SEPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Introduction
vvww2.epa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-program/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Introduction: What is the TRI National Analysis?
Tens of thousands of chemicals are used by industries and businesses in the United States
to make the products on which our society depends, such as pharmaceuticals, clothing, and
automobiles. Many of the chemicals needed to create these products are toxic, and while
the majority of toxic chemicals are managed so that they are not released into the
environment, some releases of toxic chemicals are inevitable.
It is your right to know what toxic chemicals are being used in your community, how they are
being disposed of or otherwise managed, and whether their releases to the environment are
increasing or decreasing over time. The Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) is an EPA program
that tracks the management of certain toxic chemicals that may pose a threat to human
health and the environment. This information is submitted by thousands of U.S. facilities on
over 650 chemicals and chemical categories under the Emergency Planning and Community
Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) and the Pollution Prevention Act fPPA).
Geographic Distribution of TRI-Reporting Facilities
Puerto Rico
This map shows the locations of all facilities that reported to TRI for 2013. Facilities that
report to TRI are typically large and are from industry sectors involved in manufacturing,
metal mining, electric power generation, and hazardous waste treatment. Federal facilities
are also required to report to TRI by Executive Order 12858.
1
-------
vvEPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Introduction
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Users of TRI data should be aware that TRI captures a significant portion of toxic chemicals
in wastes that are managed by industrial facilities, but it does not cover all toxic chemicals
or all industry sectors of the U.S. economy. Furthermore, the quantities of chemicals
reported to TRI are self-reported by facilities using readily-available data. Each year, EPA
conducts an extensive data quality analysis before publishing the National Analysis. During
the data quality review, potential errors are identified and investigated to help provide the
most accurate and useful information possible. This effort makes it possible for TRI data
presented in the National Analysis to be used along with other information as a starting
point in understanding how the environment and communities may be affected by toxic
chemicals.
The TRI National Analysis is developed on an annual basis, and the 2013 TRI National
Analysis is EPA's interpretation of TRI data reported for 2013 by July 1, 2014. It provides a
snapshot of the data at one point in time. Any reports submitted to EPA after the July 1st,
2014 reporting deadline may not be processed in time to be included in the National
Analysis. The most recent data available are accessible from the TRI Data and Tools
weboage.
Production-Related Waste Managed, 2013
25.63 billion pounds
Energy Recovery
11%
Disposed of or
Otherwise Released
16%
Treated
37%
Recycled
36%
Total Disposal or Other Releases, 2013
4.14 billion pounds
Off-site Disposal
or Other Releases
10%
On-site Surface
Water Discharges
5%
Quick Facts for 2013
Number of TRI Facilities:
21,598
Production-Related Waste Managed:
25.63 billion lb
• Recycled:
9.23 billion lb
• Energy Recovery:
2.91 billion lb
• Treated:
9.49 billion lb
• Disposed of or Otherwise Released:
4.00 billion lb
Total Disposal or Other Releases:
4.14 billion lb
• On-site:
3.74 billion lb
o Air:
0.77 billion lb
o Water:
0.21 billion lb
o Land:
2.75 billion lb
• Off-site:
0.41 billion lb
2
-------
vvEPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Introduction
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
For 2013, 21,598 facilities reported to TRI. These facilities reported managing 25.63 billion
pounds of toxic chemicals in production-related wastes. This is the quantity of toxic
chemicals in waste that is recycled, burned for energy recovery, treated, and disposed of or
otherwise released. In other words, it encompasses all toxic chemicals in waste generated
from facilities' processes and operations. Of this total, 21.62 billion pounds were recycled,
burned for energy recovery, or treated, and 4.00 billion pounds were disposed of or
otherwise released to the environment, as shown in the Production-Related Waste Managed
pie chart.
TRI facilities also reported total on- and off-site disposal or other releases of 4.14 billion
pounds of toxic chemicals. As shown in the Disposal or Other Releases pie chart, most were
disposed of or released on-site to land (including landfills, other land disposal and
underground injection).
Note that the two metrics related to disposal or other releases shown in the Quick Facts box
are similar (4.00 and 4.14 billion pounds), but total disposal or other releases is slightly
higher. The reason total disposal or other releases is higher is that it includes waste from
catastrophic, remedial, and non-production related events, which is not included in the
production-related waste quantities. Another reason the two metrics are different is because
total disposal or other releases counts only the quantity of toxic chemicals in waste at its
final disposition, while production-related waste managed counts the toxic chemical waste
as many times as it is managed during the year. For example, if a TRI facility transfers a
waste off-site to another TRI facility that disposes of it to land, the waste would be counted
twice (once for each facility that manages it) under production-related waste managed, but
only once under total disposal or other releases.
Additional information is presented in the following chapters of the TRI National Analysis:
• Waste Management and Pollution Prevention presents trends in toxic chemicals
managed and the types of pollution prevention activities that facilities have
implemented.
• Releases of Chemicals presents trends in releases of toxic chemicals, including a
focus on selected chemicals of concern.
• Industry Sectors highlights toxic chemical waste trends for four industry sectors.
• Where You Live presents analyses of TRI chemicals by state, city, county, ZIP code,
metropolitan area or micropolitan area, and by Large Aquatic Ecosystems (LAEs)
such as the Chesapeake Bay, as well as information about facilities in Indian
Country.
• Beyond TRI combines TRI data with other EPA data, such as greenhouse gas
emissions, to provide a more complete picture of national trends in chemical use,
management and releases.
To conduct your own analysis of TRI data, use EPA's TRI data access and analysis tools
available to the public from the TRI Data and Tools webpage.
3
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Pollution Prevention and Waste Management
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Pollution Prevention and Waste Management
The Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) collects information from facilities on the quantities of toxic
chemicals recycled, combusted for energy recovery, treated for destruction, and disposed of or
otherwise released on- and off-site. This information is collectively referred to as production-related
waste managed.
Looking at production-related waste managed over time helps track
progress in reducing waste generated and in moving toward safer
waste management methods. EPA encourages facilities to first
eliminate waste at its source. For waste that is generated, the
preferred management method is recycling, followed by burning for
energy recovery, treating, and, as a last resort, disposing of or
otherwise releasing the waste. These waste management priorities
are illustrated in the waste management hierarchy established by the
Pollution Prevention Act (PPA) of 1990. The goal is that, when
possible, facilities will shift over time from disposal or other releases
toward the preferred techniques in the waste management hierarchy.
Energy Recovery
Treatment
Waste Management Trends
Trend by waste management practice
Production-Related Waste Managed, 2003-2013
30,000
25,000
¦o 20,000
3
O
CL
"5 15,000
ifl
c
o
| 10,000
5,000
i Recycled
Energy Recovery
Treated
i Disposed or Otherwise Released
I II
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year
This figure shows that from 2003 to 2013, production-related waste managed by TRI facilities
declined by 4% from 25.09 to 24.04 billion pounds. Changes over this time period by waste
management method were:
4
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Pollution Prevention and Waste Management
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
- Disposal and other releases decreased by 606 million pounds (-13%)
- Combustion for energy recovery decreased by 551 million pounds (-17%) and
- Recycling and treatment held steady with each method changing by less than 1%.
Since 2009, production-related waste managed has generally been increasing as the U.S. economy
has improved. Quantities of waste managed in 2013 are similar to what they were six years ago in
2007, with little overall change within any waste management method.
Waste Management by Industry Sector
Trend in waste managed by industry sector
Production-Related Waste Managed by Industry, 2003-2013
30,000
25,000
20,000
O
CL
o 15,000
Ui
c
0
1 10,000
5,000
i Chemicals
Primary Metals
I Metal Mining
I Electric Utilities
Food/Beverages/Tobacco
Paper
Petroleum
All Others
niiiiiiil
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year
This figure shows the seven industry sectors with the most reported waste managed in 2013. The
contribution of each of the top sectors to production-related waste managed has not changed
considerably between 2003 and 2013. For example, the top two sectors by total waste managed in
2013 (chemicals and primary metals) reported over half of waste managed in both 2003 and
2013.
Most industry sectors reported a decline in production-related waste managed from 2003 to 2013
resulting in an overall decrease of 4%. Of the seven sectors shown in the figure, only two increased
their quantity of waste managed since 2003 (metal mining and food/beverages/tobacco).
In the past year, however, four of the seven sectors shown in the figure have increased their waste
managed. Sectors with the greatest increases in wastes from 2012 to 2013 were:
5
-------
f/EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Pollution Prevention and Waste Management
www2.epa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-program/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Chemical manufacturing, which increased by 856 million pounds (+9% from 2012)
Metal mining, which increased by 332 million pounds (+22%)
Electric utilities, which increased 109 million pounds (+7%) and
Food/beverages/tobacco, which increased by 98 million pounds (+7%).
Generated waste in some industries fluctuates considerably from year to year, due to changes in
production or other factors (e.g., reporting in the mining sector can change significantly based on
changes in the composition of waste rock).
Economic trend in production-related waste for the manufacturing sector
Production-Related Waste Managed and Value Added by the Manufacturing Sector,
2003-2013
25
20
¦U
c
3 15
o
CL
O
w
| 10
E
5
i TRI Production-Related
Waste Managed
-Value Added
$2,500
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
t is also important to consider the influence that production and the economy have on chemical
waste generation. The figure above illustrates how changes in production levels at TRI facilities may
influence production-related waste. It presents the trend in production-related waste managed by
the manufacturing sector and the trend in the manufacturing sector's value added (as shown by the
solid line). "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. While not all of the facilities that report to TRI are in the
manufacturing sector, most are (89% in 2013). The manufacturing sector includes sectors such as
chemical manufacturing, metals processing, and pulp and paper manufacturing, but excludes
mining, electric utilities, and waste management facilities. In 2013, TRI manufacturing facilities
accounted for 80% of the production-related waste managed.
The solid line in the figure shows that value added by the manufacturing sector (adjusted for
inflation) decreased by 4% from 2003 to 2013, while production-related waste managed by the
manufacturing sector decreased by 8%. This graph demonstrates that, because waste is
6
-------
TRI National Analysis 2013: Pollution Prevention and Waste Management
www2.epa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-program/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
decreasing faster than production, factors other than production were also contributing to the
reductions in releases. Other factors such as source reduction and pollution prevention (P2)
practices are discussed in the Source Reduction/Pollution Prevention section.
More information on production trends for individual sectors, including the electric utility and metal
mining sectors, which are not included in the manufacturing sector, can be found in the industry
sector profiles.
Source Reduction/Pollution Prevention (P2)
Types of newly implemented source reduction
SEPA
Newly Implemented Source Reduction Practices, 2013
Facilities Reporting to TRI Source Reduction Activities Reported
t
Without Facilities With
Source Source 10%
Reduction: Reduction:
84% ^ 16%
37%
12%
21%
Good Operating Practices Process Modifications ¦ Spill and Leak Prevention
Raw Material Modifications ¦ Inventory Control ¦ Product Modifications
¦ Cleaning and Degreasing ¦ Surface Preparation and Finishing
Note: Facilities report their source reduction activities by selecting from activities that fall into one of the eight
categories listed in the graph legend. "Good operating practices" are defined by four codes in the Reporting Forms and
Instructions, which facilities select when submitting their forms.
This figure shows the types of source reduction activities reported as implemented during 2013. In
2013, a total of 3,362 facilities (16% of all TRI facilities) reported initiating 10,623 source
reduction activities. Of the source reduction activities implemented, good operating practices is
reported the most at 37%. To learn more about source reduction and pollution prevention, see
the TRI Pollution Prevention webpage.
7
-------
TRI National Analysis 2013: Pollution Prevention and Waste Management
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Facilities may have ongoing source reduction activities initiated in previous years that are not
captured in the figure. You can find data on previously implemented source reduction activities by
using the TRI P2 Search Tool.
Methods used to identify newly implemented source reduction activities
Methods To Identify Newly Implemented
Source Reduction Activities, 2013
v>EPA
Materials Balance
Audits: 8%
Vendor
Assistance: 8%
Participative
Team
Management:
34%
Employee: 11%
Internal P2
Audit(s): 18%
Other: 18%
Trade
Association: 1%
External P2
Audit(s): 2%
For each source reduction activity, facilities also provide information about how they identified the
opportunity for source reduction. This figure shows that facilities most frequently identified source
reduction opportunities through participative team management (e.g., team training to identify
process improvements) and internal audits.
8
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Pollution Prevention and Waste Management
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Chemicals with largest percentage decrease in waste managed
Percentage Change in Production-Related Waste Managed and Releases for
Chemicals with Largest Decreases in Waste Managed, 2010-2013
o%
-5%
S -io%
° -15%
rc
o
a
-20%
Si "25%
bo
-30%
v
a.
-35%
-40%
i % Decrease in Production-Related Waste Managed
I % Decrease in Releases
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene
Cobalt and Cobalt
Compounds
Trichloroethylene
Barium and Barium
Compounds
Hydrochloric Acid
Note: Limited to chemicals with at least 25 forms reporting source reduction and 100 total Form Rs in 2013.
This figure shows the five chemicals with the greatest percentage decrease in waste quantities in
recent years (from 2010 to 2013). Decreases in waste management quantities can be caused by
many factors, including changes in production levels or estimation methods. Source reduction
activities implemented by facilities have also played a significant role in reducing waste generation.
The relationship between source reduction, changes in total waste generation, and chemical
releases varies from chemical to chemical.
- In many cases, reducing the generation of total waste through source reduction also
decreases the amount of chemical ultimately released to the environment. For example,
releases of trichloroethylene (a carcinogen that is released primarily to air) declined by 19%
over the same period that total waste managed declined by 16%.
- In cases where pollution is already being effectively controlled through management
methods such as treatment and recycling, source reduction may reduce the amount of total
chemical waste but does not significantly decrease chemical releases. For example, cobalt
(another carcinogen) is managed almost exclusively through recycling at TRI facilities. While
the total quantity of cobalt waste decreased by 19%, releases declined by only 2%.
- Finally, the quantity of releases can decrease at a greater rate than the quantity of total
waste generated. For example, production-related waste of hydrochloric acid decreased by
about 10% while releases decreased by 38%, as facilities switched from releasing
hydrochloric acid to preferred management methods, such as treatment, and also
undertook source reduction activities.
Source reduction activities reported for the five chemicals in this figure are shown in the next figure.
9
-------
hbk a> TRI National Analysis 2013: Pollution Prevention and Waste Management
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Types of source reduction activities for chemicals with largest decreases in waste managed
Number of Newly Implemented Source Reduction Activities for Top Chemicals by Percentage
Decrease in Waste Managed, 2010-2013
350
-o 300
250
Good Operating Practices
Process Modifications
Spill and Leak Prevention
Raw Material Modifications
Inventory Control
Product Modifications
Cleaning and Degreasing
Surface Preparation and Finishing
200
150
100
50
Chemical
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene
Cobalt and Cobalt
Compounds
Trichloroethylene
Barium and Barium
Compounds
Hydrochloric Acid
% Decrease in
Waste Managed
-28%
-19%
-16%
-14%
-10%
2010-2013
Notes: 1) Limited to chemicals with at least 25 forms reporting source reduction and 100 total forms in 2013. 2)
Facilities report their source reduction activities by selecting from activities that fall into one of the eight categories
listed in the graph legend. "Good operating practices" are defined by four codes in the Reporting Forms and
Instructions, which facilities select when submitting their forms.
This figure shows the types of source reduction activities reported from 2010 to 2013 for the
chemicals with the greatest percentage decrease in production-related waste managed over this
time period. The type of source reduction activity implemented varies depending on the chemical's
use in industrial operations and the chemical's characteristics. For example, some types of source
reduction activities relate to:
- Cleaning and degreasing. Changing to aqueous cleaners is more commonly implemented
for trichloroethvlene. a common industrial solvent, than for the other chemicals shown.
- Spill and leak prevention. This activity is more commonly used to reduce waste
of benzo(g.h.i)pervlene. a persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic (PBT) chemical constituent
in petroleum products. Common spill and leak prevention activities for this chemical include
improving procedures for loading, unloading, and transfer operations at petroleum bulk
terminals, and installing overflow alarms or automatic shutoff valves at asphalt product
manufacturing facilities.
Facilities may also report additional details to TRI about their source reduction, recycling, or
pollution control activities. For the chemicals profiled in the above figure, examples of additional
10
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Pollution Prevention and Waste Management
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
pollution prevention-related information reported are shown below with a link to each facility's
pollution prevention report in Envirofacts.
- Benzo(g.h.i)pervlene: A rubber product manufacturer installed three natural gas boilers and
decommissioned two #6 fuel oil boilers in an effort to reduce emissions. The change was
made in September 2013 and resulted in a 36% reduction in benzo(g,h,i)perylene emissions
from the previous year. The facility expects they will not have any benzo(g,h,i)perylene
emissions in 2014. [facility detailsl
- Cobalt and Cobalt Compounds: By installing air pollution controls on its anode furnace, a
copper smelter decreased emissions of hazardous air pollutants, including cobalt
compounds. The project also resulted in approximately 12% savings in natural gas
consumption, [facility detailsl
- Trichloroethvlene: With the help of a vendor, a pipe and tube manufacturer improved the air
blanket zone on its refrigeration lines and reduced releases of trichloroethylene. [facility
detailsl
- Barium and Barium Compounds: A printing plate and ink manufacturing facility significantly
reduced the use of barium compounds by reformulating its products, [facility detailsl
- Hydrochloric Acid: By changing to an immersion acid process instead of using spray acid
equipment, a semiconductor manufacturer is reducing emissions of aerosolized hydrochloric
acid, [facility detailsl
You can view all reported pollution prevention activities and compare facilities' waste management
methods and trends for any TRI chemical by using the TRI P2 Search Tool.
Industry sectors with the largest percentage decrease in releases
Percentage Change in Production-Related Waste Managed and Releases
for Industries with Greatest Decreases in Releases, 2010-2013
o%
-5%
ro
rH
-io%
©
rH
S -15%
!3 -20%
HI
« -25%
-35%
u
a.
-40%
-45%
I 'I I'
i% Decrease in Production-Related Waste Managed
i % Decrease in Releases
Printing and Electrical Equipment Misc. Mfg. (e.g.,
Publishing Medical Equipment)
Electric Utilities
Chemical
Wholesalers
This figure shows the sectors with the greatest percentage decrease in releases from 2010 to
2013. For many sectors, source reduction activities, which reduce or eliminate waste generation at
its source, have contributed to substantial decreases in both the amount of waste generated and
11
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Pollution Prevention and Waste Management
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
the amount released. In other cases, pollution controls (e.g., scrubbers) have reduced releases but
do not affect waste management totals, because chemicals that are treated or recycled instead of
being released are still included in the total waste managed quantity. Improved pollution control
techniques may thus explain why releases declined at an even faster rate than overall waste
generation for four of the five industries shown above. Other factors, such as reduced production,
can also contribute to decreases in both releases and overall waste generation.
Source reduction activities reported by these five industries are discussed further in the next figure.
Types of source reduction activities for sectors with largest decrease in releases
1,400
1.200
1,000
<
c
o
£
*6
-------
TRI National Analysis 2013: Pollution Prevention and Waste Management
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Waste Management by Parent Company
Parent companies with the most production-related waste managed
Production-Related Waste Managed by Top 10 TRI Parent Companies, 2012-2013
Millions of Pounds
TECK AMERICAN INC
2013(1)
2012 (1)
CLEAN HARBORS INC
2013(109)
2012(104)
KOCH INDUSTRIES INC
2013(127)
2012(124)
THE DOW CHEMICAL CO
2013 (46)
2012 (46)
SYNGENTACORP
2013(3)
2012 (3)
HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL INC
2013 (59)
2012 (58)
PBFENERGY
2013(3)
2012(3)
BASF CORP
2013 (59)
2012 (58)
THE RENCO GROUP INC
2013(11)
2012(11)
E I DU PONT DE NEMOURS & CO
2013 (56)
2012 (56)
Note: For TRI Reporting, the parent company is the highest level U.S. company which directly owns at least 50 percent
of the voting stock of the company. This figure uses EPA's standardized parent company names.
Many of the facilities reporting to TRI are owned by parent companies that also own other facilities
reporting to TRI. Facilities reporting to TRI are asked to provide information on their parent company
if they have one. The parent companies reported to TRI must be located in the United States.
This figure shows the parent companies that reported the most production-related waste in 2013.
Eight of these parent companies were also in the top 10 in 2012, while Clean Harbors and E I Du
Pont De Nemours moved into the top 10 in 2013.
v>EPA
200
400
600
800
1,000
The numbers in parentheses after the
year indicate the total number of the
parent companies' facilities that
reported to TRI in a given year.
13
-------
TRI National Analysis 2013: Pollution Prevention and Waste Management
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
These parent companies vary in size and in the sectors in which they operate. The number of TRI
reporting facilities owned by these companies ranges from 1 to 127. The parent companies' TRI
facilities operate in the following sectors:
- Metal mining: Teck American
- Hazardous waste and solvent recovery: Clean Harbors
- Multiple sectors, e.g., pulp and paper, petroleum refining, and chemicals: Koch Industries
- Chemical manufacturing: Dow Chemical, Syngenta, Honeywell International, BASF, and E I
Du Pont De Nemours
- Petroleum Refining: PBF Energy
- Metal smelting: The Renco Group
Nine of these top parent companies reported implementing one or more new source reduction
activities in 2013. Some companies also reported additional (optional) information to TRI about
their pollution prevention or waste management activities. Among the top 10 parent companies,
additional information reported included:
- A Honeywell facility worked with vendor and internal department resources to develop a new
formulation for its coating line. This raw material substitution resulted in a 99% reduction in
the use of methanol at the facility. (Raw Material Modification) [facility detailsl
- Through an internal pollution prevention audit and an employee recommendation, a
Syngenta facility reduced ammonia emissions by improving ammonia recovery through
stripping and optimizing the conditions of reactions that involve ammonia. (Process
Modification) [facility detailsl
- A BASF organic chemical manufacturing plant implemented a site-wide spill prevention plan,
focused specifically on over-fill protections and safer chemical transfer. (Spill and Leak
Prevention) [facility detailsl
To conduct a similar type of parent company comparison for a given sector, chemical, or geographic
location, use the TRI P2 Search Tool.
14
-------
TRI National Analysis 2013: Pollution Prevention and Waste Management
www2.epa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-program/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Parent companies with the greatest number of new source reduction activities
Top Parent Companies Based on Newly Implemented Source Reduction Activities, 2012-2013
KOCH INDUSTRIES INC
2013 (38/127)
2012 (30/124)
THE VALSPAR CORP
2013 (14/24)
2012 (15/24)
3M CO
2013 (25/49)
2012 (18/48)
SHELL OIL CO
2013 (1/15)
2012 (1/15)
SILGAN HOLDINGS INC
2013(15/19)
2012 (18/19)
NUCOR CORP
2013 (6/51)
2012 (7/48)
GLOBAL PARTNERS LP
2013 (10/11)
2012 (10/11)
ILLINOIS TOOL WORKS INC
2013 (20/68)
2012 (14/63)
SALT RIVER PROJECT
2013 (2/2)
2012 (2/2)
BASF CORP
2013 (11/59)
2012 (17/58)
CHEMPLEX ADVANCED MATERIALS LLC
2013 (4/4)
2012 (4/4)
Notes: 1) For TRI Reporting, the parent company is the highest level U.S. company that directly owns at least 50% of
the voting stock of the company. This figure uses EPA's standardized parent company names. 2) Facilities report their
source reduction activities by selecting from activities that fall into one of the eight categories listed in the graph
legend. "Good operating practices" are defined by four codes in the Reporting Forms and Instructions, which facilities
select when submitting their forms.
This figure presents the parent companies that reported the most newly implemented source
reduction activities in 2013. The parent companies' TRI facilities primarily operate in the following
industries:
- Pulp and paper, petroleum refining, and chemicals: Koch Industries
SEPA
250
300
350
¦ Surface Preparation and Finishing
Cleaning and Degreasing
¦ Product Modifications
¦ Inventory Control
Raw Material Modifications
¦ Spill and Leak Prevention
Process Modifications
Good Operating Practices
The numbers in parentheses after the year indicate how many of the
companies' facilities reported source reduction activities compared to the
total number of the parent companies' facilities that reported to TRI that year.
15
-------
TRI National Analysis 2013: Pollution Prevention and Waste Management
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
- Chemical manufacturing sector: Valspar, 3M and BASF
- Petroleum refining and chemicals: Shell Oil
- Bulk petroleum industry (store and distribute crude petroleum and petroleum products):
Global Partners
- Metal containers: Silgan Holdings
- Steel manufacturing: Nucor
- Chemicals, fabricated metals, and industrial equipment: Illinois Tool Works
- Electric utility: Salt River Project
Good operating practices, such as improving maintenance scheduling and installation of quality
monitoring systems, are the most commonly reported source reduction activities for these top
parent companies. Spill and leak prevention and process modifications are also commonly
reported. Some of these parent companies submitted additional text to EPA with their TRI reports
describing their pollution prevention activities. Examples include:
- An automotive products manufacturing facility, owned by Illinois Tool Works, reduced the
need to flush pipe lines when changing product lines by adding designated pipe lines for
specific chemical products. (Process Modification) [facility detailsl
- By switching from a batch manufacturing process to a continuous process, one 3M Co
chemical facility reduced total waste of certain glycol ethers. (Process Modification) [facility
detailsl
- A BASF organic chemical manufacturer reduced its use of nitric acid bv implementing more
precise delivery methods and improved metering, [facility detailsl
You can find P2 activities reported by a specific parent company and compare facilities' waste
management methods and trends for any TRI chemical by using the TRI P2 Search Tool.
16
-------
TRI National Analysis 2013: Releases of Chemicals
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Releases of 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.
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
Disposal or Other Releases, 2003-2013
5,000
4,500
4,000
m 3,500
~o
C
§ 3,000
CL
*5 2,500
EPA
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.
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
i-site Air Releases On-site Surface Water Discharges On-site Land Disposal
17
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Releases of Chemicals
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
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).
Land Disposal
Trend in land disposal
On-site Land Disposal, 2003-2013
3,000
2,500
2,000
O
a.
o 1,500
IA
c
o
^ 1,000
2
500
Underground Injection
Landfills
Land Treatment
Surface Impoundments
Other Land Disposal
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
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
18
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Releases of Chemicals
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
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 Metal Mining
section.
On-site Land Disposal excluding Metal Mines, 2003-2013
1,000
900
800
to
"O
700
c
3
o
600
CL
•S
500
l/i
o
400
i
300
200
100
0
Underground Injection
Landfills
Land Treatment
Surface Impoundments
Other Land Disposal
Ia Other Land Disposal
+II44tHm
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.
19
-------
TRI National Analysis 2013: Releases of Chemicals
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Land disposal by industry
v>EPA
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
\A
•a
c
1,200
o
CL
1,000
*5
i/J
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
20
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Releases of Chemicals
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.
21
-------
TRI National Analysis 2013: Releases of Chemicals
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
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.
v>EPA
22
-------
TRI National Analysis 2013: Releases of Chemicals
vvww2.epa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-program/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Water releases by chemical
vvEPA
Water Releases by Chemical, 2013
Nitrate Compounds: 89%
Barium and Barium
Compounds: 4%
Sodium Nitrate: 10% Zinc and Zinc
Compounds: 4%
All Others: 22%
Manganese and
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
Certain Glycol
Ethers
Arsenic and Arsenic
Compounds
Zinc and Zinc
Compounds
Nickel and Nickel
Compounds
Methanol
o
n
rh
o
o
CN
ra
01
i-
u
01
G
•M
c
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Releases of Chemicals
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.
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
Wastewater Treatment 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
l Biological treatment
I Sludge treatment and dewatering
Others
H
¦ Settling or clarification
¦ Chemical treatment
¦ Phase separation
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.
24
-------
TRI National Analysis 2013: Releases of Chemicals
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%
25
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Releases of Chemicals
vvww2.epa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-program/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Vm
I Tra
n 5.4
Transfers for Disposal to Colorado:
5.4 million lbs
Top Sources:
1. Colorado
2. Nebraska
3. Oregon
4. Minnesota
5. New Mexico
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.
600mi
Top Chemicals:
1. MANGANESE COMPOUNDS
2. BARIUM COMPOUNDS
3. ZINC COMPOUNDS
4. LEAD COMPOUNDS
5. NITRIC ACID
^ j Zoom to Get Directions
Mexico
City
BAHM1A5
gnavana
__ , CUBA
Esrir DeLorrne, FAOr USG5r TiOAAy EPA.L
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.
26
-------
TRI National Analysis 2013: Releases of Chemicals
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Releases by Industry
Total releases by industry
c nnn
Total Disposal or Other Releases by Industry, 2
003-2013
¦ Metal Mining
¦ Electric Utilities
Chemicals
¦ Primary Metals
¦ Paper
Hazardous Waste Management
4,500
4,000
¦o 3,500
o 3,000
Q_
o 2,500
| 2,000
| 1,500
1,000
snn
¦
1
¦
¦
¦
—
¦
1
1
1
¦
1
¦
¦
¦
¦
¦
s
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year
v>EPA
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 29 million pounds (+6%)
- 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.
27
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Releases of Chemicals
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
2.0
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
•S 1.0
= 0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
$2,500
$2,000
$1,500
$1,000
$500
$-
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Year
2013
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.
28
-------
TRI National Analysis 2013: Releases of Chemicals
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
-o 700
| 600
^ 500
EPA
29
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Releases of Chemicals
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Releases of lead and lead compounds, excluding metal mining
Disposal or Other Releases of Lead and Lead
Compounds excluding Metal Mining, 2003-2013
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Year
2013
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
-a
c
3
o
a.
¦a
c
(Q
Ui
1,400
1,200
1,000
800
600
400
200
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year
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
30
-------
TRI National Analysis 2013: Releases of Chemicals
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
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 TTi—n—n
oo
1120 — — — —r~
£ ioo — —
"s n n
to 80 -
¦o
| 60
| 40
20
o M i i i — i i i i — i i i L-i
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.
v>EPA
31
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Releases of Chemicals
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
l/t
I 80,000
13
60,000
40,000
20,000
0
Total Disposal or Other Releases, 2003-2013: Dioxin and Dioxin-like
Compounds
1,600
1,400
1,200
1,000
800
600
400
200
a
tr
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Releases of Chemicals
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
Chemicals: 67%
Primary Metals: 26%
Hazardous
Waste/Solvent
Recovery: 5%
Paper: 1%
All Others: 1%
Primary M
70%
Hazardous
Waste/Solvent
Recovery: 15%
Chemicals: 10%
Paper: 2%
All Others: 3%
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 67% of the total grams of
dioxins released, while the primary metals sector accounted for only 26% 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%.
33
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Releases of Chemicals
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Air releases of carcinogens
140
120
IA
¦o
100
c
3
o
CL
80
*5
(SO
C
o
i
40
20
Air Releases of Carcinogens, 2003-2013
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 stvrene
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).
Human health risk is determined by many factors,
including:
• The hazard (or toxicity) of the chemical(s)
• The quantity of the chemical(s)
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.
34
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Releases of Chemicals
vvww2.epa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-program/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
• 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
Air
Water
Land
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, all 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
• The hazard estimates consist of the pounds released multiplied by the chemical's
toxicity weight. They do not include any exposure modeling or population estimates.
35
-------
TRI National Analysis 2013: Releases of Chemicals
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
• 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-
Hazard trend and corresponding releases
RSEI Hazard and Corresponding Releases, 2003-2012
« Releases (lb)
2,500
60,000
(/)
c
o
50,000
| 2,000
40,000 Q3
§ 1,500
o
30,000 «
1,000
20,000
500
10,000
0
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Year
36
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Releases of Chemicals
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
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.
Risk trend and corresponding releases
RSEI Score and Corresponding Releases, 2003-2012
2,500
2,000
*- 1,500
-o
c
3
O
1,000
500
- Releases (lb)
RSEI Score
1,600
1,400
1,200 S?
o
1,000 -g
800 !
3
tfl
600
400
200
2003 2004 2005 2006
2007 2008
Year
2009
2010 2011
2012
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
37
-------
TRI National Analysis 2013: Releases of Chemicals
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
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.
v>EPA
38
-------
TRI National Analysis 2013: Industry Sectors
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Industry Sectors
Comparing Industry Sectors
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. Therefore, it is useful to look at waste management trends within a sector to
identify potential emerging issues and opportunities for better waste management practices.
This chapter examines which sectors contribute the most to production-related waste
managed and total disposal or other releases in 2013, and highlights several industry
sectors to show trends occurring over time within each. For analysis purposes, the TRI
program has combined 3- and 4-digit North American Industry Classification System (NAICS)
codes to create 26 distinct industry sector categories.
Production-related waste managed and releases by industry
v>EPA
Production-Related Waste by Industry, 2013
25.63 billion lb
This pie chart shows that 86% of production-related waste managed was reported from
seven industry sectors. More than 60% originated from three sectors: chemicals (42%),
primary metals (11%), and metal mining (7%).
39
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Industry Sectors
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Total Disposal or Other Releases by Industry, 2013
4.14 billion lb
All Others: 3S
Food/Beverages,'"TcbaccD: 3%
Hazardous Waste Management: 456
Paper: 5%
Primary Metals: S%
Chemicals: 12n
Metal Mining: 4756
Electric Utilities: 13«
This pie chart shows that 92% of total disposal or other releases of TRI chemicals originated
from seven of the 26 TRI industry sectors. Recall that disposal or other releases make up a
portion of production-related waste managed, so this chart shows a more in-depth look at
the 4.14 billion pounds of releases that are also one part of the 25.63 billion pounds of
production-related waste managed. More than two-thirds originated from just three industry
sectors: metal mining (47%), electric utilities (13%), and chemicals (12%). Both metal mining
and chemical sectors are in the top three for waste management and total releases.
Over time, the amounts and proportions of TRI chemicals managed including how released
have varied. For more details, see the production-related waste managed bv industry trend
graph and the releases bv industry trend graph.
Some sectors have reported a significant percentage decrease in production-related waste
managed and releases in recent years. For more information on these sectors and their
reported source reduction activities, see the industry sectors with largest percentage
decrease in releases graph and the types of source reduction activities graph.
It is also important to consider the influence that production and the economy have on
waste managed and releases. For more information, see the production-related waste
managed and value added bv the manufacturing sector graph and the total releases and
value added bv the manufacturing sector graph.
40
-------
TRI National Analysis 2013: Industry Sectors
www2.epa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-program/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Chemical Manufacturing
Chemical Manufacturing Facilities Reporting to TRI, 2013
Chemical manufacturers produce a variety of products, including basic chemicals, products
used by other manufacturers (such as synthetic fibers, plastics, and pigments), and
consumer products (such as paints, fertilizers, drugs, and cosmetics). In 2013, 3,454
chemical manufacturing facilities reported to TRI; more than any other sector. This sector
reported 42% of the TRI production-related waste managed; also more than any other
sector.
vvEPA
41
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Industry Sectors
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Quick Facts for 2013
Chemical Manufacturing
Number of TRI Facilities: 3,454
Facilities Reporting Newly Implemented Source
Reduction Activities: 737
Production-Related Waste Managed: 10,819.1 million lb
¦Recycled: 4,375.0 million lb
¦ Energy Recovery: 1,557.4 million lb
¦Treated: 4,364.6 million lb
¦ Disposed of or Otherwise Released:
522.2 million lb
Total Disposal or Other Releases: 523.3 million lb
¦ On-site: 453.8 million lb
o Air: 177.9 million lb
o Water: 34.0 million lb
o Land: 241.9 million lb
¦ Off-site: 69.5 million lb
42
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Industry Sectors
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Waste management by the chemical manufacturing sector
10,000
8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
0
I
Production-Related Waste Managed, 2003-2013
Chemical Manufacturing
Recycled
Energy Recovery
Treated
Disposed of or Otherwise Released
Production
100
80
60
40
20
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year
This figure shows that production-related waste managed by the chemical manufacturing
sector decreased by 5% from 2003 to 2013, while production (represented by the black line
as reported by the Federal Reserve Board Industrial Production Index) fluctuated but
changed little overall. In 2013, 5% of the sector's waste was released, while the rest was
managed through treatment, energy recovery, and recycling. Quantities of waste released,
treated, or used in energy recovery have decreased since 2003, while the quantity of waste
recycled has increased. From 2012 to 2013, production-related waste managed increased
by 9%, primarily due to an increase in treatment and recycling.
Although the chemical manufacturing sector has consistently been the sector with the most
production-related waste managed, 21% of facilities in the sector initiated source reduction
activities in 2013 to reduce their toxic chemical use and waste generation. The most
commonly reported category of source reduction activities for the sector was good operating
practices, which includes improving maintenance scheduling, record keeping, and
procedures and changing production schedules to minimize equipment and feedstock
changes. For example, one facility reported adjusting its production schedule to increase the
batch size of zinc products, which reduced the frequency of vessel cleanouts. Other common
source reduction activities in the chemical manufacturing sector include process
modifications and spill and leak prevention. TRI's Pollution Prevention Search Tool can help
you learn more about pollution prevention opportunities in this sector.
43
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Industry Sectors
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Releases by the chemical manufacturing sector
Total Disposal or Other Releases, 2003-2013
Chemical Manufacturing
o
a.
600
500
400
300
*6
| 200
I
100
Off-site Disposal or Other Releases
On-site Land Disposal
On-site Surface Water Discharges
On-site Air Releases
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
2008
Year
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
As shown in this figure, total releases by the chemical manufacturing sector decreased by
9% from 2003 to 2013. This is primarily due to a reduction in air emissions. Water releases
have also declined since 2003, while on-site releases to land and off-site disposal have
increased slightly. Over the past four years, total releases remained fairly constant with only
an increase of 5 million pounds (+1%) from 2012 to 2013. The chemical manufacturing
sector had the third-largest quantity of total disposal or other releases in 2013.
For more information on how this sector and others can choose safer chemicals, visit
EPA's Design for the Environment Program pages for Alternatives Assessments and
the Safer Chemical Ingredients List.
44
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Industry Sectors
www2.epa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-program/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
s I 1 If
Metal Mines Reporting to TRI, 2013
The portion of the metal mining sector covered by TRI includes facilities mining for copper,
lead, zinc, silver, gold, and several other metals. In 2013, 88 metal mining facilities reported
to TRI and they tend to be in Western states where most of the copper, silver, and gold
mining occurs; however, zinc and lead mining tend to occur in Missouri, Tennessee, and
Alaska. Metals generated from U.S. mining operations are used in a wide range of products,
including automobiles and electrical and industrial equipment. The extraction and
beneficiation of these minerals generate large amounts of waste.
45
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Industry Sectors
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Quick Facts for 2013
Metal Mining
Number of TRI Facilities: 88
Facilities Reporting Newly Implemented Source
Reduction Activities: 9
Production-Related Waste Managed: 1,863.4 million lb
¦ Recycled: 66.1 million lb
¦ Energy Recovery: 5 lb
¦Treated: 25.2 million lb
¦ Disposed of or Otherwise Released:
1,772.1 million lb
Total Disposal or Other Releases: 1,966.0 million lb
¦ On-site: 1,962.9 million lb
o Air: 2.9 million lb
o Water: 1.3 million lb
o Land: 1,958.7 million lb
¦ Off-site: 3.1 million lb
Note: The amounts disposed of or otherwise released under Production-Related Waste Managed exclude
releases due to catastrophic or other one-time events not related to normal production processes.
46
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Industry Sectors
www2.epa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-program/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Waste management by metal mines
Production-Related Waste Managed, 2003-2013
Metal Mining
Recycled
Energy Recovery
Treated
Disposed of or Otherwise Released
Mine Production
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year
As shown in this figure, 95% of the metal mining sector's production-related waste managed
is disposed of or otherwise released. While metal mining production (as reported in the U.S.
Geological Survey Mineral Commodities Surveys) has remained relatively steady from 2003
to 2013, as shown by the black line in the graph, the quantity of waste managed has
fluctuated. This indicates that factors other than production have contributed to the recent
changes in quantities of waste managed. One factor frequently cited by facilities is the
composition of the extracted ore and waste rock, which can vary substantially from year to
year. In some cases, small changes in the waste's composition can impact whether
chemicals in waste rock qualify for a concentration-based exemption. Large quantities of
toxic chemicals in waste rock may qualify for the exemption and not need to be reported in
one year, but not qualify for the exemption the next year or vice versa.
In the metal mining sector, 9 of the 88 facilities initiated source reduction activities in 2013
to reduce their toxic chemical use and waste generation. Toxic chemical quantities reported
by this sector are not especially amenable to source reduction, because they primarily
reflect the natural composition of the ore and waste rock. The most commonly reported
source reduction activity was improving maintenance scheduling, record keeping, or
procedures.
To learn more about this sector, visit ERA'S website on reducing pollution from mineral
processing operations.
47
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Industry Sectors
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Releases by metal mines
o
a.
Total Disposal or Other Releases, 2003-2013
Metal Mining
2,500
2,000
1,500
= 1,000
500
Off-site Disposal or Other Releases
On-site Land Disposal
On-site Surface Water Discharges
On-site Air Releases
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year
The metal mining sector's total disposal or other releases reflect the high volume of
materials managed on-site at metal mines. As shown in this figure, more than 99% of the
sector's releases are on-site land disposal. On-site land disposal by metal mines has
fluctuated in recent years, decreasing significantly in 2012 and then increasing again in
2013. Several mines have reported that changes in production and changes in the chemical
composition of the deposit being mined are the primary cause of these fluctuations in the
amount of chemicals reported. Metal mining facilities typically handle large volumes of
material, and even a small change in the chemical composition of the deposit being mined
can lead to big changes in the amount of toxic chemicals reported nationally.
In 2013, the metal mining sector reported the largest quantity of total disposal or other
releases, accounting for 47% of the releases for all industries. It also represents almost
three quarters (71%) of the on-site land disposal for all sectors in 2013.
48
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Industry Sectors
www2.epa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-program/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
*
n.
3 J
m
Northern
^ '
Mariana
Islands
Guam
«¦
V
Electric Utilities Reporting to TRI, 2013
The electric utilities sector consists of establishments primarily engaged in generating,
transmitting, and distributing electric power. Electric-generating facilities use a variety of
fuels to generate electricity; however, only those that combust coal or oil to generate power
for distribution in commerce must report to TRI. There are 567 electric generating facilities.
49
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Industry Sectors
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Quick Facts for 2013
Electric Utilities
Number of TRI Facilities: 567
Facilities Reporting Newly Implemented Source
Reduction Activities: 17
Production-Related Waste Managed: 1,705.6 million lb
¦Recycled: 7.3 million lb
¦ Energy Recovery: 38.9 million lb
¦Treated: 1,112.4 million lb
¦ Disposed of or Otherwise Released:
547.0 million lb
Total Disposal or Other Releases: 547.9 million lb
¦ On-site: 479.1 million lb
o Air: 197.9 million lb
o Water: 3.3 million lb
o Land: 277.8 million lb
¦ Off-site: 68.8 million lb
Waste management by electric utilities
2,500
2,000
o 1,500
CL
.2 1,000
500
Production-Related Waste Managed, 2003-2013
Electric Utilities
Recycled
Energy Recovery
Treated
Disposed of or Otherwise Released
Electricity Generation
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year
50
-------
TRI National Analysis 2013: Industry Sectors
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Production-related waste managed has decreased by 4% since 2003, while net electricity
generation (in terms of electricity generated using coal and oil fuels as reported by the U.S.
Department of Energy's Energy Information Administration), has decreased by 23%. The
recent production decrease is driven by the industry's transition to natural gas, which
exempts many electric utilities from TRI reporting. While the overall quantity of production-
related waste managed has not significantly changed, the ways in which the sector manages
this waste have changed considerably.
In 2013, approximately two-thirds of production-related waste managed was treated, while
approximately one-third was released. This is in contrast to 2003, when the opposite was
the case - almost two-thirds of the waste was released, and over one-third was treated. This
trend is in large part due to an increase in the number of scrubbers at electric utilities that
treat (or destroy) acid gases that would otherwise be on-site air releases. The releases per
gigawatt-hour (GWH) produced have dramatically decreased, offset by an increase in
quantities treated per gigawatt-hour produced.
In the electric utilities sector, only 3% of facilities initiated source reduction activities in
2013 to reduce their toxic chemical use and waste generation. (Note: Adding a scrubber
would not be considered a source reduction activity because it controls waste rather than
preventing waste generation.) The most commonly reported type of source reduction
activities for this sector was process modifications, which include activities such as
modifying equipment, layout, or piping. TRI's Pollution Prevention Search Tool can help you
learn more about pollution prevention opportunities in this sector.
51
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Industry Sectors
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Releases by electric utilities
o
a.
"5
Ui
c
o
1,200
1,000
800 4—|
600
400
200
Total Disposal or Other Releases, 2003-2013
Electric Utilities
~ On-site Air Rele;
¦¦I'll,,.
Off-site Disposal or Other Releases
On-site Land Disposal
On-site Surface Water Discharges
~ On-site Air Releases
'llll
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year
The electric utilities sector's releases decreased by 49% from 2003 to 2013. This decrease
is driven by a 73% decrease in on-site air releases from 2003 to 2013. Over this time
period, on-site land disposal and off-site disposal or other releases remained relatively
constant, while on-site surface water discharges increased by 13%. From 2012 to 2013,
releases by electric utilities increased by 5% (28 million pounds). This increase was primarily
driven by an increase in on-site land disposal.
This sector reported the second-largest total disposal or other releases of any industry
sector in TRI for 2013, including the largest on-site air emissions, which represented over
25% of air emissions from all industries.
52
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Industry Sectors
www2.epa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-program/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Petroleum Refineries Reporting to TRI, 2013
Petroleum refineries process crude oil and natural gas liquids to produce finished petroleum
products. The primary products of the industry fall into three major categories: fuels (e.g.,
gasoline, kerosene); finished non-fuel products (e.g., solvents, asphalt); and petrochemical
feedstocks (e.g., benzene, xylene). While there are only 151 facilities in this sector (0.7% of
all facilities), they report almost 7% of production-related waste managed. Refineries are
primarily concentrated near oil fields and ports, with the majority being along the Gulf Coast
and in the Midwestern states.
53
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Industry Sectors
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Quick Facts for 2013
Petroleum Refining
Number of TRI Facilities: 151
Facilities Reporting Newly Implemented Source
Reduction Activities: 17
Production-Related Waste Managed: 1,661.3 million lb
¦ Recycled: 147.8 million lb
¦ Energy Recovery: 411.4 million lb
¦Treated: 1,038.7 million lb
¦ Disposed of or Otherwise Released:
63.4 million lb
Total Disposal or Other Releases: 63.6 million lb
¦ On-site: 60.3 million lb
o Air: 35.5 million lb
o Water: 22.3 million lb
o Land: 2.4 million lb
¦ Off-site: 3.3 million lb
54
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Industry Sectors
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Waste management by petroleum refineries
Production-Related Waste Managed, 2003-2013
Petroleum Refining
1,600
1,400
1,200
1,000
800
600
400
200
7,800
7,600
7,400
7,200 2
ID
CO
7,000 §
6,800 1
6,600
6,400
6,200
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year
Note: Hydrogen sulfide is excluded from the production-related waste trend figure because it was not
a TRI-reportable chemical until 2012.
This figure shows that production-related waste managed by the petroleum refining sector
has decreased by 17% from 2003 to 2012, while production (represented by the black line
as reported by the Federal Reserve Board Industrial Production Index) has also decreased,
but only by 5%. In 2013, 4% of the sector's waste was released, while the rest was
managed through treatment, energy recovery, and recycling. The quantity treated decreased
by 45% from 2003 to 2013 while the quantity used for energy recovery increased by 34%. In
2013, three chemicals accounted for two-thirds of the sector's waste — hydrogen sulfide
(40%), ammonia (18%), and ethylene (9%). Hydrogen sulfide is excluded from the
production-related waste trend figure because it was not a TRI-reportable chemical until
2012. The following figure shows quantities of hydrogen sulfide managed by the petroleum
refining sector in 2012 and 2013.
55
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Industry Sectors
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
1,600
1,400 -
¦o
1,200
c
3
0
1,000
CL
"S
800
U)
O
600
I
400 -
200
0 -
Production-Related Waste Managed, 2012-2013
Petroleum Refining
¦ Recyled
Energy Recovery
Treated
¦ Disposed of or Otherwise Released
2012
2013
Hydrogen Sulfide
All Other Chemicals
This figure shows the quantity of hydrogen sulfide that the petroleum refining industry
reported to TRI in 2012 and 2013 compared to all other TRI chemicals reported by
refineries. Hydrogen sulfide is generated from the hydrotreating process that reacts the
sulfur compounds found in crude oil with hydrogen gas. The resulting hydrogen sulfide is
then typically converted into elemental sulfur using the Claus process. Thus, almost all
hydrogen sulfide is reported as treated.
From 2012 to 2013, when hydrogen sulfide is included, the industry's production-related
waste decreased by 31%, driven by a reduction in hydrogen sulfide waste reported, which
dropped from 1,483 million lb to 665 million lb. This reduction was primarily due to
decreased hydrogen sulfide reporting by a few facilities, although most facilities in the sector
reported much less hydrogen sulfide waste in 2013 than they did in 2012.
In 2013,11% of petroleum refineries initiated source reduction activities in 2013 to reduce
their toxic chemical use and waste generation. The most commonly reported source
reduction activities were good operating practices, process modifications, and spill and leak
prevention. For example, a petroleum refinery reported that it replaced two charge heaters
with one charge heater that uses an ultra-low nitrogen oxides burner and reduced
the benzene waste generated while increasing production. TRI's Pollution Prevention Search
Tool can help you learn more about pollution prevention opportunities in this sector.
56
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Industry Sectors
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Releases by petroleum refineries
o
a.
Total Disposal or Other Releases, 2003-2013
Petroleum Refineries
80
70
60
50
¦5 40
= 30
20
10
Off-site Disposal or Other Releases
On-site Land Disposal
On-site Surface Water Discharges
On-site Air Releases
un-biie Mir tteiedbeb
11111111111
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
2008
Year
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
The petroleum refining sector's releases decreased by 11% from 2003 to 2013. This
decrease was driven by a decrease in on-site air releases from 2003 to 2013, although the
reduction is offset in part by increased water releases. From 2012 to 2013, both releases by
petroleum refineries and production levels remained relatively steady. The top chemicals
released were nitrate compounds (to water), and ammonia and sulfuric acid aerosols (to
air). Ammonia is generated from nitrogen compounds in crude oil from hydrotreatment or
catalytic cracking. Ammonia is destroyed in wastewater treatment operations, generating
nitrate compounds that are subsequently released in wastewater streams. Sulfuric acid is
generated by the reaction of water with sulfur compounds present in processed crude oil or
from fuel combustion.
57
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Where You Live
www2.epa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-program/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
201 3 TRI National Analysis: Where You Live
Introduction
& Summary
Pollution Prevention
& Waste Management
Releases
of Chemicals
Industry
Sectors
I Where
Beyond
| You Live
TRI
Note: It may take a moment for the map to load.
Show map by: * States Metropolitan Areas Watersheds Tribal
Search: State: Select...
or Zip Code:
City:
(Optional)
Count?,':
(Optional)
Legend Data to Display:
¦ «i Basemap ~
BAHAMAS
. Havana
1000km
600mi
CUBA
Esri, DeLorme, FAQ1, tfSGS; NOAA, EPA j U.S. ...
View Larger Map, Click on any one of the states or counties in the map to see detailed information.
58
-------
TRI National Analysis 2013: Where You Live
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
This chapter of the National Analysis looks at toxic chemical disposal or other releases at
various geographical levels throughout the United States. The map default display is of total
releases by state.
To view summary TRI data, select search parameters within the top two rows or query the
map directly. Note that searching for city or zip code level information is possible only by
specifying the search parameters.
The map displays data for states, counties, metropolitan areas, watersheds and tribal.
States
States include all U.S. territories for a total of 56 states/territories. All 56 states and
territories have facilities that report releases to the TRI program. The three states with the
greatest number of TRI facilities are Texas, Ohio and Pennsylvania, which together
accounted for 22% of total reporting facilities in 2013. Selecting a state on the map will
provide a pop-up with:
- a state-level summary of TRI data
- a link to the state-level TRI fact sheet
- an option to zoom to the counties within the state.
When zoomed to the state's map of counties, you may click to retrieve county-level
summaries of TRI data and link to a county-level TRI fact sheet.
Metropolitan Areas
More than 80% of the country's population and many of the industrial facilities that report to
the TRI Program are located in urban areas. This map option shows all metropolitan and
micropolitan statistical areas (metro and micro areas) in the United States as defined by the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB), that had releases in 2013. Metro and micro areas
consist of one or more socially and economically integrated adjacent counties, cities, or
towns. Click on any of these areas on the map for an analysis of TRI data specific to each.
Watersheds
A watershed is the land area that drains to a common waterway. Rivers, lakes, estuaries,
wetlands, streams, and oceans are catch basins for the land adjacent to them. Ground
water aquifers are replenished based on water flowing down through the land area above
them. These important water resources are sensitive to chemicals and other pollutants
released within or transferred across their boundaries.
Large aquatic ecosystems (LAEs) comprise multiple small watersheds and water resources
within a large geographic area. The Large Aquatic Ecosystems Council was created by the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in 2008 to focus on protecting and restoring the
health of critical aquatic ecosystems. Currently, there are 10 LAEs in this program. Click on
any of the 10 LAEs featured on the map to see an analysis of toxic chemical releases in
each LAE.
59
-------
TRI National Analysis 2013: Where You Live
www2.epa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-program/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Water pollution, surface runoff, contaminated sediment, toxic discharges, and air emissions
can affect the environmental quality of the land, water, and living resources within an
aquatic ecosystem. Persistent toxic pollutants can be especially problematic in aquatic
ecosystems because pollutants can accumulate in sediments and may bioaccumulate in the
tissues of fish and other wildlife at the top of the food chain to concentrations many times
higher than in the water or air, causing environmental health problems for humans and
wildlife.
vvEPA
TRI Disposal or Other Releases by Large Aquatic Ecosystem, 2013
~ Air BWater ¦ Land ¦ Total Off-site Disposal or Other Releases
Gulf of Mexico* (453 million lb)
Great Lakes (218 million lb)
Columbia River Basin (93 million lb)
Chesapeake Bay (51 million lb)
San Francisco Bay Delta (36 million lb)
Long Island Sound (10 million lb)
Puget Sound - Georgia Basin (7 million lb)
Lake Champlain Basin (615 thousand lb)
Pacific Islands (533 thousand lb)
"includes South Florida Geographic Initiative facilities
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Percent of Total
Total Disposal or Other Releases by Large Aquatic Ecosystem
per Square Mile, 2013
Gulf of Mexico*
Great Lakes
Pacific Islands
Chesapeake Bay
San Francisco Bay Delta
Puget Sound-Georgia Basin
Long Island Sound
Columbia River Basin
Lake Champlain Basin
250 500
includes South Florida Geographic Initiative facilities
750 1,000 1,250 1,500 1,750 2,000 2,250
Pounds persq. mile
60
-------
TRI National Analysis 2013: Where You Live
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Tribal
Congress has delegated authority to EPA to ensure that environmental programs designed
to protect human health and the environment are carried out throughout the United States,
including on tribal lands. EPA's policy is to work with tribes on a government-to-government
basis to protect the land, air, and water in Indian country and to support tribal assumption of
program authority.
The map presents 2013 Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) data relating to federally-recognized
tribes in the lower 48 states and Alaska Native Villages (ANVs) as depicted by the U.S.
Bureau of Land Management's Alaska State Office. This analysis shows facilities that believe
their facility is in Indian country and reported Bureau of Indian Affairs codes to EPA for 2013.
The table below lists the Indian tribes and ANVs that had at least one TRI facility reporting
2013 data, and shows which industry sector and chemicals accounted for the majority of
disposal or other releases in each area. Click on the number of facilities for more
information about those facilities including chemicals released, quantities released, parent
company, and facility contacts.
Indian Tribes and Alaska
Native Villages
State(s)
Number
of
Facilities
Total On-site and
Off-site Disposal or
Other Releases
(lbs)
Primary Industry
Sector(s) (% of
disposal or other
releases)
Primary Chemical(s)
(% of disposal or
other releases)
Navajo Nation, Arizona,
New Mexico and Utah
AZ, NM
2
5,322,217
Electric Utilities
(100%)
Barium and Barium
Compounds (68%)
Tohono O'odham Nation
of Arizona
AZ
1
2,413,448
Metal Mining
(100%)
Lead and Lead
Compounds (74%)
Ute Indian Tribe of the
Uintah and Ouray
Reservation, Utah
UT
1
1,857,696
Electric Utilities
(100%)
Barium and Barium
Compounds (83%)
Puyallup Tribe of the
Puyallup Reservation
WA
12
347,729
Petroleum (39%);
Hazardous
Waste/Solvent
Recovery (32%)
Ammonia (23%);
Methanol (23%);
Lead and Lead
Compounds (15%)
Confederated Tribes and
Bands of the Yakama
Nation
WA
3
204,267
Plastics and
Rubber (100%)
Styrene (74%)
Coeur D'Alene Tribe
ID
2
41,264
Wood Products
(100%)
Methanol (98%)
Rincon Band of Luiseno
Mission Indians of the
Rincon Reservation,
California
CA
1
6,575
Transportation
Equipment
(100%)
Styrene (100%)
Arapaho Tribe of the
Wind River Reservation,
Wyoming
WY
1
3,023
Chemicals
(100%)
Sulfuric Acid
(100%)
Saginaw Chippewa Indian
Tribe of Michigan
Ml
1
2,049
Machinery
(100%)
Chromium and
Chromium
Compounds (62%)
v>EPA
61
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: Where You Live
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Tulalip Tribes of
Washington (previously
listed as the Tulalip
Tribes of the Tulalip
Reservation, Washington)
WA
1
775
Primary Metals
(100%)
Chromium and
Chromium
Compounds (66%)
Oneida Tribe of Indians of
Wisconsin
Wl
4
455
Chemicals (99%)
Methanol (97%)
Suquamish Indian Tribe
of the Port Madison
Reservation
WA
1
43
Stone/Clay/Glas
s (100%)
Lead and Lead
Compounds
(100%)
Colorado River Indian
Tribes of the Colorado
River Indian Reservation,
Arizona and California
AZ
1
30
Hazardous
Waste/Solvent
Recovery (30%)
Beneze (33%);
Toluene (33%);
Dichloromethane
(33% )
Nez Perce Tribe
ID
1
23
Wood Products
(100%)
Lead and Lead
Compounds
(100%)
Gila River Indian
Community of the Gila
River Indian Reservation,
Arizona
AZ
6
9
Primary Metals
(100%)
Copper and Copper
Compounds (99%)
Salt River Pima-Maricopa
Indian Community of the
Salt River Reservation,
Arizona
AZ
1
1
Stone/Clay/Glas
s (100%)
Lead and Lead
Compounds
(100%)
62
-------
TRI National Analysis 2013: TRI & Beyond
www2.epa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-program/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
TRI & Beyond
TRI is a powerful resource that provides the public with
information about how toxic chemicals are managed
by industrial facilities in the United States. However,
there are many other programs at EPA that collect
information about chemicals and our environment.
The next figure is an overview of laws that EPA carries
out and the industrial processes they regulate. While
many programs at EPA focus on one area, TRI covers
releases to air, water, and land; waste transfers; and
waste management activities. Therefore, TRI data are especially valuable, as they can be
combined with many other datasets to provide a more complete picture of national trends in
chemical use, management, and releases.
vvEPA
Note: The Emergency Planning and
Community Right-to-Know Act
(EPCRA) establishes requirements
for emergency planning,
preparedness, and reporting on
hazardous and toxic chemicals
involving air releases, water
releases, land disposal, waste
transfers and waste management.
- Toxic Substances
Control Act (TSCA)
- Federal Insecticide
Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act
- Resource Conservation
Recovery Act fRCRAl
- Comprehensive Environmental
Response. Compensation, and
Liability Act (CERCLAI
- Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA)
- Clean Air Act (CAAl
- Clean Water Act fCWA)
- Ocean Dumping Act
fQDAi
- Safe Drinking Water
Act (SDWA)
This chapter highlights three thematic areas that combine TRI with other data sources:
• Climate Change:
o A comparison of TRI data and EPA's Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program
(GHGRP) data collected under the Clean Air Act (CAA);
o A comparison of TRI and GHG waste rates for different fuels using data from
the Department of Energy's Energy Information Administration; and
63
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: TRI & Beyond
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
o A look at projected sea level rise in the United States relative to TRI facility
locations using National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
data.
Surface Water
o An analysis of TRI and EPA's Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) data
collected under the Clean Water Act (CWA).
Chemical Safety:
o An analysis of TRI and emergency planning data collected under the Clean Air
Act (CAA), including Risk Management Plans (RMPs), and other sections of the
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA).
64
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: TRI & Beyond
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Comparing TRI and Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Under the authority of the Clean Air Act, EPA's Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program requires
large emitters of greenhouse gases (GHGs) and
suppliers of certain products to submit annual
greenhouse gas reports to EPA. Emissions of GHGs
lead to elevated concentrations of these gases in the
atmosphere that alter the Earth's radiative balance
and contribute to climate change. These elevated
concentrations are reasonably anticipated to
endanger both the public health and welfare of current
and future generations. The purpose of the GHGRP is
to collect timely, industry-specific data to help us
better understand the source of GHG emissions and to
inform climate policy.
What is C02e?
GHG emissions are typically
expressed in a common metric,
so that their impacts can be
directly compared as some
gases are more potent than
others. The international
standard practice is to express
GHGs in CCbe.
In 2013, over 7,800 facilities reported
direct emissions of GHGs to the
atmosphere, totaling over 3.18 billion
metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent
(mtCCbe). This represents about half of
the 6.5 billion mtCCbe that EPA
estimated to be released in the United
States from all human-related sources per the 2012 annual U.S. Greenhouse Gas Inventory.
The GHGRP does not require direct emissions reporting from all U.S. sources. For example,
the transportation sector and agricultural sources of GHG emissions are not included in the
GHGRP.
What chemicals were reported to GHGRP for
2013?
• Carbon dioxide = 91.4% of the mtCCbe total
• Methane = 7%
• Nitrous Oxide (N2O) = 0.8%
• Fluorinated gases (HFCs, PFCs, SF6) = 0.7%
65
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: TRI & Beyond
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
op sectors reporting TRI air emissions and GHG C02e
GHG Emissions (C02e) and TRI Air Emissions by Sector, 2013
Reported GHG Emissions from Stationary Sources, 2013
(3.18 billion metric tons)
All Other GHGRP Sectors
12%
Toxic Chemical Air Emissions from TRI, 2013
(773 million pounds)
Waste 4%
Chemicals 5%
Refineries 6%
Petroleum and Natural
Gas Systems 7%
Power Plants 66%
All Other TRI Sectors 10%
Transportation Equipment 3%
Plastics and Rubber 4%
Primary Metals 4% ^
Petroleum 5%
Food, Beverages, Tobacco
6%
Paper
Electric Utilities 26%
Chemicals 23%
his figure shows the top sectors reporting air emissions to the GHGRP and TRI in 2013. The
primary greenhouse gas reported to the GHGRP is carbon dioxide (CO2), which is released
during fossil fuel combustion and various industrial processes. TRI reporting focuses on toxic
chemicals and therefore covers different chemicals from the GHGRP. Some TRI chemicals
are a result of combustion of fuels for energy (as most GHG emissions are), but others are
used in and released from additional processes ranging from metal mining to surface
cleaning. Therefore, the top air emitting sectors in TRI are similar, but not identical to, the
top emitting sectors covered by the GHGRP. While electric utilities are the primary reporters
of air emissions to both programs, the chemical manufacturing industry reports more
chemical air emissions to TRI than to the GHGRP. Analyzing toxic chemical releases reported
to TRI and greenhouse gas emissions reported to the GHGRP together creates a more
complete picture of emissions at the facility and sector levels.
Note that in addition to differences in the chemicals reported to TRI and the GHGRP, there
are numerous other program differences including reporting thresholds. For TRI, the
reporting threshold for most chemicals is 25,000 pounds manufactured or processed, or
10,000 pounds otherwise used per year, whereas for the GHGRP, the reporting threshold is
based on emissions and is generally 25,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent per
year.
66
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: TRI & Beyond
www2.epa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-program/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Overlap in TRI and GHG reporting
Overlap in TRI and GHGRP Reporting, 2013
Facilities in GHGRP and TRI, 2013
GHGRP 2013
7,879 Facilities
n 2013, more than one-third of the facilities reporting to GHGRP also reported to TRI.
However, this subset of GHGRP reporters accounted for almost three-quarters of GHGRP
emissions, indicating that the facilities reporting the greatest GHG emissions also trigger TRI
requirements for reporting on toxic chemicals.
GHGRP Facilities also
Reporting to TRI, 2013
Total Emissions:
2.36 billion mtCO,e
Emissions Reported to the GHGRP by Facilities also
Reporting to TRI, 2013
GHGRP 2013
Total Emissions:
3.18 billion mtC02e
67
-------
TRI National Analysis 2013: TRI & Beyond
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Percentage change in air emissions for facilities reporting to both TRI and GHGRP
&EPA
Percentage Change in Air Emissions for Facilities
Reporting to both TRI and GHGRP: 2012-2013
a
15%
10%
5%
12.0%
£ -5%
-10%
5.9%
6.8%
0.7%
1.4%
-1.7%
¦
-6.1%
-7.7%
Electric Utilities Chemicals
Paper Food, Beverages, Petroleum
Tobacco
l Toxic Chemical Air Emissions TRI HGHG Direct Emissions: GHGRP
This figure shows the percentage change in total air emissions from 2012 to 2013 for the
subset of facilities reporting to both TRI and GHGRP, in the five industry sectors with the
greatest TRI air emissions. While the graph is based on a consistent subset of facilities, the
percentage change in emissions by industry sector varies between the two programs. The
variations are driven by differences in the types of pollutants reported to TRI and GHGRP
and by the impacts of certain source reduction and pollution control activities. Some actions
taken by facilities, such as reducing fuel consumption, decrease emissions of both
greenhouse gases and toxic chemicals that are byproducts of fuel combustion. Other
actions, like the installation of new treatment technology, may reduce emissions of a
specific TRI chemical but not affect greenhouse gas emissions.
68
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: TRI & Beyond
www2.epa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-program/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
TRI waste rates and GHG emissions rates by fuel type
Waste Rates for all TRI Chemicals and GHG, 2012
i Land Releases
Air Releases
Treatment
i C02 Equivalent
0.77
0.45
1
0.01
007 1
<0.01 <0.01
1-4 _
3
1
1.2 I?
O
u
0.8
v
0.6 2
0.4 »
0.2
S.O
Number of facilities included perfuel type is shown in parentheses afterthe fuel name.
This figure shows TRI waste management rates and GHG emission rates for facilities in the
electric utilities industry that reported to both TRI and the GHGRP for 2012, the most recent
year for which the facility-level fuel use data are available. By fuel type, the figure shows:
• Bituminous coal has the highest total TRI waste generation per megawatt hour
(MWh) of electricity produced, most of which is treated for destruction. Of the coal
types, however, bituminous coal has the lowest moisture content, making it the most
efficient coal in terms of power generation. Bituminous coal therefore has the lowest
GHG emission rate. West Virginia leads production of bituminous coal, followed by
Kentucky and Pennsylvania.
• Among coal types, combustion of subbituminous coal generates significantly less
acid aerosol than bituminous coal or other coal, resulting in a lower TRI waste
generation rate. Wyoming produces the vast majority of subbituminous coal in the
U.S.
• All coal combustion (bituminous, subbituminous, and other which includes lignite and
waste coal) generates ash, which may be disposed of to land.
• Of the fossil fuels, natural gas has the lowest TRI air release rate and the lowest TRI
waste management rate, as it contains lower levels of toxic chemicals in the fuel.
Natural gas also has the lowest carbon content per energy quantity and as such, has
a GHG emission rate considerably lower than that of coal and oil fuels.
• Oil fuels, consisting of distillate and residual fuel oil, have the highest air release rate
of the fossil fuels. This reflects an absence of reported treatment methods at TRI
69
-------
TRI National Analysis 2013: TRI & Beyond
www2.epa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-program/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
facilities burning oil. As oil fuels have a lower carbon content than coal, they have a
lower GHG emission rate than coal, but greater than that of natural gas.
• Few nuclear power plants are required to report to TRI and the rates calculated in the
graph are based on only six facilities. Based on these facilities' reporting, nuclear
plants' generation rates for both toxics and GHGs are very low.
You can learn more about TRI reporting by electric utilities in the Electric Utilities Industry
section.
Notes:
• This figure only includes electric utilities that combust some (even small amounts) of
coal or oil; most natural gas electric utilities do not combust these fuels and
therefore are not subject to TRI reporting.
• The figure includes waste rates for the primary TRI waste management methods for
the sector: air emissions, land disposal, and treatment. Other TRI waste management
methods, such as recycling and discharges to water, account for less than 1% of
waste managed and therefore are not included in the figure.
• To ensure that the emissions were representative of the specific fuel types, 481
facilities were excluded from this graph because their fuel mix exceeded 1% of other
fuel types.
• These rates are based on waste generated at the electric utility only and do not
reflect the entire lifecycle of the fuel (e.g., they do not include extraction of the fuel).
• Data on the quantity of fuel used by facility are from the Department of
Energy's Energy Information Administration.
TRI facilities and sea-level rise
vvEPA
70
-------
TRI National Analysis 2013: TRI & Beyond
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Global sea-level rise has been a persistent trend for decades. It is expected to continue
beyond the end of this century, which will cause significant impacts in the United States.
Scientists have very high confidence (greater than 90% chance) that the global mean sea-
level will rise at least 8 inches (0.2 meters) and no more than 6.6 feet (2.0 meters) by
2100.1 This map displays facility locations that reported to TRI in 2013 with a preliminary
look at the potential of a 2 foot sea-level rise as projected by NOAA. The blue areas on the
coast show the potential sea-level rise inundation of 2 feet above the current Mean Higher
High Water mark. Therefore, TRI facilities in or near this area may be inundated in a 2-foot
sea-level rise scenario. Prior to any actual sea-level rise, many of these facilities face a
higher potential to experience flooding or other weather-related damage due to periodic
storm events.
• These sea-level rise data are provided by NOAA's Coastal Services Center and
illustrate the scale of potential flooding, not the exact location. They should only be
used for screening-level visualization and should not be used for navigation,
permitting, or other legal purposes.
• The NOAA sea-level rise map includes all states except for Louisiana and Alaska. There
are no plans to map Alaska because of inadequate statewide coastal elevation data.
Similarly, Louisiana is not included because of a lack of recent, accurate coastal
elevation data and the difficulty in accurately flood mapping this coastal geography that
includes a complex levee system. NOAA is discussing the issue with Louisiana officials.
For information about how the federal government is taking action to help Americans adapt
to current and potential risks of climate change, see EPA's website on federal and EPA
adaptation programs.
Notes:
1 http://cpo.noaa.gov/Home/AIINews/Tabld/315/ArtMID/668/ArticlelD/80/Global-Sea-Level-Rise-Scenarios-
for-the-United-States-National-Climate-Assessment.aspx
71
-------
TRI National Analysis 2013: TRI & Beyond
www2.epa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-program/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Regulating chemical releases to water
EPA collects data on pollutant releases to water under the authority of the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). The NPDES program aims to protect and restore the
quality of U.S. rivers, lakes, and coastal waters through permits that control and require
monitoring of pollutant discharges from point sources. Under the Clean Water Act (CWA),
facilities are required to obtain a NPDES permit for all point sources that discharge
pollutants into waters of the United States and report compliance with permit limits via
monthly Discharge Monitoring Reports (OMRs).
Through the DMRs submitted, the NPDES program collects data for the facility-specific
parameters identified in the facility's NPDES permit. The DMR data may include release
quantities of specific chemicals as well as other water quality measures, such as pH and
temperature, flow rates, and conventional parameters such as biochemical oxygen demand
and total suspended solids. Along with TRI data about toxic chemical releases to water,
DMRs serve as a primary source of data on pollutant discharges to surface water.
This figure illustrates the types of wastewater streams that the TRI Program and DMR data
describe.
Municipal discharge to POTW:
X DMR X TRI
vvEPA
Industrial
discharge to
receiving stream:
~ DMR ~ TRI
Wastewater
transfer
to POTW:
X DMR S TRI
POTW discharge to
receiving stream:
s DMR X TRI
72
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: TRI & Beyond
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
TRI data capture discharges to receiving streams and chemical transfers to Publically Owned
Treatment Works (POTWs) from industrial facilities. DMR data capture discharges to
receiving streams by both industrial facilities and POTWs, but do not capture transfers from
an industrial facility to a POTW. Neither data set captures municipal discharges to POTWs.
DMR data for facilities that report to TRI
DMR-Reporting Facilities DMR Data for Facilities that Submit DMRs and Report to TRI:
% of Facilities with DMR Data for Each Pollutant Category
Report to TRI
Metals
Organ c
Enrichm
Temperature
I Nitrogen
Phosphorus
_ Pathogen
Indicators
20%
Solids
¦ TRI Chemicals
Wastewater
Flow
100%
While the data collected by TRI and DMRs differ in important ways, using both TRI and DMR
data provides a more complete understanding of pollutants being discharged into surface
waters. As shown in the pie chart, 6% of the facilities that submit DMRs also report to TRI.
The bar graph focuses on this subset of facilities that report to TRI and submit DMRs.
Through their DMRs, these facilities provide information on many other parameters that may
impact water quality, such as the temperature, or biochemical or chemical oxygen demand
(i.e., organic enrichment) of their water discharges.
There are several considerations to keep in mind when comparing TRI and DMR data:
• Reporting Facilities: Permitting authorities, such as the states, are not required to
report DMR measurements for smaller, non-major, facilities. In addition, facilities
may be exempt from reporting to TRI if they are not in a covered industry sector or
does not meet the threshold number of employees.
• Regulated Chemicals: In the DMR data, facilities only report discharges of pollutants
that the NPDES permit requires them to monitor. The pollutants with monitoring
requirements in a facility's NPDES permit are at the discretion of the permitting
authority. Other pollutants may be discharged but are not reported on DMRs. TRI
facilities only report chemicals on the TRI list, and may be exempt from reporting
releases of chemicals if they do not meet activity thresholds.
DMR and TRI data can be explored together using the DMR Pollutant Loading Tool. This tool
provides information on which facilities are discharging pollutants to surface water, what
pollutants and how much of each they are discharging, and where these discharges occur.
Explore the tool to learn more about discharges of pollutants to surface waters in your
community.
73
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: TRI & Beyond
www2.epa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-program/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Jump to a DMR Loading Tool Search
EZ Search Data Explorer
m
TRJ 5earch
Advanced Search
Top Industrial Dischargers Facility Search
74
-------
TRI National Analysis 2013: TRI & Beyond
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Chemical safety and emergency planning
In the wake of recent chemical spills and accidents at facilities in Texas, West Virginia and
North Carolina, the government has renewed focus on chemical safety and accident
preparedness. On August 1, 2013, the President signed Executive Order 13650 to improve
the safety and security of chemical facilities and reduce the risks of hazardous chemicals to
workers and communities. The order directs the federal government to improve operational
coordination with state and local partners, and enhance Federal agency coordination and
information.
Both the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) and (which
includes the Toxics Release Inventory) the Clean Air Act (CAA) section 112(r) Risk
Management Program encourage communication between facilities and the surrounding
communities about chemical safety and chemical risks. The programs implemented under
these regulations are intended to encourage state, local, and tribal planning for, and
response to, releases of hazardous substances; to provide the public, local governments,
fire departments, and other emergency officials with information concerning potential
chemical hazards present in their communities; and to prevent and minimize the impact of
chemical releases.
TRI data, along with other EPCRA and
risk management data on chemical
storage and use, provide a greater
understanding of potential hazards in
communities.
EPCRA, enacted in 1986, has four
major provisions. The Community
Right-to-Know provisions cover TRI
(section 313) and the hazardous
chemical storage reporting
requirements (sections 311-312).
Other EPCRA sections focus on
emergency planning (sections 301-
303) and emergency release
information (section 304). Separately
from EPCRA, CAA section 112(r)
establishes the Risk Management
Plan rule and helps to reduce harm
from extremely hazardous
substances (EHS). Facilities covered report information to the respective authorities as
noted in the diagram.
The types of hazardous and toxic chemicals covered by the RMP and each of the EPCRA
provisions differ as shown in the table below. A broad array of chemicals is also covered,
more extensive than the 650 chemicals and chemical categories covered by TRI.
v>EPA
State Emergency Response Commission (SERC),
Local Emergency Planning Committees (LEPCs), and
Tribal Emergency Response Commissions (TERCs)
~
One Time for
Emergency
Response Plans.
EPCRA 301-304
~
Emergency
Notification of
Releases.
EPCRA 304
~
Annually Submit
MSDS for Hazardous
Chemicals.
EPCRA 311 & 312
Facility Reporting
US EPA
provides RMPs
to the SERC,
LEPCs
and TERCs
Risk Management
Plans, Every Five Years.
CAA 112 (r)
Annual Toxics Release
Inventory Reporting.
EPCRA 313
75
-------
&EPA
TRI National Analysis 2013: TRI & Beyond
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Chemicals Covered by EPCRA and CAA 112(r)
EPCRA 301-303
355 extremely hazardous substances (EHS)
EPCRA 304
355 EHS and approximately 800 specific substances and
1,500 radionuclides under CERCLA
EPCRA 311/312
More than 500,000 hazardous substances with material
safety data sheets (MSDSs)
EPCRA 313
More than 650 toxic chemicals and chemical categories
CAA 112(r)
77 EHS and 63 flammable gases and liquids
Regulatory requirements by themselves will not guarantee safety from chemical accidents.
Those who are handling hazardous substances must take the responsibility and act to
prevent, prepare for, and respond to chemical emergencies. For extremely hazardous
substances (EHS), a facility must notify the appropriate officials and participate in local
emergency planning activities. This includes preparation of an emergency response plan
that contains information community officials can use at the time of a chemical accident. A
facility covered under the RMP Rule is required to submit a Risk Management Plan (RMP) to
EPA. Currently, approximately 13,000 facilities have an active RMP.
Risk Management Plans
70,000
60,000
RMP Chemicals with Greatest Quantities in Processes
I RMP Chemical Only
I RMP and TRI Chemical
I I I
Flammable Ammonia Propane Butane Propylene Ethylene Isobutane Ethane Chlorine Vinyl
Mixture (anhydrous) chloride
Source: EPA Internal RMP Dataset, data frozen on May 14, 2014.
76
-------
TRI National Analysis 2013: TRI & Beyond
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
The Risk Management Plan (RMP) complements TRI in that it provides details on chemical
hazards and emergency planning. RMP and TRI cover some, but not all, of the same
chemicals, as shown in this figure. RMP reporting includes 77 acutely toxic chemicals and
63 flammable gases or highly volatile flammable liquids - 53 of which are also individually
listed TRI chemicals. The RMP chemical with the greatest quantity processed at facilities is
"flammable mixture," which can consist of mixtures of different flammable gasses and
liquids such as propane, butane and isobutane.2 Chemical reporting thresholds also differ
between TRI and RMP - RMP thresholds vary from 1,000 to 20,000 pounds of chemicals in
a process, while TRI thresholds reflect total annual use. Approximately 2,700 facilities report
to both TRI and RMP. RMP also provides information on many sectors not covered by TRI,
such as Sewage Treatment Facilities.
RMP and TRI data complement each other when a facility reports under both programs.
RMP submissions provide details on where the chemical is used and how the facility
prevents and prepares for accidental releases. TRI data provide details on the process-
related, non-accidental releases of the chemical. In the following graphics, chlorine is used
as an example of how TRI and RMP data may be combined for a more complete picture of
the facility's handling of the chemical.
Example chemical: Chlorine reported in RMP & TRI
Chlorine is reported to both TRI and RMP. It is one of the most commonly manufactured
chemicals in the United States, with a domestic production volume of 22 billion pounds in
2011.3 It is used in industrial operations primarily as a chemical reactant, but is also widely
used as a bleach or disinfectant. While chlorine can be pressurized and cooled to a liquid for
storage and shipment, when liquid chlorine is released, it quickly turns into a gas that stays
close to the ground and spreads rapidly. Chlorine gas irritates the respiratory system, and as
a strong oxidizer, it may react strongly (e.g., explosively) with other materials. Data over the
past five years show that there have been 588 accidents, resulting in 749 injuries, one
death, and an estimated $128 million in property damage.4 5 Proper management of
chlorine at industrial facilities is vital to workers and the surrounding community.
2 Flammable mixtures are covered under RMP if a regulated substance is in the mixture above 1 percent and
the entire mixture meets the National Fire Protection Association flammability hazard rating of 4 (NFPA-4).
3 http://vwvw.epa.gov/cdr/
4 EPA Internal RMP Dataset, data frozen on May 14, 2014.
5 Injuries and damages include all accidents at the facilities, not just those involving chlorine.
77
-------
TRI National Analysis 2013: TRI & Beyond
www2.eDa.gov/toxics-release-inventorv-tri-Drogram/2013-tri-national-analvsis
Updated January 2015
Quantity of Chlorine in Processes by Industry
Inorganic Dye and
Other Chemical and Pigment Manufacturing
Sewage Treatment
Facilities
Water Supply & Irrigation
Systems
Other Non-TRI Industries
Rail Transportation
Manufacturing
Chlorine is covered by RMPs in over 3,300 facilities from May of 2009 to May of 2014, with
approximately 808 million pounds in processes. The top industries by pounds of chlorine are
Chemical Manufacturing and Chemical Wholesalers, as shown in the figure. These industry
sectors also report to TRI. When viewed by counts of facilities, the two industries with the
most facilities reporting chlorine in processes in an RMP are water supply and irrigation
systems (1,401 facilities) and sewage treatment facilities (703 facilities). Neither of these
industries is required to report to TRI.
Facilities report different types of information in an RMP than to TRI. For example, a facility
in Charleston, TN, reported in its 2013 RMP:
• Quantity in processes: 33.8 million pounds of chlorine in its chlor-alkali process in
100% concentration as gas liquefied by pressure
• Accident history: In 2005, over-pressurization of a line, caused by human error,
resulted in an accidental release of less than 1 pound of chlorine
For 2013, the same facility reported to TRI 272.7 pounds of chlorine air releases. Taken
together the data provide a more complete picture of the facility's handling of the chemical.
For more information, please visit the EPCRA weboage. To learn more about Risk
Management Plans, see the RMP Rule weboage. The public may access RMP data
at Federal Reading Rooms. For more information on TRI, see EPA's TRI weboage.
78
------- |