganese Compounds:
25%
As shown in this figure, nitrate compounds accounted for 89% of all water releases in 2013.
Nitrate compounds are soluble in water and commonly formed as part of wastewater
treatment processes. Manganese, ammonia and methanol are the next most commonly
released chemicals, and combined account for 7% of 2013 releases to water.
Chemicals with the largest percentage decrease in water releases
Chemicals with Largest Percent Decreases in Surface Water Discharges,
2003-2013
0%
m
3 -io%
CM
A
g -20%
-------
TRI National Analysis 2013: Disposal or Other Releases
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
This figure displays the chemicals with the greatest percentage decreases in surface water
discharges from 2003 to 2013. Glycol ethers are commonly used as industrial solvents;
methanol is used as a chemical feedstock and other applications; and arsenic, nickel, zinc,
and their associated compounds are metals, primarily discharged to surface water by
electric utilities and paper manufacturing facilities in 2013. Arsenic and arsenic compound
discharges decreased by the greatest quantity, decreasing by 88 million pounds (-63%) from
2003 to 2013.
SEPA
Facilities can decrease their releases of TRI chemicals to water through source reduction or
by improving or installing treatment systems. More information on wastewater treatment
methods is presented in the next figure.
Wastewater treatment by chemical
WastewaterTreatment Methods for Chemicals with Largest Decreases in Water Releases,
2013
Number of Times Treatment Method Was Applied to Wastewater Containing Chemical in 2013
0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500
Certain Glycol Ethers (-74%)
Arsenic and Arsenic Compounds (-63%)
Zinc and Zinc Compounds (-46%)
Nickel and Nickel Compounds (-44%)
Methanol (-35%)
i Neutralization
I Biological treatment
I Sludge treatment and dewatering
Others
i Settling or clarification
Chemical treatment
Phase separation
3,000
The percentage in parentheses after the chemical
name is the percent decrease in the chemical's
surface water discharges from 2003-2013
Note: Chemicals with greatest percentage decreases in surface water discharges, 2003 to 2013. Limited to
chemicals with releases to water of at least 100,000 pounds in 2003 and at least 100 current forms with
discharges to water.
This figure displays the types of wastewater treatment methods applied in 2013 to the
chemicals for which water releases have declined at the fastest rate. Many TRI facilities
treat a waste stream before release or transfer to reduce the quantities of chemicals that
are ultimately released.
Different types of chemicals tend to undergo different on-site treatment methods. For
example, metals (arsenic, zinc, nickel, and their compounds) in wastewater are most
commonly treated by settling or clarification, whereas solids are removed using
sedimentation techniques. While metals cannot be destroyed, they can be removed from the
waste stream. Glycol ethers are more commonly treated using biological treatment, which is
effective for some non-metals.
8
-------
TRI National Analysis 2013: Disposal or Other Releases
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
TRI facilities report the type and efficiency of waste treatment methods applied on-site to
waste streams containing TRI chemicals. Facilities report all treatment methods that the
waste stream goes through, even if the method has no impact on removing or destroying a
particular chemical. For example, an aggregated waste stream containing metals and acids
may go through a neutralization process, which destroys the acid but has no effect on the
metals. In this case, neutralization would still be reported as a treatment method for the
metal.
Water releases by industry
The food, beverages and tobacco sector reported the greatest pounds of releases to water
in 2013, as shown in this figure. Nitrate compounds accounted for over 98% of releases by
this sector. The primary metal and chemical manufacturing sectors reported the next largest
releases in 2013, accounting for 17% and 16% of total releases to water respectively.
Water Releases by Industry, 2013
All Others: 8%
Electric Utilities: 2%
Primary Metals: 17%
9
-------
SEPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Disposal or Other Releases
wwvv2.epa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-program/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Off-site Disposal or Other Releases
Off-site disposal or other releases, by state receiving transfer, 2013
Note: The transfers shown do not include transfers to Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTWs) and, thus,
reflect only a portion of total TRI transfers.
Top Chemicals:
1 Zoom to Get Directions Bahamas
V — -v o cu»v
Mexico
cjt>. | Esri, DeLorme, FAO, USGS, NOAA> EflAlU
1. MANGANESE COMPOUNDS
2. BARIUM COMPOUNDS
3. ZINC COMPOUNDS
4. LEAD COMPOUNDS
5. NITRIC ACID
I Transfers for Disposal to Colorado:
1 5.4 million lbs
| Top Sources:
1. Colorado
2. Nebraska
3. Oregon
4. Minnesota
5. New Mexico
Montreal
o
TRI facilities report the quantities of chemicals that they transfer off-site for disposal or
further waste management. This map displays the amount of TRI chemicals in waste
received for disposal or release by each state in 2013. The Midwest - Indiana, Pennsylvania,
I llinois, Michigan, and Ohio - received the majority of TRI transfers for disposal in 2013,
making up 52% of such TRI transfers.
Nationally, 83% of TRI transfers were of metals and metal compounds. Zinc, manganese,
barium, copper, and lead and their compounds were the top five metals transferred during
2013. The same five states (Indiana, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Michigan, and Ohio) received the
majority of metal transfers for disposal. When metals and their compounds are excluded
from the analysis, Texas, Indiana, Ohio, Louisiana, and Michigan received the most non-
metal transfers for disposal. The top five non-metal TRI chemicals transferred during 2013
were nitrate compounds, ethylene glycol, methanol, nitric acid, and ammonia.
When looking at the geographic range of TRI transfers, 46 of the 50 U.S. states were their
own largest sources of transfers for disposal; that is, facilities sent chemical waste for
disposal to other sites within their state borders, in addition, a large number of transfers
were from neighboring states (states with directly adjoining borders). Overall, 93% of TRI
transfers for disposal came from either the receiving state or from neighboring states.
10
-------
4>EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Disposal or Other Releases
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Releases by Industry
Total releases by industry
Total Disposal or Other Releases by Industry, 2003-2013
5,000
4,500
4,000
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
I
I
I Metal Mining
i Electric Utilities
i Chemicals
i Primary Metals
i Paper
i Hazardous Waste Management
I Food/Beverages/Tobacco
All Others
Mil ULI lei S
ilium
—¦ ¦ 8—8—
2003 2004 2005 2006
2007
2008
Year
2009 2010
2011 2012
2013
This figure shows the seven industry sectors with the largest disposal or other releases
reported in 2013. Total releases from all of the top sectors besides metal mining have
decreased since 2003. In the past year, however, three of the seven sectors have shown
increased releases:
Metal mining increased by 519 million pounds (+36% from 2012)
Electric utilities increased by 28 million pounds (+5%)
- Chemicals increased by 5 million pounds (+1%)
Since 2010, on-site releases to land by metal mining facilities have fluctuated significantly.
Metal mines have cited changes in production and changes in the composition of waste rock
as the primary reasons for this variability.
Individual industry sectors reporting to TRI can vary substantially in size, scope, and
makeup; therefore, the amounts and types of toxic chemicals generated and managed by
each differ greatly. Within a sector, however, the industrial processes, products, and
regulatory requirements are often similar, resulting in similar toxic chemical use and waste
generation. It is useful to look at waste management trends within a sector to identify
potential emerging issues. A more detailed analysis of releases and waste management by
sector can be found in the industry sector profiles.
11
-------
4>EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Disposal or Other Releases
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
iconomic trend and releases for the manufacturing sector
Total Disposal or Other Releases and Value Added by the Manufacturing Sector, 2003-2013
TRI Disposal or Other Releases
Value Added
$2,500
$2,000
$500
$-
o
Q
$1,500
¦o
$1,000 £
¦c
<
2003 2004 2005 2006
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year
t is also important to consider the influence that production and the economy have on the
disposal or other releases of chemicals into the environment. This figure presents the trend
in total disposal or other releases by the manufacturing sector and the trend in the
manufacturing sector's value added (as shown by the solid line). This figure illustrates how
changes in production levels at TRI facilities may influence releases. "Value added" from
the Bureau of Economic Analysis is used as a proxy for production levels for the
manufacturing sector. Value added measures the contribution of manufacturing to the
nation's Gross Domestic Product (GDP), which represents the total value of goods and
services produced annually in the United States. The manufacturing sector includes most
TRI facilities (89% in 2013), including chemical manufacturers, metals processing, and pulp
and paper manufacturing. Excluded facilities include mines, electric utilities, and waste
management facilities.
From 2003 to 2013, total disposal or other releases by the manufacturing sector decreased
by 25%, while value added by the manufacturing sector (adjusted for inflation) decreased by
only 4%. This suggests that other factors besides production may be contributing to
declining releases. Possible other factors include installation of new pollution control
measures and the implementation of source reduction activities.
More information on production trends for individual sectors, including additional non-
manufacturing sectors, can be found in the industry sector profiles.
12
-------
TRI National Analysis 2013: Disposal or Other Releases
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Chemicals of Special Concern
Some chemicals on the TRI list are of special concern
because they are highly toxic, persistent in the
environment, and accumulate in tissue, or because
they may cause a health effect of special concern. Here
we take a closer look at some of those chemicals.
Some TRI chemicals and chemical categories have
been designated as persistent, bioaccumulative, and
toxic (PBT) chemicals. PBT chemicals are of particular
concern not only because they are toxic, but also because they remain in the environment
for long periods of time, and they tend to build up, or bioaccumulate, in the tissue of
organisms. PBT chemicals have lower reporting thresholds than other TRI chemicals. In TRI
there are 16 PBT chemicals and 4 PBT chemical compound categories; see TRI's PBT
webpage for the full list. In this section we look more closely at: lead and lead compounds;
mercury and mercury compounds; and dioxin and dioxin-like compounds.
There are also about 180 chemicals in TRI that are known or suspected carcinogens, which
EPA refers to as Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA) carcinogens. These
chemicals also have different reporting requirements. A full list of these chemicals can be
found on the TRI chemicals webpage. In this section we examine how the volume of OSHA
carcinogens released to air have changed over time.
Total releases of lead and lead compounds
Total Disposal or Other Releases of Lead and Lead
Compounds, 2003-2013
900
800
-3 700
| 600
£ 500
400
c
J 300
i 200
100
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year
This figure shows the trend in disposal or other releases of lead and lead compounds from
2003 to 2013, with a 93% increase over the time period displayed. Lead and lead
compounds accounted for 99% of the total releases of PBT chemicals in 2013 and drive
total PBT chemical release trends over time. Total releases of lead and lead compounds
rose and fell between 2003 and 2013, and especially fluctuated between 2010 and 2013.
SEPA
Graphs in This Section
- Total Releases of Lead
-Air Releases of Lead
- Air Releases of Mercury
- Total Releases of Dioxin
- Total Releases of Dioxin bv
Industry
-Air Releases of Carcinogens
13
-------
4>EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Disposal or Other Releases
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Trends have been driven by changes in on-site land disposal or other releases from the
metal mining sector. The next figure shows disposal or other releases of lead and lead
compounds excluding metal mining.
Releases of lead and lead compounds, excluding metal mining
Disposal or Other Releases of Lead and Lead
Compounds excluding Metal Mining, 2003-2013
¦HI
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year
This figure shows the trend in disposal or other releases of lead and lead compounds for all
sectors excluding metal mining. It is important to note that metal mining accounts for the
majority of releases of lead and lead compounds; in 2013, 93% of total lead releases were
reported by metal mines. Releases of lead by other sectors have decreased 35% from 2003
to 2013, as evident in the figure. Decreases have been driven by decreases in the primary
metal, hazardous waste, and electric utilities sectors.
Air releases of lead and lead compounds
On-site Air Releases of Lead and Lead Compounds,
2003-2013
1,400
1,200
to
"I 1,000
£ 800
O
>5 600
5 400
3
jC 200
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year
J L
14
-------
4>EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Disposal or Other Releases
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Air releases of lead and lead compounds have decreased by 35% since 2003. This decrease
has been driven by electric utilities and metal mines - both sectors have decreased air
releases of lead and lead compounds by more than 65%. The sector with the greatest
quantity of lead and lead compound air releases is the primary metals sector, which
includes iron and steel manufacturers, steel product manufacturers, metal production and
processing, and foundries. In 2013, primary metals facilities accounted for almost 60% of
air releases of lead and lead compounds. Air releases of lead and lead compounds have
increased since 2011 due to large increases in air releases at a textile mill and a lead
smelter.
Air releases of mercury and mercury compounds
On-site Air Releases of Mercury and Mercury Compounds,
2003-2013
160
140 ——
120
S. 100
80
60
40
20
o
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
This figure shows that releases of mercury to air have decreased by 15% from 2003. In the
United States, coal-burning power plants are the largest source of mercury emissions to the
air. Electric utilities, which include coal- and oil-fired power plants, accounted for 52% of the
mercury and mercury compounds air emissions reported to TRI in 2013. This sector is also
driving the decline in mercury air emissions, with a 47% reduction since 2003. Reasons for
this decrease include a shift from coal to other fuel sources and installation of control
technologies at coal-fired power plants. From 2012 to 2013, mercury air emissions
increased by 15% (12,000 pounds), primarily driven by increased emissions from concrete
manufacturing facilities, while mercury emissions at electric utilities remained constant.
15
-------
4>EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Disposal or Other Releases
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Releases of dioxin and dioxin-like compounds
160,000
140,000
120,000
100,000
-------
TRI National Analysis 2013: Disposal or Other Releases
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Releases of dioxin and dioxin-like compounds by industry
Percentage of Disposal or Other Releases by Sector, Dioxin and Dioxin-like Compounds, 2013
Grams
Grams-TEQ
Primary Metals:
25%
Hazardous
Waste/Solvent
Recovery: 15%
Chemicals: 10%
Hazardous
Waste/Solvent
Recovery: 5%
Paper: 2%
Paper: 1%
All Others: 3%
Chemicals: 68%
All Others: 1%
Primary Metals
70%
This figure shows the releases of dioxins in grams and grams-TEQ. Various industry sectors
may dispose of or otherwise release very different mixes of dioxin congeners. Four industry
sectors accounted for most of the grams and grams-TEQ of dioxins released in 2013;
however, their ranking in terms of percentage of total grams and grams-TEQ is quite
different.
In 2013, the chemical manufacturing industry accounted for 68% of the total grams of
dioxins released, while the primary metals sector accounted for only 24% of the total grams.
However, when TEFs are applied, the primary metals sector accounted for 70% of the total
grams-TEQ, and the chemical manufacturing industry accounted for just 10%.
17
-------
4>EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Disposal or Other Releases
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Air releases of carcinogens
Air Releases of Carcinogens, 2003-2013
140
120
IA
¦o
100
c
3
o
CL
80
*5
(SO
C
o
i
40
20
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year
Among the chemicals that are reported to TRI, there are about 180 known or suspected
carcinogens, which EPA refers to as OSHA carcinogens. This figure shows that the air
releases of these carcinogens decreased by 48% between 2003 and 2013. The long-term
decreases in air releases of OSHA carcinogens were driven mainly by decreases in styrene
air releases from the plastics and rubber and transportation equipment industries.
Hazard and Risk of TRI Chemicals
TRI provides information about releases of toxic
chemicals from industrial facilities throughout the
United States. However, trends in pounds of chemical
releases do not account for potential risk of chemical
releases. Although TRI cannot tell an individual
whether or to what extent they might have been
exposed to these chemicals, you can use it as a
starting point in evaluating potential risks to human
health and the environment.
First, it is helpful to introduce the concepts of hazard
and risk. The hazard of a toxic chemical is its ability
to cause an increased incidence of adverse health
effects (e.g., cancer, birth defects). Toxicity is a way to
measure the hazard of a chemical. While there are
many definitions of the word risk, EPA considers risk
to be the chance of adverse effects to human health
or to ecological systems resulting from exposure to
an environmental stressor (e.g., a toxic chemical).
Graphs on Hazard and Risk
- Hazard trend
- Risk trend
Helpful Concepts
The hazard of a toxic chemical is
its ability to cause an increased
incidence of adverse health
effects (e.g., cancer, birth
defects). Toxicity is a way to
measure the hazard of a
chemical.
The risk of a toxic chemical is the
chance of adverse health effects
occurring as a result of exposure
to the chemical. Risk is a
function of hazard and exposure.
18
-------
SEPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Disposal or Other Releases
wwvv2.epa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-program/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Human health risk is determined by many factors, including:
• The hazard (or toxicity) of the chemical(s)
• The quantity of the chemical(s)
• The fate of the chemical in the environment
• The route of exposure (inhalation, ingestion, dermal absorption)
• Frequency and length of exposure
• Individual susceptibility (e.g., genetics, life stage, health status)
TRI contains some of this information, including what chemicals are released from industrial
facilities; the amount of each chemical released; and the amounts released to air, water,
and land. The next figure shows some of the factors that influence an individual's risk from a
toxic chemical exposure.
Overview of Factors That Influence Risk
Emissions
TRI
Non-TRI
Exposure
Inhalation
Ingestion
Absorption
Chemical
Concentration
Chemical
Properties
Individual
Exposed
Timing of
exposure
Duration of
Exposure
It is important to keep in mind that while TRI captures a significant portion of toxic
chemicals in wastes managed, including how chemicals are released by industrial facilities,
it does not cover all facilities, ail toxic chemicals, or all sources of toxic chemicals in a
community. For example, potential sources of chemical exposure that would not be in TRI
include exhaust from cars and trucks, chemicals in consumer products, and chemical
residues in food and water.
To provide information on the potential hazard and
risk of disposal or other releases, the TRI Program
presents its data from EPA's publicly available Risk-
Screening Environmental Indicators (RSEI) model.
The RSEI model includes TRI data on on-site releases
to air and water, transfers to Publicly Owned
Treatment Works (POTWs) and transfers for off-site
incineration. Other release pathways, such as land
disposal, are not currently included in the RSEI
model.
The model produces a hazard estimate and a unitless
risk "score," which represents relative chronic human
health risk. Each type of result can be compared to
results of the same type from other years.
Risk-Screening Environmental
Indicators
The RSEI model considers more
than just chemical quantities
released, including:
• Location of releases
• Toxicity of the chemical
• Fate and transport
• Human exposure
pathways
• Number of people
exposed
19
-------
TRI National Analysis 2013: Disposal or Other Releases
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
• The hazard estimates consist of the pounds released multiplied by the
chemical's toxicity weight. They do not include any exposure modeling or population
• RSEI risk scores are calculated using on-site releases to air and water, transfers to
POTWs, and transfers for off-site incineration as reported to TRI. Note that other
release pathways, such as land disposal, are not currently modeled in RSEI. The
scores are based on many factors including the amount of the chemical released, the
location of the release, the chemical's toxicity, its fate and transport through the
environment, and the route and extent of potential human exposure.
RSEI is a screening-level model that uses simplifying assumptions to fill data gaps and
reduce the complexity of calculations in order to quickly evaluate large amounts of data and
produce a simple score. The model should be used for screening-level activities such as
trend analyses at the national level that compare relative risk from year to year, or ranking
and prioritization of chemicals or industry sectors for strategic planning. RSEI is not a formal
risk assessment, which typically requires site-specific information and detailed population
distributions to predict exposures for estimating potential health effects. Instead, RSEI is
commonly used to quickly screen and highlight situations that may potentially lead to
chronic human health risks. Because modeling the exposure of TRI chemicals is time and
resource intensive, only RSEI data through 2012 are currently available. More information
about the model can be accessed at the RSEI webpage.
Most disposal or other release practices are subject to a variety of regulatory requirements
designed to limit environmental harm. To learn more about what EPA is doing to help limit
the release of harmful chemicals to the environment see EPA's laws and regulations page.
estimates.
20
-------
TRI National Analysis 2013: Disposal or Other Releases
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Hazard trend and corresponding releases
RSEI Hazard and Corresponding Releases, 2003-2012
2,500
tO
c
0
1 2,000
uT
¦o
§ 1,500
o.
1,000
500
0
Year
Note: Only includes releases currently modeled through RSEI (on-site releases to air and water, transfers to
POTWs, and off-site transfers for incineration). RSEI hazard = reported pounds x chemical-specific toxicity
weight.
RSEI hazard estimates consider the amounts of chemicals released to air and water from
reporting facilities, POTWs or off-site incinerators, and the toxicity of the chemicals. This
figure shows RSEI hazard estimates for 2003 through 2012. The increase in the hazard
estimate from 2004 to 2007 is driven mainly by an increase in off-site transfers to
incineration of diaminotoluene and increased chromium releases to air. Overall, the figure
shows that hazard has increased by 14% from 2003 to 2013, while corresponding pounds
released have decreased by 40%. This suggests that TRI reporters may be releasing
chemicals with relatively higher toxicities in recent years.
SEPA
Q.
03
30,000 <"
20,000
10,000
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
21
-------
4>EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Disposal or Other Releases
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Risk trend and corresponding releases
RSEI Score and Corresponding Releases, 2003-2012
2,500
2,000
« 1,500
o
a.
1,000
500
—•—Releases (lb)
0
+
• RSEI Score
1,600
1,400
1,200 S?
o
1,000
800 f
3
to
600
400
200
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Year
Note: Only includes releases currently modeled through RSEI (on-site releases to air and water, transfers to
POTWs, and off-site transfers for incineration).
RSEI also produces unitless risk "scores," which represent relative chronic human health
risk and can be compared to RSEI-generated scores from other years. RSEI scores are
different from RSEI hazard estimates because they also consider the location of the release,
its fate and transport through the environment, and the route and extent of potential human
exposure.
This figure shows the trend in the RSEI score from 2003 through 2012. Over this time
period, the RSEI score decreased by 47%, while the corresponding pounds released over the
same time period decreased by 40%. These results, when considered along with the RSEI
hazard trend, suggest that the RSEI score is going down not because of reduced toxicity, but
rather because of reduced exposure modeled in RSEI, which may be a result of where the
chemical waste is released or how it is being released, such as a shift in the release media.
22
------- |